Understanding the Boundary: Structure-Function vs. Disease Claims
The fundamental distinction between a structure-function claim and a disease claim lies in the intended effect being communicated. A structure-function claim focuses on the role of a nutrient or ingredient in affecting the normal structure or function of the human body. This might include maintaining healthy bones, supporting the immune system, or aiding in digestion. It describes a benefit related to general well-being rather than a specific illness or medical condition. In contrast, a disease claim directly states, suggests, or implies that a product can diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure, or prevent a specific disease or class of diseases. Under U.S. law, making a disease claim for a food or dietary supplement product automatically reclassifies it as a drug, triggering the need for extensive clinical trials and FDA pre-market approval, a process dietary supplements generally do not undergo.
The Legal Framework: DSHEA and FDA Oversight
The regulatory landscape for dietary supplements and their claims is defined by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). This legislation established the framework that allows manufacturers to make structure-function claims without prior FDA approval, provided they meet certain requirements.
- Substantiation: Manufacturers must have scientific evidence to prove that their claims are truthful and not misleading. This documentation must be on hand and ready for review by the FDA if necessary.
- Notification: Within 30 days of first marketing a product with a structure-function claim, the manufacturer must notify the FDA.
- Disclaimer: The product label must prominently display the mandatory disclaimer: "This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.".
For conventional foods, structure-function claims are also permitted but do not require manufacturers to notify the FDA or include a disclaimer. This adds another layer of complexity to the regulatory environment, especially for so-called "functional foods" that blur the lines between food and supplement.
Comparison: Structure-Function Claims vs. Disease Claims
| Feature | Structure-Function Claim | Disease Claim |
|---|---|---|
| Regulatory Pathway | No FDA pre-market approval required. | Requires extensive FDA review and approval process (like a drug). |
| Scope of Benefit | Describes effect on normal structure or function of the body (e.g., "calcium builds strong bones"). | Claims to treat, cure, mitigate, or prevent a specific disease (e.g., "cures osteoporosis"). |
| Substantiation | Must be truthful, not misleading, and backed by competent scientific evidence. | Requires rigorous clinical trials and data demonstrating safety and efficacy for the intended use. |
| Labeling | Must be accompanied by a mandatory FDA disclaimer on dietary supplements. | No disclaimer; labeling indicates FDA approval as a drug. |
| Consequences of Misuse | Potential FDA enforcement action, warning letters, or recalls if unsubstantiated or false. | Product is reclassified as an unapproved drug, leading to fines, recalls, and criminal penalties. |
The Risks of Crossing the Line
For a company, making an unauthorized disease claim, even unintentionally, can have severe consequences. The FDA actively monitors the marketplace and can issue warning letters, force product recalls, and pursue legal action against companies making unsubstantiated therapeutic claims. A product’s entire context—including its name, accompanying literature, and any implied benefits—is scrutinized by regulators. A seemingly innocuous phrase or the citation of a scientific paper mentioning a disease could be enough to cross the line from a legal structure-function claim to an illegal disease claim. This regulatory vigilance is meant to protect consumers who might otherwise forgo proven medical treatments in favor of unproven dietary supplements.
Practical examples
To illustrate the difference, consider the following examples:
-
Permissible: "Fiber maintains bowel regularity." (Structure-function claim)
-
Impermissible: "Fiber cures irritable bowel syndrome." (Disease claim)
-
Permissible: "Helps support immune health." (Structure-function claim)
-
Impermissible: "Helps prevent colds and flu." (Disease claim)
-
Permissible: "Supports healthy joints." (Structure-function claim)
-
Impermissible: "Reduces arthritic pain." (Disease claim)
The difference is subtle but critically important. The acceptable claims focus on maintaining a healthy state, while the impermissible ones promise to treat or prevent a medical condition.
Navigating the Regulatory Landscape
For manufacturers, navigating these regulations requires careful consideration and precise language. Vague or general health promotion statements are more likely to be accepted than specific, outcome-based claims. For consumers, understanding these rules means scrutinizing supplement labels and marketing materials. The presence of the mandatory FDA disclaimer on a dietary supplement indicates that the product's claims have not been pre-approved as safe and effective for treating diseases, and that the product should not be seen as a substitute for medical treatment. Always consult a healthcare professional for serious medical conditions.
Conclusion
The assertion that a structure-function claim can be used to prevent or treat a serious health condition is false. The two types of claims are fundamentally different under FDA regulations, with disease claims requiring extensive approval processes that dietary supplements typically do not undergo. The regulatory framework, established largely by DSHEA, aims to strike a balance between allowing truthful, non-misleading marketing for dietary supplements and preventing unsubstantiated, potentially harmful, therapeutic claims. By clearly distinguishing between claims about normal body function and those about disease, the FDA provides a crucial layer of consumer protection in the vast and often confusing marketplace of dietary supplements. Adherence to these regulations is essential for manufacturers, while awareness of them is key for consumers to make informed health choices.
