A supplement that claims to treat a disease is legally a drug, so botanical supplements describe structure or function instead
U.S. law defines a drug by its intended use, and a label claim is evidence of that use. Read the statute and FDA's rule, then sort FDA's own 22 examples yourself.
Not legal advice. This course explains published law and FDA's examples as of October 23, 2026. Claim decisions belong to qualified regulatory counsel. EUTECNIQ Sciences is a company in formation and makes no product claims.
The law classifies by intended use, so one extract can be a supplement, a food with a health claim or a drug
Explanation, details and sources
A drug includes “articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease” and “articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body” (§ 201(g)(1)(B), (C)). A supplement making a compliant § 403(r)(6) statement “is not a drug under clause (C) solely because” of it.
You will learn
- Quote the statutory definition of a drug and explain why intended use, not the plant, decides the category.
- State the three conditions on a structure/function statement and the exact disclaimer.
- Apply the ten disease-claim criteria of 21 CFR 101.93(g)(2) to FDA's own examples.
- Distinguish authorized health claims, qualified health claims and drug claims by their evidence standards.
- Recognize the chain of violations in a disease-claim warning letter.
- Outline the botanical drug pathway and name the four approved botanical drugs.
Each statute since 1906 added a requirement, and DSHEA in 1994 created the structure/function route
Text version of the timeline
- June 30, 1906: Food and Drugs Act. June 25, 1938: FD&C Act; new drugs shown safe before marketing.
- October 10, 1962: Kefauver–Harris amendments; effectiveness proven before marketing.
- November 8, 1990: Nutrition Labeling and Education Act. October 25, 1994: Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act.
- 1999: Pearson v. Shalala, 164 F.3d 650. January 6, 2000: structure/function final rule, 65 FR 1000, effective February 7, 2000.
- 2006: Veregen approved October 31; serious adverse event reporting law signed December 22 (Pub. L. 109-462).
- January 4, 2011: FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, § 113 on new dietary ingredients (passed by Congress December 21, 2010).
- December 2016: Botanical Drug Development guidance, Revision 1. December 20, 2022: FTC Health Products Compliance Guidance. October 19, 2026: FDA final guidance on NDI identity and safety information.
Explanation, details and sources
The 1938 Act required new drugs to be shown safe before marketing; the 1962 amendments added proof of effectiveness. The 1990 NLEA authorized health claims for foods, and DSHEA defined dietary supplements and their statements.
A structure/function statement needs substantiation, a notice to FDA within 30 days and a fixed disclaimer
Explanation, details and sources
The statement “may not claim to diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure, or prevent a specific disease or class of diseases” (§ 403(r)(6)). The disclaimer reads: “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.” (21 CFR 101.93(c)(1)).
FDA's 2000 rule lists ten ways a statement becomes a disease claim, and context can decide
Sort FDA's own examples FDA examples, verbatim
“protective against the development of cancer”
FDA: disease claim, criterion (i), a specific disease. 65 FR 1012; SECG criterion 1.
“Helps promote urinary tract health”
FDA: structure/function; no specific disease state. 65 FR 1012.
“reduces the pain and stiffness associated with arthritis”
FDA: disease claim, criterion (i). 65 FR 1012; SECG criterion 1.
“inhibits platelet aggregation”
FDA: implied disease claim, criterion (ii); inhibiting platelet aggregation “is a well-recognized therapy for the prevention of stroke and recurrent heart attack.” FDA reversed its 1998 proposal here. 65 FR 1016.
“For relief of occasional constipation”
FDA: “would therefore not be considered a disease claim,” though labeling should exclude chronic constipation. 65 FR 1015.
“decreases the effects of alcohol intoxication”
FDA: disease claim, criterion (i); intoxication “meets the definition of disease, albeit a transient disease.” 65 FR 1012, 1015.
“helps to maintain cholesterol levels that are already within the normal range”
FDA: “an appropriate structure/function claim.” 65 FR 1019.
“lowers cholesterol”
FDA: “however qualified, is an implied disease claim,” criterion (ii). 65 FR 1019.
A claim about “hot flashes”
FDA: on its list of natural-state conditions about which structure/function claims could be made, criterion (iii). 65 FR 1020.
A claim about “severe depression associated with the menstrual cycle”
FDA: remains a disease claim, criterion (iii). 65 FR 1020; SECG criterion 3.
“CarpalHealth” (a product name)
FDA: implied claim for carpal tunnel syndrome through the name, criterion (iv)(A). 65 FR 1022; SECG criterion 4.
“Soothing Sleep” (a product name)
FDA: could be a claim to treat insomnia “unless other context in the labeling makes clear that the claim relates to a non-disease condition, such as occasional sleeplessness.” SECG criterion 4; 65 FR 1022.
“Promotes good health and prevents the onset of disease”
FDA: disease claim, criterion (iv)(D), because it implies the product itself prevents disease; “a good diet promotes good health and prevents the onset of disease” is acceptable. 65 FR 1025; SECG.
