ABC Testing Labs Doesn’t Begin to Describe the Danger of Inadequate Testing Competency

July 16, 2019

This column has looked at FDA Warning Letters as “must reads” (4/24/2018) and unbelievable reads (6/5/2019), yet a recent FDA Warning Letter to Advanced Botanical Consulting & Testing Inc. (ABC Testing) serves to combine all and perhaps trump all of the remarkable aspects of previous letters from our highest governmental agency tasked to ensure safety from the food and drug industries. While some FDA Warning Letters serve as instruction on how to improve, this letter leaves as many questions as answers, and in this article, we’ll try  to deal with this concern head-on, and again to call to action the powers we collectively possess to make our dietary supplement industry all we imagine it should be.

It should be noted and perhaps emphasized that while ABC’s current violation stems from its work outside of the dietary supplements industry, the fact that the majority of their operations lie within it should create a cringe factor and relevance all the same.

Just like our recent reporting of the Confidence USA FDA Warning Letter, the conversation regarding ABC Testing from the FDA dates back over several years and repeats the same violations. Unlike the matter involving Confidence USA, the notice sent to Advanced Botanical Consulting & Testing Inc dba ABC Testing includes a note relating multiple patient deaths to the issue of concern. To date seven civil lawsuits against PharmaTech LLC, the makers of the Diocto (docusate sodium) in question, have been filed relating to the contamination by a bacteria – Burkholderia cepacia. Three infant deaths have been attributed to this outbreak as defined by the CDC and confirmed by the FDA. While these incidents are related to a pharmaceutical product, if violations occurred on the pharma side, what do you think is happening on the nutraceutical side?

The recent FDA Warning Letter described two previous warning letters: Nov. 1 to Nov. 13, 2018 and March 12 to 16, 2012, where ABC Testing at the close committed to not to perform drug testing in the future. ABC Testing said it primarily tested botanical and nutritional products. According to the FDA, the company resumed drug testing in 2016 despite having not taken the necessary corrections to ensure the lab was capable of performing drug tests. How could this happen unchecked?

What appears to be the most concerning allegation by the FDA states that on July 16, 2016, the lab at ABC Testing performed microbiological testing on Diocto docusate sodium oral liquid stool softener Lot #201351513. ABC Testing then provided a certificate of analysis stating no detection of Burkholderia cepacia (B. cepacia). The FDA and the CDC tested samples of the same lot and found the presence of genetically matching B.cepacia isolated in both the lot tested and the ill patients. The FDA and CDC reported that at least 60 confirmed cases of illness or death associated with the presence of B. cepacia in the Diocto product. The FDA noted in the Warning Letter that ABC Testing did not have a test method suitable to detect the bacteria, so again how did this happen unchecked?

Pharmatech LLC then conducted a nationwide voluntary recall of the products affected by the contamination and discontinued production at the Davies, Florida location.

It could be said that the FDA and CDC system worked as it should in that it detected a dangerous outbreak and stopped the continued flow of product to the consumer. Hospitals, pharmacies, retailers, and e-tailers all worked to recall the identified products and presumably save lives. As evidenced by the lawsuits, that action does not satisfy the patients made ill or killed by the products.

Both in 2012 and 2019 the FDA commented on the drug manufacturing inadequacies specifically but also equipment, mechanical and software processes presumably shared by the entire lab. For example, from the 2019 FDA Warning Letter:

Your notebooks and worksheets for the (b)(4) analysis of (b)(4) Brd Spect SPF 50 lack documentation of lot numbers and expiration dates of standards.

All CGMP-related data must be retained by a contract testing laboratory to enable appropriate assessments and decisions by the quality unit and customers and to demonstrate ongoing control.

In your response, you stated that you updated notebooks and worksheets to “document the Lot Numbers and Expiry Date for the Standards and CRM used in Tests at all times.” Your response is inadequate because it is unclear whether you performed a global review of all your procedures related to notebooks and worksheets to determine if there is any additional missing information.

This violation is a repeat observation from your 2012 inspection.


