FTC stabs at a class of alternative medicine, states it's not backed by modern science, and there should be disclaimers.

On November 16, 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued an enforcement policy about a form of alternative medicine: homeopathy. The FTC stated that homeopathy is not substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence. It went on to state that homeopathic “medicines” might not be deceptive if the advertisement or label effectively communicates that: 1) there is no scientific evidence that the product works; and 2) the product’s claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts.
This enforcement policy seems damaging to an already questionable class of alternative medicine. This policy statement was also reported in Scientific American on November 27, 2016, in an article entitled: “Homeopathic Medicine Labels Now Must State that Products Do Not Work.”
The FTC policy begs other questions. Must individuals who offer homeopathic remedies disclose to their customers that there is no scientific evidence that the medicine works? Will the FTC extend this policy to herbalism? And without giving these damaging disclaimers, have these alternative medicine providers violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (Florida Statutes, 501.201, et seq.)?