Let's not forget the mysterious but very real placebo effect though! Most of the supplement industry ($50 billion in the US annually dome say) - which you could look at as a waste of money, or a relatively safe and inexpensive way to feel better.
Of course the WH is said to have a Dr Feelgood on its staff, and those items are clearly not placebos, but maybe we are seeing the side effects play out on the world stage ;-)
With respect to the supplement industry, it could be improved quite a lot if there was large scale testing of purity and potency, by the government presumably. There should be fines if whats in the bottle is not what the label says.
I subscribe to Consumer Labs but they simply don't have the resources to even scratch the surface. The chocolate I eat was approved by CL in 2019, I doubt the results are even valid.
But I doubt RFK would be interested in any of this.
The term "supplement" has been stretched too far, agreed. It is up to the consumer to do the research, but how many consumers have the background to do it? "Third party testing" is supposedly done by some manufacturers, but not by all. But the side effects and interactions of some pharma products should raise eyebrows too.
Honestly, the idea that supplements are harmless... Is harmful.
The number of supplements that boost or deplete things like CYP3A4 (commonly known as don't eat grapefruit on BP meds) is responsible for an unknown number of unintentional overdose deaths- and healthcare is such that frequently doctors don't realize it at all.
Let's not forget the mysterious but very real placebo effect though! Most of the supplement industry ($50 billion in the US annually dome say) - which you could look at as a waste of money, or a relatively safe and inexpensive way to feel better.
Of course the WH is said to have a Dr Feelgood on its staff, and those items are clearly not placebos, but maybe we are seeing the side effects play out on the world stage ;-)