Nutritional science for mind health products
DSM Nutritional Products
Industry veterans Marc Ullman, James Neal-Kababick, Suzanne Shelton and Len Monheit spoke on the topic of current product testing programs, and what they see as the insufficiency of these models for securing consumer trust in scientifically valid products on the market.
Panelists recommended an independent testing program for the entire industry that would permit companies to publicly reaffirm the safety of their products while also weeding out those products and companies that cannot live up to what they print on their labels.
"There are problem products and problem companies out there with no long-term vision," said Neal-Kababick, a scientist with Flora Research Laboratories.
Len Monheit of NPICenter told attendees that, in speaking with dietary supplement companies, he often hears the question "why should good companies pay extra to show what they already know?"
The answer, according to the speakers, is that the industry's reputation and long-term livelihood is at stake as it weathers blow after blow from controversy surrounding products brought to media attention for allegedly being unsafe.
The speakers repeatedly pointed the finger at ConsumerLab.com as an unfavorable business model for fairly policing the industry. It is a fee-based company that tests products sold on the market, but does not make its results, methods or the names of its contract labs readily available.
ConsumberLab.com recently broke to the media that it found lead in leading brands of vitamins, but the company guarded details of the testing methods.
"We know that 'one size fits all' does not work for testing," said Neal-Kababick.
He explained that numerous factors such as the encapsulation technology or the excipients used in a product can affect the outcome of a test.
Neal-Kababick called on companies to make their single-lab validation methods for their ingredients available, so that the appropriate tests can be run on them as need arises. However he acknowledged many companies are reluctant to do this out of fear of releasing trade secrets.
The speakers praised the Natural Products Association's existing TruLabel testing program, but said its small size has prevented it from having an industry wide impact to date. They insisted if the industry does not group together to fill the void with a large scale industry wide testing program, the only voice heard by the mainstream media will be that of ConsumerLab.com.
"If we as an industry don't come up with an alternative, all of our complaining is just sour grapes," said Ullman, partner with Ullman, Shapiro, Ullman LLP.
Among other solutions, Ullman proposed the dietary supplement industry follow the example of the industry watchdog formed by the financial regulatory services industry, the NASD.
"They've come together and established a self-regulated body," he said.
What the dietary supplement industry needs, according to Ullman, is a not-for-profit
organization that truly has the consumers' best interests in mind. "It wouldn't lead the industry to being policed by a group that has other motives."
Apart from a lack of long term vision, another major obstacle to getting such a project underway is the question of financing and whether or not companies can be persuaded to step up to the plate and contribute, said panelists.
"The industry will have to fund this program and this is a notoriously frugal industry," said Suzanne Shelton, of the Shelton Group PR.
However, she remarked that as an increasing number of companies with scientifically solid products suffer, this situation could change and companies may advocate more strongly for an independent program that differentiates researched products from fly-by-night cure-alls.
"This kind of program could help marginalize the outliers," said Shelton.