Whack-a-mole
Overview: The aim is to provide students with practical experience of the role of regulators in protecting the public from false and misleading therapeutic claims by product sponsors and health practitioners.
Why “Whack-a-mole”: Because, given deficiencies in the current regulatory system, no sooner does one miscreant get “whacked” than another (or the same one) pops up!
Hence our seminar, “The Advertising of Therapeutic Goods and Services (and its regulation)“, Monash Law Chambers, Sept 8, 2017.
See also: “Whacking moles, a pharmacist and the TGA”
Methodology: Evaluate the evidence for questionable claims made about therapeutic goods and services and, if appropriate, submit a complaint to the appropriate regulator.
More information about this project is available here.
Some examples of upheld complaints based on work submitted by students last year are available below:
- Complaint 2016/09/023 ChinaMed Back and Knees Formula
- Complaint 2016/09/024 Osteotron IV
- Complaint 2016/09/025 Fertility Formula Male
- Complaint 2016/10/008 Jes Extender
- Complaint 2016/10/009 Thompson’s One-A-Day Milk Thistle 35000
- Complaint 2016/10/012 HeadsUp
- Complaint 2016/10/014 Blackmores Bilberry Eyestrain Relief
- Complaint 2016/10/017 Nutra-Life BioActive Curcumin
- Complaint 2016/10/019 Horny Goat Weed For Her
- Complaint 2016/10/020 ChinaMed Cardiac Formula
- Complaint 2016/10/022 Herbs of Gold Resveratrol AdvantAGE
- Complaint 2016/10/023 Horny Goat Weed For Him
- Complaint 2016/10/025 Sambucol
- Complaint 2016/11/012 Dry Nights Formula
- Complaint 2016/12/003 Blooms Coenzyme Q10 150 Max
Feel free to submit URLs of questionable claims for future students to assess by leaving a reply (below) or emailing me direct: ken.harvey@medreach.com.au.
by 
