The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Label Accuracy of Weight Loss Dietary Supplements Marketed Online With Military Discounts
Open accessAbstract
Importance: Dietary supplements for weight loss, among the most popular supplement products on the market, are promoted not only for losing weight and shedding fat, but also for added benefits of energy and performance, all packed into 1 capsule with multiple combinations of ingredients. Fraudulent marketing of weight loss supplements, some with exaggerated claims, some that are potentially dangerous, and some that contain illegal ingredients, is ever present, especially through online sources, where multiple manufacturers target service members by offering military discounts. Objectives: To examine whether select dietary supplements marketed online for weight loss from companies advertising military discounts are accurately labeled according to the Supplement Facts listed ingredients, whether they contain any ingredients prohibited for use in the military, and to qualitatively describe the products’ label claims. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this case series, 30 dietary supplement products marketed for weight loss were selected and purchased in June 2023 from 12 online companies advertising military discounts. Data were analyzed from July to August 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry was used to verify whether products were accurately labeled according to the Supplement Facts listed ingredients and whether they contained any substances on the DoD Prohibited Dietary Supplement Ingredients List. A separate analysis was conducted to describe product label claims by using the Operation Supplement Safety (OPSS) Risk Assessment Scorecard. Results: Of the 30 products tested, analysis showed that 25 had inaccurate labels. Of these, 24 had ingredients listed on the label that were not detected (misbranded); 7 had hidden components not present on the label, some of which would be considered adulterated; and 10 had substances on the DoD Prohibited Dietary Supplement Ingredients List either on or hidden from the label. All products were rated as risky when applying the OPSS Scorecard. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series study, the majority of products had inaccurate labels. Some were misbranded, others would be considered adulterated with ingredients not allowed in dietary supplements, and some contained ingredients prohibited for use in the military.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several studies of the accuracy of dietary supplement labeling have found that many of the products analyzed contained significantly lower amounts of the specific ingredient or additional, possibly risky, ingredients that were not declared on the supplement label [29,32,33,76-81].
“Several studies of the accuracy of dietary supplement labeling have found that many of the products analyzed contained significantly lower amounts of the specific ingredient or additional, possibly risky, ingredients that were not declared on the supplement label [29,32,33,76–81].”
From How reliable is the labeling of a commercial phytosteroid product? A 12-week randomized double-blind training study (2025) · cites this paper as [77]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Crawford, C., Avula, B., Lindsey, A. T., Katragunta, K., Khan, I. A., & Deuster, P. A.
- Affiliations
- Henry M. Jackson Foundation (US)
- University of Mississippi (US)
- Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (US)
- Corresponding author
- Deuster, Patricia A.
- Venue
- JAMA Network Open
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2024-05-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- e249131
- ISSN
- 2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4396561991
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 4.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
- Keywords
- supplement labeling accuracy, military personnel, supplement adulteration, misbranding
- MeSH terms
- Advertising, Humans, Military Personnel, Product Labeling, United States, Weight Loss, Anti-Obesity Agents, Dietary Supplements, Marketing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review