Perspectives and issues relating to analytical methods and testing of dietary supplements http://www.npicommunity.com/Blogs/tabid/53/BlogId/8/Default.aspx en-US editor@npicenter.com contactus@npicenter.com Fri, 16 May 2008 19:18:22 GMT Fri, 16 May 2008 19:18:22 GMT http://backend.userland.com/rss Blog RSS Generator Version 3.1.20.17153 The recent press release, "Single Lab Validation for Chondroitin Sulfate Completed" , has generated a lot of buzz in the dietary supplement community. Numerous questions regarding the method are being posed and it seems a forum for discussion is needed. To begin let us address the most frequently asked question, "Why did AOAC go with a different method from USP?" The USP publishes monographs, which are collection of methods (see http://www.usp.org/USPNF/), not just a single analytical method. The individual methods in the USP monographs are not intended to be used as "stand alone" methods and thus, individually are not suitable for determining the quality or purity of chondroitin. Unfortunately it is a common practice in the Dietary Supplement Industry, to employ the CPC analytical method while claiming to follow the USP. The problem with using only the CPC method is that it is "non-specific" and as such is not suitable for testing chondroitin levels in finished products containing other ingredients which can interfere with the test results. The current AOAC method was selected for its specificity to chondroitin and is suitable for use in assessing the quality of chondroitin as a single entity and within a product formulation. http://www.npicommunity.com/Blogs/tabid/53/EntryID/50/Default.aspx editor@npicenter.com http://www.npicommunity.com/Blogs/tabid/53/EntryID/50/Default.aspx#Comments http://www.npicommunity.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&EntryID=50 Sun, 21 Jan 2007 19:58:00 GMT 0 http://www.npicommunity.com/DesktopModules/Blog/Trackback.aspx?id=50