ADDRESSING CONSEQUENCES AT THE STATE LEVEL
While MAHA advanced the conversation around preventive health nationally, some states moved faster. In the perceived absence of adequate federal oversight, many state legislatures fast-tracked efforts—often without scientific nuance—with misguided proposals seeking age restrictions, heavy metal mandates, ingredient bans, and additive warnings.
CRN distinguished genuine consumer protection from compliance burdens that would inappropriate restrict access to legal, beneficial products.
CRN’s state-by-state response delivered pragmatic wins through thoughtful opposition and education, emphasizing that policymaking must be science-backed.
Julia Gustafson, VP Government Relations, discusses the spate of age restriction proposals in the states during the CRN Member Breakfast Briefing at Expo West.
STATE VICTORIES: PRAGMATIC SOLUTIONS
While defending constitutional principles federally, CRN delivered pragmatic wins at the state level:
California: Secured clarification that supplements aren’t subject to baby food testing mandates and negotiated a workable compromise on SB 646 heavy metals reporting. See more on this page.
Louisiana & Texas: Protected melatonin from restrictive legislation.
Texas: Exempted supplements from additive warning label requirements.
Multiple States: Removed titanium dioxide from restriction bills.
Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan and more: Actively opposed proposed age-restriction legislation targeting weight loss and muscle-building supplements, holding back proposals based on flawed premises about eating disorders and supplements.
