Vitamin and Dietary Supplements
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, has regulations on dietary supplement products based on the Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994. In addition, manufacturers are not required to submit proof of product safety to FDA prior to marketing dietary supplements, except when supplements contain a novel dietary ingredient (a dietary ingredient not sold in this country before Oct. 15, 1994) that has not been preserved in the food supply as a food-use article in a form that has not been chemically altered by the food. Now, under the Acts structure, dietary supplements containing new products not marketed in the U.S. prior to 1994, the date that we passed the DSHEA, must file a petition with FDA 75 days prior to marketing, and if it is not sold as a supplement, must file a petition with FDA within 75 days before the date we passed DSHEA, in the form of food that has been manufactured.
The core structure of DSHEA allows for any products that were marketing as food additives at the time of enactment of the Act to remain on the market, except where the FDA can demonstrate a safety issue in the specific product or product line–this is what is called a grandfather clause; manufacturers have to submit the petition to the FDA before marketing any new ingredients. The supplements lobby worked hard to make sure the FDA would be unable to maintain any oversight of vitamins, either via NLEA or some other means. Their driving force was Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who was the primary responsible for the resulting 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), signed by President Bill Clinton. The law was designed to permanently prohibit FDA from applying the NLEA to regulated supplements. A coalition consisting of health stores, supplement users, the supplement industry, lobbyists, and sympathetic members of Congress created a new class of products, and at the same time declared that the new class of products would be exempt from FDAs mandate. The new class was created and declared by FDAs regulatory authority to be permanently exempted by NLEA. The Coalition composed of health stores, users, lobbyists, and the NLEA from applying it in the regulation of supplements, like vitamins. A coalition composed of health stores, users, supplement users, supplement manufacturers, lobbyists, and supportive members of Congress created a new product category, created a new class, and at the same time declared this new category to not fall under FDAs mandate.
Bush signed into law the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA), which required nutrition labels on foods and supplements. The FDA issued proposed regulations implementing the NLEA, which stated that companies were making fraudulent claims, vitamins would be held to the same standards as other drugs, and that any claims would have to be supported by science. The supplement lobby immediately objected. FDA regulates dietary supplement manufacturing, production, labeling, and packaging under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), enacted in 1994 as a federal Food Amendment. Dietary supplement companies are responsible for having proof their products are safe, and to make sure that label claims are truthful and non-misleading claims. The FDA is required to provide proof of safety, that dietary supplements will have to meet the same standards as other medications, and that any claims will have to meet immediate counter-promotion. The FDA oversees dietary supplements by dietary supplements via the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA, enacted in 1994 as a federal dietary supplement health and education act.9 dietary supplement companies are required to possess proof that their products are safe, and for dietary supplements as adrug products. Dietary supplement companies are required to possess proof their products are truthful, not misleading claims. FDA has pursued enforcement actions against dietary supplement products for safety problems, manufacturing violations, and improper marketing or misbranding, including the use of prohibited disease claims. While structure/function claims, which describe the effect of a substance on bodily structure or function (e.g., helps improve memory), are allowed, disease claims–or claims that a product can diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent disease (e.g., reduces pain and stiffness associated with arthritis) are prohibited on dietary supplement labels and require FDA approval and evidence to be used on the labels of approved drug products. Bipartisan legislation would address the issue of nascent products by establishing a mandatory product listing rule for all dietary supplements, requiring manufacturers to provide FDA with a comprehensive list of the ingredients in their products, along with warnings and precautions and allergen statements, among other information.
We urge the Agency to publish final new dietary ingredient (NDI) guidelines offering protections to innovation and research; establish and clarify the legal pathway for hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) as a dietary supplement; implement a mandatory product listing, providing transparency for regulators and consumers alike; and address concerns about N-acetyl-l-cysteine (NAC) and other ingredients shared between supplements and medications. We urge the agency to release final New Dietary Ingredient (NDI) guidance that offers protection for innovation and research ; to establish and clarify a legal path to market for hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) as a dietary supplement ; to implement a mandatory product listing that provides transparency for regulators and consumers alike ; and to address the issues around N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC) and other ingredients that are shared among supplements and drugs. CHPA has enjoyed positive and productive cooperation with the FDAs Office of Nutrition Supplement Programs, as well as proposals for strengthening regulatory oversight, implementing a new process for new product notifications, as well as to create additional resources to support increased inspections and review activities. Pew encourages Congress to quickly pass bipartisan legislation and ensure safety and quality for all supplements in the marketplace.
Enforcement focus on companies who do not figure it out is always welcome, as long as the FDA does not get creative reinterpreting rules Congress intended to apply to dietary supplements in a way that would diminish or harm consumers access to a wide variety of health-promoting supplements. Now, it is complicated further by the fact that the FDA has a number of actual bureaucrats that loathe dietary supplements, and who would like to see premarket approvals, thereby driving down the costs of vitamins, minerals, and even herbal products. Amid rising consumer dietary supplement usage, which has spiked in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, Sens. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Mike Braun (R-IN) introduced bipartisan legislation April 26 that would provide Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency primarily responsible for these products, more oversight of products that are sold on the market.
The task force evaluated and averaging results from several studies looking at health outcomes associated with beta-carotene and vitamin E supplements. The expert panels concluded that, for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer, the harms of beta carotene supplementation outweighed the benefits, and there was no net benefit to supplementing with vitamin E for these purposes.
A recent study found that most patients in the U.S. are overly optimistic about the results that can be achieved with supplementation. The Prediction Period Consumers are constantly looking for supplements to improve their health, which provide all of the essential nutrients while on-the-go. Companies are pouring their resources into this as supplements are developed with shorter timeframes, with lower lifecycle costs compared with pharmaceutical products.
Add a Comment