Abstract
Over-the-counter diet pills and muscle-building supplements are linked to increased eating disorder diagnoses, especially among youth. With limited regulatory oversight, minors may unknowingly consume harmful substances leading to other adverse effects. Massachusetts has proposed restricting sales to individuals under 18 years. However, concerns about health equity and unintended consequences arise when proposing new policies. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of the proposed age-restriction policy compared to the status quo, focusing on 2 closed cohorts of males and females aged 0-17 years in Massachusetts over a 30-year time horizon. We evaluated the impact from both societal and health systems' perspectives and further assessed equity implications by modeling 3 racial/ethnic subgroups. The policy is projected to prevent 57 034 eating disorder cases and over 46 000 additional adverse medical events (eg, liver injuries). It would yield 51 749 quality-adjusted life years and generate healthcare savings of $14 million and societal savings of $30 million annually. The Latine subpopulation would see the highest per capita health benefits followed by Black and White residents, respectively. Restricting the sale of these supplements to minors offers both health and economic benefits. These findings underscore the policy's effectiveness, fiscal responsibility, and positive equity impacts, providing confidence for policymakers and the public.
With limited regulatory oversight, over-the-counter diet pills and muscle-building supplements are associated with harmful substances and adverse medical events. Furthermore, use of these supplements is lined to increased eating disorder diagnoses, especially among young people. We investigated the economic and equity implications of a proposed ban on the sale of these supplements to minors using cost- and aggregate distributional cost-effectiveness methodologies.
Over-the-counter diet pills and muscle-building supplements are linked to increased eating disorder diagnoses, especially among youth, as well as other harms such as liver and kidney injury. In part that is because there is limited regulatory oversight, so users can unintentionally consume harmful substances. Massachusetts has proposed restricting sales to individuals under 18 years, but with any new proposal, policymakers and people want to know how much it will cost and will it increase health disparities. We investigated using both economic- and equity-related methods. We found that the policy would not just be cost-effective; it would save both the healthcare system and society money from preventing more than 100 000 adverse medical events (eg, eating disorder cases and liver injuries). Healthcare savings would be $14 million per year, and societal savings would be closer to $30 million annually. Latine residents would see the highest increase in overall health, followed by Black and White residents, respectively. In short, restricting the sale of these supplements to minors offers both health and economic benefits.