Hi BBM,
This may be a good article to discuss on the podcast during the monthly research review. Not sure if you all have seen the review paper published by the ISSN regarding supplements and laws regarding their safety and legal oversight by government entities. I read through it and they seem to be conveying that the supplement industry is more heavily monitored for safety and efficacy than it really is.
Their first claim “In summary, the primary regulatory body responsible for the dietary supplement industry is the FDA (as well as the FTC). Key aspects of FDA regulation include, but are not limited to, new dietary ingredients, labeling requirements, and safety monitoring”. This seems to be omitting the fact that FDA monitoring is post-market surveillance rather than the pre-market process of drug manufacturing.
For another claim made is that “In summary, contrary to some media claims, dietary supplements are regulated on a higher level than conventional foods regarding safety, manufacturing, and labeling” . This seems misleading they aren’t making the comparison in relationship to drug safety which supplements are more akin to rather than food safety.
These are just a few examples. I feel like there’s a lot to be said in this review article that can be taken apart in a journal club style.
On a personal note I did research under Dr. Antonio in college and presented posters at ISSN. As a resident physician now, with more experience critically evaluating research, I can see how the ISSN in this paper has quite a conflict of interest in this matter.
Here’s the link to the full text as well:
Thanks
Rithin