“antidepressant” (a product class)
FDA: a class name tied to disease treatment, criterion (v). 65 FR 1026; SECG criterion 5.
“diuretic that relieves temporary water-weight gain”
FDA: “an appropriate product claim,” because the context limits it to structure/function. SECG criterion 5.
“supports the body's antiviral capabilities”
FDA: disease claim, criterion (viii), the body's response to disease. 65 FR 1028; SECG criterion 8.
“supports the immune system”
FDA: “not specific enough to imply prevention of disease.” SECG criterion 8; 65 FR 1029.
“to maintain the intestinal flora in people on antibiotics”
FDA: disease claim, criterion (ix), implying prevention of overgrowth after antibiotic therapy. SECG criterion 9.
“helps maintain cardiovascular function and a healthy circulatory system”
FDA: structure/function; no specific disease state. 65 FR 1012.
“Relieves crushing chest pain”
FDA: implied disease claim for “angina or heart attack,” criterion (i). 65 FR 1013; SECG criterion 1.
“improves absentmindedness”
FDA: an appropriate structure/function claim “if there is no context linking them to a disease.” SECG criterion 2; 65 FR 1016.
“promotes relaxation”
FDA: structure/function; no specific disease state. 65 FR 1012.
Method, assumptions and limits
- What it does
- Compares your classification of 22 statements with FDA's own classification and counts the matches. Score = matches ÷ statements answered.
- Source of every statement
- Each statement is quoted verbatim from the preamble to FDA's final rule, 65 FR 1000 (January 6, 2000), at the page given, or from FDA's Small Entity Compliance Guide on Structure/Function Claims (SECG, January 2002). Capitalization follows the source.
- Assumptions
- Each statement is read without other labeling. Where FDA said context decides, the answer is “Depends on context.”
- What it does not establish
- It does not classify new wording. FDA reads each claim in the context of the whole label and labeling, and FTC substantiation rules apply separately.
- Verification
- The answer key is checked against an independent Python key written from the FDA texts (tests/numerics/ref/academy_why-no-disease-claims.py).
Explanation, details and sources
A disease is “damage to an organ, part, structure, or system of the body such that it does not function properly (e.g., cardiovascular disease), or a state of health leading to such dysfunctioning (e.g., hypertension)”; nutrient-deficiency diseases are excluded (21 CFR 101.93(g)(1)). FDA “will consider the context in which the claim is presented.”
Conditions of pregnancy, menstruation, menopause and aging are disease claims only when uncommon or harmful
Check a claim against the ten criteria Educational logic
No criterion is met by the features chosen. The statement could be a structure/function statement if it is substantiated, notified within 30 days and carries the disclaimer; context can still change that.
- (i) Has an effect on a specific disease or class of diseases; Not met
- (ii) Has an effect on the characteristic signs or symptoms of a specific disease or class of diseases, using scientific or lay terminology; Not met
- (iii) Has an effect on an abnormal condition associated with a natural state or process, if the abnormal condition is uncommon or can cause significant or permanent harm; Not met
- (iv) Has an effect on a disease or diseases through one or more of the following factors: (A) The name of the product; (B) A statement about the formulation of the product …; (C) Citation of a publication or reference …; (D) Use of the term “disease” or “diseased” …; or (E) Use of pictures, vignettes, symbols, or other means; Not met
- (v) Belongs to a class of products that is intended to diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure, or prevent a disease; Not met
- (vi) Is a substitute for a product that is a therapy for a disease; Not met
- (vii) Augments a particular therapy or drug action that is intended to diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure, or prevent a disease or class of diseases; Not met
- (viii) Has a role in the body's response to a disease or to a vector of disease; Not met
- (ix) Treats, prevents, or mitigates adverse events associated with a therapy for a disease, if the adverse events constitute diseases; or Not met
- (x) Otherwise suggests an effect on a disease or diseases. Not met
Method, assumptions and limits
- What it calculates
- Which of the ten criteria of 21 CFR 101.93(g)(2) a statement meets, given the features you tick, and how many.
- Rule for criterion (iii)
- Met when a natural state is chosen and the condition is uncommon (share < 50%) or can cause significant or permanent harm. The 50% line is FDA's “fewer than one-half” (SECG, criterion 3).
- Variables and units
- Share: percent of people in the stage or process, 0–100. Criterion (iv) counts once, whichever of its five factors applies.
- What it does not establish
- You decide whether each feature is present; FDA decides from the whole label and labeling. A statement that meets no criterion still needs substantiation, notification and the disclaimer, and must not be misleading. Not legal advice.
- Verification
- Seven feature sets are checked against an independent Python implementation (tests/numerics/ref/academy_why-no-disease-claims.py) and by unit tests.
