Sean Moloughney, Editor03.02.15
Our coverage of the New York Attorney General’s investigation into herbal supplement products offers several expert voices who agreed that DNA barcoding analysis is not a valid test method for identification of botanical extracts due to the loss or denaturation of DNA material during processing.
Separately, our March issue also includes discussion about the broader state of testing in the nutraceuticals market, presenting the progress industry has made, challenges companies still face and scientifically validated methods of analysis (page 59).
Perhaps DNA barcoding is a worthwhile tool that could play an important role in the scientific evaluation of dietary supplements. However, as of press time, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has yet to release testing data—instead redirecting his focus to label claims, issuing subpoenas to retailers and demanding evidence to support product claims.
While the nutraceuticals industry may have issues at times with adulteration, product integrity and questionable marketing practices, in this particular case, the attorney general’s investigation seems uninformed and misguided.
As the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) noted, “Without additional confirming analysis, using a DNA method that has not been validated for each specific tested product is unscientific and results only in speculation.”
It’s somewhat ironic that alongside calls for increased testing and scientific rigor, such an investigation would be opaque and rely on inadequate and unproven methods. Transparency can’t be one sided, especially when it comes to public health.
While the industry may eventually be vindicated in this round of allegations, what damage has already been done? And if you believe crisis reveals opportunity, then what can we learn from this scenario to prevent unwarranted accusations in the future?
Separately, our March issue also includes discussion about the broader state of testing in the nutraceuticals market, presenting the progress industry has made, challenges companies still face and scientifically validated methods of analysis (page 59).
Perhaps DNA barcoding is a worthwhile tool that could play an important role in the scientific evaluation of dietary supplements. However, as of press time, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has yet to release testing data—instead redirecting his focus to label claims, issuing subpoenas to retailers and demanding evidence to support product claims.
While the nutraceuticals industry may have issues at times with adulteration, product integrity and questionable marketing practices, in this particular case, the attorney general’s investigation seems uninformed and misguided.
As the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) noted, “Without additional confirming analysis, using a DNA method that has not been validated for each specific tested product is unscientific and results only in speculation.”
It’s somewhat ironic that alongside calls for increased testing and scientific rigor, such an investigation would be opaque and rely on inadequate and unproven methods. Transparency can’t be one sided, especially when it comes to public health.
While the industry may eventually be vindicated in this round of allegations, what damage has already been done? And if you believe crisis reveals opportunity, then what can we learn from this scenario to prevent unwarranted accusations in the future?