Nutrition Business Journal

10 years from now, what should the nutrition industry look like?

Assessing progress since 2002, envisioning more progress for 2022

What is in this article?:

  • 10 years from now, what should the nutrition industry look like?
  • The Future

Nutrition Business Journal co-founder Thomas Aarts envisions an ideal future for the nutrition industry.

This article is the third in a series addressing the state of the dietary supplement industry in a post- DSHEA world. The first article, written with Loren Israelsen of the United Natural Products Alliance and published in December 2002 inside the pages of Nutrition Business Journal, urged companies to resist their reactive stance in defending DSHEA, and instead focus greater energies on self-regulation. We encouraged the supplement industry to take responsibility for its own future, proving by our own proverbial hand that this industry is well-regulated. Thanks to self-policing initiatives and more effective communication between the industry and FDA, FTC and Congress, I believe this has happened.


In December 2003, Mr. Israelsen and I surfaced again with another editorial in NBJ that addressed the signature issues of the day: the lingering myth that our industry is unregulated, the scourge of drugs posing as dietary supplements, and our lack of quality and safety standards. Since that article appeared, the ephedra ban and the steroid precursor ban went some signifcant measure toward debunking this myth. The ephedra ban, in particular, robbed industry foes of their tallest lightning rod, while the ban on steroid precursors began to seriously address concerns over drug spiking.

We are still dealing with adulteration issues today, driven largely by economic opportunity and vague testing and analysis protocols. To address this issue more pointedly, the American Botanical Council is working with several groups, including the American Herbal Pharmacopoeia, to provide a series of reports on adulterants in botanical materials. The reports from this project will publish over the next few years, with the first white paper on solvents to come out this year.

On the question of protecting the most important provisions of DSHEA outlined in our second article—a definition of dietary supplements, distinguishing between supplements and food additives, and the burden-of-proof problem—I believe that the industry has been even more successful. There are now more executives and leaders who understand the importance of DSHEA’s core provisions. Our leading trade associations have grown larger and more effective at communicating with each other and the government.

In 2001, the Dietary Supplement Education Association (DSEA) was formed with a stated mission to educate the public about the positive aspects of dietary supplements. This group eventually merged with the Natural Products Foundation, but before that it did help to fund and broadcast the results of the Lewin Group Study, which documented concrete savings in healthcare costs associated with five supplements. The first two—calcium & folic acid— demonstrated combined savings of over $14 billion over five years, while omega- 3 supplements, glucosamine and saw palmetto showed substantial promise for improving health and quality of life.

Since Congress heard the results of this study in September 2004, growing numbers of consumers have taken to calcium and folic acid, so the actual savings could be even higher. Moreover, the consumption of omega-3s has increased dramatically, with consumers now spending over $1 billion annually on omega-3 supplements in hopes of preventing cardiovascular disease. In 2005, the Centers for Disease Control estimated that at least 84,000 heart-disease-related deaths each year could be prevented with omega-3s.

As healthcare costs and related personal bankruptcies approach staggering numbers, some industry leaders have proposed that we update the Lewin Study, adding several additional supplements such as vitamin D3, vitamin K and magnesium, among others. I concur. I believe that certain nutritional ingredients, whether delivered in supplement or food form, can help mitigate healthcare costs from diseases associated with the Western diet. These supplements can counterbalance the perverse incentives in the current healthcare system for quick fixes and sickcare solutions.

On the question of restoring public confidence, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) has implemented and funded a successful industry self-policing initiative in partnership with the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division. With enforcement teeth provided by FTC, the program allows industry to self-regulate its peers over erroneous and illegal claims. This single intitative has unquestionably raised the bar and helped to weed out many bad apples.

Finally, the industry has made a concerted effort to communicate to the media and the general public that we are, in fact, a regulated industry. Last year, at the annual NBJ Summit, several industry leaders charged CRN with creating a summary document entitled, “Does DSHEA Give FDA Adequate Authority over Dietary Supplements?” The report cites FDA commissioners verbatim, on the record, that DSHEA does provide the adequate authority to regulate dietary supplements. Another document that came out of that Summit was a brief timeline, drafted by Al Powers of NOW Foods, of all regulatory acts and developments intersecting with the supplement industry from 1994 to 2011.

