Browse regulations

42 CFR parts 71 and 72 federalizes sanitation and communicable disease control for interstate commerce. It defines terms like 'conveyance' and 'potable water,' mandates specific bactericidal treatments for utensils, requires pasteurization of milk, tagging of shellfish, restricts small turtles and psittacine birds, regulates garbage feeding to swine, and sets potable water standards for vessels. The FDA Commissioner wields broad approval authority.

Keeping this regulation imposes massive hidden costs—over $2 trillion nationwide in compliance burdens—while violating constitutional federalism. Health and safety are reserved to the states; federal micromanagement stifles local innovation, raises barriers for small businesses, and creates regulatory capture opportunities. The rule's complexity (185,000+ pages of federal regs) undermines rule of law, and its prescriptive mandates ignore market-based alternatives. States can protect public health through their own laws and interstate compacts without federal overreach, saving households an average $14,000 annually in hidden regulatory taxes.

Mandates that all manufacturers of human blood, blood products, and certain licensed biological devices register with the FDA and submit product listings through an electronic system, with regular updates twice annually. Includes foreign manufacturer requirements with US agents, and exemptions for pharmacies, practitioners, research use, carriers, and transfusion services.

Deletion would prevent the government from tracking manufacturers during blood product contamination outbreaks or recalls, creating severe public health risks. A centralized registry is the only efficient way to quickly identify all manufacturers and their products during national emergencies affecting the blood supply. The compliance burden is minimal compared to the catastrophic consequences of an untraceable blood product crisis.

Federal regulation defining blood products, collection procedures, facility requirements, labeling standards, and quality controls for blood and blood components used in transfusion and manufacturing.

This regulation creates excessive compliance costs ($2+ trillion industry burden) and regulatory complexity that protects large blood banks from competition while driving up prices for hospitals and patients. The detailed labeling and processing requirements could be handled by market-driven quality standards and voluntary certification.

Comprehensive regulations governing animal feed manufacturing, drug classifications, and veterinary feed directives for medicated animal feeds. Establishes categories for new animal drugs, defines feed types (A, B, C), sets manufacturing requirements, and mandates veterinary oversight for certain medicated feeds.

Creates unnecessary regulatory burden on animal feed manufacturers and farmers while enabling pharmaceutical capture of the livestock industry. The complex classification system and licensing requirements increase compliance costs, favor large agribusinesses over small farmers, and restrict farmers' ability to make independent decisions about animal health. The veterinary feed directive system centralizes control over animal nutrition and creates barriers to market entry for innovative feed solutions.

This regulation is a compilation of FDA-approved animal drug specifications, sponsors, and conditions of use. It lists detailed requirements for veterinary pharmaceuticals including antibiotics (amikacin, gentamicin, oxytetracycline), anesthetics (isoflurane, sevoflurane), antiparasitics (formalin, hydrogen peroxide), and reproductive hormones (progesterone inserts). Each entry specifies drug composition, manufacturer, approved indications, dosages, and limitations, often restricting use to licensed veterinarians and prohibiting use in food-producing animals.

Federal regulation of veterinary drugs imposes massive hidden costs: compliance raises drug prices, hurting small veterinary practices and animal owners. It stifles innovation by erecting barriers to entry that protect large pharmaceutical incumbents. This usurps state authority over veterinary medicine, violating Tenth Amendment federalism. Veterinarians' professional judgment is constrained by narrow labeling, leading to suboptimal treatment. The unseen costs—delayed access to better drugs, inflated healthcare costs, and eroded local accountability—outweigh any marginal safety benefits, which states and market mechanisms could deliver far more efficiently.

This regulation specifies the composition, sponsors, and veterinary use conditions for various topical and ophthalmic medications used in dogs, cats, and cattle. Products include antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, parasiticides, and wound treatments. All require veterinary prescription and many have restrictions on food-producing animals or specific species.

These regulations ensure veterinary oversight of medications that could harm animals if misused, prevent drug residues in food supply, and maintain product safety standards. The restrictions on food-producing animals and controlled substances are critical for public health and food safety.

This regulation establishes mandatory specifications, approved uses, dosages, and limitations for numerous veterinary drugs, restricting them to use by licensed veterinarians. It serves as a federal approval and control system for animal pharmaceuticals, including withdrawal periods for food animals and prohibitions on extra-label use.

This represents federal overreach into veterinary medicine—a field properly regulated by states under the Tenth Amendment. The regulatory burden imposes massive compliance costs that inflate drug prices for farmers and pet owners while protecting established pharmaceutical companies from competition through costly approval processes. The 'veterinarian-only' restriction creates artificial barriers to entry, inflating costs for small farms and independent practitioners. Private certification systems, tort law, and market reputation could ensure drug safety without this bureaucratic apparatus, which distorts incentives, raises barriers to innovation, and treats farmers and veterinarians as incapable of making their own professional judgments.

