The Hawaii State Senate and Alaska State House of Representatives have joined a growing list of state legislatures to introduce bills seeking to put age restrictions on dietary supplements marketed for weight loss or muscle building.

The language in both of the bills largely follows bills passed into law in New York, and introduced in nearly a dozen other states in prior legislative sessions, all of which have been supported by the Strategic Training Initiative for the Prevention of Eating Disorders (STRIPED), part of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Each bill, if passed, contains sweeping language that would place civil penalties on any business, brick-and-mortar or online, that sells a dietary supplement or “nonprescription diet pill” positioned or marketed for weight loss or muscle building to anyone under the age of 18.

The Hawaii Senate’s bill, SB2106, was placed on the agenda for its Health and Human Services Committee meeting today. Kyle Turk, vice president of government affairs at the Natural Products Association, and Andrea Wong, PhD, chief science officer at the Council for Responsible Nutrition, both testified against the bill. The Alaska bill, HB 236, was introduced on January 20.

According to STRIPED, dietary supplements that are marketed for weight loss and muscle building purposes are correlated with incidences of eating disorders and steroid use in teens.

Trade associations representing the dietary supplements industry have contended that there isn’t evidence of a causative connection between lawful dietary supplements and eating disorders, and that the broad, sweeping nature of state bills introduced thus far would chill free, lawful speech and hamper adult consumers’ access to safe, legitimate products.

Further, eating disorders are complex mental health conditions with a wide range of contributing factors; policies that single out FDA-regulated dietary supplements will not address the root causes of these conditions or improve outcomes, the Council for Responsible Nutrition stated, but will scapegoat safe and legal products and provide false hope in solving eating disorders. Beyond lack of evidence, the bill would place an undue burden on businesses to: determine which products are impacted; restructure store layouts; restrict self-service access; and implement age verification protocols, while also increasing enforcement costs for the state. Further, CRN noted that it is engaged in federal litigation challenging the constitutionality of a similar law that was enacted by New York; the Hawaii bill poses similar concerns about First Amendment protections, the association noted.

“There is no credible evidence that lawful dietary supplements cause eating disorders and using a serious mental health issue as a political talking point is irresponsible,” said Turk. “Instead of focusing on real problems, lawmakers are trying to dress up government overreach as consumer protection. Congress already created a comprehensive framework for these products under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA).”

During her remarks, Wong said that the bill is not rooted in sound science and risks misleading policymakers and the public.

“SB 2106 is not based on a scientific assessment of risk,” she said. “Peer-reviewed research does not support hte notion that dietary supplements cause eating disorders, and restricting access to lawful, FDA-regulated products diverst attention from the real, complex drivers of these serious mental health conditions.”