Ingredient Suppliers Arrested at Supply Side West

Last month employees and owners of four raw ingredient suppliers to the dietary supplement industry were arrested at the industry’s largest trade show — Supply Side West.

The arrests and a subsequent set of indictments came as the result of a Confidential Informant in Texas who had the companies ship mislabeled stimulants into the country and across state lines (DMBA, DMHA, and DMAA were all shipped with fake names plus incorrect certificates of analysis to avoid detection).

Another set of documents filed as evidence shows Joe Oblas, from Texas, enticing the now-indicted suppliers into mislabeling DMHA as Junglans Regia Tree Bark Extract.

Joe Oblas is the former COO of ProSupps (formerly known as Professional Supplements) and current COO of Stryve Foods.


Indicted were Genabolix Lifestyles’ SSW attendees Gao Mei Feng ( aka Amy Gao) and Zhang Xiao Dong (aka Mark Zhang), as well as Shanghai Waseta’s Xu Jia Bao (aka Fred Xu) and Li Ting Ting (aka Sunny Lee), and a firm by the name of Max Pharmatech Inc.

Although some of these suppliers worked with Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, I am uncertain that there is a strong connection between their respective arrests. There is no mention of the company in the indictments or evidence. Furthermore, it was filed in Texas, where USP Labs is fighting an ongoing criminal case (over nearly identical charges of DMAA mislabeling, forged COAs, and other assorted hijinks), and involving many of the same principals.


Professional Supplements was founded by Art Atwood, who was himself a confidential Informant.

Earlier this year they (ProSupps) received a warning letter from the FDA that seemed fairly ominous as it included numerous severe Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act violations, but also a reference to the United States v. Dotterweich case (explaining that an offense can be committed by anyone who has “a responsible share in the furtherance of the transaction which the statute outlaws”) as well as a reference to United States v. Park (criminal liability under the Act does not turn on awareness of wrongdoing, and that “agents vested with the responsibility, and power commensurate with that responsibility, to devise whatever measures are necessary to ensure compliance with the Act” can be held accountable for violations of the Act).

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.