CRN opposes California’s protein powder bill for “burdensome requirements”

Representatives of the dietary supplement and functional food sectors under the US Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) have spoken out in opposition to California Senate Bill 1033. The proposed legislation would enforce additional testing, disclosure, and labeling mandates on protein powder and other concentrated protein products sold within the state. 

Introduced on Feb 11, 2026, by State Senator Steve Padilla, the bill has divided consumer advocacy groups and the dietary supplement industry.

CRN asserts that singling out protein powders for “special treatment” will worry consumers and discourage the use of these products. It adds that the policy does not acknowledge that most everyday activities subject consumers to low levels of environmental contaminants.

The industry body argues SB 1033 represents a “misplaced policy approach” that would create burdensome requirements outside the established federal regulatory framework. It also warns against the “alarmist” messaging to consumers, which it says is “disconnected to any actual harm.”

Ultimately, the organization believes that such measures risk confusing consumers, increasing costs, and “undermining the uniform national system that has governed dietary supplements for more than three decades.”

“Dietary supplements are already regulated under a comprehensive federal framework that includes rigorous Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) and contaminant testing requirements,” says Steve Mister, president & CEO of CRN.

“Layering additional state-specific mandates on top of that system is unnecessary and counterproductive. It creates regulatory fragmentation without improving consumer safety.”

Regulatory redundancies?

US federal law mandates that dietary supplement manufacturers adhere to GMPs, which include screening for contaminants, including heavy metals, and ensuring products meet established safety standards.

While modern analytical techniques can detect extraordinarily small trace levels of naturally occurring elements, detection alone does not equate to risk, highlights CRN.

In addition, the organization argues that protein products in the state are already subject to California’s Prop 65, which requires warning labels for items that exceed very conservative thresholds for heavy metals. Therefore, California consumers are already alerted if a product exceeds California’s permissible levels.

The industry body alleges that SB 1033 would instead layer on additional California-specific testing disclosures and labeling mandates for protein powders and related products, creating a parallel compliance regime unique to one state.

CRN argues that the new regulation would ignore the fact that many food items will have trace amounts of heavy metals from the environment, including fresh produce and meat.

Impact of “patchwork” regulations

CRN adds that this kind of “patchwork approach” will affect companies of all sizes, from national brands to emerging innovators. It anticipates that the new legislation will require separate testing protocols, website disclosures, packaging revisions, and supply chain adjustments tailored to individual state requirements.

“The proliferation of inconsistent mandates across states could disrupt national distribution systems and increase costs for businesses and consumers alike,” Mister adds. “A fragmented state-by-state system introduces uncertainty, inefficiency, and unnecessary expense across the marketplace.”

CRN strongly supports a “singular, science-based” national standard of compliance. Along with other supplement industry groups, it welcomes the recently proposed federal Dietary Supplement Regulatory Uniformity Act, overseen by the US FDA as the national regulator of dietary supplements.

This bill proposes amending the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to clarify that no state may establish requirements for supplements that differ from, or are additional to, those in the act.

“For more than 30 years, dietary supplements have been regulated under a clear, science-based federal framework,” says Mister. “Consumers are best served when there is one national standard — not a growing patchwork of state-by-state mandates.”

“CRN will continue fighting to protect responsible companies, defend consumer access, and ensure supplement policy remains grounded in sound science — not sensationalism.”