Supplements aren’t reviewed for safety and effectiveness, but disclaimers about health benefits are required on products.

The Food and Drug Administration is considering a rule change that would cut back on how often dietary supplement warnings must appear on packaging, a move experts say could make them easier to miss.

Unlike prescription drugs, the FDA doesn’t review dietary supplements for safety and effectiveness before they hit the market.

A 1994 federal law requires supplement companies to include a disclaimer when they make health claims like “supports immune health” or “promotes heart health” or better memory. According to the law, next to promises about benefits, the packaging must display in boldface type: “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”

all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 10 months ago (1 child)

They're already basically nonexistent

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    Look no further than RFK "anti-vax pro-heroin" Jr. and his band of merry morons like Dr. Oz shilling their supplement brands intent on "curing" anything from COVID to the Measles. This is pure grift, make no mistake.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    outside of vitamins, and some nutrients every other supplements is snakesoil, and even harmful. i once was in "chronic lyme community" and they were using supplments based on pseudoscience and treating themselves, yea it was causing alot of side effects, plus the antibiotics they were chugging down.

  • source
  • 13 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 61 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

    Jesus. The regulations for dietary supplements are already almost nonexistent (Thanks DSHEA!). That has led to significant harm at times.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    Fucking make it easier for the scammers, suits this administration perfectly

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago* (1 child)

    What is everybody's favorite snake oil?

    I need to cure my daughter of consumption so she can be married off for a dowry ASAP.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Hmm maybe I should start a business scamming maga dipshits with health supplements that are actually just powdered sugar or oregano or whatever. I could probably make a killing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago

    I wonder what mental poison "Dr Oz" fed RFK Jr ....

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Bring back radithor for these fucking morons.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago*

    This is precisely what would change:

    the possible proposal would still require companies to include the disclaimer on their products at least once, but it would no longer require it to be repeated every time a health claim appears.

    Meh, not nearly as big a deal as the headline suggests. And from the looks of this thread, not many people actually got this far into the article, and just made assumptions based on the headline, so sensationalism wins again, I guess...

  • source