Regulations specify drug formulations, dosages, and veterinary use conditions for various medications across animal species, including tranquilizers, antibiotics, antiparasitics, and coccidiostats. Each regulation details specific formulations, dosage amounts by species, indications for use, and restrictions requiring licensed veterinarian supervision.

These regulations create artificial scarcity and increase costs for animal healthcare through mandatory veterinary gatekeeping. The restrictions on who can administer medications and under what conditions represent regulatory overreach into private veterinary practice, raising barriers to animal care while serving pharmaceutical industry interests rather than animal welfare.

This regulation specifies procedural requirements for FDA new animal drug applications, including detailed submissions on chemistry, manufacturing processes, labeling, safety and effectiveness evidence, residue testing methods, and good manufacturing practice commitments. It establishes the framework for pre-market approval of all new animal drugs in the United States.

The regulation imposes massive compliance costs that burden innovators, especially small businesses, protecting market incumbents from competition. Centralized pre-approval creates delays and raises barriers to entry, distorting incentives and reducing supply of veterinary pharmaceuticals. The FDA suffers from a fundamental knowledge problem—bureaucrats cannot efficiently evaluate complex drug data dispersed among experts—and is prone to regulatory capture. Unseen consequences include slower innovation (animals suffering longer), higher costs for farmers, and elevated food prices for consumers. Private certification, liability law, and state-level oversight could achieve safety goals without the heavy-handed federal control that undermines liberty and free enterprise.

Definitions and regulations for new animal drugs, animal feed, and import tolerances, including safety requirements, labeling standards, and reporting procedures for veterinary medications and food-producing animals.

Creates excessive regulatory burden on veterinary medicine and animal feed industry, requiring extensive testing and approval processes that delay access to beneficial medications, while the free market and state-level oversight could provide adequate safety mechanisms without federal intervention.

Comprehensive FDA regulations for animal drugs and feed, banning specific hazardous chemicals (PCBs, methylene blue, hexachlorophene, gentian violet, propylene glycol), mandating carcinogenicity testing, controlling labeling language, and permitting emergency epinephrine use.

These regulations impose crushing costs that violate property rights and stifle competition. They centralize knowledge, create barriers to entry, and rely on coercion instead of market mechanisms like liability and certification. The unseen effects include reduced innovation, higher prices, and cronyism. The same safety goals would emerge more efficiently through individual choice and legal accountability.

This regulation establishes a standardized naming system for drugs, designating official names under section 508 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and requiring the 'established name' on drug labels under section 502(e). It coordinates with the U.S. Adopted Names Council (USAN) while reserving FDA authority to intervene when names are inadequate, duplicative, or nonexistent.

Standardized drug names prevent fatal medication errors and ensure clear communication across the healthcare system. Without this regulation, confusing proprietary names, duplicate names for identical drugs, and inconsistent terminology would lead to widespread prescription and dispensing errors that kill thousands annually. The unseen costs of repeal—wrong medications, dangerous drug interactions, and compromised patient safety—far exceed compliance costs. States lack the capacity to coordinate a unified naming system, making federal oversight essential.

Federal regulations governing prescription requirements for controlled substances, including dispensing restrictions, warning label requirements, and emergency prescription provisions for Schedule II drugs.

Americans would be worse off if these regulations were deleted because they provide essential safeguards against drug abuse, diversion, and misuse. The prescription requirement creates a medical gatekeeping system that prevents dangerous substances from being freely available while allowing legitimate medical access. Warning labels on controlled substances help prevent illegal distribution and protect public health. Emergency provisions ensure critical care can be delivered when immediate treatment is necessary.

FDA policy document imposing prescription-only restrictions and labeling requirements on various drug products based on safety and efficacy concerns, including thyroid/stimulant combinations, stramonium, amyl nitrite, methamphetamine inhalers, coronary vasodilators, gelsemium, potassium permanganate, vitamin B12 products, and hexachlorophene-containing preparations. Defines when such products are 'misbranded' and subject to enforcement.

These regulations impose massive compliance costs, restrict patient autonomy, create barriers to entry that protect incumbent manufacturers, and rely on the pretense of centralized knowledge. Unseen harms include delayed access to beneficial treatments, inflated prices, black markets, erosion of personal responsibility, and violation of Tenth Amendment federalism. Fraud and safety concerns are better addressed through tort law, criminal statutes, and market reputation mechanisms without paternalistic restrictions that harm all consumers.

FDA current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulation for Type A medicated articles—concentrated animal drug feed additives. It mandates detailed requirements for personnel qualifications, facility design and maintenance, equipment suitability, production controls, laboratory testing, packaging/labeling procedures, master formula and batch records, and recordkeeping to ensure product safety, identity, strength, quality, and purity.

Deletion would create unacceptable risks of adulterated, mislabeled, or improperly formulated medicated animal feeds entering the market, leading to animal illness or death, economic losses for farmers, and potential human health hazards through drug residues in the food supply. The regulation addresses a clear market failure: downstream users (feed manufacturers, farmers, consumers) cannot independently verify the safety and potency of these concentrated drug products, and the potential for widespread, latent harm justifies federal minimum standards.