Supplement Shake-Up: Firm Calls for End to "Wild West" Quality Control

TEMPE, AZ – December 31, 2025 – A new white paper from supplement company Nootropics Depot is challenging the foundations of quality control in the multi-billion-dollar botanical supplement industry, arguing that current standards often fail to guarantee that products contain the very compounds responsible for their purported health benefits. The paper calls for a mandatory shift away from basic identity tests toward a rigorous, science-based model of "bioactive standardization."

The technical document, authored by President and CEO Paul Eftang, uses the popular herbal supplement Tongkat Ali (Eurycoma longifolia) as a case study for systemic industry failures. It presents testing data suggesting many products on the market, despite passing species identification, contain negligible levels of the key active compound, eurycomanone. Some, the paper alleges, are little more than "spent marc"—the leftover plant material after the valuable bioactives have already been extracted.

"The industry has reached a point where identity testing and inflated ratio claims are no longer acceptable proxies for quality," said Eftang in the press release. "If products are not standardized to the compounds that actually drive their effects... then consumers, clinicians, and researchers cannot trust what is on the label or in the bottle."

This move signals a potential turning point for an industry long criticized for inconsistent quality and a lack of transparency, placing the burden of proof squarely on manufacturers to scientifically validate their products' potency.

A System of Loopholes

The U.S. botanical supplement market is regulated by the FDA under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994. This framework requires manufacturers to follow Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs) to ensure products are not adulterated and are labeled correctly. However, critics point out that these regulations primarily focus on identity and purity, not efficacy. Unlike pharmaceuticals, supplements do not require pre-market approval demonstrating they actually work.

This regulatory gap creates an environment where a product can be legally compliant while being therapeutically inert. For example, a manufacturer can use DNA barcoding to prove a supplement contains authentic Tongkat Ali root, thereby meeting identity requirements. However, this test reveals nothing about the concentration of eurycomanone, the compound believed to drive the herb's effects.

The problem of adulteration is well-documented. Independent studies and government reports have repeatedly exposed issues across the industry. A 2010 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found contaminants in the vast majority of supplements tested. More alarmingly, academic research has shown that a high percentage of botanical products contain plant species not listed on the label or have had their primary ingredients substituted. The American Botanical Council’s Botanical Adulterants Prevention Program has published extensive bulletins on the widespread adulteration of popular herbs like turmeric and Ginkgo biloba.

Nootropics Depot's white paper argues that misleading marketing tactics exacerbate the issue. Claims of "100:1" or "200:1" extracts, which imply high concentration, are often meaningless without data on specific bioactive compounds. These ratios typically refer to the weight of raw plant material used to create the extract, not the final concentration of active ingredients, a nuance lost on most consumers.

The Push for a New Gold Standard

The solution proposed in "The Bioactive Imperative" is a fundamental shift to compound-specific quantification. This means using advanced analytical chemistry to measure the precise amount of key bioactive compounds in every batch of a finished product.

For Tongkat Ali, this would mean a mandatory minimum level of eurycomanone. For Ashwagandha, it would be withanolides; for Panax ginseng, ginsenosides; and for Turmeric, curcuminoids. This approach would make it nearly impossible to sell spent marc or low-potency extracts, as they would fail to meet the required bioactive threshold.

Achieving this requires sophisticated technology. The white paper advocates for validated High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) and Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC) methods, often paired with Mass Spectrometry (MS). These powerful tools can separate, identify, and precisely quantify individual molecules within a complex botanical extract, providing a detailed chemical fingerprint that goes far beyond simple identity confirmation.

Nootropics Depot states it has already implemented these standards across its catalog of over 600 products, pioneering methods for ingredients like erinacine A in lion's mane mycelium and ebelin lactone in Bacopa. By partnering with third-party testing facility Omnient Labs and the advocacy group Future Nutra Foundation, the company aims to push these higher standards into the mainstream.

Economic Hurdles and Industry Resistance

While a shift to bioactive standardization promises greater efficacy and consumer trust, it presents a significant challenge to the industry's status quo. The economic and practical hurdles are substantial.

Implementing advanced analytical testing requires a major capital investment in equipment that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, plus the expense of hiring and training skilled chemists. These costs would disproportionately affect the thousands of small and medium-sized businesses that make up a large portion of the supplement market.

Furthermore, a mandatory standard would ripple down the entire supply chain. Raw material suppliers would face pressure to guarantee specific bioactive levels, potentially requiring changes in cultivation, harvesting, and processing techniques. This could lead to higher raw material costs and supply shortages for certain botanicals, with the increased expenses likely being passed on to consumers.

Industry insiders anticipate a mixed reaction. Quality-focused brands that already invest in robust testing may welcome a change that levels the playing field and weeds out bad actors. However, companies whose business models rely on lower-cost, less-vetted ingredients would likely resist such a stringent and costly regulatory overhaul. Trade organizations like the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) and the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), which promote voluntary guidelines, would face intense debate among their members over a mandatory standard.

Rebuilding Trust, One Compound at a Time

Despite the challenges, proponents argue that bioactive standardization is a necessary evolution for an industry seeking legitimacy and long-term stability. Years of headlines about contaminated, ineffective, or fraudulent supplements have fostered deep-seated consumer skepticism. Providing verifiable, scientific proof of potency could be the most effective way to rebuild that trust.

A focus on active compounds could also spur a new wave of innovation. It would encourage deeper research into the pharmacology of botanicals, leading to the discovery of new bioactives and the development of more effective extraction and delivery methods. For consumers, it would finally provide a clear metric to compare products and make informed decisions based on scientific data rather than marketing claims.

The call to action from Nootropics Depot places the botanical supplement industry at a crossroads. The path forward involves choosing between maintaining a system with known flaws or embracing a more scientifically rigorous, transparent, and accountable future that could fundamentally redefine what consumers expect from the products on their shelves.