“Fat incinerator. Metabolism booster. Thermo activator.” The shelves of over-the-counter sports supplement aisles are adorned with promising labels, luring consumers with performance-enhancing claims.
However, a recent scientific investigation has unveiled a disconcerting truth: a mere 11 percent of nearly 60 tested dietary supplements actually contain the specified quantity of key ingredients listed on their labels. Even more troubling, 40 percent of these supplements contained no detectable amount of the advertised ingredients at all.
The findings, published on July 17 in JAMA Network Open, cast a glaring spotlight on the discrepancy between label promises and actual product contents. Pieter Cohen, a primary care doctor at Cambridge Health Alliance, expressed his disbelief, remarking, “It’s incredible that in 40 percent of the products, the manufacturer doesn’t even bother putting any [of the ingredient] in.”
The study conducted by Cohen and his colleagues involved chemical analysis of 57 sports supplements boasting ingredients such as R. vomitoria, methylliberine, halostachine, octopamine, or turkesterone. These plant-based components were touted for their potential as stimulants or muscle-builders. However, only 34 of the products actually contained the claimed ingredient. Shockingly, a mere six had the correct quantity, while 28 displayed wildly inaccurate amounts ranging from 0.02 percent to a staggering 334 percent of the indicated quantity.
The implications are not to be taken lightly. Luis Rustveld, a dietician and epidemiologist at Baylor College of Medicine, expressed concern for individuals who might be hypersensitive to these ingredients, noting that they could be unknowingly consuming excessive amounts.
The research also unearthed another troubling revelation: seven of the tested products contained compounds prohibited by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This adds to the growing body of evidence highlighting the presence of potentially harmful drugs in supplements, a concern raised by scientists in the past.
In a striking departure from prescribed drugs, dietary supplements do not require FDA approval before entering the market. However, the FDA mandates that these supplements must, at the very least, contain the ingredients listed on their labels.
Patricia Deuster, a nutrition specialist at the Uniformed Services University, emphasized the challenges faced by consumers. She highlighted the difficulty in making informed decisions about purchasing supplements without external assistance. Third-party organizations like NSF, BSCG, and USP play a crucial role by analyzing supplements and providing their seal of approval. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Defense has developed an online scorecard to help consumers evaluate supplements.
Amidst the uncertainty surrounding supplements, experts advocate for a skeptical approach. Cohen advises consumers to exercise utmost skepticism, while Rustveld echoes the sentiment, cautioning against falling for claims that sound too good to be true. As the allure of dietary supplements remains, it becomes evident that vigilance and informed decision-making are paramount when navigating this complex terrain.
