Supplement Labels Should Be a Test Result
I wrote this piece about supplement regulation.
The FDA estimated a $60 billion U.S. market of roughly 100,000 products in the dietary supplement market as of 2024, with most able to end up in storefronts like GNC without the agency having any knowledge of the product and no systemic way to know when new ones appear or what’s in them. The labels are allowed to worsen customer uncertainty through the use of “proprietary blends” with only the total weight of the blend required for reporting. Just over two decades ago, the FDA had considered requiring a more rigorous system, but in the end they backed off.
Since I first wrote about supplement regulation as a community college student, I’ve been of the opinion that every batch of every dietary supplement should be held from sale until a representative sample passes testing by an accredited, independent laboratory. The back panel should show verification of ingredients and amounts, as well as product-specific tests for contaminants or adulterants. The same rule should require the amounts of each ingredient to appear instead of letting the words “proprietary blend” tell you to go screw yourself for wanting more info. The laboratory should draw the sample under a documented chain of custody and report the results directly to the FDA instead of allowing repeated testing with only a favorable certificate being sent in. Each lot should also carry a code linking the buyer to a public result while coming with the same kind of insert one gets with a new pharmaceutical. Failed tests should remain part of the public record even if a batch is abandoned and destroyed.
The FDA already operates an accredited food-laboratory program, and NIST and NIH develop the reference materials and methods such testing requires. Extending that system to supplements would require more laboratories and better assays for difficult products. The industry makes $60 billion a year and can pay for them. Testing each batch will not establish that a supplement works or make its marketing honest. It will answer the more basic question the current system too often leaves open: does this bottle contain the ingredients and doses printed on its label? The answer should come from the batch in the buyer’s hands.
Do you think this would be too stringent of a regulation? Do you think it'd be beneficial regardless of your answer to the previous question?
Full piece: https://theedgeofepidemiology.substack.com/p/supplement-labels-should-be-a-test