In what it calls a “misleading marketing campaign,” Nammex (Gibsons, BC, Canada) said it feels compelled to renew a call for accuracy and transparency in labeling and marketing fungi products.
“As happens more often than it should, those of us who have long been advocates for transparency in fungi product labeling and marketing are compelled to clarify the issue,” said Skye Chilton, CEO of Nammex. “It’s really very simple. The main point we have been making for decades is that functional fungi products should be accurately and properly identified in their entirety. To protect the integrity of this growing product category, consumers deserve the truth. Products that don’t contain mushrooms shouldn’t be hidden behind the term mushroom.”
According to Nammex, inconsistent use of fungal terminology, especially the term “mushroom,” is fueling the confusion. This is especially prevalent in product marketing, and a disservice to consumers. Information on the correct use of terminology is readily available, including on the Nammex website. A consumer survey of 10,000 people found overwhelmingly that shoppers know what a mushroom is and expect it to be the fruiting body when they buy a product marketed as mushroom.
“The North American Functional Mushroom Council marketing group with “mushroom” in its name and made up primarily of mycelium fermented grain producers, doesn’t even have the word “mycelium” on its website,” said Chilton.“It does, however, have the word “mushroom” in its name and over 100 times on its website, which also features plenty of pictures of mushrooms. The implication is they represent products made from mushrooms, which they primarily do not.”
Nammex said that when mycelium is grown on a grain substrate, which is the most economical and common method of obtaining this fungal part in North America, the majority of the final product is the grain. It’s not “transformed” into something else as often claimed. AOAC method 996.11 for starch testing confirms and quantifies this grain presence, as mushrooms and mycelium themselves contain no starch. It’s an inexpensive test that most third party labs can perform. The chemical profile is closer to the grain than the mushroom or mycelium. And yet the grain component goes unacknowledged in most mycelium fermented grain product labeling and marketing.
Another potential regulatory vulnerability is the marketing of mycelium fermented grain products with the claim “Made with U.S. Grown Mushrooms,” which Nammex views as misleading to consumers and against FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) guidelines. Actual U.S. mushroom growers should be concerned about this deception.
“Full spectrum” is another term often used to obfuscate mycelium fermented grain, according to Nammex. A full-spectrum preparation is a formulation intentionally designed to preserve the broad, representative chemical complexity of a specific, therapeutically relevant plant or fungal part, prioritizing the synergistic interactions of natural constituents over the isolation of single compounds. Achieving this requires extraction processes that retain the proportional profile of the original material, ensuring that the major and characteristic compound classes remain intact even if standardized to specific markers. Products where the mass or chemical profile is primarily composed of non-medicinal substrates, such as grain in mycelium fermented grain products, cannot be classified as full spectrum.
In a statement, the Functional Mushroom Council responded: “Fungi naturally contain glucose-based polysaccharides, such as beta-glucans and related compounds, which can react with iodine reagents despite not being dietary starch. In addition, fermentation fundamentally transforms substrate carbohydrates through enzymatic digestion and metabolic conversion into fungal biomass. As a result, these legacy tests cannot meaningfully distinguish residual grain starch from fungal-derived polysaccharides, nor can they meaningfully characterize the composition or biological relevance of a finished ingredient. This is clearly demonstrated in a short video, showing that both lion’s mane fruitbody and a hot water extract of the fruitbody produce a positive starch reaction based solely on the color change, highlighting the lack of specificity of iodine-based tests.”
“This video compares various fungal materials side-by-side, showing that lion’s mane mushroom products on the market—imported Chinese fruit body extract, whole fruit bodies (fresh and dried), and a mushroom mycelium fermented substrate matrix—all turn purple from an iodine solution,” added industry pioneer Paul Stamets. “This is a clear example of why the iodine test is misleading when assessing the bioefficacy of functional mushroom supplements. Consumers want an answer to the question, ‘Are these supplements beneficial, and am I being told the truth?’”
“Today, functional mushroom science relies on far more advanced and reliable technologies. Modern analytical approaches, including intensive metabolomics and chemical fingerprinting, are used to directly characterize the chemistry of finished mushroom ingredients and to validate the presence, diversity, and consistency of bioactive compounds,” the Functional Mushroom Council continued. “Both M2 Ingredients and Fungi Perfecti have conducted extensive metabolomics work to verify the chemical composition and bioactive profiles of the ingredients they manufacture and supply to customers. These methods provide a far more accurate and meaningful assessment than historical iodine starch tests, which are not appropriate tools for evaluating contemporary functional mushroom products.”
“Specifically, in response to the patent-related comment from the rebuttal, Stamets replied, ‘To clarify, the patent that the commenter was referring to is citing a family of patents that repeatedly provides evidence for the activity of mycelium grown on grain against a wide variety of viruses. Within this family of patents there are a range of parameters that depend on the type of virus and the species of fungi. Different species colonize the grain to different proportions and can be tailored accordingly during their growout to achieve a desired colonization, keeping in mind that fermented rice itself has also shown to be active immunologically–and, at times, demonstrating greater benefits–even when separated from the mycelium (Benson et al 2019).”
“To close, the Functional Mushroom Council reiterates that we will not get lost in semantic or nomenclature debates—they are unproductive for the industry and confusing for consumers. Our focus remains squarely on end-product science, which overwhelmingly supports whole-mushroom ingredients that include both mycelium and fruiting body as a single, integrated fungal organism. We are increasingly concerned that some overseas suppliers, particularly those focused exclusively on fruiting-body extracts, have a clear business incentive to instill fear by mischaracterizing mycelium as merely ‘grain,’ a claim that is scientifically inaccurate and repeatedly refuted by modern research … Rather than arguing over outdated tests, legacy assumptions, or the naming of mushroom parts, the Council believes the industry must stay focused on rigorous science, transparent manufacturing, and what ultimately matters most—the demonstrated impact of functional mushrooms on human health.”
Nammex filed a Citizen Petition requesting that the FDA take action to ensure dietary supplements and foods containing ingredients from fungi are properly labeled to identify the fungal part and list any included grain substrates.
For more information, visit www.nammex.com or https://functionalmushroomcouncil.org.
