Sophia Lai1, Christine Yu2, Cathi E Dennehy3, Candy Tsourounis4, Kirby P Lee3. 1. Utilization Management at United Health Group, Irvine, CA, USA. 2. Medical Plaza Pharmacy, San Francisco, CA, USA. 3. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 4. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Medication Outcomes Center, School of Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abstract
Objective: To characterize dietary supplements marketed online as "ephedra-containing or ephedra-like products" for weight management and to assess labeling/marketing compliance with the ban on the sale of ephedrine alkaloids. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study assessed websites selling ephedra-like supplements using the search term "buy ephedra." For each website, the first three featured products were characterized by evaluating the label for (1) Ephedra sp. or its alkaloid content, (2) serving size, (3) other ingredients, (4) directions, (5) side effects, (6) reported interactions, (7) recommendation to consult a health care provider, (8) recommendation to use with diet and exercise, and (9) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) disclaimer. Results: Thirty-six (71%) of the first 51 websites evaluated sold at least one weight loss product. A total of 105 products were assessed, 93 had labeling with 10 (11%) in possible violation of the ephedra ban. Five were labeled as containing ephedrine or ephedrine hydrochloride, two reported containing ephedrine alkaloids, and two reported containing unidentified Ephedra sp. not formulated as an extract; one reported containing Ma Huang. Sixty-seven (72%) products listed caffeine with a daily serving size averaging 400 mg. Other ingredients with stimulant properties include green tea, yohimbe, and phenylethylamine. Conclusions: Nearly 20% of websites sold weight loss products that potentially violated the 2004 ban of ephedra alkaloids. Ephedrine, unidentified Ephedra sp. not formulated as an extract, and Ma Huang were labeled as present in 11% of products evaluated. Incomplete reporting of adverse effects and drug interactions was common.
Objective: To characterize dietary supplements marketed online as "ephedra-containing or ephedra-like products" for weight management and to assess labeling/marketing compliance with the ban on the sale of ephedrine alkaloids. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study assessed websites selling ephedra-like supplements using the search term "buy ephedra." For each website, the first three featured products were characterized by evaluating the label for (1) Ephedra sp. or its alkaloid content, (2) serving size, (3) other ingredients, (4) directions, (5) side effects, (6) reported interactions, (7) recommendation to consult a health care provider, (8) recommendation to use with diet and exercise, and (9) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) disclaimer. Results: Thirty-six (71%) of the first 51 websites evaluated sold at least one weight loss product. A total of 105 products were assessed, 93 had labeling with 10 (11%) in possible violation of the ephedra ban. Five were labeled as containing ephedrine or ephedrine hydrochloride, two reported containing ephedrine alkaloids, and two reported containing unidentified Ephedra sp. not formulated as an extract; one reported containing Ma Huang. Sixty-seven (72%) products listed caffeine with a daily serving size averaging 400 mg. Other ingredients with stimulant properties include green tea, yohimbe, and phenylethylamine. Conclusions: Nearly 20% of websites sold weight loss products that potentially violated the 2004 ban of ephedra alkaloids. Ephedrine, unidentified Ephedra sp. not formulated as an extract, and Ma Huang were labeled as present in 11% of products evaluated. Incomplete reporting of adverse effects and drug interactions was common.
Entities:
Keywords:
dietary supplement; ephedra; labeling and marketing; weight loss