Herbal Supplements Essay Research Paper Jeff Reese

Herbal Supplements Essay, Research Paper

Jeff Reese was a bright, energetic scholar-athlete at the University of Michigan when he died suddenly on December 9, 1997. His death came as a total shock because, as a wrestler, Reese was a fit young man without any known medical conditions. The autopsy said the cause of death was “rhabdomyolysis,” a cellular breakdown of skeletal muscle. His family, friends, doctors, and the NCAA all think Reese’s death was caused by the supplement creatine Reese was taking to improve his wrestling skills.

This unfortunate story highlights a growing problem in America today, namely the use of supplements. The September 22, 1998 New York Times states that supplements can be broadly defined to include herbs, amino acids, botanical extracts, quasi-vitamins as well as real vitamins and minerals. According to the September 8, 1998 Los Angeles Times, the supplements business is becoming big business, grossing $18 million dollars in annual sales. The April 30, 1998 USA Today reports that more than 130 million Americans regularly use supplements. Unfortunately, there are number of problems related to supplements that pose a number of critical dangers to consumers. The majority of these dangers can be linked to one single problem overall, the lack of adequate labeling.

Today we will explore one of the most troubling problems in society today, that being supplement labeling. We will begin by first, exploring the dangers associated with supplement labeling. Second, we will identify why these dangers exist. And finally, we will examine what steps we can take to protect ourselves when taking supplements

Ira Flatow in NPR’s September 25, 1998 edition of Talk of the Nation points out that there are over 20,000 supplements on the market today. Unfortunately, there are a number of dangers associated with these supplements because of their labeling. Those dangers include misleading labels, poor FDA regulation, and the lack proper medical research on supplements.

The first danger associated with supplements labeling is that current labels mislead the public. The August 28, 1998 Regulatory Intelligence Data Agency states that the DSHEA or the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 allows dietary supplements to make claims that a product MAY affect the structure or functioning of the body – but CANNOT make claims that they can treat, diagnose, cure or prevent a disease.

In addition, supplements labels are not always clear about what they may or may not do, thus confusing consumers about the supplements different uses. For example, the February 1998 Scientific American states that manufacturers have interpreted the law very liberally, making package statements like “Clinically Proven to Improve Memory and Concentration.” To the uninformed consumer, this statement implies legitimacy to supplements when that legitimacy really has not been established.

A second danger stems from the lack of adequate FDA regulation regarding supplements. According to the September 1, 1998 FDA Consumer, the DSHEA expanded the types of products that could be marketed as “supplements” beyond essential nutrients to include vitamins, minerals, herbs or other botanicals, amino acids, and any concentrate, metabolite, constituent, extract, or any combination of such ingredients. This means ANYTHING could be considered an essential nutrient and thus be marketed as a supplement.

A third danger centers on the lack of proper research on supplements and their effectiveness. The New York Times of September 17, 1998 reports that unlike drugs, dietary supplements do not have to be proven safe and effective before they are put on the market. Bruce Silverglade, legal affairs director for The Center for Science in the Public Interest , said in the August 7, 1998 Biloxi Sun Herald that Congress and the DSHEA has handcuffed the FDA by “allowing dietary supplement companies to make claims without first proving they’re true.” Dr. Marcia Angell, executive director of the New England Journal of Medicine, states that if supplements were held to the same standards as drugs, the “onus would be on the manufacturers to prove safety and efficacy, and I think most of them would shut down.” Because supplements are not tested, consumers are putting themselves at risk when they use them.

Now that we are more familiar with the dangers that exist, we can now turn our attention to why these dangers will continue to exist in the future. To do this, we will turn our attention to the new FDA supplement law and explore why this new law will not address current labeling problems.

According to the January/February 1998 FDA Consumer, new labeling rules will take place next month. These news labels will contain information about appropriate servings, how supplements should be referred to on a label and when products can use the terms “high potency” and “antioxidants.”

What is alarming about this new law is that it does not address the fundamental problems linked to supplements. The first reason why this new law will be ineffective is because these new labels still will not protect consumers from supplements or warn them of side effects. Prevention’s Guide to Healing Herbs from September 29, 1998 states that manufacturers are prohibited from labeling herb products to specify possible side effects. That’s because the FDA views posting t