Because every bottle is clearly labeled “The FDA has not evaluated this for treating any condition”. There are a great many products that the FDA hasn’t evaluated that are still sold, why should these be any different?
The reason that these get to make health claims and stuff without regulation, and get special treatment, is lobbying resulting in that act. Otherwise they would have been regulated.
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/pharmacy/walgreens-tes...
> "The safety of our patients is very important, but we also have to do what our customers are requiring us to do," Walgreens CEO Stefano Pessina told the WSJ. "We see that when we don’t sell tobacco, we have a lot of [negative] reactions."
They need to avoid making claims that they can treat or diagnose some condition. They do their best to hint at it without crossing the line, and frequently blatantly do cross it. The FDA does not have anywhere near the manpower to enforce it. And when they do finally get around to it, the brand vanishes, and a new one appears with exactly the same product lineup.
The sector has long lost any entitlement to benefit of the doubt. They are knowingly making illegal claims and using a disclaimer as a fig leaf even though everything else on the package contradicts it.
It's not a manpower issue, it's not a legal issue. It's not against the law because they wrote the law. There is no line they try to avoid crossing because that line was erased by lobbyists in 1994.