The annual NIE New Ingredients Awards are chosen based on the recommendations of a distinguished panel of experts in the dietary supplements and nutritional ingredient industries to ensure fair, objective evaluations based on established criteria. From mid-April to mid-July, the panel reviews entries to determine the most cutting-edge and advanced natural branded nutritional ingredients backed by science.

The criteria are based on:

• Product Research/Evidence/Bioavailability
• Sustainability/Traceability/Certifications (if applicable)
• Consumer Need
• The “Impressiveness Factor”

 For companies seeking to provide the strongest entry possible, judges Cheryl Myers, Chief of Scientific Affairs and Education, EuroPharma, Inc., and Gene Bruno, DBM, MS, RH(AHG), Chief Scientific Officer, Nutraland USA,  have offered their advice:

1. What are the judges looking for? Proof of effectiveness and safety. Clearly defined, quantifiable outcomes. For example, saying “significant improvements in skin quality” would be valued less than “showed a 20 percent increase in hydration and a 42 percent reduction in fine lines.”
2. Check the dates. Be careful that your submission falls within the dates accepted. For example, if the directions indicate that the ingredient should have been launched after Oct. 1, 2024, don’t submit an ingredient launched on July 7, 2021.
3.  Follow entry guidelines. Please read the guidelines carefully. Follow the instructions. Many submissions are disqualified when they might have been approved had the instructions been followed.
4. Pay attention to the categories.Read the criteria for each category carefully. Make sure your product fits the guidelines.
5. Advice on submitting scientific research. (They will be limited to five studies.) The gold standard is a human double blind, placebo-controlled study published in a reputable journal. We realize that, especially with new products, the early science may be pilot studies, observational, or animal studies, or cell cultures. Submit the best of what you have, even if not yet published. Marketing materials are not science. People have submitted marketing materials with graphs and pie charts proving efficacy with no explanation at all from whence such statistics came nor sometimes even differentiating human from animal studies. Please attach the studies or the abstracts. Please do not include a list of links such that we must click and find the studies ourselves. If there is a problem with the link—and there often is—you lose an opportunity to share the science on your product.
6. Clearly explain why the product stands out. Does it solve a problem for consumers, etc.? Please use clear language and tell us everything you want us to know about your product. What are its unique selling points? What is the science? Is there anything special about the way it is made—special plant extraction methods, boosted absorption delivery system, higher levels of marker compounds, etc.? It is especially compelling if your product has been tested against a standard—i.e., your apple extract showed five times the potency of generic apple extracts; your CoQ10 showed eight times the absorption of plain CoQ10 powder; your omega-3 had four times less rancidity markers than generic fish oil, and so forth.
7. Other comments? Please use understandable language in your descriptions. Do not get lost with too much technical speak. We understand that some of the science included will be highly technical. While the   judges can review any level of scientific information, often clarity is lost when dense, obscure scientific terms are used to sound more scientific. If you need to use obscure scientific terminology, please define it.

If you have a question, contact VRM Editor-in-Chief Janet Poveromo at [email protected]. Best wishes and good luck!