All In Nutritionals
Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Website
Home Blog

Ubiquinol Just Won a Healthspan Award. Here Is How to Use It on a Canadian Shelf

By
Olivier Felicio
-
0
A health store associate showing a customer an open jar of golden CoQ10 supplement powder at a wooden wellness shelf

A health store associate showing a customer an open jar of golden CoQ10 supplement powder at a wooden wellness shelf

A customer in her late fifties stops at the CoQ10 bay with her phone out. An AI assistant has just told her about mitochondria, cellular energy and something called healthspan, and it mentioned ubiquinol by name. Her question is simple: which of these bottles should she buy, and is the expensive one worth it?

More shoppers will arrive with that question this fall. Kaneka Ubiquinol has been named Healthspan Ingredient of the Year at the NutraIngredients-Asia Awards, and the recognition gives Canadian health retailers a timely reason to talk about CoQ10. The catch is that a Canadian label can only promise what ordinary CoQ10 already promises, while the ubiquinol form costs about two and a half times as much per milligram. Stores that turn this award into sales will be the ones whose staff can tell the story in the words Health Canada allows and explain the price difference honestly.

What the award is worth at the counter

The ceremony took place in Bangkok on September 2, with a record 256 entries across the program. It is the ingredient’s third consecutive recognition from these awards, following a healthy ageing win in 2024 and a women’s health shortlisting in 2025. Kaneka counts it as its seventh international honour. According to publisher Gary Scattergood, the judges were impressed by the scientific evidence behind ubiquinol and by “significant evidence of commercial success across the region.”

For a buyer, that combination is the useful part. An independent panel reviewed both the research file and the sales record, which makes ubiquinol a lower-risk listing and gives staff a credible reply when a customer wonders whether it is a passing fad.

Kaneka is also using the moment to promote “mitoceuticals,” its term for nutraceuticals formulated to support mitochondrial function. Ubiquinol, the reduced form of coenzyme Q10 that cells use in energy production, sits at the centre of that idea. To make the point, the company’s release cites an eLife study estimating more than 5,000 mitochondria in every heart cell. Kaneka describes itself as the sole global manufacturer of ubiquinol. Even so, a March 2026 trial in Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development tested a ubiquinol cocrystal from a Chinese developer. Suppliers should be able to say whose raw material is in their product, since research on one source does not automatically transfer to another.

The raw material itself usually travels as a powder. Alongside its standard ingredient, Kaneka supplies an air-stable ubiquinol powder, Kaneka Q30, which it says suits capsules, stick packs, powdered beverages and nutrition bars, and its product developers work in formats from gummies to fast-dissolving powders. For the shelf, that means one ingredient can arrive in several forms, and the format a customer prefers is as much a reason to choose a product as the ingredient inside it.

Demand at home is real. A Global Burden of Disease analysis published this summer in The Lancet Public Health measured the gap between lifespan and years lived in good health. Worldwide, it reached 10.7 years in 2023, up from 8.8 in 1990. Canada’s gap was wider still, at 13.7 years. People facing that prospect are looking for ways to stay well for longer, and many of them are already in the aisle.

Telling the story the Canadian way

None of the award’s vocabulary appears on a Canadian label. Health Canada’s Coenzyme Q10 monograph, revised on January 31, 2025, names ubiquinone-10 and allows three kinds of claim: support for cardiovascular health, antioxidant protection, and fewer migraine headaches when taken preventively. Ubiquinol products are licensed here too, and they use the same language. Natural Factors’ Ubiquinol Active CoQ10, which contains Kaneka’s ingredient, says it “helps support cardiovascular health” and “provides antioxidants for the maintenance of good health.”

Those words matter beyond the bottle, because Canada’s consumer advertising guidelines for health products treat in-store promotional material as advertising. A retailer may paraphrase a product’s approved claims but cannot go beyond them. Awards and seals from recognized organizations are acceptable as long as the claims beside them stay within the licence and the advertiser can document the recognition. A shelf-talker reading “Award-winning Kaneka ubiquinol. Helps support cardiovascular health and provides antioxidants” meets that standard, provided a copy of the award announcement is kept on file. “Cellular energy for healthy ageing” would not.

One line from Kaneka’s release should stay off the shop floor entirely. The company describes ubiquinol as supporting health “from preconception to healthy ageing,” yet every CoQ10 product sold under the monograph must tell pregnant and breastfeeding customers to speak with a practitioner first. Ubiquinol therefore belongs nowhere near a fertility or prenatal display.

Which bottle she should take home

Back at the bay, the price difference is the first thing she notices. Here is how it looked at Nutrition House’s Canadian online store on September 16:

Product Form Price Cost per 100 mg
Natural Factors, 100 mg, 120 softgels Ubiquinol $74.95 about 62 cents
Preferred Nutrition, 150 mg, 180 softgels Ubiquinone $61.97 about 23 cents
NOW, 400 mg, 60 softgels Ubiquinone $62.29 about 26 cents

Absorption accounts for part of that gap. In the comparison most often cited, a 2014 study by Peter and Alena Langsjoen, 12 healthy volunteers took 200 mg a day of each form for four weeks. Blood CoQ10 rose from 0.9 to 2.5 µg/mL with ubiquinone and from 0.9 to 4.3 µg/mL with ubiquinol, a gain slightly more than twice as large.

At that dose, ubiquinol costs about $1.25 a day and raised blood levels by 3.4 units, or 37 cents per unit. Ubiquinone costs about 46 cents a day for a rise of 1.6 units, which works out to 29 cents per unit. These figures are illustrative, drawn from one retailer’s prices and one small open-label study with no placebo group, and they assume absorption behaves the same way at other doses. A blood level is also not a health outcome.

What emerges is a natural two-tier shelf. Ubiquinone is the value option and still delivers blood CoQ10 slightly more cheaply. Ubiquinol is the convenience option, reaching a higher level from fewer servings, which appeals to customers who dislike taking several capsules a day. Showing cost per 100 mg on both tags lets her make that choice herself, and those who trade up bring a larger ticket and more margin dollars without feeling pushed. The 2026 cocrystal study also reported roughly double the exposure, but its results apply only to that formulation and should not be quoted for other brands.

Beyond the CoQ10 bay

The Lancet study also shows where the rest of her basket could come from. Musculoskeletal disorders, depression and anxiety, hearing loss and falls account for more than half of the world’s unhealthy years, and none of them is a CoQ10 claim. A healthy-ageing destination built on that evidence groups products by approved need-states such as joints, bone, sleep, mood and heart. CoQ10 sits in the heart section beside other cardiovascular products, many omega-3 formulas among them. The neighbouring sections give staff an easy next conversation once the first purchase is settled. An award that brought one customer to one bottle can end in a basket that covers several of the years she hopes to keep healthy.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which other cautions must a CoQ10 product carry in Canada?
Beyond the pregnancy and breastfeeding warning, every product under Health Canada’s January 2025 monograph must advise consulting a practitioner before use with blood pressure medication. Products supplying more than 100 mg a day must also caution people taking blood thinners, a threshold most ubiquinol softgels pass at their upper recommended dose.

What dose does Health Canada allow for the CoQ10 migraine claim?
Adults may take 150 to 300 mg a day preventively, and the label must direct use for at least three months before judging the effect. The cardiovascular claim covers 30 to 300 mg a day, and antioxidant claims cap at 300 mg. A 100 mg softgel therefore needs at least two daily servings to carry the migraine claim.

How can a retailer check exactly what a CoQ10 product is allowed to claim?
Search the product’s eight-digit NPN in Health Canada’s Licensed Natural Health Products Database, which shows the recommended use, dose and cautions on the licence. Natural Factors Ubiquinol CoQ10 100 mg, for example, is listed by Canadian retailers under NPN 80028985. Signage and website copy should follow that record rather than supplier sales sheets.

Do women and men face the same healthspan gap?
No. The Lancet Public Health analysis found that women spend an average of 12.1 years in poor health, compared with 9.3 years for men, despite living longer. For a healthy-ageing set, that makes women over 50 the larger share of demand, which argues for giving bone, joint and mood products as much space as heart health.

This is independent editorial analysis by IHR Magazine. It references Kaneka Ubiquinol as one example of the mitochondrial health trend and is not an endorsement of any product or supplier. Retailers should verify each product’s NPN and licensed claims before merchandising. Prices were recorded on September 16, 2026, and will change.


