I found this post at the New York Times interesting but unsurprising:
The New York State attorney general’s office accused four major retailers on Monday of selling fraudulent and potentially dangerous herbal supplements and demanded that they remove the products from their shelves.
The authorities said they had conducted tests on top-selling store brands of herbal supplements at four national retailers — GNC, Target, Walgreens and Walmart — and found that four out of five of the products did not contain any of the herbs on their labels. The tests showed that pills labeled medicinal herbs often contained little more than cheap fillers like powdered rice, asparagus and houseplants, and in some cases substances that could be dangerous to those with allergies.
[…]
“Mislabeling, contamination and false advertising are illegal,†said Eric T. Schneiderman, the state attorney general. “They also pose unacceptable risks to New York families — especially those with allergies to hidden ingredients.â€
The attorney general’s investigation was prompted by an article in the New York Times in 2013 that raised questions about widespread labeling fraud in the supplement industry. The article referred to research at the University of Guelph in Canada that found that as many as a third of herbal supplements tested did not contain the plants listed on their labels — only cheap fillers instead.
Hat tip: Glenn Reynolds
What’s missing from the article is why? It’s not simple greed on the part of the “major retailers”. Walgreens, Target, GNC, and Walmart don’t manufacture the supplements and, presumably, although they’re the ones getting sued they’re victims of fraud as certainly as their customers are. Even the private label supplements that bear their brand names aren’t manufactured by them.
I strongly suspect that even Walgreens et al.’s suppliers aren’t the actual culprits. I’m guessing that they’re paying for and using ingredients in the things they’re compounding under the mistaken assumption that they’re the real deal.
You may not be aware of this but practically all food additives, whether for nutrition, color, or texture are made in China and I’m guessing that the same is true of many of the ingredients used in the supplements in question. As was clear from the dog food adulteration scandal of a couple of years ago and which I wrote about extensively, practically nobody up or down the supply chain does any kind of quality assurance. They just hope for the best.
Of corporations did quality assurance, two things would happen.
First it would cut into corporate profits, and we all know that maximizing profits is The One True Goal of corporations.
Second, it would call into question outsourcing so much production to the Third World. And they don’t want to upset the apple cart. Plus, it’s probably racist to even hint of a shifty Chinaman, so shut up & eat yer daily lead supplement.
My wife had a health food store, but after Katrina, she had to go out of business. She knows a lot more about this than me, but she hates those cheap brands for this very reason. Many high end brands will (or would) only sell to health food stores. Their products are not cheap, but many of them will have them assayed for content.
Most of her customers would spend substantially more than a Walmart customer, and she could not compete with Walmart prices. After the storm, many of the customers never returned. and as they say, the rest is history.
The testing methodology is probably the reason for the results. If GNC claims that they had their products tested, their products have what is on the labels, but Walmart, Walgreens, and Target probably have no idea what is in their products. My wife hates GNC, but she does not like the quality of their ingredients.
Some wizkid has decided that if DNA is good enough for CSI:NY, it is good enough for supplemental testing.
This is a setup.
Old problem and well known. I used give a lecture on the topic. Even when they have the actual ingredients listed, the doses vary widely from what is on the packages. I wouldn’t worry much about though as I am told that the unregulated free market works best.
Steve
” practically nobody up or down the supply chain does any kind of quality assurance”
Nor do they have to, actually, as a matter of law. The manufacturers are shielded from the nasty FDA. See Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994. Which is one the reasons given by the New York AG for stepping in.
@sam, I cannot believe they are shielded from basic requirements that a product is what it says it is. That link references “ingredient” requirements for one thing.
I suspect these companies have done “quality assurance” by having contracts written with strongly worded guarantees/ indemnities from the suppliers. Unfortunately, the suppliers are probably judgment proof.
Haven’t read the article, but I wonder if the same is true for other supplements like vitamins.
One of the great unaddressed problems is that China does not have a robust system of civil law. So you win a lawsuit against the domestic middleman. Basically a rented warehouse and office without other assets. BFD. Going after the overseas supplier is a practical impossibility.
The real solution is independent QA before the goods leave China. That would be expensive enough that it would eat up the small margin that’s actually being made by producing the vitamins, coloring agents, texturing agents, or other additives in China. As I think Tasty mentioned above nobody wants to think about that because if they do, the games is over.
I’m shocked (shocked!!) that those supplements I’ve been taking haven’t made me look like a Greek god, cured all known ailments and made my wanger twice as long. OK, serious for a minute.
Dave and PD I think are correct, at least in my experience. You ought to be able to enforce truth in advertising,but try suing a mirage. And by the way, my experience in potential financings of generic drug cos suggests some healthy skepticism there too…..regulations be damned. Never got comfortable with those folks.
Sometimes buyer beware is all you have. I never promised you a rose garden. I know this will get me in trouble, but sometimes stupid people are going to get taken advantage of. Before you all go off against those evil corporations remember the scourge of government sponsored gambling called the Lottery…………and how it’s going to finance schools. Snicker. Kind of like marijuana now. Maybe sometimes we need to skip the tears and the faux outrage and whoop some people upside the head with a stern WTFU.
The 1994 law was not intended to allow defective products manufactured in China to be sold in big box retailers. It was intended to allow the medium herbal and supplemental producers to be able to sell to health food stores without the pharmaceuticals using the FDA to take over the industry.
If you go into Wholefoods, you will find the brands that are produced in the US, and they are not cheap. Unless they have changed, Wholefoods does not carry the crap brands. At one time, this was a requirement of the high end brands.
The bottles do not make any medical claims. St. John’s Wort could be for depression or it could be for toe fungus, and I do not think there is any dosage instructions either. These are all medical claims, and these fall under FDA testing regulations.
The healthcare industry does not want anybody honing in on their racket. A doctor prescribing Oxycontin, Valium, Quaaludes, Prozac, Paxil, Adderall, etc. like they were candy is just a drug dealer. The only difference between him and the criminal is the white coat and office.
The pharmaceutical company sells the drug, the doctor hooks the patient on the drug, the hospital provides rehab for the addict, the insurance company gets reimbursed by the government. Quite a little racket they have going. Any street hustler would get this in about 30 seconds.
(I personally think this is a lot of nonsense, but it is not my body.)
This reminds me of a recent CE session I attended to fulfill my LEAP requirement (legal, ethics, and something or other.) The gist of it was that there are all sorts of regulations that go unenforced 98% of the time but will bite you in the ass if you end up on the receiving end of the 2% of the time.
I mention that because the article, incorrectly IMO, conflated this incident with the failure to pass a stricter law in 1994. The fact that these retailers have been caught shows that lack of enforcement is the problem, not lack of regulation on the books. I’m not saying that one couldn’t make that argument too, but I don’t think this case supports it.
The net effect of a very large number of regulations and spotty enforcement is that regulators get to pick winners and losers.