From Deseret News archives:

Dietary data legislation opposed

Nutraceutical chief says reporting law not needed

Published: Monday, Jan. 9, 2006 8:26 p.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Should the dietary supplement industry be required to notify the government when its products cause adverse side effects?

Bruce Hough, president of Park City-based Nutraceutical Corp., says no.

However, legislation before Congress might force companies like Nutraceutical — which manufactures 3,000 nutritional and herbal products — to do exactly that.

Hough says Utah's nutritional and dietary supplement industry, with annual revenues estimated between $3 billion and $4 billion, is under attack.

At the center of the debate is the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act, a bill that would require nutritional supplement manufacturers to report to the Food and Drug Administration any serious adverse health events arising from their products.

On Monday, the issue was debated in downtown Salt Lake City.

"It doesn't really do anything other than create an overlay of bureaucracy on an industry that doesn't really have issues now," Hough said. "This is a solution looking for a problem, and there really isn't a problem."

Drug manufacturers are required to notify the government of all known adverse health events involving their products.

Story continues below
And Steven Mister, president of the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a trade organization based in Washington, D.C., that represents about 70 manufacturers of dietary supplements, said its members overwhelmingly support the legislation.

"If a consumer calls a company and tells the company that they had a serious adverse event, they ought to have a right to expect that the company is going to tell the FDA about it," Mister said. "This industry has a credibility problem with Congress and FDA because there's a perception that there is a serious problem."

Jonathan Emord, a legal expert in food and drug law, said under the new legislation anyone could file a complaint and not provide any proof of injury.

"The complaints are posted on the Web, so the information becomes, to the extent it is not true, defamatory," Emord said. "This is an open-ended invitation to expand the scope of inspections and inquiry into the operations of a dietary supplement company through the window of a complaint that may not even be legitimate."

Emord said the bill imposes a burden of proof on every accused company to establish that its product is safe by rebutting every adverse event report that is filed.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

True. It's not terribly funny and if it has any effect on society, it won't...

Letters: Christian founders

What else would you expect to find in a book called "The Founders on Religion"?

5A: Davis runs over Hunter

Ok not to be rude here, but check the stats, Hinds isnt first in yards and...

t-hinds = best player in utah

Anonymous: Was that English? I though conservatives believed if you are in...

Attack meant to kill apostle

Wow! Glad the Lord kept you safe. Separate comment: That was a horrible...

5A: Bingham rolls to title game

I have never been to a Utah high school game before as I am not from the...

Sponsor for gay-rights bills found

It would behoove the above commenters to recall that religion, including our...

Vandals take advantage of young Utes

Only 8000 attendance? BYU had 16,000+ tonight. What is wrong with Ute fans?...

ian you are the 3A MVP If you win next week so just do it that would be nice....

Advertisements
Advertisement