The Under-Fuelled Athlete Is a Real Customer. REDs Is Not a Category

By
Olivier Felicio
-
0
Wide torn paper collage of supplement shelving packed with blank unlabelled jars giving way to bare kraft paper, with a scoop and a fragment of wheat field

Wide torn paper collage of supplement shelving packed with blank unlabelled jars giving way to bare kraft paper, with a scoop and a fragment of wheat field

Relative energy deficiency is well documented in Canadian athletes and almost entirely absent from Canadian shelf strategy. The sections being built to serve it are pointed at the slowest-growing products in the store.

Athlete under-fuelling has become a merchandising theme in Canadian natural health retail, and the sets being built around it share a common design: collagen for bone health, iron and calcium for depletion, omega-3 and turmeric for inflammation, an adaptogen for hormonal balance. Every one of those categories is either flat or declining. None of them carries a Health Canada claim that touches the condition. The demand is real and growing quickly. The shelf answer is aimed in the wrong direction.

The demand signal is unusually Canadian

The strongest applied dataset on the syndrome anywhere in the world was produced in Victoria, British Columbia. Researchers at Canadian Sport Institute Pacific ran the IOC’s Clinical Assessment Tool version 2 across 213 elite athletes and placed 55 per cent in the green category, 36 per cent yellow, five per cent orange and four per cent red. Athletes in the orange band carried nearly eight times the odds of a subsequent bone stress injury. A companion CSI Pacific study of 180 athletes put prevalence at 46 per cent.

The condition is also not what the merchandising shorthand assumes. A 2024 meta-analysis of 6,118 athletes found low energy availability in 44.2 per cent of women and 49.4 per cent of men, a numerically higher male rate. Elite Canadian female sprinters, not distance runners, showed indicator rates climbing from 31 per cent pre-season to 54 per cent after a five-month training block. Neither the sex nor the sport behaves the way the category assumes.

Underneath the elite tier sits a far larger commercial base. Canada’s professional women’s sports market has doubled since 2023 to between $380 million and $400 million, tracking toward $570 million by 2030, according to research from Canadian Women & Sport with Canadian Tire Corporation. In the same organization’s Rally Report, nearly one in two Canadian girls aged 13 to 18 said their menstrual cycle affects their participation in sport.

What the consensus actually says

Read the 2023 International Olympic Committee consensus statement looking for the supplement recommendations and there are none. Across 26 pages, no dietary supplement is recommended for any purpose. The only substantive mention of supplements places them in a differential-diagnosis column, among the alternative causes of low T3 that clinicians should rule out. Vitamin D appears exactly once, also as something to exclude when investigating low bone density.

What the panel does prescribe is food: “The primary approach to treating REDs should be a restoration of optimal EA via non-pharmacological approaches, including changes to diet and exercise.”

The statement, led by McMaster University’s Margo Mountjoy, also dismantles the number most retail messaging leans on. It walks back the familiar 30 kcal/kg fat-free mass threshold, warning of “risks in setting a definitive clinical threshold of EA due to many moderating factors,” and replaces it with a qualitative continuum from adaptable to problematic low energy availability. There is no longer a figure an athlete or a store can calculate. Assessment moved to CAT2, which requires fasted bloodwork, DXA imaging, eating-disorder questionnaire scoring and menstrual history, and whose own text states it “is not a substitute for professional clinical diagnosis, advice and/or treatment from a physician-led team.” An in-store or app-based risk quiz operates outside the tool’s stated conditions of use.

The evidence behind the corrective categories is thinner still. A 2026 systematic review of 13 experimental studies found no consistent changes in calcium metabolism, inflammatory markers or iron status under induced low energy availability. And in the only 12-month randomized controlled trial to raise energy intake in exercising women with menstrual dysfunction, spine and total-body bone density did not improve at all. If a supervised year of additional real food could not move bone density, no capsule can be sold as doing so.

The regulatory read: shared liability, and a runway

The monographs draw the line sharply, and it falls exactly where the popular sets are built. Hydrolyzed collagen carries permitted claims for osteoarthritis-related joint pain and amino acid content, and none for bone density. Fish oil permits cardiovascular, cognitive and triglyceride claims, and none for inflammation, soreness or recovery. Turmeric permits digestive, antioxidant and hepatoprotectant claims, and nothing about training load. Ashwagandha permits “adaptogen to help increase energy and resistance to stress,” and nothing about hormones or menstrual function. Health Canada published a hepatotoxicity safety review of oral ashwagandha in August 2026 that found insufficient evidence of a definite link but could not rule one out, having already declined the ingredient for supplemented foods in 2024.

Naming the syndrome makes it worse rather than better. Amenorrhoea, bone stress injury and low energy availability are clinical states with no authorized claim behind them, and depression and acute anxiety state both sit on Schedule A of the Food and Drugs Act, where section 3(1) prohibits advertising any product to the public as a treatment. Amenorrhoea is also a severe primary indicator under CAT2. Positioning an adaptogen as hormonal support for a woman who has stopped menstruating substitutes a product for a referral, which is the failure mode clinicians warn about most.

Retailers are not bystanders in any of this. Health Canada’s compliance policy applies to “every person that conducts an activity subject to the FDA,” names selling and advertising explicitly, and treats point-of-purchase material as advertising. A retailer who directly imports is treated as the importer. The Canadian Olympic and Paralympic Sport Institute Network is blunter: “Those who advise athletes about supplementation or those who provide supplements to athletes are equally liable.” Its list of qualified supplement advisors runs to three entries, and retail staff is not among them.

The same body supplies the runway. COPSIN confirms that an NPN “is not a designation to indicate that the supplement has been tested for banned substances,” while peer-reviewed work published in March 2026 estimates nine to 15 per cent of commercially available supplements carry undeclared prohibited substances. Under anti-doping strict liability, third-party certification is a merchandising asset a themed zone will never be, and it is the one organizing principle for an athlete set that survives legal review. As IHR noted when sport certification moved into the prenatal aisle, proof is becoming a condition of listing.

Where the money actually moved

The commercial case closes the argument. In SPINS US data, collagen showed zero per cent growth within sports protein, intra- and post-workout declined three per cent, and global omega-3 value fell 4.3 per cent in 2025 even as volume rose. Against that, US performance nutrition grew 22 per cent year over year to November 2025, hydration and electrolytes rose 29 per cent to US$2.2 billion, and creatine grew 77 per cent with a repeat-purchase rate near 50 per cent. Amazon searches for “creatine for women” now exceed 174,000 a month. Canadian scanner data for these subcategories is not published, which is worth stating rather than papering over, though the direction is consistent.

Carbohydrate is the quiet centre of it. The Workout Supplements monograph permits “source of carbohydrates to support energy production” and “helps to maintain performance/promote endurance in extended (greater than 60 min), high intensity exercise.” That is the closest any authorized Canadian claim comes to speaking to an under-eating athlete, and it is a performance claim rather than a treatment claim. Protein sits beside it with clean claims for tissue repair and lean mass.

A second doorway leads to the same fixture. Leger research fielded in February 2026 found three million Canadian adults taking GLP-1 medications, over half reporting decreased appetite and a third buying more protein-rich food. That is a managed energy deficit with elevated nutrient-density needs, arriving with an entirely different story. With semaglutide’s Canadian patent expired and generics entering through 2026, that volume lands in the dispensary precisely when the national guidance is silent: the 2025 Canadian obesity pharmacotherapy guideline update offers no implementation detail on protein or lean-mass preservation, and does not mention pharmacists at all. The prescription and the answer are thirty feet apart, with no protocol connecting them.

The pharmacy counter has a licence the health food store does not

This is where the two halves of the trade diverge sharply, and where the more interesting commercial opportunity sits.

British Columbia’s own provincial guideline on iron deficiency names “endurance athletes” and “those with disordered eating” in a single sentence listing who to test, and specifies the two tests that answer the question: serum ferritin and a CBC. Since August 2024, BC pharmacists have been designated referring practitioners able to order both from a 42-test schedule, free to MSP beneficiaries. The catch is that BC ties ordering to assessing or monitoring drug therapy, so a walk-in athlete on no medication falls outside it.

Alberta has no such limit. Alberta pharmacists need no additional prescribing authorization to order lab tests, there is no list of permitted tests, and the governing standard allows ordering to identify a condition, not merely monitor a drug. An Alberta pharmacist with additional prescribing authorization can order a ferritin and CBC on a fatigued runner, interpret the result, prescribe oral iron and refer onward, entirely in-store. No other province permits the full sequence. Ontario and Saskatchewan pharmacists cannot order lab tests at all as of September 2026, and Nova Scotia explicitly refuses bloodwork unrelated to a medication under assessment.

None of this is being used. In a survey of Canadian university athletes, 75.6 per cent regarded pharmacists as a good source of information on banned substances; 37.7 per cent actually consulted one. The study is a decade old and single-institution, so treat it as directional, but the shape of the gap has not obviously changed. Athletes trust the counter and walk past it.