Explanation, details and sources
FDA's test for criterion (iii): “a condition is uncommon if it occurs in fewer than one-half of those experiencing that stage or process,” and it can cause significant or permanent harm “if it must be treated effectively to prevent that harm and for which effective treatments are available” (SECG).
Health claims are a separate, pre-cleared route, and only twelve are codified
Data: qualified health claim entries by year
2000: 2 · 2001: 2 · 2003: 6 · 2004: 5 · 2005: 5 · 2006: 1 · 2007: 1 · 2009: 2 · 2011: 2 · 2012: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2024: 1 (total 40). Plant-derived subjects: tomatoes (two letters, 2005), green tea (2011) and its update (2012), psyllium husk (2014), cranberry juice and cranberry supplements (2020), cocoa flavanols (2023).
Text version of the decision ladder: a statement with no disease effect is a structure/function statement; one with a disease effect is lawful on a food or supplement only as an authorized health claim the product qualifies for, or as a qualified health claim with FDA's wording; otherwise the product is an unapproved new drug unless approved for that use.
Explanation, details and sources
FDA authorizes a health claim only when there is “significant scientific agreement, among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate such claims, that the claim is supported by such evidence” (21 CFR 101.14(c)). Psyllium is one botanical example: its husk must be at least 95% pure by USP methods (101.81(c)(2)(ii)(B)).
Each claim type carries a different evidence standard, and the FTC applies its own to all advertising
Data: Inspector General findings
127 supplements with 378 structure/function claims. 26 (20%) had prohibited disease claims; 9 (7%) lacked the disclaimer. 66 of 104 manufacturers sent 1,624 substantiation documents for 72 supplements; 557 (34%) were human studies. Of those: 2% studied the actual product, 85% were not randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials, 49% used populations unlike the intended users, 189 (34%) focused on disease research, and 20 (4%) contradicted the claims.
Explanation, details and sources
The FTC guidance of December 20, 2022 says health benefits generally need “randomized, controlled human clinical testing,” that traditional-use claims face “the same requirement,” and that the guide “doesn't have the force or effect of law.” In 2012 the HHS Inspector General tested the system on 127 supplements.
Disease-claim warning letters follow one chain: intended use, unapproved new drug, misbranding, prohibited act
Explanation, details and sources
FDA's COVID-19 letters show the pattern at scale: from March 2020 to August 2022 FDA listed 221 letters to firms selling products with claims to prevent or treat the disease, including herbal teas and tinctures.
A botanical can be sold to treat a disease only as an approved drug, and FDA has approved four
Explanation, details and sources
FDA's December 2016 guidance adapts the IND and NDA process to plant mixtures. The four approvals are Veregen (2006), crofelemer (2012), NexoBrid (2022) and Filsuvez (2023); Course 2 shows their plants and specifications and FDA's 739 botanical INDs.
Nine terms used in this course
Show the 9 key terms
- Intended use
- What a product is for, shown by labeling, advertising and websites; it sets the category.
- Labeling
- Labels and other written, printed or graphic matter on or accompanying a product (§ 201(m)).
- Structure/function statement
- A § 403(r)(6) statement about the body's structure or function, naming no disease.
- Disease claim
- A statement meeting a 101.93(g)(2) criterion; on a supplement it makes a drug.
- Health claim
- A claim linking a substance to a disease, allowed only as FDA authorizes.
- Qualified health claim
- A health claim below significant scientific agreement, used with FDA's qualifying words.
- Substantial evidence
- Adequate and well-controlled investigations of a drug's effect (§ 505(d)).
- Warning letter
- FDA's usual notice of what it believes are significant violations.
- Botanical drug
- A drug from plants, algae or macroscopic fungi, under FDA's botanical guidance.
Five questions on claims
A website for a supplement says it “helps the body fight colds.” Does the disclaimer make that acceptable?
No. A disclaimer applies only to structure/function statements. A role in the body's response to disease meets criterion (viii), and a disease claim makes the product a drug whatever the disclaimer says.
Why is “maintains cholesterol levels already within the normal range” acceptable but “lowers cholesterol” not?
Lowering cholesterol is a recognized disease treatment, so FDA treats it as an implied disease claim however qualified. Maintaining normal levels describes a normal function.
Hot flashes are on FDA's list of conditions open to structure/function claims. What test put them there?
Criterion (iii): a natural-state condition is a disease only if uncommon (in fewer than half of those in the stage) or able to cause significant or permanent harm.
Who reviews the evidence behind a structure/function statement before it is used?
No one at FDA. The firm must hold substantiation and notify FDA within 30 days after first marketing; the FTC can act on advertising after the fact.
Can a botanical make a disease claim legally?
Yes, as an approved drug after an IND and an NDA showing substantial evidence, or as an authorized or qualified health claim for which the product qualifies.
Next: multi-objective ingredient design
Course 11 shows how identity, safety, evidence and regulatory status are weighed together in one ingredient decision.