Many pieces of equipment that you used for drug product testing were out-of-calibration or not validated. For example, you used stability chambers to perform stability testing on drug products such as (b)(4) Docusate K Lot #1605311, (b)(4) Docusate K lot #1606061, (b)(4) (docusate) lot #1606201, and (b)(4) (docusate) lot #1702061. However, the stability chambers have not been calibrated since 2016. Chart recorders indicate that stability chamber temperatures also fluctuated wildly without any explanation or investigation on multiple occasions for months at a time. Chart recorders also indicated that the stability chambers’ actual temperatures were different from their intended temperatures on multiple studies for extended periods.

Both of these citations are reflective of activity effecting all aspects of the testing lab and are unlikely to be confined to only one element of the lab. The result is this Warning Letter should not be interpreted by this industry as “merely” a drug warning; it is highly relatable to dietary supplements.

It must be questioned why repeat violations go unimpeded with only threats of actions should the breach occur again. The FDA stated, “Repeated failures demonstrate that executive management oversight and control over the testing of drugs are inadequate.” They went on to recommend a cGMP consultant in 2019 as if to suggest the consultant would change the attitudes of management that failed to follow the commitment it provided to the FDA in 2012. As with previous FDA Warning Letters, FDA expresses the fact that each part of the supply chain should act, and be responsible, as extensions of the manufacturer’s facility. These Warning Letters confirm the FDA position that failure to comply with cGMP affects the quality, safety, and efficacy of the client’s products.

In 2012 ABC Testing agreed not to test drugs going further because it was not their primary expertise. But in 2019, the FDA continues to provide an implied green light to ABC Testing to move forward with drug testing provided the proposed corrective actions are taken. The enforcement action proposed in the FDA Warning Letter state the FDA “may (emphasis added) withhold approval of pending drug applications listing your facility.” The Warning Letter also states the FDA “may (emphasis added) re-inspect to verify that you have completed your corrective actions.” As evidenced by the actions of the FDA to ABC Testing, this verification by the FDA of corrective actions may take almost seven years to occur. Is this true, responsible oversight?

In both the Confidence USA and ABC Testing matters, the FDA took years to follow up on the issues brought up during inspection. It is recognized the FDA is singularly neither the problem nor the solution as they do not have the resources to facilitate the responsibilities they are entrusted to protect. The missing component of marketplace protection comes from within the industry and not a reliance on external oversight. When an FDA Warning Letter is provided, the companies within the industry must be more vigilant to ensure the oversights mentioned are corrected. If the FDA Warning Letter indicates the facility is not equipped to handle drugs, no company should submit drugs to that facility without significant due diligence. Do companies that used ABC share the responsibility here? Presumably so – across both the pharma and dietary supplements landscape. Know who your prospective partners are and check out their FDA history. It makes good business sense as well as risk management practice.

In the case of Confidence USA, we, as an industry, need to adhere to the first warnings and not the last warnings. Even after two months of Trust Transparency Center bringing a brighter light to the issues presented by the Department of Justice to Confidence USA, these Confidence, USA products remain on

This listing of the Amazon offerings can go on, but the point is that it should not. Amazon, as well as every component in the supply/retail chain, is ultimately held accountable for the trust and confidence we need to ensure. Get these products off the market through whatever means possible.

While that accountability can occur at the behest of the FDA, CDC, the civil and class action attorneys or the consumer, the reality is we, as an industry, must be collectively capable of policing ourselves. We at Trust Transparency Center are working to identify and correct the problems and contribute to the collective success we are confident we together can achieve.


Unlock the Power of Transparency: Schedule a Meeting Now

Ready to Illuminate Your Path?
Partner with Trust Transparency Today.

Get inTouch

Lori Diez

Lori Diez combines compassion and excellence to lead organizations to their next level. A small-town Texas childhood taught her the value of hard work and relationships, which she uses to foster teamwork that brings results that have transformed cultures and programs to their highest potential. Her successful career in pharmaceutical and nutraceutical sales leadership and event hosting has prepared her to deliver results as the COO of TrustTransparency, where she uses her industry knowledge to ensure that the company’s operations run smoothly as they support nutraceutical companies in their mission to help others. Lori’s passion for charity reflects her belief that individuals working together can change the world, no matter how small their contribution to the effort. This year, she looks forward to continuing over a decade of service at the Houston Livestock Show And Rodeo, where she will be the Chairman of the Livestock Committee.