Two absences make the opening wider. No province’s minor-ailments list includes anemia, iron deficiency, fatigue or menstrual irregularity. And no Canadian pharmacy standard, directive or continuing-education module anywhere mentions relative energy deficiency, the female athlete triad, amenorrhoea or stress fracture, nor does any Canadian body publish guidance for pharmacists on recognizing disordered eating. The duty to refer is real and enforceable under provincial standards; the training to know when is not supplied by anyone.

For independents without a dispensary, the arithmetic is different and the honest answer is narrower. Canada’s health stores generated $4.2 billion in 2025 while growing at 0.5 per cent annually against category growth of seven to eight per cent, with Popeye’s Supplements and Supplement King contesting the athlete customer from over 100 locations each. Testing is not available to them, and a curated section will not win that fight. What does travel is the referral relationship, built in the other direction: a named dietitian, sports physician or pharmacy to send people to, and a floor team that recognizes when a sale is the wrong response. Amenorrhoea, repeated stress fractures, rapid weight loss and restrictive eating are the triggers, and NEDIC is the national referral point.

That protocol has to be written in-house, because no Canadian guidance exists on it for retail either. Not from Health Canada, not from CHFA, not from any provincial college, not from NEDIC itself. For a trade that sells to athletes every day, four separate bodies have left the same gap, and it is worth raising with all of them.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is REDs, and how does it differ from RED-S?
REDs stands for Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport, a syndrome of impaired physiological and psychological function caused by prolonged or severe low energy availability. The 2023 IOC consensus statement changed the acronym from RED-S to REDs for improved comprehension and dissemination. It affects both male and female athletes and requires a physician-led diagnosis.

Can a Canadian retailer market supplements for REDs or low energy availability?
No. No Health Canada monograph authorizes a claim referencing REDs, low energy availability, amenorrhoea or bone stress injury. Presenting a product as addressing those conditions is an unauthorized treatment claim, and point-of-purchase and social material both count as advertising under Canadian consumer health product advertising guidelines.

Does a Natural Product Number mean a supplement is safe for drug-tested athletes?
No. Canada’s sport institute network states plainly that an NPN indicates safety, quality and claims review under Health Canada criteria, but is not a designation that a product has been tested for banned substances. Athletes carry strict liability, so third-party certification through NSF, Informed Sport or BSCG remains the relevant assurance.

Which product categories can retailers legitimately merchandise to under-fuelled athletes?
Those with authorized claims under the Workout Supplements monograph: carbohydrates for energy production and endurance in sessions over 60 minutes, protein for tissue repair and lean muscle, creatine for strength and power, and electrolyte sources. These are fuelling claims rather than treatment claims, and they align with the consensus position that restoring energy intake comes first.

Can a Canadian pharmacist order iron tests for an athlete?
It depends on the province. Alberta pharmacists may order ferritin and CBC to identify a condition, with no restricted test list. British Columbia pharmacists may order both, but only in connection with assessing or monitoring drug therapy. Ontario and Saskatchewan pharmacists cannot order laboratory tests at all as of September 2026.

This is independent editorial analysis from IHR Magazine, written for retailers and brand managers. It is not clinical guidance and not a substitute for medical advice. REDs is diagnosed by a physician-led multidisciplinary team, and retailers should verify current NPN status and authorized claims before making purchasing or marketing decisions.

CHFA Launch Pad 2026 : deux finalistes québécois, et ni l’un ni l’autre n’a besoin d’une licence de Santé Canada

By
Olivier Felicio
-
0
CHFA Launch Pad 2026 : répartition des huit finalistes de Toronto, dont deux marques québécoises, cinq aliments, deux soins personnels et un supplément
Les finalistes du CHFA Launch Pad 2026 présentent leur produit au CHFA NOW Toronto le 25 septembre.

Huit marques émergentes présenteront leur produit au CHFA NOW Toronto le 25 septembre. Une seule vend un produit de santé naturel homologué.

Deux des huit finalistes du CHFA Launch Pad 2026 viennent du Québec, et leur position dans la liste dit l’essentiel. Laboratoire Abieze présente un savon noir à la caméline qui dissout la saleté au lieu de la parfumer. Les Produits Mooz, de Québec, présentent un déodorant enrichi de probiotiques vivants qui travaillent avec le microbiome cutané. Ni l’un ni l’autre ne passe par une revue préalable à la mise en marché : ce sont des produits que l’on n’avale pas.

C’est le portrait de la liste au complet. Cinq finalistes vendent des aliments. Deux vendent des soins personnels. Her Dailys, une formule pour la périménopause et la ménopause conçue par des naturopathes, est la seule inscription qui exige un numéro de produit naturel de la Direction des produits de santé naturels et sans ordonnance de Santé Canada. La sélection de Vancouver, plus tôt cette année, avait la même forme : six marques d’aliments et boissons, une gamme de soins de la peau, un seul supplément. Deux concours, seize finalistes, deux NPN en tout. La vitrine la plus visible des marques émergentes en santé naturelle au pays est devenue, dans les faits, un salon de l’alimentation.

Ce que vendent les huit finalistes

Les inscriptions torontoises se répartissent en trois groupes, et le plus gros se mange. Snackish arrive avec une croustille de pomme de terre qui porte 13 grammes de protéines et des fibres favorables au microbiote. Suna Wellness marie un matcha japonais de qualité cérémonielle à 20 grammes de protéines, dont 10 de collagène marin. Pod Squad Snacks construit une gaufrette croustillante à partir de légumineuses biologiques, d’avoine à grains entiers et de graines de lin moulues; Stealthy Foods congèle légumes et protéines en portions individuelles de sauce; Tocha propose une sauce épicée qui mise sur le goût plutôt que sur le feu et se destine au centre du magasin.

Le deuxième groupe, celui des deux entreprises québécoises, ne touche jamais la bouche. Abieze et MOOZ innovent sur la formulation sans porter le fardeau réglementaire qui vient avec une allégation santé. Her Dailys forme à elle seule le troisième groupe : trèfle rouge, gattilier, bacopa, CoQ10, probiotiques et base de vitamines et minéraux, avec chaque allégation fonctionnelle de l’étiquette soumise à une revue avant qu’une seule caisse ne parte.

La protéine sort de son allée

Deux de ces inscriptions mènent avec un nombre de grammes, ce qui indique où la demande s’est déplacée. Le président et chef de la direction de la CHFA, Aaron Skelton, décrit des consommateurs qui veulent bien vieillir plutôt que simplement vivre longtemps, et les marques du secteur canadien de la santé naturelle, du biologique et du mieux-être, un marché de 28 milliards de dollars, répondent par la densité protéique, le maintien de la masse musculaire et la santé digestive, à mesure que les ordonnances de GLP-1 remodèlent l’appétit.

Pour un détaillant, c’est un problème de planogramme. La protéine a cessé de se comporter comme une catégorie et se comporte désormais comme un attribut : elle apparaît dans les croustilles, dans le matcha et bientôt dans les condiments. Le client qui cherche des grammes ne marche plus vers la section nutrition sportive. Les indépendants qui concentrent encore la protéine dans une seule section cèdent le panier supplémentaire aux chaînes d’alimentation qui l’ont dispersée dans le magasin il y a des années.

Stealthy Foods pose une question plus dure. Les formats congelés en portion individuelle exigent des portes de congélateur, et la plupart des magasins d’aliments naturels indépendants n’en ont pas ou les ont remplies depuis longtemps. Qu’une marque congelée atteigne une scène nationale laisse croire que la prochaine vague d’aliments fonctionnels arrivera par le froid, et un magasin sans capacité s’en trouve exclu par son architecture, quelle que soit la décision de son acheteur.

L’arithmétique derrière le virage

Rien de tout cela ne relève de la mode. Un produit de santé naturel exige un site autorisé, une licence de mise en marché approuvée et un dossier d’allégations qui survit à l’examen de Santé Canada avant qu’une seule caisse ne circule; une croustille riche en protéines exige un tableau de valeur nutritive conforme. Les fondateurs qui soupèsent ces deux voies soupèsent dix-huit mois contre une saison, et l’écart devrait se creuser. Santé Canada a proposé des frais de recouvrement des coûts pour les produits de santé naturels en mai 2023 et les a révisés en mars 2024 sans les mettre en vigueur, et les montants définitifs attendent toujours leur publication dans la Gazette du Canada, Partie II, pendant que le ministère avance son chantier d’allègement réglementaire. Personne n’attend le chiffre final avant d’intégrer la tendance des coûts réglementaires.

