Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

FTC Revises Longstanding “Dietary Supplement Guide” to Cover all Health Products

By Phyllis H. Marcus on December 21, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The FTC has just announced a release of updated “Health Products Compliance Guidance” to help advertisers ensure that claims about the benefits and safety of health-related products are truthful, not misleading, and supported by science.

Last tackled in 1998 and styled as a Dietary Supplements Advertising guide for dietary supplements, the new guidance document covers a broad spectrum of products including foods, over-the-counter drugs, homeopathic products, health equipment, diagnostic tests and health apps, and other health-related products. The FTC staff indicates the new materials take into account several decades worth of law enforcement and seeks to debunk certain “urban myths” about FTC enforcement in this area. Among the many items discussed, FTC staff emphasizes that:

  • Adequate Substantiation:
    • As a general matter, to meet the competent and reliable scientific standard, substantiation of health-related benefits will need to be in the form of randomized, controlled human clinical testing.
    • Animal studies have only limited value in predicting the effect of a product in humans.
    • While in vitro studies may help identify a possible mechanism of action, they similarly are of limited value to predict benefits for humans.
    • Anecdotal evidence (including surveys of consumer experiences) is never sufficient to substantiate claims about the effects of a health product.
    • Public health recommendations and advisories are not equivalent to a finding that there is a causal link between the recommended course of action and the health benefit.
  • Study Design: The design, implementation, and results of each piece of research are important to assessing the adequacy of a marketer’s substantiation.
  • P-hacking: Post hoc analysis that departs from the originally stated study protocol (e.g., an analysis that looks at various smaller subgroups of the study population) does not generally provide reliable evidence to substantiate a claim.
  • Claims Construction: Claims must accurately reflect what the research shows.
  • Traditional/Homeopathic Medicine:
    • Claims for products based on traditional use are subject to the same requirement of substantiation in the form of competent and reliable scientific evidence as any other product.
    • A claim that suggests a health-related benefit for which there isn’t competent and reliable scientific evidence must clearly communicate the lack of scientific evidence.

Advertisers should familiarize themselves with the FTC’s new guidance, including the examples, which are drawn directly from the agency’s cases.

  • Posted in:
    Food, Drug & Agriculture
  • Blog:
    Hunton Retail Law Resource
  • Organization:
    Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo