Who makes the most trusted supplements?

Makes, not sells: why most supplement brands make nothing, the three kinds of maker behind the labels on a shelf, and what each kind means for the trust in the tub

Who makes the most trusted supplements is a question whose verb is doing more work than the person asking it usually realises, because the brands on a shelf mostly do not make anything. A supplement brand is, in the ordinary case, a company that owns a name, designs a label, chooses a formulation from a menu, and pays a contract manufacturer to blend, encapsulate, bottle and release it; the brand sells, and someone else makes. That is not a scandal, it is how most of the food industry works, but it means the question who makes the most trusted supplements is not answered by a list of brands. It is answered by finding the maker behind the brand, because the maker is where the powder was weighed, where the metals were tested or not, where the capsules were checked for disintegration or not, and where a release decision was made by a person at a site with or without a certificate on the wall.

There are three kinds of maker, and the shelf mixes them without saying so. The first is the brand with its own facility: a company that owns the plant, employs the quality team, holds the facility certificates in its own name and is inspected as a manufacturer, so that the brand and the maker are the same company and the trust in one is the trust in the other. These are a minority, and they tend to be either the large old companies that grew into manufacturing or the small specialist firms that started as manufacturers and added a brand. The second is the contract manufacturer: a facility that makes for dozens or hundreds of brands under its own certificates, often to a far higher standard than any of its customers could afford alone, because the certificates, the laboratory and the quality team are paid for across every customer's volume. A brand made by a good contract manufacturer is made well whatever the brand's own size, and a brand made by a poor one is made poorly whatever its marketing; the trust sits at the site, and the brand has borrowed it. The third is the white-label filler: a facility or a trading company with a catalogue of stock formulations, which any brand can put its label on without changing a thing, so that the same capsule appears under twenty names at twenty prices. A white-label product is not necessarily bad, but the brand has designed nothing, chosen nothing and tested nothing, and the trust in the tub is the trust in a facility the brand may never have visited.

Once the three kinds are separated, the question has an answer with a shape. The most trusted supplements are made either by a brand with its own facility whose certificates are in its own name, or by a contract manufacturer whose site holds the certificates and whose customer has chosen to say so; and the least trusted are the white-label products of a facility nobody names, sold by a brand that is a label. The trust is in the maker and the maker is a place, which is why the next question is how a buyer finds the place.

The three makers set out, with how the maker is found from the label, the certificate and the manufacturer register, the question that locates the trust, the worked example and the verdict in the next section.

Finding the maker: the manufactured-by line, the facility certificate that names a site, and the programme that certifies manufacturers; the one question that locates the trust; the worked example; and the verdict

The label gives the first clue, though not always a name. Under the UK food information rules a supplement must carry the name and address of the food business operator responsible for it, which is the brand or its importer and not necessarily the maker, but a brand that is also the maker will say manufactured by, and a brand that is not will say manufactured for, packed for, or distributed by, which tells the buyer that someone else made it without saying who. A brand that is proud of its maker names the site or at least the country and the standard; a brand that is not says nothing, and the silence is read.

The certificate gives the second clue, and it is the decisive one, because a facility certificate names a facility. Good manufacturing practice certification and the BRC global standard for food safety are issued to a site at an address after an audit of that site, and the certificate carries the site's name, its scope and its grade; a brand that claims to be GMP or BRC certified is either the site itself or a customer of one, and the certificate it can show says which. The buyer who asks a brand which site makes this product and whether it can show that site's certificate has asked the question that locates the trust, and the three kinds of maker answer it differently: the own-facility brand sends its own certificate, the brand made by a good contract manufacturer sends the manufacturer's certificate or names the site, and the white-label brand either does not reply or sends a certificate with a name on it the brand has never mentioned. A banned-substance programme adds a third clue for the sports buyer, because those programmes certify manufacturing sites as well as products: a site on the manufacturer register has had its whole process audited for contamination control rather than one lot screened, and a brand whose maker is on that register has borrowed a trust that was earned by an audit.

The worked example is made at a named UK site and says so, which is what this page asks any brand to be able to say: {FL}, 1500mg magnesium bisglycinate stated as 300mg elemental at 80% NRV, two capsules with the evening meal, is manufactured in the UK at a site holding GMP and BRC certification, with the certificate available on request, each batch tested for lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium by ICP-MS at an accredited UK lab with the certificate for a lot available on request, a UK responsible operator's address on the label, and three ingredients, magnesium bisglycinate, the HPMC capsule shell and rice flour; 180 capsules for £19.99 at 22p a day. It does not claim to be the maker, because it is not; it claims to name the maker's site and show the site's certificate, which is the honest claim a brand of its size can make. The full label breakdown is here.