Cela ne fait pas de la voie alimentaire un laissez-passer. Une boisson au collagène peut relever de l’un ou l’autre cadre selon ce que déclare l’étiquette, et un fournisseur qui a choisi l’aliment renonce définitivement au langage thérapeutique. L’exposition réglementaire ne s’évapore pas; elle se déplace vers l’affichette de tablette, le présentoir de bout d’allée et ce que dit un employé au comptoir, autant de surfaces qui appartiennent au détaillant. D’où l’intérêt de l’exception. Her Dailys peut affirmer ce que sa formule soutient parce qu’elle en a payé le droit, Snackish ne le peut pas et n’en a pas besoin, et pour un gérant de catégorie qui bâtit une section santé des femmes, cette différence détermine quel produit porte l’éducation en magasin.

Ce que la liste vaut sur le plancher

Un filtre façonne chaque sélection du Launch Pad : les concurrents doivent exposer au CHFA NOW. Les finalistes représentent donc des marques émergentes qui ont les moyens d’acheter un kiosque, et beaucoup de fournisseurs régionaux qui différencient véritablement un magasin indépendant n’atteignent jamais le plancher. Ce que le concours livre, c’est une liste courte assortie d’un jugement. Isabèle Chevalier de NAD Capital, Shelley R. King de Natural Products Canada et Steve Hollingsworth de Nature’s Emporium accordent à chaque fondateur deux minutes de présentation contre quatre minutes de questions, et les questions valent plus que le verdict, en particulier celles du détaillant du jury, qui teste la décision de référencement que chaque acheteur de la salle affronte.

Le prix mérite aussi un œil commercial. L’enveloppe torontoise dépasse 25 000 $ en consultation de marque chez Brand Natural, en visibilité média chez In Conversation with Bruce W. Cole, en promotion CHFA, en kiosque au prochain salon et en année d’adhésion; celle de Vancouver, portée par d’autres commanditaires, franchissait 50 000 $ et comprenait un volet de données et de conseil NielsenIQ. Les données de balayage valent souvent plus que tout le reste de l’enveloppe, parce qu’elles convertissent la conviction d’un fondateur en preuve de vélocité sur laquelle un gérant de catégorie peut agir.

Pour les bannières québécoises, Avril, Rachelle-Béry, Tau, Crac et les indépendants qui les entourent, la séance du 25 septembre se travaille comme un exercice d’approvisionnement. Les finalistes sont présélectionnés, déjà sur le plancher et joignables deux jours de plus, et trois petits essais dans les zones les plus minces d’un assortiment justifient l’heure investie. Pour la plupart des indépendants qui préparent 2027, ces trous se trouvent dans la collation fonctionnelle et la santé des femmes. Que deux des huit finalistes soient québécois rappelle par ailleurs une évidence commerciale : les fournisseurs d’ici arrivent en tête des vitrines nationales, et le référencement local n’attend pas le verdict d’un jury torontois.

Foire aux questions

Quand et où se tient le concours CHFA Launch Pad 2026?

Le concours a lieu le vendredi 25 septembre à 17 h, salle 206BCD de l’Automotive Building, à Exhibition Place, Toronto, dans le cadre du CHFA NOW Toronto. L’accès est ouvert à tous les types de badges, visiteurs comme exposants, et aucun laissez-passer de conférence n’est requis.

Quelles marques québécoises figurent parmi les finalistes?

Deux des huit finalistes sont québécois : Laboratoire Abieze, avec un savon noir à la caméline, et Les Produits Mooz, de Québec, avec un déodorant naturel aux probiotiques actifs. Aucun des deux n’exige de licence de mise en marché de Santé Canada, puisqu’il ne s’agit pas de produits ingérés.

Qui sont les huit finalistes?

Abieze avec un savon noir à la caméline, Her Dailys avec un multivitamine périménopause et ménopause, MOOZ avec un déodorant probiotique, Pod Squad Snacks avec des mini-gaufrettes croustillantes, Snackish avec des croustilles riches en protéines, Stealthy Foods avec des portions de sauce congelées, Suna Wellness avec un matcha cérémoniel protéiné et Tocha avec des sauces épicées.

Que remporte le gagnant?

Le lauréat du Produit le plus innovant obtient une enveloppe de plus de 25 000 $ : 10 000 $ en consultation de marque chez Brand Natural, 10 000 $ en visibilité et média de détail chez In Conversation with Bruce W. Cole, de la promotion sur les canaux de la CHFA, une couverture médiatique, un kiosque au prochain salon CHFA NOW et une adhésion d’un an à la CHFA.

Pourquoi si peu de finalistes vendent-ils des suppléments homologués?

Les formats alimentaires et de soins personnels atteignent la tablette plus vite et échappent à l’homologation préalable, tandis qu’un produit de santé naturel exige d’abord une licence d’exploitation, une licence de mise en marché et une revue des allégations. Sur les deux sélections de 2026, seuls deux finalistes sur seize détenaient un numéro de produit naturel.

Analyse éditoriale indépendante d’IHR Magazine. Les finalistes du CHFA Launch Pad sont cités à titre d’exemples de mouvement de catégorie et ne font l’objet d’aucune recommandation. Les détaillants doivent vérifier le statut NPN, les licences d’exploitation et les allégations autorisées avant tout référencement.

This article is also available in English: CHFA Launch Pad 2026: Canada’s Innovation Pipeline Has Left the Supplement Aisle.


CHFA Launch Pad 2026: Canada’s Innovation Pipeline Has Left the Supplement Aisle

By
Olivier Felicio
-
0
CHFA Launch Pad 2026 finalists breakdown: five food brands, two personal care brands and one supplement of eight Toronto finalists
CHFA Launch Pad 2026 finalists pitch at CHFA NOW Toronto on September 25.

Eight emerging brands pitch for Most Innovative Product at CHFA NOW Toronto on September 25. Only one of them needs a licence from Health Canada to sell. CHFA has named its eight finalists for the 2026 Launch Pad competition, and the list rewards a second look. Five sell food. Two sell personal care. Her Dailys, a peri-menopause and menopause formula built by naturopathic doctors, stands alone as the only entrant needing a product number from Health Canada’s Natural and Non-prescription Health Products Directorate. Vancouver’s slate ran the same way earlier this year: six food and beverage brands, one skincare line, one supplement. Two competitions, sixteen finalists, two NPNs between them. Canada’s most visible showcase of emerging wellness brands has quietly become a food show.

What the eight are selling

The Toronto entries fall into three groups, and the largest is edible. Snackish arrives with a potato chip carrying 13 grams of protein and gut-friendly fibre. Suna Wellness blends ceremonial-grade Japanese matcha with 20 grams of protein, ten of them marine collagen. Pod Squad Snacks builds a waffle crisp from organic beans, whole-grain oats and milled flax; Stealthy Foods freezes vegetables and protein into single-serve sauce pucks; Tocha offers a spiced sauce that trades heat for flavour and lands in centre store. A second group never touches the mouth. Abieze makes a camelina-oil black soap that dissolves household grime instead of perfuming over it, and MOOZ ferments live probiotics into a deodorant, neither facing pre-market review of any kind. Her Dailys forms the third group alone: red clover, vitex, bacopa, CoQ10, probiotics and a vitamin-mineral base, with every functional claim on the label subject to review before a case can ship.

Protein escapes its aisle

Two of those entries lead with a gram count, which tells you where demand has travelled. CHFA president and chief executive Aaron Skelton describes consumers who want to age well rather than simply live long, and brands across the $28-billion Canadian natural, organic and wellness sector are answering with protein density, muscle maintenance and gut health as GLP-1 prescriptions reshape appetite. For a retailer that is a planogram problem. Protein has stopped behaving like a category and started behaving like an attribute, turning up in chips, in matcha and soon in condiments, so the shopper hunting grams no longer walks to the sports nutrition set. Independents who still concentrate protein in one bay are handing the incremental basket to grocery chains that scattered it across the store years ago. Stealthy Foods sharpens the point. Frozen single-serve formats need freezer doors, and most independent health food stores either lack them or filled them long ago. A frozen brand reaching a national pitch stage suggests the next wave of functional food will arrive cold, and a store without capacity gets excluded by its own architecture, whatever its buyer decides.

