DEAR DR. BLONZ: I appreciate that you answer questions about health claims made on social media. I am continually amazed when I want to learn about a condition and then find it can be treated successfully using a particular promoted product. It seems there are cures out there for everything, often promoted by doctors, but it is unclear whether these are doctors with genuine credentials. What bothers me is the lack of guardrails, and I wanted your comment on how all this continues to exist. -- S.K., Lombard, Illinois
Advertisement
DEAR S.K.: I am less concerned with who hawks the products, and more so with the products themselves. A laissez-faire attitude over the past few decades has spawned an unbridled atmosphere of health claims associated with nutritional supplements. Social media, often with an anti-science bent, has amplified the situation. While it is against the law to make unsubstantiated health claims, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other consumer protection agencies don't have the resources to make any significant dent in the infractions.
Another element of uncertainty involves adding supplements alongside a doctor-prescribed medication regime. A 2017 study in the respected journal American Family Physician reported that nearly 25 percent of U.S. adults take supplements along with their prescription medications -- and possible interactions must be considered. (For more on drugs, supplements and potential interactions, see b.link/cvkx2c3.)
While consumer protection laws can vary between states, scientific literature has no such boundaries. The FDA, FTC, state agencies and other respected elements of the supplement industry wouldn't dispute the need for a mechanism to regulate claims that lack clinical evidence, but testing for safety and effectiveness can be a thorny issue. Manufacturers might have a lack of economic incentive to fund research if it involves non-proprietary substances -- because other companies selling the same substances could benefit from their results when published. Many companies offer "proprietary blends," but the missing link is clinical evidence showing that their product's blend works as they claim. Then there is the issue of bogus claims that escape any accountability. The burden of proof should rest with the companies profiting from supplement sales -- not consumer protection agencies inadequately funded for the task.
I would support a goal for the supplement industry to establish a self-policing policy to evaluate their health claims. A panel of independent scientists could be empowered to decide on the essential proof for any particular claim. A ratings system as simple as the red-yellow-green of a traffic light could link to a consumer-friendly database of evidence.
Having something like this on the product's label or website could empower consumers to patronize brands that favor consumer protection and education. In the meantime, I will continue to respond to my readers' queries.
Send questions to: "On Nutrition," Ed Blonz, c/o Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.