Buyer
Beware?
False Health Claims for Dietary Supplements
24
September 2003
by Peter Everett, vice president and co-founder of DSQI, and Wyn
Snow, managing editor
Is
the Web riddled with false health claims for dietary supplements?
Yes,
according to a recent article in the Journal of the American
Medical Association (JAMA). Doctors Morris and Avorn
searched the Web with the names of eight popular herbal products.
They analyzed 522 pages the search engines found, and characterized
their health content as "worrisome."
A
recent article in The Boston Globe described their research
findings: "Of 338 sites selling products or linked to a vendor,
81 percent made one or more health claims that have not been backed
up by FDA reviews; of those, 55 percent claimed to treat or cure
specific diseases."
Editor's
note: Dietary supplements are allowed to give "structure/function
claims"describing how the supplement affects the structure
or function of the human body. These structure/function claims
do not have to be reviewed by the FDA prior to use. However,
claims to treat or cure diseases (other than nutritional
deficiency diseases) are explicitly not allowedunless
approved by the FDA. |
The
Boston Globe reportage gave a fair and balanced portrayal.
Globe staff reporter Christopher Rowland also presented the
point of view of the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA),
a trade organization representing herbal supplement manufacturers,
and was reasonably accurate in describing the regulatory framework
for supplementssomething often lacking from recent media coverage
of dietary supplements.
Patient
safety is the primary concern of Doctors Morris and Avorn: "We want
to make sure consumers are not misled with the properties of these
products and how they are marketed." The JAMA article concludes,
"More effective regulation is required to put this class of therapeutics
on the same evidence-based footing as other medicinal products,"
which implies that consumers would be better protected if all health
claims had to be approved by the FDA before the product could be
marketed, as is the case for drugs.
However,
AHPA disagrees that preapproval of marketing claims would benefit
the consumer. According to Suzanne Shelton, an AHPA spokesperson,
"It's a fallacy that the FDA-approval model is a guarantee of anything,
other than that the companies had enough money to go through the
FDA approval process" (which can often run as high as $500 million
dollars). Michael McGuffin, president of AHPA, thinks stricter enforcement
is a better approach than stricter regulation, and says, "Why would
we want the FDA to enforce a different law when they aren't enforcing
this one?"
SupplementQuality.com
responds
"False
claims for supplements should be prosecuted under existing law just
as vigorously as false claims for any other product or service,"
says Peter Everett, vice president and cofounder of the Dietary
Supplement Quality Initiative.
The
crux of the matter is what constitutes a "false claim." Historically,
the FDA has called any claim that they haven't specifically approved
as "false."
For
example, in 1989 the FDA threatened a manufacturer of aspirin for
making the "false claim" that low-dose aspirin can prevent heart
attacks. It was known then, as it is now, that daily low-dose aspirin
can prevent about one-third of all heart attacks. Until recently
the FDA was threatening legal action against the scientifically
well-established claim that fish oil, specifically omega-3 fatty
acids, can be used to reduce the risk of heart attacks and stroke.
The
explosion of new scientific information about the benefits of supplements,
and risks for that matter, is too big to squeeze through the bottleneck
of a single bureaucratic arbiter of "truth."
The
medical and scientific communities have known this for a long time.
Their solution was to set up the process of peer review, and create
specialized committees for the purpose of issuing guidelines and
consensus statements.
Practitioners
of traditional herbal medicine have also amassed a valuable body
of empirical knowledge about the safety, efficacy, and interactions
of herbal supplements.
Consumers
need to have available the full range of information to make informed
choices, including summaries of the latest findings in the medical
community. Neither the FDA's conclusions nor the findings of medical
studies are always reliable. For example the FDA has approved many
drugs that turn out to be unsafe or ineffective, and doctors have
recently reversed themselves on the benefits of hormone-replacement
therapy.
The
quality of dietary supplements cannot be higher than the quality
of information about them. By the admission of former FDA Commissioner
Jane Henney, existing regulations under the Dietary Supplement Health
and Education Act contain all the tools the FDA and FTC need to
root out fraudulent claims. They also allow truthful claims that
aren't yet blessed by the FDA to be made. This is exactly the kind
of information and protection that consumers want and need.
Sources
Christopher
Rowland. "Study cautions buyers of online herbal products." The
Boston Globe, 17 September 2003.
Dr.
Charles A. Morris (of Brigham and Women's Hospital's Division of
Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics) and Dr. Jerry Avorn
(of Brigham and Women's and Harvard Medical School). Abstract of
"Internet Marketing of Herbal Products." Journal of the American
Medical Association, 17 September 2003. (JAMA. 2003;290:1505-1509.)
|