The arithmetic behind the format shift

None of this reflects fashion. A natural health product requires a licensed site, an approved product licence and a claims file that survives Health Canada review before a single case ships; a high-protein chip requires a compliant nutrition panel. Founders weighing those routes are weighing eighteen months against a season, and the gap should widen. Health Canada proposed cost-recovery fees for natural health products in May 2023 and revised them in March 2024 without bringing them into force, and final figures still await publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II while the department works through its red-tape agenda. Nobody is waiting for the final number before pricing in the direction of travel on regulatory cost. That does not make the food route a free pass. A collagen beverage can fall under either framework depending on what the label claims, and a supplier who chose food forfeits therapeutic language permanently. Compliance exposure does not evaporate; it moves onto the shelf talker, the endcap sign and whatever a staff member says at the counter, all of which belong to the retailer. Which is the case for the outlier. Her Dailys can state what its formula supports because it paid for the right, Snackish cannot and has no need to, and for a category manager building a women’s health set that difference decides which product carries the in-store education.

What the shortlist is worth on the floor

One filter shapes every Launch Pad slate: competitors must exhibit at CHFA NOW, so the finalists represent emerging brands with the capital to buy a booth, and many of the regional suppliers that genuinely differentiate an independent store never reach the floor. What the competition does deliver is a shortlist with judgement attached. Isabele Chevalier of NAD Capital, Shelley R. King of Natural Products Canada and Steve Hollingsworth of Nature’s Emporium give each founder two minutes to pitch against four minutes of questioning, and the questions repay attention more than the verdict, particularly from the retailer on the panel, who is pressure-testing the listing decision every buyer in the room faces. The prize rewards a commercial eye too. Toronto’s package clears $25,000 across brand consultation from Brand Natural, a retail media package from In Conversation with Bruce W. Cole, CHFA promotion, a booth at the next show and a year of membership; Vancouver’s, on a different sponsor group, passed $50,000 and carried a NielsenIQ data and consulting component. Scan data often outvalues everything else in a package like that, because it converts a founder’s conviction into velocity evidence a category manager can act on. That is the frame for the session itself: the finalists are screened, already on the floor and reachable for two days afterwards, and three small trials in the thinnest parts of an assortment will justify the hour. For most independents heading into 2027 planning, those gaps sit in functional snacking and women’s health.

Frequently Asked Questions

When and where is the 2026 CHFA Launch Pad competition?

The competition runs Friday, September 25 at 5:00 p.m. in room 206BCD of the Automotive Building at Exhibition Place, Toronto, during CHFA NOW Toronto. Attendance is open to all attendee and exhibitor badge types, and no conference pass is required.

Who are the eight finalists?

Abieze with a camelina black soap, Her Dailys with a peri and menopause multi, MOOZ with a probiotic deodorant, Pod Squad Snacks with mini waffle crisps, Snackish with high-protein chips, Stealthy Foods with frozen sauce pucks, Suna Wellness with a protein ceremonial matcha, and Tocha with spiced sauces.

What does the winner receive?

The Most Innovative Product winner takes a package worth more than $25,000: $10,000 in brand consultation from Brand Natural, a $10,000 retail media and visibility package from In Conversation with Bruce W. Cole, promotion across CHFA channels, media exposure, a booth at the next CHFA NOW show and a complimentary one-year CHFA membership.

How do brands qualify for CHFA Launch Pad?

Entrants must be emerging natural, organic or wellness brands whose product has recently launched or is preparing to launch in Canada, and they must exhibit at CHFA NOW to compete. Applications for the Toronto competition closed on June 20, 2026.

Why do so few finalists sell licensed supplements?

Food and personal care formats reach shelf faster and skip pre-market product licensing, while a natural health product needs a site licence, a product licence and a claims review first. Across both 2026 Launch Pad slates, only two of sixteen finalists carried a natural health product number. This is independent editorial analysis by IHR Magazine. It references CHFA Launch Pad finalists as examples of category movement and does not endorse any brand or product. Retailers should verify NPN status, site licensing and authorized claims before listing.
Cet article est aussi disponible en français : CHFA Launch Pad 2026 : deux finalistes québécois, et ni l’un ni l’autre n’a besoin d’une licence de Santé Canada.

Trading Places: What Shifting US and Canada Supplement Regulations Actually Cost

By
Editor
-
2

Five hundred and forty-two dollars. That is the annual fee Health Canada proposed for the right to keep one natural health product on the market, per NPN, every year, whether the product moves or not. A brand carrying 150 licences would owe $81,300 before manufacturing a single bottle, or $60,975 after the small-business reduction. The fee is not in force. It has also never been withdrawn.

Hold that number. It measures a shift the trade keeps getting backwards, because nobody here is deregulating anything. Ottawa has deferred an invoice it already wrote and costed. Washington, moving the other way, is assembling pre-market machinery on top of a mechanism that has spent thirty years turning most applicants away. The two markets are swapping seats, and what follows is what that costs a Canadian catalogue.

IHR Magazine · Figure 1

What the right-to-sell fee costs a catalogue

Annual cost of Health Canada’s proposed $542 per-NPN right-to-sell fee, by number of live licences. Site licence and evaluation fees are additional. The fee is proposed and not currently in force.

Standard rate
Small-business rate (25% reduction)

Source: Health Canada, revised proposed fees for natural health products, March 2024. Chart: IHR Magazine. Small-business rate applies to firms with fewer than 100 employees or $30,000 to $5 million in annual revenue.

View as table
Live NPNs Standard rate Small-business rate

The bill Ottawa deferred

The 2022 amendments to the Natural Health Products Regulations get discussed as a design problem. Read the costing and they turn into a capital problem. Health Canada’s own impact analysis put the average label redesign at $5,333 per SKU. Roughly 50,000 SKUs are affected, held by slightly more than 4,000 licence holders, and the department totalled the sector’s bill at $158.7 million in present value over fifteen years.

Industry never accepted those numbers. One in five brands told the Canadian Health Food Association they were seriously considering leaving the Canadian market over regulatory cost. That is not the answer you get to $17,550 spread across fifteen years, which is what the department calculated the average small business would pay. Someone’s arithmetic is wrong, and the unresolved gap between the two is the real reason the date keeps sliding.

Slide it has. A ministerial exemption order signed March 7, 2025 lifted newly licensed products out of their June 2025 obligation and swept the whole catalogue to June 21, 2028. Health Canada has since signalled a further extension, with revised amendments now targeted for Canada Gazette, Part I in spring 2027. Six years after the rules were written, no brand in this country can tell a packaging supplier when to book press time.

The fee file is where the real money sits

Labelling is the headline. Cost recovery is the balance sheet. The revised March 2024 schedule proposed $542 annually per NPN for the right to sell, plus annual site fees of $20,035 for importation, $23,071 for non-sterile manufacturing and $7,650 for packaging. Pre-market evaluation ran from $1,124 for a Class I submission to $58,332 for a Class III novel.

Read the importation line again. Twenty thousand a year, per site, simply to be the party bringing product across the border. That fee was drafted for a world without counter-tariffs. It now queues behind them. Since September 8, 2026, Canada has applied surtaxes of 15, 25 and 50 per cent across $27.6 billion of US imports, with personal care in the top band. Anyone distributing American lines is looking at a tariffed cost base, a fee regime idling offstage, and a labelling deadline nobody will put in writing.

Final fees must clear Canada Gazette, Part II before they bite, which is why the file reads as paused rather than dead. Budgeting on that distinction is budgeting on a technicality.

Washington is building a door it has rarely opened

The FDA named supplements in its 2026 Human Foods Program priorities back in January, promising final new dietary ingredient guidance and a look at modernized oversight. By March it had convened a public meeting on what should even count as a dietary ingredient, with precision fermentation and cell culture forcing the question. A proposed rule scheduled for December would make GRAS notices mandatory for new substances, closing thirty years of self-affirmation.

The track record is the part worth studying before you source another American ingredient. The NDI pathway, closest US analogue to Canadian pre-market review, has taken 1,166 notifications since 1995 and acknowledged 36.5 per cent of them without objection, a rate that sank to 12.6 per cent in fiscal 2017. Two-thirds of the ingredients that bother to knock get an objection letter. That is the filter, in a market Senator Dick Durbin puts at roughly 100,000 products against about 4,000 when DSHEA passed.

Nobody should read this as America turning into Canada. What it is turning into is harder to plan around, because the pressure now arrives through courts and state legislatures rather than the Federal Register. New York’s marketing-based age restriction on weight-loss and muscle-building products survived the Second Circuit in November 2025; CRN took it to the Supreme Court in March. The FTC sued Amare Global in June. None of that surfaces in a rulemaking search before a buyer lists a line.

Why the NPN starts looking like an asset

Canadian operators have spent twenty years treating the Natural Product Number as a tax. On this trajectory it becomes a credential. An NPN file is documented safety, quality and evidence work that US retail diligence teams increasingly ask for and US suppliers often cannot produce. Put plainly: a brand with clean monograph files sits closer to a national vendor review than a competitor with a better label and no dossier behind it.

