Media storm as supplements are scrutinised

Whatsinit.com, a controversial new website designed to alert UK consumers to adulterated or poor quality dietary supplements, has defended its testing methods in the wake of criticism from supplements suppliers and retailers.

"Whatsinit.com only uses third party independent laboratories that specialise in the active ingredient being tested," said a spokesman. "The methodologies we chose and will choose in future are those that are either listed in the European, British or US Pharmacopeia, which are the gold standard. The USP method was used for testing glucosamine and chondroitin.

"Any failed products were then tested again using the latest AOAC methodology. Manufacturers have attempted to muddy the water and create confusion by claiming the methodologies we use are inaccurate."

According to the website, which enables consumers to check whether their favourite supplements contain what is stated on the label, many leading brands are not being entirely honest with shoppers.

Out of 52 chondroitin and glucosamine joint supplements tested, 41 contained less than 95% of the active ingredient in question and two did not contain any active ingredient at all, claimed whatsinit.com. Omega-3 fatty acid supplements were also singled out for criticism on similar grounds.