Association responds to GAO supplement guidelines


Council for Responsible Nutrition has issued a statement in response to GAO supplement guidelinesA recent Government Accountability Office report on the supplement market regulation has met with a mixed response from a leading industry association.

The GAO’s January 2009 report acknowledged the progress that has been made in the area of regulation of dietary supplements, but stressed that the FDA should take further steps to improve oversight and consumer understanding.

In response, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) has praised the agency for highlighting the positive developments such as the adoption of the FDA Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) which the industry itself advocated and promoted.

"These kinds of improvements in industry regulation are the cornerstone of producing safe, high-quality dietary supplements used by more than 150 million Americans each year," said Steve Mister, president and CEO of CRN.

However, the association has criticized the report for its recommendations to submit all adverse event reports, and not just serious adverse effects under the current regulations, for FDA review.

"The agency is already overburdened and understaffed, and we are opposed to creating more bureaucratic paperwork that would not result in true benefits for consumer safety," added Mister.

He concluded by saying that the FDA should concentrate its limited resources on tighter enforcement with a view of ensuring that all companies live up to their commitments to protecting consumers and producing beneficial supplement products.

Personal Liberty

Personal Liberty News Desk

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.