Retailers get caught on the reverse trade. A longer Canadian runway buys relief on artwork and none at all on language, since claims here are bounded by what the NPN authorizes, and structure-function copy that passes unchallenged in Ohio is not licensed in Ontario. No public figure exists for how much of the Canadian natural health shelf is US-origin. That is a gap this industry should be embarrassed by, though any buyer can measure their own exposure in an afternoon.

Our view

The pause is the worst available outcome for a serious operator. A hard 2028 deadline would have forced the SKU rationalisation this industry has needed for a decade: catalogues costed, the tail cut, the savings redirected into evidence. Instead the cost sits on the books with no date attached, and the discipline never arrives.

Deferral is a subsidy, and it flows to the wrong operators. The heaviest relative burden falls on brands that licensed properly and invested in substantiation. They now compete against companies betting the rules never land at all, and Ottawa has effectively backed the bet.

What IHR is tracking next

Three dates decide how this ends. December 2026, when the FDA’s mandatory GRAS proposal is scheduled. Spring 2027, when Health Canada’s revised labelling amendments are due in Canada Gazette, Part I. And the Supreme Court’s call on the New York case, which tells brands whether marketing-based sales restrictions travel past one state.

IHR will publish the costed read on each within the week it lands, and the fee and deadline figures above are maintained in our regulatory cost tracker, updated whenever the Gazette moves. Until then the arithmetic is the assignment: live NPN count times $542, in front of whoever approves the catalogue, before the next reset order goes in.

IHR Magazine · Regulation & Compliance

Regulatory Cost & Deadline Tracker: Canada and the US

Every proposed fee, confirmed deadline and pending decision that changes what a Canadian natural health catalogue costs to carry. Maintained by IHR and updated whenever the Canada Gazette or the Federal Register moves.

Last updated 1 September 2026

What your catalogue would cost

Enter your live NPN count. Based on Health Canada’s proposed $542 annual right-to-sell fee, at the standard rate and with the 25 per cent small-business reduction.


Standard$81,300
Small business$60,975

Right-to-sell fees only. Site licence and evaluation fees are additional. These amounts are proposed and not currently in force.

Canada: proposed fees (paused, not withdrawn)

Fee Amount Basis Status
Right to sell $542 Per NPN, annual Paused
Site licence: importation $20,035 Per site, annual Paused
Site licence: manufacturing (non-sterile) $23,071 Per site, annual Paused
Site licence: packaging $7,650 Per site, annual Paused
Pre-market evaluation, Class I $1,124 Per submission Paused
Pre-market evaluation, Class III $7,209 Per submission Paused
Pre-market evaluation, Class III novel $58,332 Per submission Paused
Small-business relief 100 / 50 / 25% First evaluation waived, 50% after, 25% off site and right-to-sell Paused

Dates that decide the next two years

Date What happens Market Status
8 Sep 2026 Counter-tariffs of 15, 25 and 50% across $27.6B of US imports Canada In force
Dec 2026 FDA proposed rule to make GRAS notices mandatory for new substances US Scheduled
During 2026 FDA final guidance on new dietary ingredient notifications US Committed
Pending Supreme Court decision on hearing the New York age-restriction case US Awaiting
Spring 2027 Revised NHP labelling amendments due in Canada Gazette, Part I Canada Targeted
21 Jun 2028 Product Facts Table compliance for all NHPs, pending further extension Canada Under review

The numbers behind the argument

Figure What it measures Source
$5,333 Average label redesign cost per SKU under the new labelling rules Health Canada regulatory impact analysis
$158.7M Total sector cost of the labelling amendments, present value over 15 years Health Canada regulatory impact analysis
50,000 SKUs affected, held by slightly more than 4,000 licence holders Health Canada regulatory impact analysis
1 in 5 Brands seriously considering exit from the Canadian market over regulatory cost Canadian Health Food Association
36.5% US new dietary ingredient notifications acknowledged without objection since 1995 FDA data, 1,166 notifications filed
$28B Canadian natural, organic and wellness sector, supporting 150,000+ full-time jobs Canadian Health Food Association, Feb 2026

How IHR maintains this. Fee amounts are Health Canada’s proposed figures and are not in force. We update this tracker whenever a status changes in the Canada Gazette or the US Federal Register, and publish the costed read on what it means for retailers and brand managers within the week. Verify NPN status, site licensing and tariff classification with a Canadian regulatory adviser before acting on any figure here.

Bookmark this page. For the analysis behind the numbers, read Trading Places: What Shifting US and Canada Supplement Regulations Actually Cost.

More regulation and compliance intelligence

Frequently Asked Questions

How much would Health Canada's proposed natural health product fees cost a brand?

The revised March 2024 schedule proposed $542 per NPN annually for the right to sell, $20,035 a year for an importation site licence, and pre-market evaluation from $1,124 to $58,332. Small businesses were offered a first-evaluation waiver and 25 per cent off site and right-to-sell fees. Implementation is paused, not cancelled.

When do the Canadian NHP labelling rules actually take effect?

A March 2025 exemption order aligned every product to June 21, 2028, and Health Canada has since signalled a further extension, with revised amendments targeted for Canada Gazette, Part I in spring 2027. The Product Facts Table requirement has not been withdrawn, only its date.

What is the FDA changing for dietary supplements in 2026?

The FDA committed to final new dietary ingredient guidance in 2026, held a March meeting on modernizing the definition of a dietary ingredient, and has a December 2026 proposed rule requiring GRAS notices for new substances. Congress is separately weighing a federal product listing.

Does holding a Canadian NPN help a brand sell in the United States?

Not legally, since the FDA does not recognize Canadian licences, but commercially it increasingly does. An NPN file documents safety, quality and evidence work that shortens retailer diligence in a market where only about 36 per cent of new dietary ingredient notifications clear without objection.

This is independent editorial analysis from IHR Magazine. Fee figures are Health Canada's proposed amounts and are not in force; timelines were current at publication. Verify NPN status, site licensing, authorized claims and tariff classification with a Canadian regulatory adviser before acting on them.

Canada’s Biggest Supplement Brand Was Priced as an Export Asset

By
Editor
-
0
Kirin Jamieson Wellness acquisition - Canadian vitamins and supplements on a pharmacy shelf, illustrating foreign ownership of Canada's largest VMS brand.

Kirin Holdings is paying about C$2.5 billion for Jamieson Wellness, and the growth behind that price sits outside Canada. Jamieson’s domestic revenue rose 5.7 per cent last quarter. China rose 46.6 per cent and the United States 21.7 per cent. A Japanese buyer paid a 27 per cent premium for a Canadian label it can aim at faster-growing markets, together with the plants and licences that make the label portable.

For the Canadian trade, the valuation logic matters more than the transaction. The country’s anchor VMS brand has been priced on what it sells abroad. Anyone who competes with Jamieson, stocks it, or benchmarks against it should read that carefully.

What the segment split says about the domestic aisle

Second-quarter revenue broke down as C$91.6 million in Canada, C$54.3 million in China, C$50.1 million in the United States and C$14.3 million across other international markets. Canada remains the largest line and the slowest one. Normalized gross margin in the Jamieson Brands division improved 160 basis points to 45.7 per cent, which management credited to geographic mix favouring the higher-margin China business.

Strip away the corporate language and there is a plain statement about this market inside those figures. Domestic VMS behaves like a penetrated, promotion-driven category. Growth arrives through innovation in specific need states, with sleep and stress carrying the quarter, and through promotional execution at a handful of large accounts. New households are not entering the category in numbers that move a national brand.

Kirin’s own position explains why that profile was still worth the cheque. Its health science division turned profitable for the first time in FY2025, on revenue up 43.4 per cent to ¥251.4 billion and normalized operating profit of ¥11.1 billion, built largely on Blackmores in Oceania and FANCL in Japan. The division is chasing ¥500 billion in revenue at a 15 per cent operating margin. Canadian shelf growth cannot deliver that on its own. A trusted Canadian brand already selling into Asia and the United States, backed by domestic manufacturing capacity, can contribute to it.

Where this leaves the independent tier

A better-capitalized owner behind the mass-market anchor usually intensifies the pressure independents already feel. Expect heavier innovation spend, faster line extensions, deeper promotional funding in grocery and pharmacy, and a larger research budget aimed at mainstream need states. Kirin brings Blackmores’ and FANCL’s formulation libraries and Kyowa Hakko Bio’s ingredient science into the same group as Canada’s most recognized supplement label.

Price is the one lever specialty retail should not reach for here. The defensible ground is the part of the category a global CPG owner serves slowly: practitioner-grade formats, single-ingredient SKUs chosen for a mechanism, staff who can explain why a form or a dose matters, and suppliers whose claims hold up under scrutiny. Consolidation at the mainstream tier has historically widened the gap that specialty operators sell into, provided they genuinely sell on proof.

