Media: Supplementary benefits?
Authors: Anne Gulland
Journal: BMJ (2003)

To the consumer it must all seem rather confusing. On the one hand the government is warning that high doses of vitamin tablets can be harmful and on the other our favourite media doctors and the health food industry are telling us to carry on popping the pills.

The confusion has arisen over the publication last month of a report by the Food Standards Agency (FSA), which recommended upper limits on popular vitamin pills such as calcium, iron, and vitamin C. For the vitamin industry the headlines could not have been worse. “Too many vitamins may be bad for you,” said the Express. And the Mirror: “Government warning: vitamin pills are a waste of money and may damage health.”

However, while the news headlines were harmful to the financial health of the manufacturers of food supplements, media doctors gave them a shot in the arm. Dr Thomas Stuttaford of the Times said that he would carry on taking vitamin supplements as the “price to be paid for 21st century life.” The Sun's Carol Cooper agreed, as did the Observer's Dr John Briffa, who admitted to downing a “judicious collection of nutritional supplements” every day.

Dr Stuttaford has often used his Times column to hail the wonders of supplements and he said he had no financial interest in any vitamin companies. He told the BMJ: “The modern doctor's left wing inclinations shouldn't be allowed to obscure their vision so that they condemn the vitamin industry merely because it's rich and capitalist.”

Of course, an industry with an estimated £300m ($500m; €419m) annual turnover at stake is not going to take this assault lying down. The Health Food Manufacturers' Association has written to the FSA complaining about the negative coverage.

Sharon Flynn, regulatory affairs manager at health food chain Holland and Barrett, saw the report when it went out to consultation and is disappointed that many of the company's comments failed to be taken on board. She said the report was an “overreaction.” She added: “The industry firmly believes the report was geared towards creating as much negative publicity as possible.”

One supplement company, Healthspan, took out a full page advertisement in several newspapers, including the Times—which charges between £36 000 ($60 000; €50 000) and £47 500 ($79 000; €66 000) for a full page colour display advert—to decry the media coverage of the report.

Derek Coates, managing director of Healthspan, believes the negative press has come about because a few rogue manufacturers of nutritional products give the legitimate companies a bad name: “You can make vitamins in your garage and sell them—and that's wrong. Our products are of a very high quality and customers know that what it says on the packet is what you get in the tablet—and that should be legislated for.” But Mr Coates also believes that the powerful pharmaceutical lobby prevents positive coverage of food supplements and vitamin tablets.

The FSA denies that there was any deliberate attempt to cast the food supplement industry in a bad light. A spokes-woman said that the manufacturers and retailers were fed up because they lobbied for the report to highlight the benefits of vitamins, but this was not what the group was set up to do. She added: “The expert group on vitamins and minerals took four years to come to its conclusions. We had an extensive consultation period. This is the most robust and thorough piece of research; we looked at over 10 000 references and looked at human, animal, and in utero studies.”