TGA to test Choice Glucosamine

Monday 29th August 2005 10:30am

Clara Pirani, Medican reporter
27 Aug 05

THE Therapeutic Goods Administration will investigate claims that many brands of the popular arthritis supplement, glucosamine, do not contain the quantity of glucosamine promoted on labels.

A study by the Australian Consumers' Association's Choice magazine this month found some brands contain up to 28 per cent less glucosamine than claimed on the label.

A TGA spokesperson said although there were no safety concerns associated with the findings, it would investigate the results. Choice has provided the study details, including testing techniques used, to the regulator.

'The TGA will undertake its own testing of glucosamine products using validated, analytical methods to determine if regulatory action is warranted,' a TGA spokesperson said. 'Medicines containing glucosamine are generally classified as low-risk. They are usually indicated for the relief of osteoarthritis, and may not claim that they are for the prevention, treatment or cure of this condition.'

Glucosamine sulfate is an amino sugar occurring naturally in the body and bleieved to cushion tissues around joints. It has been shown in some studies to reduce pain associated with cartilage damage caused by arthritis. The withdrawal of arthritis drug Vioxx in September last year prompted an increased consumer interest in lucosamine.

The Choice article acknowledged there is good evidence that glucosamine is a safe and effective treatment for osteoarthritis. However, when the magazine's researchers tested 10 brands they found nine contained less glucosamine than stated on the label.

Herron was the only brand to contain more glucosamine than claimed on the label.

Following media coverage of the report, Blackmores ran full-page advertisements in newspapers claiming the Choice article contained incorrect information about its glucosamine products.

'Blackmores tests every batch before it is sold and two independent licensed testing laboratories have now confirmed that Blackmores Glucosamine 1000 is true to the amount stated on the label,' the advertisement stated. 'The irrational exuberance for some to denigrate the complimentary medicine industry is hard to fathom.'

Choice magazine, however is standing by its results, 'We commissioned a highly respected lab to do our testing and we've gone back to the TGA and given them information about the methodologies used by the lab,' spokeswoman Lisa Tait told Weekend Health. 'We are really confident in their methods and the standards that they used.'

Tait said the debate over glucosamine illustrated a broader problem within the complementary industry about the way supplements were tested. She argued there is a lack of standard testing techniques and a reluctance by the complementary healthcare industry to release test results.

'There are different ways of testing for glucosamine and what's coming out of all this is that there is a debate about methodologies. We want to try and resolve these issues about methodologies with the manufacturers and the TGA, and see what sort of consensus can come about as a result of this.'

Tait said it was not the first time Choice and the complementary health industry disagreed about the testing of supplements and the release of information.

'A few months ago we tried to test St John's wort in the same way, because there is a lot of compelling evidence that it is effective for mild depression and anxiety. But the industry absolutely shut the door on us, and because of their lack of cooperation we couldn't test he products.

'We think it would be good if the Complementary Healthcare Council could exert more pressure on their members to engage in a constructuve dialogue with us. We test all sorts of things, and we don't get this reluctance from any other industry.'

However, Complementary Healthcare Council executive director Tony Lewis rejected the claims. The release of sensitive testing data was a complex issue, he said.

'On the issue of St John's wort, they asked a number of our members to provide information to them that was commercial-in-confidence. So not all, but most of them, rejected that request because they regarded that information as commercial-in-confidence.'

He said sponsors generally only supplied information about test results and techniques to the TGA. Further, he said Choice's glucosamine study was wrong. Since the Choice study was released almost four weeks ago many manufacturers had the same batch of glucosamine products tested by the magazine re-tested by independentlaboratories.

'They've had the results come back that the products do meet the label claims, so we take issue with the Choice study.'

He said Choice did not provide information about its testing techniques to the manufacturers before releasing the results.

'We think Choice acted prematurely. It caused a lot of concern amongst consumers for the product when we don't beleive there is a concern there. Glucosamine is an important product and a lot of people are getting relief from it.'