A supply-side question deserves attention on a shorter timeline. When a country’s largest supplement manufacturer becomes one node in a global platform, contract manufacturing priorities and co-packing capacity get reviewed against group objectives. Jamieson’s Strategic Partners division reached C$23.6 million in the quarter. Brands running private label or partner production through that capacity should be asking about terms and horizons now, well ahead of closing.

Two regulators, two different messages

The deal mechanics are routine. A plan of arrangement under Ontario’s Business Corporations Act, two-thirds shareholder approval at a special meeting expected in September, a C$70 million termination fee, and a target close in the fourth quarter. The Canadian regulatory questions are the interesting part.

Kirin is ultimately controlled in Japan, a CPTPP party, which makes it a trade agreement investor under the Investment Canada Act. The 2026 net benefit review threshold for that category is C$2.179 billion in enterprise value, and the announced enterprise value of roughly C$2.5 billion sits above it. Enterprise value under the Act follows a defined calculation that will not necessarily match a figure in a press release, but a transaction of this size involving a household Canadian brand is squarely in review territory, and the Minister retains a separate national security screen at any value. Net benefit approvals are typically resolved through binding undertakings covering head office location, employment, capital investment and sourcing. Those undertakings are where the domestic interest actually gets settled, and they are worth reading closely when the management information circular reaches SEDAR+.

Health Canada sends the opposite signal, and it constrains the buyer rather than the seller. Nothing in the Blackmores or FANCL catalogue enters this market on foreign paperwork. Every product requires its own Natural Product Number, a licensed Canadian site, and claims drawn from what that NPN authorizes. Australian and Japanese marketing copy carries no standing here. The same framework rewards an owner holding real clinical assets, because an evidence-backed licence produces claims a competitor cannot copy off a label. Underneath all of it sits the bilingual Product Facts Table requirement, mandatory by June 2028, which will land in the middle of integration across a very large catalogue.

What to watch, and what to do this quarter

Three signals will show how this settles. The undertakings attached to any Investment Canada Act approval will indicate whether Canadian manufacturing and head-office functions are protected in writing or only in quotation. Innovation spending on the Canadian portfolio over the next two years will show whether this market is being grown or managed for cash while capital follows growth abroad. Contract manufacturing terms for third-party brands will reveal how much of Jamieson’s capacity stays available to the wider Canadian industry.

The immediate move for retailers is a supplier concentration audit. Count the facings and the margin dollars that now trace back to one foreign-owned parent, then identify which of your differentiated lines depend on capacity that parent controls. For brand builders, the lesson sits in what commanded the premium: regulatory credibility, manufacturing control, and demand in more than one market. None of those can be assembled in the quarter a business goes up for sale.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Kirin buying with Jamieson Wellness?

Kirin is acquiring all outstanding shares at C$45.75 in cash, valuing the company near C$2.0 billion in equity and C$2.5 billion in enterprise value. The purchase covers the brand portfolio, Canadian manufacturing capacity, a licensed product catalogue, and established export businesses in China and the United States.

Does the Investment Canada Act apply to this transaction?

Japan is a CPTPP party, so Kirin qualifies as a trade agreement investor, and that category’s 2026 net benefit review threshold is C$2.179 billion in enterprise value. The announced enterprise value exceeds it, which makes a review likely. A national security review remains separately available to the Minister at any transaction value.

Can Kirin sell Blackmores or FANCL products in Canada right away?

No. Every natural health product sold in Canada needs its own Natural Product Number, a licensed Canadian site, and claims limited to what the NPN authorizes. Foreign approvals and foreign marketing copy do not transfer. Moving group brands into Canada means a full licensing process for each individual product.

What happens to brands that use Jamieson’s contract manufacturing?

Nothing changes at signing, but new ownership normally triggers a review of third-party production against group priorities. Jamieson’s Strategic Partners division booked C$23.6 million last quarter. Brands relying on that capacity should confirm contract length, renewal terms and capacity commitments before the transaction closes rather than after.

This is independent editorial analysis from IHR Magazine. It references the Kirin–Jamieson Wellness transaction as one example of a broader shift in how Canadian natural health assets are valued, and is not an endorsement of any company, brand or security, nor investment advice. Retailers and brand partners should verify current NPN status, site licensing and authorized claims before making purchasing decisions.

The T Is Back: What Loblaw’s Tariff Labels and Ottawa’s Counter-Tariff List Mean for Natural Health

By
Editor
-
0
Grocery shelf label showing a triangle T tariff symbol beside a maple leaf Canadian product tag, supplement bottles above

Canada’s largest grocer revives its tariff shelf symbol as 50 per cent counter-tariffs land on whey protein, honey and personal care in the middle of a global protein shortage. Finished supplements stay off the list.

What is the T symbol? It is a triangle-shaped shelf tag with a “T” inside that Loblaw places beside products whose prices have risen because of tariffs. First introduced in March 2025 and retired as tensions cooled, it returns to Loblaws, No Frills, Real Canadian Superstore and Shoppers Drug Mart on September 8, 2026, the day Canada’s newest counter-tariffs take effect.

Key takeaways

  • Loblaw restores tariff labels, maple leaf marks and country-of-origin produce signage across its banners on September 8, including at Shoppers Drug Mart, where they will appear in the vitamin and beauty aisles.
  • Ottawa’s counter-tariffs answer Washington’s new duties with surtaxes of 15 to 50 per cent on close to $20 billion in U.S. imports.
  • Whey protein, casein and milk albumin take the top rate while high-protein whey is already up 162 per cent since early 2025 and U.S. suppliers are sold out for the year.
  • Honey is now tariffed in both directions; so is much of the beauty and personal care aisle.
  • Finished vitamins, supplements, essential oils and soap are absent from the list, a carve-out that spares most of the NHP shelf.

Trade talks between Ottawa and Washington collapsed on August 21. Within days, a 50 per cent American tariff was in force on roughly $20 billion of Canadian goods, about five per cent of everything Canada sells into its largest market, and the list ignored protections that CUSMA-compliant products had carried through earlier rounds. “You’re at war when you get attacked. We got attacked,” Prime Minister Mark Carney said. On August 25, Canada answered dollar for dollar: surtaxes of 15, 25 and 50 per cent on hundreds of U.S. tariff lines effective September 8, plus a $7.5-billion support package for affected workers and businesses.

One day later, Loblaw told customers the T symbol was coming back.

By the numbers

  • 50 per cent — the U.S. tariff on roughly $20 billion of Canadian goods, in force since late August (PBS NewsHour)
  • 15, 25 and 50 per cent — Canada’s counter-tariff rates on close to $20 billion of U.S. imports, effective September 8 (Finance Canada)
  • 162 per cent — the rise in high-protein whey prices since the start of 2025, before any surtax applies
  • US$200 million+ — Canadian protein exports covered by the new American duties
  • 70 per cent — the share of Canadians who prioritize locally made or sourced products (CHFA research)
  • Under 4 per cent — Canadian vitamin and supplement category growth in 2026, per the market leader’s own read

Penny for penny, with Shoppers in the frame

Loblaw’s playbook mirrors spring 2025: the triangle-T wherever tariffs push up cost, the maple leaf beside Canadian-made goods, and country-of-origin labels restored in fresh produce. CEO Per Bank has promised exact pass-through: “Where tariffs increase our cost, any resulting increase on our shelves will reflect that impact — penny for penny.” He says a year of shifting sourcing from the United States to Canada leaves the company better prepared than last time.

The detail that matters most to this readership is the banner list. Shoppers Drug Mart carries the labels too, which puts tariff transparency directly beside the supplement and natural beauty sets of the country’s biggest pharmacy chain and will shape how mainstream shoppers interpret price moves in categories independents also sell.

Competitors are choosing celebration over warning. Empire’s Sobeys banners are expanding signage that pairs local products with provincial flags; Metro says it already prioritizes Canadian products and will lean harder into that positioning. Independents got there first. Winnipeg grocer Foodfare has been running “Made in Canada” shelf stickers and giving domestic lines priority placement. “We’re always looking at different products and making sure that those ones that are made right here in Canada are highlighted first, and given more shelf space,” says owner Ramsey Zeid. Retail analysts expect the renewed Buy Canadian wave to lift sales quickly but unevenly: Kantar’s Amar Singh predicts the surge will concentrate among affluent shoppers, and the first wave had largely faded by November 2025 after food inflation wore consumers down.

Where the counter-tariff list touches the industry

The September 8 schedule published by Finance Canada reads, at first glance, like a grocery and hardware story: dairy, cheese, paper, appliances, steel. Look closer and several lines land squarely on the natural health cost base.

