Dietary Supplement Industry Faces an Existential Crisis Amid State Threats to DSHEA
Josh Long, VP of Communications and Regulatory Affair, NPAIn 2026, the most pressing issue facing the natural products industry will be the attempts of state legislatures to regulate dietary supplement products, limiting consumer access, disrupting retail operations and undermining the national framework under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA).
NPA anticipates that these bills will be introduced across the country, and if they follow New York’s lead and become law, retailers will find it increasingly challenging to meet conflicting state-level obligations.
Perhaps more alarming, these bills are causing long-term harm to the reputation of the industry. Not only do proponents of the bills convey the false impression that limiting consumer access to supplements will alleviate a public health crisis (eating disorders), but they also claim in spite of contrary evidence that these products are unregulated and pose unacceptable safety concerns that the federal government is not addressing.
The national regulatory framework that has protected our industry and American consumers faces an existential crisis. It is naive to think that our critics will stop at passage of age-restriction bans. Simply put, DSHEA could collapse in the face of state efforts to take over the job that Congress principally entrusted over 30 years ago to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—regulating dietary supplement products.
The industry’s inertia or indifference to the state bills would certainly lead to their passage. The result: restricted consumer access to supplements, increased liabilities for retailers and stunted growth for the entire FDA-regulated category, especially products marketed for weight loss and muscle building.
At the federal level, the industry faces growing uncertainty over the regulatory status of next-generation ingredients. FDA’s decisions, in connection with the drug preclusion clause in DSHEA, continue to cast a shadow over innovation.
FDA in September 2025 reversed its determination that NMN is excluded from the definition of a dietary supplement product, in response to a citizen petition filed by NPA and the Alliance for Natural Health USA. But NPA, in particular, had to invest substantial resources in all three branches of government to influence the outcome, and unfortunately, many companies who benefited directly from these efforts sat on the sidelines. NPA’s previous actions at FDA and in U.S. District Court to protect NAC further underscore that supplement companies cannot make informed decisions about potential investments in emerging ingredients without legislative changes to the drug preclusion clause.
NPA and its allies can work with Congress on the above-referenced legislative changes, effectively defeat growing threats at state houses, and strongly advocate for federal preemption. But NPA and the broader industry cannot overcome these herculean legislative and policy challenges in the coming years without raising millions of dollars in funding for advocacy.
We urge consumers and companies alike to contribute to industry trade groups, including NPA’s $5 million fundraising initiative, as the Washington, D.C.-based association approaches its 90-year anniversary.
The industry has grown to over $70 billion in annual revenues, thanks largely to the twin pillars of DSHEA: promoting consumer access to dietary supplements while giving FDA the tools to act against unsafe products. Investing in advocacy today is a small price to pay to defend this revered national framework.
