From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov

Transcript for: Memory Supplements 

Description: Memory Supplements are a growing market - sales nearly
doubled to $643 million in 2015 from 2006. So, how are these products
marketed? And do their marketing practices violate federal laws? 

Related GAO Work: GAO-17-416: Memory Supplements: Clarifying FDA and FTC
Roles Could Strengthen Oversight and Enhance Consumer Awareness

Released: June 2017

[ Background Music ]

[ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and
information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. It's June
2017. Memory supplements are dietary supplements that claim to improve
your memory. These supplements are a growing market, with sales
estimated at $643 million in 2015. A team led by Seto Bagdoyan, a
Director in GAO's Forensic Audits and Investigative Service team, looked
into memory supplement marketing and federal oversight. Sarah Kaczmarek
sat down with Seto to talk about what they found. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] How are memory supplements marketed? Is it mostly
on TV ads or online? 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] The work we did, we spent about 2 months looking up
various media channels, TV, internet, newspapers, magazines, and retail
outlets, and we found that 96 percent of the 1,600 or so ads we found
were through the internet, and about 4 percent in retail outlets,
nothing anywhere else. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] And do these ads target a specific demographic? 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] Not really. We found about 9 percent of the ads
referenced senior moments, sharper memory in older years, that sort of
thing, but the general proposition, no. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] So, tell me what some of the issues were with how
these memory supplements were marketed. 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] The issue of principle concern is whether these
supplements make disease claims, like they say, we will cure your
Alzheimer's or some other mental condition that's generally associated
with that demographic, and that's prohibited, unless it's backed up by
solid science. So that is the principle concern. And we did find 28 of
the ads we encountered did come close to making those kinds of claims,
and we referred those to FDA and the FDA is investigating them. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] So one thing I was wondering about is what the
government can do if it doesn't like how something's being marketed or
the way something is marketed might kind of violate some federal law or
regulation. 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] What the government, as currently in statute, is
allowed to do is, essentially, after the fact, kind of cleaning up if
there has been a situation where there has been adverse effects from
some of these supplements, but in terms of proactive, they can't
prohibit marketing, they keep an eye on it, for obviously misleading
claims, but it's essentially an after-the-fact reaction. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] And is it clear to consumers how the federal
government regulates these products? 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] Speaking with several groups and the agencies
themselves, the general consensus is that there's a lot of ambiguity
and, perhaps, lack of detail in terms of who does what. For example, the
Federal Trade Commission has oversight over advertising, and the FDA,
Food and Drug Administration, has oversight over marketing at the point
of sale related to labeling claims, which is very esoteric, but that
breakdown, if you will, between the roles is causing people to not
really know what to do, when to do what, and that sort of thing. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] And so the FDA, they're looking at how they're
marketed, but does the FDA also look at how the products are
manufactured, or kind of any guarantee or signoff on these claims that
they support memory? 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] Based on their authorities, they're very limited in
terms of what they can do. Again, it's essentially a reactive posture.
If something does go wrong and there are reports to the FDA that there
has been harm detected or experienced, then they jump in. But in terms
of enforcement actions, just to give you an idea, between the two
agencies over a roughly 10-year period, they've brought only 21
enforcement actions against supplements. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Well, let me ask you then, what recommendations is
your team making in this report? 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] We have one principle recommendation to both agencies
is to clarify and amplify their guidance to the public, to make the
public more knowledgeable and comfortable reporting incidents or any
adverse effects, or any hints that something may be amiss in one of
these supplements. 

[ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] And finally, what do you see as the bottom line
here for consumers? 

[ Seto Bagdoyan: ] The bottom line for consumers is the agencies making
guidance available to them and clarifying their roles, developing a
better understanding of what can and can't be done, and, again,
providing consumers with a comfort level to reach out and report
something that they think is amiss.

[ Background Music ]

[ Narrator: ] To learn more, visit GAO.gov and be sure to tune in to the
next episode of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from the congressional
watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office.