California’s new supplement restrictions mark another advance in a growing state campaign that threatens access to affordable nutritional support. Action Alerts!
THE TOPLINE
- California joins New York in restricting sales of supplements marketed for weight loss or muscle building to minors, while similar proposals continue spreading across other states.
- Broad restrictions rely on misleading safety narratives, while creating barriers for consumers to health-promoting products.
- Join us in opposing these state bills and urging Congress to advance H.R. 7366, the Dietary Supplement Regulatory Uniformity Act, to preempt these misguided laws.
New restrictions on supplement sales draw strength from familiar scare stories—and threaten access to affordable nutritional support.
On September 28, Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 2030, restricting sales of over-the-counter diet pills and supplements represented for weight loss or muscle building to people under 18, with a prescription exception. California joins New York in adopting this approach.
The campaign is spreading: Ohio introduced HB 943 earlier this year, and New Jersey introduced A5487 in September. A slew of other states considered similar bills, but they ultimately did not move forward.
Protecting young people from eating disorders and dangerous products is a goal we share. But these measures restrict broad categories of lawful supplements that offer scientifically-proven benefits without requiring evidence that they cause harm.
A Broad Reach Beyond Diet Pills
California’s law allows courts to consider ingredients, claims about metabolism or strength, and even product placement in stores or online. Online sellers must use database age verification, verified adult delivery, or both. Retailers may limit access to covered products. These requirements can make it more difficult for all consumers, not just minors, to purchase these supplements.
ANH has warned for years that loosely defined restrictions can sweep in products supporting ordinary nutrition and fitness. Meanwhile, differing state rules create uncertainty and increased costs for smaller businesses.
Proponents cite associations between diet-pill use and later eating-disorder diagnoses. But an association does not establish causation—or demonstrate that broad supplement restrictions will prevent eating disorders.
How Headlines Distort the Evidence
The more important point is that these bills gain traction in an environment where supplements are repeatedly portrayed as dangerous, ineffective, and unregulated.
ANH has challenged that narrative again and again and again. Our coverage of poison-control reports explained why calls about exposure and accidental ingestion should not become evidence that supplements used appropriately are broadly unsafe.
Consider the often-used estimate of 23,000 supplement-related emergency-room visits annually. Lost amidst alarmist headlines is the fact that roughly one-fifth of these ER visits involved unsupervised children; among adults 65 and older, about 38 percent involved choking or other swallowing problems. Many more cases likely involve sexual enhancement or exercise supplements spiked with illegal ingredients. These findings support specific responses: secure storage, suitable pill formulations, and scrutiny of misbranded or illegal products which the FDA already has the power to remove. Presenting the total 23,000 visits as a measure of toxicity from ordinary supplement use is, in our view, a lie by omission.
Harvard Health’s recent blog titled “Don’t buy into brain health supplements” offers another example. Despite sweeping statements about absent evidence, the article acknowledges that the Harvard-led COSMOS trial found cognitive benefits from a daily multivitamin in older adults.
This is another familiar trope: “Supplements don’t work!” True, supplements are not a silver bullet that will cure all your ails. But the idea that they have no positive effect on the body is ludicrous. We found around 450 scientifically supported nutrient-disease statements on the government’s own websites at places like the CDC and the NIH. These form the foundation of our lawsuit to open up speech about these claims. “Supplements don’t work,” then, is not an idea supported by the health officials of the US government—even if they don’t want you to be able to learn about the benefits at the point of sale.
Supplements also have a strong overall safety record. They are federally regulated: manufacturers must meet safety, labeling, and manufacturing requirements; FDA can act against adulterated or misbranded products; and FTC oversees advertising.
Not to mention that young people face mental health challenges such as anxiety and depression at an unprecedented scale. Those seeking to have agency in their health journeys in an effort to become fitter and healthier shouldn’t face obstacles to using products that have established benefits. They should be encouraged to make informed choices, not hindered.
The notion that supplements are somehow a public health menace is simply not true. What is true, however, is that properly prescribed drugs cause an estimated 128,000 deaths each year in the US along with 1.9 million hospitalizations. Where are the calls to regulate drugs more stringently?
The Financial Interests Behind the Narrative
ANH sees these recurring attacks within a larger struggle over who controls healthcare.
Affordable nutritional support can promote prevention and therefore competes with pharmaceutical approaches. Reducing illness can reduce demand for long-term treatment, creating turmoil for a system built around selling drugs to manage chronic disease.
Alarmist coverage builds distrust, distrust helps sell restrictions, and restrictions weaken access to affordable alternatives. The pharmaceutical model benefits when nutritional options are marginalized.
ANH supports targeted enforcement against adulteration and fraudulent claims, meaningful help for eating disorders, and H.R. 7366, the Dietary Supplement Regulatory Uniformity Act, to address conflicting state requirements.
Consumers need reliable information and access to nutritional tools. Lawmakers should resist turning recurring scare stories into permanent barriers to choice.
Action Alerts!