These two documents were used extensively by trade associations and industry leaders to help explode the myth of an unregulated industry in the minds of regulators, government officials and consumers. Changing existing mindsets is a challenging endeavor, and much more is left to do on this front.
 

Discuss this article 9

Nice article. I like your suggestion of working toward a desired state/systems theory. Begin with the end in mind....

Let's establish clear goals for industry, including in healthcare and with consumers. There is great opportunity here.

I've been in the industry more than 25 years..........we are positioned to take these steps. Let's do it!

Gretchen Vannice, MS, RD
Nutrition Research Consultant

By NutritionRD  on Jul 6, 2011

Now what are we gonna do about it?!?!?!?!
Ideas are useless without execution, right?

By Anonymous (not verified)  on Jul 7, 2011

Build the field and they will come. Systems approach works. The industry has always been a work in progress with asimple ideas as backdrop - sustainabilty, closer to nature solutions, personal responsibiltiy, and (ideally) integrity. Time for next steps, clarify and verify vision.
Solutions to problems and market messaging come together when the end is in mind, vision is shared and committed to by all stake holders.
The real question is how to strategically build concensus.
Nice article Tom.

By FranS (not verified)  on Jul 8, 2011

Does it sound like this article was written before the FDA's NDI guidance document was issued? Seems to me the NDI document has in it the specter of crushing innovation and removing a large percentage of ingredients and products from store shelves. Absolute worst-case scenario.

By Todd Runestad  on Jul 10, 2011

Science Based Nutraceutical/Supplement Products and their respective product positioning will grow the market and provide the basis for future Health Care reimbursed coverage!

By Rob Miotke (not verified)  on Jul 10, 2011

Don't lose your hat yet Todd. It's just a guidance document and we have time to respond as an industry. Also, don't forget that this is D.C. we're dealing with. Nothing happens fast....especially when there isn't money around to fund new oversight initiatives. It's a Tea Party!

By Anonymous (not verified)  on Jul 12, 2011

Hi there! I really respect what you’re posting here. Keep posting that way.

By cardaddy (not verified)  on Jul 13, 2011

Clinical studies for "nurtraceuticals" are few and usually entail a biased study of fewer than a couple dozen volumteers. It's about time the FDA addressees the "Snake Oil" industries with health benefit claims that are anedoctal and not substantiated in any truly scientfic basis.

By Anonymous (not verified)  on Jul 25, 2011

The push towards "human clinical trials" people, it just isn't going to happen for the majority of ingredients. There is not the financial incentive, they can't be patented. We are allowing our industry to be corraled (read: put to pasture) if we continue to beat that drum! Sure, it's great that NIH is focusing on that, at least "Integrative Medicine" is making inroads, thanks to the dedication of the MDs, NDs, DOs, DCs who serve in thousands of offices and clinics nationwide, and the retail and wholesale markets for supplements.
WE should be focusing on the inherent SAFETY and efficacy of natural ingredients, supplements, herbs. And sure, look for "evidence" where we can but focusing on the drug paradigm of "human clinicals" and "double blind placebo based" studies is not where we should be putting all our energies. The "placebos" are not defined, that is a complete separate blog and comment, but suffice it to say - we must focus on the glaringly obvious fact that supplements are basically SAFE. I still hold that the NDI "guidance" was delayed for 17+ years because frankly, the FDA was hoping someone, anyone, would DIE from a dietary supplement!
Our fragmentation and apathy as an industry will be our demise, innovation will grind to a halt, and the public - and health - will also suffer. Unless we band together. Ben Franklin was right, we will all hang separately if we don't hang together.

By Anonymous (not verified)  on Jul 27, 2011
Post new comment
Sign In or register to use your New Hope 360 ID
(optional)

 

Connect with NBJ
Upcoming Events
RSS