Conference Handouts

Conference Handouts

CoQ10 Statin Associated Myaglia Meta Study Barry Tan 0618 Case Study

CoQ10 Statin Associated Myaglia Meta Study Barry Tan 0618 (1)

Statin Q10 Effect Case Study

Statin Q10 Effect Case Study

Schedule Consultation with Trust Transparency

Glynnda Steinford

Glynnda Steinford, Trust Transparency Consulting’s Director of Customer Relations, brings over four decades of healthcare experience to her vital role in client engagement and relationship building. Her diverse background spans from administering medical groups to impactful stints in pharmaceutical and nutraceutical sales, all underlined by her degree in Healthcare Administration.

At the heart of Glynnda’s work is her talent for nurturing long-term connections, a skill she leverages to enhance client experiences and partnerships within the consultancy. Beyond her professional commitments, she enjoys life’s simple pleasures, whether it’s her love for cats and cooking or her ventures into golf, always prioritizing cherished moments with family and friends. Her personal interests echo the dedication and warmth she extends in her professional network, making her an invaluable asset to the team.

Caiti Dowden

Caiti Dowden stands as a crucial pillar at Trust Transparency Consulting, bringing invaluable insight and expertise to her role as Senior Executive Assistant’ since her start in 2018. With an academic background from Sam Houston University and a career shift from education to the nutraceutical sphere in 2010, Caiti has cultivated a sharp acumen for dissecting industry trends and bolstering strategic decision-making.

Her transition from Data Analyst reflects her growth and deep understanding of the business landscape. Caiti’s commitment goes beyond professional excellence; she thrives on balance, drawing from her rich life outside of work to enhance her organizational contributions. Whether it’s family time, volunteering, or rooting for Houston’s sports teams, she believes in embracing experiences to fuel her professional creativity and insight.

In her current role, Caiti’s dedication to dynamic business analysis and operational support proves her to be an irreplaceable asset to our team, embodying the synergy of personal enrichment and professional success.

Pam Hilpert

Pam Hilpert, Chief of Staff at Trust Transparency Consulting, has been instrumental in the firm since its inception, leveraging her 17 years of accounting experience, including a significant tenure in the nutrition sector. Her collaboration with Scott Steinford spans various successful ventures, emphasizing her integral role in the company’s financial and strategic initiatives.

An alumnus of Sam Houston State University, Pam holds degrees in both Business Administration and Accounting, as well as an MBA, adding academic heft to her practical industry insights. Beyond her professional prowess, Pam is passionate about family, enjoys live music, delves into quilting, and volunteers at her church, reflecting her well-rounded life.

Her multifaceted expertise and longstanding dedication make Pam a cornerstone of Trust Transparency Consulting’s operational strength and team unity.

Scott Steinford

Scott Steinford, a trailblazer in strategic leadership, boasts a certified M&A background, having navigated companies from their genesis to industry prominence. His brainchild, Trust Transparency Consulting, born in 2007, stands as a testament to his dedication to ethical business practices and strategic foresight, offering industry stakeholders invaluable guidance.

Beyond founding and steering companies, Scott has enriched the business landscape with his insightful keynotes and prolific written contributions, emphasizing his commitment to elevating industry standards. His executive tenure shines in roles as CEO or President of for-profits like ZMC-USA and Doctor’s Best, extending to significant contributions in non-profit sectors.

Notably, Scott’s influence is a driving force in the CoQ10 market, where his leadership has significantly bolstered the ingredient’s global presence. His roles in various capacities, including as a New Hope Ambassador, keep the community informed, providing in-depth industry reports and insights.

An active advocate within professional associations and an Editorial Advisor for leading industry publications, Scott’s expertise is both recognized and sought after. With academic roots in Pre-Law and a Master’s in Law, his journey transcends textbooks, embodying real-world business acumen and transformative leadership.

Scott Steinford merges visionary entrepreneurship with principled leadership, creating a legacy of innovation, growth, and unwavering commitment to industry excellence.