Dietary Supplement Fairness in Labeling and Advertising Act
Read twice and referred to the Committee on HELP.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 19, 1999
Dietary Supplement Fairness in Labeling and Advertising Act - Expresses the sense of Congress that a proposed rule concerning regulations on statements made for dietary supplements about their effect on the body would improperly restrict the use of appropriate labeling claims about such effect, and, therefore, such proposed rule should not take effect.Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to prohibit a truthful and accurate summary of one or more findings of a study or article appearing in a scientific or medical publication or textbook from being subject to regulation as labeling under such Act when used in connection with the sale of a dietary supplement.States that, insofar as such a publication is exempt from regulation as labeling under such Act, such publication is also exempt from regulation as advertising under the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA). Requires the Federal Trade Commission, before it files a complaint alleging that an advertisement or advertiser is not in compliance with FTCA advertising regulations for a dietary supplement or ingredient or for medical services or health treatments, to ensure that such advertiser has been provided: (1) access to individuals whom the Commission has relied upon as experts; and (2) an opportunity to communicate with the Commission on the merits of the experts' views.States that it is not inherently deceptive or unfair for advertising about a dietary supplement or ingredient, or medical services or health treatments, to describe, mention, or rely upon scientific data other than conclusive human clinical studies if such advertising is truthful, not misleading, and reveals the nature of the study or other information.Limits consent agreement application to the particular supplement, ingredient, service, or treatment that is the subject of such agreement.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1749 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1749 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1749 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1749 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.