Consumer Reports Corrects Vitamin D Prop 65 Statements

YONKERS, N.Y.A vitamin D article published in the May 2013 issue of Consumer Reports magazine has been updated online to correct statements about the labeling of several products relative to California's Proposition 65 lead level requirements. The dietary supplement industry has welcomed the correction, but urged the magazine to reach out to industry for input and guidance on future supplement-focused stories.

The article, which discussed the magazine's testing of several vitamin D-calcium products sourced from retail, originally reported nine such products contained lead levels higher than the limits set by Prop 65, which the article said would require a warning label for containing a chemical known to cause birth defects or reproductive harm. However, in its updated version, which was corrected in-line and also offered a separate clarification at the end, the article noted:

 "We have since learned that a settlement with the state Attorney General permits those companies latitude in how they calculate lead levels that could otherwise trigger such warnings, and thus no labels are required."

The chart included in the article was also updated to reflect the information outlined in the clarification. Consumer Reports is expected to issue a correction in its next print issue as well.

Steve Mister, president and CEO, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), explained Consumer Reports relied on a level for lead in calcium that was published on the State of California's website, but it did not reflect a series of settlements between various members of the industry the California Attorney's General office that occurred during the last 15 years. "As a result of those settlements, the amount of lead in calcium supplements is actually much higher than in posted on the California website," Mister said. "The Attorney General recognized companies cannot literally get all the lead out the products. Once we called that to Consumer Reports' attention and they verified that, they removed those aspects from the story."

Mister said CRN is exploring a way to work with California to make these settlements more public and to notate them on the California website.

John Shaw CEO of the Natural Products Association (NPA), welcomed the correction to the story. "While the story, published in Consumer Reports May issue, was overall very positive for our industryfinding that all 32 products tested by the magazine met or exceeded their claimed vitamin D levelsit included this one error that could possibly have been avoided by reaching out to industry experts," he said. "The Natural Products Association thanks Consumer Reports for acknowledging that a clarification was needed and for taking the appropriate steps to swiftly publish one. However, we strongly encourage the magazine to reach out to NPA and the dietary supplement industry on future stories to ensure greater accuracy."

Mister added, "It was a honest mistake made by the publisher, and we're glad to see they investigated and corrected it."

Related Content:

·         Prop 65: An Immodest Proposal

·         California Prop 65 Ruling a Victory for Dietary Supplements

·         Prop 65 Update