Belgium Faces Reckoning Over Supplement Sales and Oversight Gaps
A major investigation by Belgian newspaper De Morgen has exposed widespread compliance failures in the country’s dietary supplements market, reigniting a fierce debate over who should intervene to protect consumers. The probe, led by journalist Eva Kestemont and published in late May, found that Belgian supplement brands do not always adhere to the law — particularly regarding health claims and influencer marketing — raising urgent questions about the effectiveness of the existing regulatory framework.
Context: A Market Built on Notification, Not Verification
Belgium, like all EU member states, operates under EU Directive 2002/46/EC for food supplements. Before a product can reach store shelves, manufacturers must submit a notification to the FOD Volksgezondheid (Federal Public Service for Health) — an administrative declaration of the product’s composition and labeling. The Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain (FAVV) then conducts spot checks, sampling 546 supplements between 2020 and 2024, with 98.7% found compliant.
Yet critics argue that this system amounts to little more than a paper exercise. Professor Hans De Loof of the University of Antwerp told VRT NWS that “such a notification is an almost purely administrative check. We live in a paper world and the chance that a supplement is effectively subjected to a control is very small.”
The Investigation: What De Morgen Found
De Morgen’s investigation, framed around the provocative term “kwakzalverij” (quackery), documented instances where supplement brands flouted regulations on health claims and marketing. The article highlighted a particular vulnerability in the influencer-driven supplement economy, where products are promoted on social media with little regard for legal restrictions.
The FOD Volksgezondheid acknowledged the problem. Spokesperson Annelies Wynant stated: “The legislation is clear and the FAVV carries out targeted controls. But it seems that influencers are less aware of that.” Research from Germany suggests the scale of the issue is significant, with food supplement influencers facing health claims violation rates of up to 90%.
Industry Response: A Regulated Reality Under Fire
The Belgian supplement industry federation, be-sup — representing approximately 90% of producers and 70% of the market — pushed back against what it called an unfair characterization. In a detailed response to De Morgen’s editorial team on May 4, be-sup representative Valerie Vercammen argued that 71% of supplements are sold through pharmacies within a strict EU and Belgian regulatory framework.
“Be-sup, as the professional federation of the Belgian food supplements industry, does not recognize itself in that image — not because the sector is above criticism, but because the reporting insufficiently reflects the regulated reality of our sector,” Vercammen said.
Be-sup highlighted its ongoing efforts, including seven years of compliance training for members, four structured knowledge series through its SupAcademy program, and active participation in developing European influencer guidelines through the EHPM federation. The organization is also collaborating with the JEP (Jury for Ethical Practices in Advertising) on an influencer certification initiative.
Consumer Protection: A Pattern of Concern
Consumer organization Testaankoop has documented persistent problems in the supplement market. In March 2025, the organization warned about online slimming supplements containing illegal substances — including ephedrine, a stimulant banned in food supplements — purchased from platforms like AliExpress and Wish. Other products contained no active ingredients at all despite advertised claims.
Laura Clays, spokesperson for Testaankoop, highlighted a fundamental flaw in the system: “As soon as a substance is in your product, you can make the claim. Even if the product consists of 99% other substances and the efficacy is therefore not guaranteed.”
Experts have also raised concerns about misleading marketing for collagen supplements and the growing trend of “supplement stacking” — taking dozens of supplements simultaneously — which Dr. Bert Op ‘t Eijnde of UHasselt told VRT NWS is “overbodig en mogelijk schadelijk” (unnecessary and potentially harmful).
Analysis: Who Will Intervene?
The question posed by De Morgen’s follow-up article — “who will intervene?” — reflects a fundamental ambiguity in Belgium’s regulatory architecture. Responsibility is split across multiple agencies: FOD Volksgezondheid handles notifications, FAVV conducts food safety checks, and FAGG oversees medicines. Meanwhile, Minister of Consumer Protection Rob Beenders (Vooruit) has emphasized professional ethics among pharmacists, while Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke has focused on separate healthcare pricing issues.
Marleen Finoulst, a physician at Gezondheid en Wetenschap, captured the frustration of many critics: “Producers act as if with their pills you quickly have a solution for your problem, but they have not had to provide any evidence for that to the authorities.”
What’s Next
The De Morgen revelations have placed the supplement industry and its regulators under an uncomfortable spotlight. Be-sup has called for a more nuanced debate, acknowledging that problems exist — particularly around influencer marketing — while defending the overall regulatory framework. Consumer organizations and health experts argue that stronger government enforcement, not just industry self-regulation, is needed.
Key questions remain unanswered: Will the FOD Volksgezondheid or FAVV increase enforcement actions? Will Belgium push for stricter EU-level regulation of supplement health claims? And will political leaders propose legislative changes to close the gap between regulation on paper and enforcement in practice?
For Belgian consumers, the immediate takeaway is clear: the supplement market is not as tightly controlled as many assume, and the responsibility for navigating its risks remains largely their own.