Chromium Picolinate: Reviewed by a registered dietition

By Ellen Coleman, RD, MA, MPH

Lose fat! Build muscle! Feel more energetic!

Such misleading and fraudulent claims are the cornerstone of the chromium picolinate industry. The success of chromium picolinate is due to a remarkably well-orchestrated marketing campaign initiated by both Nutrition 21 (a San Diego, California-based food supplement company) and their consultant chemist, Gary Evans, Ph.D (the author of Chromium Picolinate).

Nutrition 21 holds the exclusive U.S. license on the patent rights to chromium picolinate and sells it to the public through distributors.

Evans worked on the synthesis of metal picolinates at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Human Nutrition Research Center in Grand Forks, North Dakota. The synthetic process for metal picolinates was patented by the USDA and leased to Nutrition 21. Picolinic acid is a natural derivative of the amino acid tryptophan and is thought to facilitate chromium absorption (1).

Evans left the USDA research center for Bemidji State College in Minnesota and began researching and promoting chromium picolinate as a fat-burner and muscle-builder. During this time, Nutrition 21 aggressively promoted it to vitamin dealers, fitness centers, and weight loss centers. Ads have emphasized that chromium picolinate was developed in the nutrition laboratories of the USDA and is patented. Unfortunately, patenting laws do not require that claims for health products be valid (see Berg 1996).

The supposed enhanced bioavailability of chromium picolinate forms the basis for claims that the supplement increases muscle mass and decreases body fat. These claims for chromium picolinate are based on two poorly controlled, unpublished research studies cited in a review article by Evans (see Evans 1989).

Independent research by the USDA does not support the marketing claims made by Evans or Nutrition 21. Melissa Hallmark (a graduate student at the University of Maryland, College Park) and researchers from the USDA Human Nutrition Research Center in Beltsville, Maryland evaluated the effects of chromium picolinate supplementation and weight training on muscle strength, body composition and chromium excretion (See Hallmark 1996). Subjects received either 200 micrograms of chromium picolinate or a placebo for 12 weeks. The training consisted of weight lilting three days per week. The weight training program significantly increased the muscular strength of both groups. The subjects on supplemental chromium had urinary chromium losses (attributed to the supplement) that were nine times greater than the placebo group. No significant changes in strength or body composition were observed between the chromium-supplemented and control groups.

Henry Lukaski, Ph.D. (a researcher at the USDA Human Nutrition Research Center in Grand Forks, North Dakota) and colleagues examined the effects of chromium supplementation on body composition, muscle strength, and trace-element status (see Lukaski 1996). The subjects received either 200 micrograms of chromium chloride, 200 micrograms of chromium picolinate, or a placebo for 8 weeks. The training consisted of weight lifting five days per week. Chromium supplementation increased serum chromium concentration and urinary chromium excretion. No differences were noted between the chemical forms of chromium. Transferin saturation decreased more with chromium picolinate supplementation (24%) than with chromium chloride (10%) or placebo (13%). No significant differences were observed among groups in strength or lean body mass gains.

In November of 1996, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ordered Nutrition 21 and two other companies to stop making unsubstantiated weight loss and health claims for chromium picolinate (see FTC 1996). The FTC’s complaint included charges that the three companies were unable to support numerous claims (e.g. reduced body fat, increased muscle mass, and increased energy) made for the supplement. The FTC also maintained that the companies falsely claimed that chromium picolinate’s benefits are proven by scientific studies. Under the FTC settlement, the companies are prohibited from making any of the challenged claims in the future unless they can be verified by reliable research. Nutrition 21 is required to notify its distributors of the FTC’s charges and to stop using sales materials which make the challenged claims. The settlements also include reporting requirements so that the FTC can monitor the compliance of the three companies.

Reprinted with permission from Ellen Coleman, RD, MA, MPH