National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$59.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety (2005)
Institute of Medicine (IOM)

Citation Manager

. "Executive Summary." Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
10
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety

Focused Versus Broad-Based Evaluation. An integrative evaluation may be reactive to the signal and focused in nature in that it is being conducted to examine a specific moderate or high-level concern about an ingredient, or it may be more proactive and broad-based in that it looks for any risk associated with use of the dietary supplement ingredient. For example, a proactive integrative evaluation might be initiated simply because a large percentage of the population is using the ingredient, rather than as a reaction to a particular safety concern.

Drafting a Safety Monograph. In most cases, the integrative evaluation will be documented in a monograph that summarizes the categories of data available and their use in drawing conclusions about the potential risk associated with use of the ingredient; it should include the conclusions of the expert committee and/or FDA. The science-based guiding principles described in the following section of this summary, and explained in detail in Chapters 4 through 10, should be used to reach a decision regarding whether there is an unreasonable risk of illness or injury.

Integrating the Data to Determine Risk. When evidence on a dietary supplement ingredient presents a moderate or higher level of concern relative to this risk, biological plausibility and consistency should be evaluated, especially when independently convincing data are not available. Such an analysis can be represented by creating a causal model diagram—a tool to visualize how the different types of available data link together to establish risk (described in Chapter 10).

The principles described for considering the various categories of data (Chapters 4 through 8), as well as the principles describing how to integrate among and within categories of data (Chapter 10), are applied in the integrative evaluation.

It is expected that FDA may want further input from an advisory committee on many of the dietary supplement ingredients undergoing an integrative evaluation because only ingredients with significant potential for concern are likely to reach this stage.

Decision to Take Action. The results of the integrative evaluation should play a pivotal role in establishing that a supplement ingredient is unsafe. If an advisory committee is used, its findings and rationale should be posted with the monograph on FDA’s website. One of the important components of DSHEA was that the public should be educated about dietary supplements. FDA thus has a responsibility to educate consumers about the safety of supplement ingredients, and the public availability of the completed monographs can be an important aspect of the educational process.

Page
10
Front Matter (R1-R20)
Executive Summary (1-18)
1 Introduction and Background (19-42)
2 Approaches Used by Others and Existing Safety Frameworks (43-84)
3 The Framework (85-125)
4 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Human Information and Data (126-155)
5 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Animal Data (156-174)
6 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Information About Related Substances (175-216)
7 Categories of Scientific Evidence--In Vitro Data (217-234)
8 Interactions (235-246)
9 Vulnerable Groups and Prevalance of Use (247-252)
10 Scientific Principles for Integrating and Evaluating the Available Data (253-268)
11 Applying the Framework: Case Studies Using the Prototype Safety Monographs (269-291)
12 Factors Influencing Use of the Safety Framework (292-296)
13 Findings and Recommendations (297-306)
Appendix A: Existing Frameworks or Systems for Evaluating the Safety of Other Substances (307-315)
Appendix B: Scope of Work and Comments to Initial July 2002 Framework (316-321)
Appendix C: Plant Family Information (322-355)
Appendix D: Chaparral: Prototype Monograph Summary (356-362)
Appendix E: Glucosamine: Prototype Monograph Summary (363-366)
Appendix F: Melatonin: Prototype Monograph Summary (367-371)
Appendix G: Chromium Picolinate: Prototype Monograph Summary (372-375)
Appendix H: Saw Palmetto: Prototype Monograph Summary (376-379)
Appendix I: Shark Cartilage: Prototype Monograph Summary (380-384)
Appendix J: Prototype Focused Monograph: Review of Liver-Related Risks for Chaparral (385-449)
Appendix K: Protoype Focused Monograph: Review of Anti-Androgenic Risks of Saw Palmetto Ingestion by Women (450-477)
Appendix L: Acknowledgements (478-480)
Appendix M: Biographical Sketches of Commitee Members (481-488)
Index (489-506)