The verdict: most brands do not make supplements, so the most trusted supplements are made by whoever can be named. A brand with its own facility and its own certificates, or a brand made by a contract manufacturer whose site holds GMP and BRC and whose customer is willing to say so, makes a trusted supplement; a white-label product from a facility nobody names, sold by a brand that is a label, does not, whatever its reviews. The buyer reads the manufactured-by line, asks which site made the product, asks for that site's certificate, and trusts the answer rather than the brand's name.

What to check on the label

Questions people also ask

Do supplement brands make their own products?

Mostly not: the ordinary supplement brand owns a name and a label, chooses a formulation, and pays a contract manufacturer to blend, encapsulate, bottle and release it, so that the brand sells and someone else makes; a minority of brands own their own facility and hold the certificates in their own name, a larger number are made by contract manufacturers whose sites hold the certificates, and a further group are white-label products from a stock catalogue that appear under many names, and the trust in any tub sits with whoever made it rather than with the name on the front.

How do I find out who manufactures a supplement?

From three places: the label, where manufactured by means the brand is the maker and manufactured for, packed for or distributed by means it is not; the facility certificate, because GMP and BRC certificates are issued to a site at an address with a scope and a grade and so name the maker whatever the label says, which the brand can be asked to show; and for sports products the banned-substance programmes' manufacturer registers, which list audited sites; the single question that settles it is which site makes this product and can you show that site's certificate, and the three kinds of maker answer it in three recognisable ways.

Is a contract manufactured supplement lower quality?

Not by itself, and often the reverse: a good contract manufacturer makes for dozens or hundreds of brands under its own certificates and pays for its laboratory, its quality team and its audits across all that volume, so a small brand made there is made to a standard it could never afford alone, while a brand made by a poor contract manufacturer is made poorly whatever its marketing; the quality is the site's, the brand has borrowed it, and the honest brand says which site and shows the certificate rather than implying it made the product itself.

What is a white label supplement?

A stock formulation from a facility's or a trading company's catalogue that any brand can put its own label on without changing anything, so that the same capsule appears under many names at many prices; it is not necessarily a bad product, since the facility may be a good one, but the brand selling it designed nothing, chose nothing and tested nothing, usually names no maker, and often cannot show a certificate without a stranger's name on it, which is why a white-label brand is the least able to answer the question who made this and the least trusted of the three kinds of maker.

Who makes this site's magnesium?

A named UK manufacturing site holding GMP and BRC certification, which the brand says on the label and can show on request, rather than the brand itself, which is the honest claim a brand of its size makes; each batch of 1500mg magnesium bisglycinate stated as 300mg elemental at 80% NRV is tested for lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium by ICP-MS at an accredited UK lab with the certificate for a lot on request, the label carries a UK responsible operator's address, and the three ingredients are magnesium bisglycinate, the HPMC capsule shell and rice flour; 180 capsules for £19.99 at 22p a day.

Sources

1. The supplement manufacturing standards: Good Manufacturing Practice, the BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety and ISO 22000 are the facility-level certifications a contract manufacturer holds and a brand may cite. https://www.brcgs.com/our-standards/food-safety/
2. The retained Food Information to Consumers regulation: the mandatory nutrition declaration for foods, its fixed order of energy, fat, saturates, carbohydrate, sugars, protein and salt per 100g, and its rules on portion information, with supplements declaring nutrients per daily dose against nutrient reference values. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2011/1169/contents
3. The batch release and certificate of analysis framework: a product has a written specification for identity, assay, contaminants and physical properties, each batch is tested against it before release, and the certificate of analysis for a batch reports the results against the specification, so that batch-to-batch consistency is read by comparing certificates across lot numbers. PubMed record
4. The Informed Manufacturer programme: a site-level certification in which a manufacturing facility is audited for banned-substance controls, distinct from the product- and batch-level Informed Sport certification, so that a certified site can make uncertified products and a certified product can be made at a site with other, uncertified lines. https://sport.wetestyoutrust.com/informed-manufacturer

Related answers

• Who makes 21st century supplements?
• What are the most trusted supplement brands in the UK?
• Is NOW a trusted brand for supplements?
• What supplements have the most scientific evidence?
• What is a trusted website for buying supplements?
• What is the best cheap supplements?