Dairy proteins, 50 per cent. Whey and whey protein concentrates (HS 0404), casein and its derivatives (3501.10), milk albumin (3502.20) and milk protein substances (3504) all take the top rate when U.S.-origin.

Sweeteners. Natural honey (0409) and cane molasses (1703), both health food staples, carry the full 50 per cent rate.

Personal care. Perfumes and toilet waters (3303), lip, eye and manicure preparations (3304) and most hair preparations (3305.90) are surtaxed at the same top rate, catching a meaningful share of U.S. beauty and grooming assortments.

Packaging, 25 to 50 per cent. Corrugated cartons at 50 per cent, kraft papers at 25 to 50 per cent and tissue at 25 per cent will feed into freight and private-label costs even for stores that stock no American product at all.

Just as important is what is absent. Vitamins and provitamins (HS 2936), food preparations and finished supplements (2106), medicaments (Chapter 30), essential oils (3301), soap (3401) and oral care (3306) do not appear. Finished natural health products from U.S. suppliers cross the border surtax-free, a carve-out that looks deliberate in a schedule this aggressive, and one that spares the core NHP shelf a direct price shock.

The protein squeeze is the real story

Tub of whey protein powder spilling onto a warehouse table beside shipping boxes and a small Canadian flag
High-protein whey prices have climbed 162 per cent since the start of 2025, and U.S. suppliers are reported sold out for the year.

For sports nutrition, the surtax could hardly come at a worse moment. High-protein whey prices have climbed 162 per cent since the start of 2025, driven by a demand boom that has put more than 38,000 protein-claiming products on U.S. supermarket shelves and been amplified by users of GLP-1 weight-loss drugs seeking to preserve muscle. American whey suppliers are reported to be sold out for the remainder of 2026, and production cannot simply scale up: whey is a byproduct of cheesemaking, and as the University of Guelph’s Hrvoje Fabek notes, expanding it means flooding the cheese market.

The trade war squeezes Canadian players from both ends. Washington’s duties cover more than US$200 million in Canadian protein exports, hitting processors such as Agropur, Saputo and Lactalis Canada. Alberta-based formulator HelloAmino reports a 50 per cent jump in dairy protein costs and months of failed attempts to secure whey supply; “Literally no one wants to do business with us,” CEO Aelie Swift told reporters this spring. Now U.S.-origin whey coming north carries a 50 per cent surtax on top of shortage pricing. Retailers should expect protein powder cost letters within weeks, more aggressive reformulation toward plant proteins, and a widening price gap between brands blending Canadian or European dairy inputs and those locked into American supply.

Honey and beauty, hit from both directions

Jars of golden honey on a farm stand table with a beekeeper working hives in a canola field behind
Canadian honey now faces a 50 per cent U.S. duty going south, while American honey takes the same rate coming north.

Honey occupies the strangest position in this dispute. The U.S. duty on Canadian honey was announced on July 20 under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, tucked, oddly, into an annex nominally about motor vehicles, and the Canadian Honey Council was blunt about the logic.

“Honey is not a source of irritation. They are just trying to hit as provocative and impactful a list as possible.”

— Jake Berg, chair, Canadian Honey Council

With Canada’s mirror surtax on American honey effective September 8, the product is now tariffed in both directions: Canadian beekeepers lose margin on exports south while U.S. jars on Canadian shelves get more expensive. For retailers, local honey programs just became both easier to justify and easier to market.

Natural beauty faces the same two-way exposure. The American list explicitly covers cosmetics and toiletries, walling off the U.S. market for Canadian personal care exporters, including goods CUSMA once protected, while Ottawa’s surtaxes raise the cost of U.S. makeup, fragrance and hair care sold here. Canadian-made body care lines gain a pricing advantage on domestic shelves at precisely the moment shoppers are primed to look for the maple leaf.

The domestic industry’s hand

The sector meets this moment with real vulnerabilities. More than 80 per cent of natural, organic and wellness businesses are small or medium-sized, with thin capacity to absorb cost shocks, and the Canadian Health Food Association has long warned about dependence on U.S. intermediaries: vitamin K2 has no North American manufacturer, Korean ginseng mostly transits American brokers, and 80 to 85 per cent of Canada’s psyllium arrives the same way. Broker-routed ingredients may escape the surtax on paper, since origin, not routing, determines liability, but they remain exposed to freight, currency and a chaotic U.S. wholesale market.

It also meets the moment with genuine advantages. CHFA research has found 70 per cent of Canadians prioritize locally made or sourced products, and manufacturers with domestic plants are structurally insulated; Jamieson Wellness, for one, makes nearly everything it sells in Canada in Canada, and where a supplier’s plant sits has become a commercial variable rather than a procurement footnote. The timing matters because the domestic category needs the help: the market leader pegged Canadian vitamin and supplement growth at under four per cent this year. A patriotic demand wave, however temporary, is the strongest tailwind the category has seen in some time, and it favours whoever can prove Canadian origin at the shelf.

Why this matters for the trade

The window before September 8 is short. Confirm country of origin and HS classification on every U.S.-sourced SKU in protein, honey, molasses and personal care rather than waiting for supplier cost letters. Review packaging contracts, where the surtax will arrive quietly. Choose a signage position (tariff transparency, Canadian celebration, or both) before the chains define shopper expectations for everyone. Above all, treat origin as merchandising: the stores that won the first Buy Canadian wave were the ones whose shelves made the patriotic choice effortless, and this wave arrives with a protein shortage and a honey standoff pushing in the same direction.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Loblaw T symbol? It is a triangle-shaped “T” printed on shelf tags to flag products whose prices rose because of tariffs. Loblaw introduced it in March 2025 and is reinstating it on September 8, 2026 across Loblaws, No Frills, Real Canadian Superstore and Shoppers Drug Mart, alongside maple leaf tags on Canadian-made goods.

Are vitamins and supplements on Canada’s counter-tariff list? No. Finished supplements (HS 2106), vitamins and provitamins (HS 2936), medicaments, essential oils, soap and oral care are all absent from the September 8 schedule, so finished U.S. natural health products enter Canada without a surtax. Freight, currency and supplier pricing pressures still apply.

Which natural health categories are hit hardest by the counter-tariffs? U.S.-origin whey protein, casein, milk albumin and milk protein substances carry a 50 per cent surtax, as do natural honey, molasses, perfumes, makeup preparations and most hair care. Corrugated packaging is surtaxed at 50 per cent and kraft papers at 25 to 50 per cent, raising costs for everyone.

Why are protein powder prices rising so fast? A global whey shortage predates the tariffs: high-protein whey has climbed 162 per cent since early 2025 on demand from GLP-1 users and protein-fortified foods, and U.S. suppliers are reportedly sold out for 2026. The new 50 per cent surtax on U.S.-origin whey stacks on top of that shortage pricing.

How is honey affected by the trade war? Both ways. Washington put a 50 per cent duty on Canadian honey in a move the Canadian Honey Council called deliberately provocative, and Ottawa’s September 8 counter-tariffs apply the same rate to U.S. honey entering Canada. Local honey programs now carry both a margin and a marketing advantage.

How should independent health food stores respond? Audit U.S.-sourced SKUs in protein, honey and personal care before September 8, verify origin claims with suppliers, review packaging costs, and invest in Canadian-origin signage. Stores with strong domestic assortments are best placed to capture the renewed Buy Canadian demand.

Sources

IHR Magazine is Canada’s trade publication for the natural health, personal care and nutraceutical industry, covering the retailers, brands and policy shifts that shape the market.

Sport Certification Is Moving Into the Prenatal Aisle

By
Olivier Felicio
-
2
Thorne Basic Prenatal bottle with NSF Certified for Sport badge — certified prenatal supplements entering women's health retail

A sport-doping certification just landed on prenatal vitamins. That move signals how the entire category will compete next—and which brand managers will be left behind.

 

Prenatal vitamins have a new competitive standard. In late July, Thorne announced its Basic Prenatal as the first certified prenatal supplement in the category to earn NSF Certified for Sport status. That’s a banned-substance verification built for Olympic athletes—now applied to pregnancy products.

 

What does that mean for brand managers? Simple: expectant mothers are starting to shop like drug-tested athletes. They want proof. Not claims. Proof.

 

Thorne’s timing matters. California’s SB 646 will require all prenatal makers to test for heavy metals and publish results online by January 2027. Brands that get certified now can say they chose verification as philosophy. Brands that wait will be saying a law forced their hand. In front of a customer making the most risk-averse purchase of her life, that difference is worth real shelf space.

 

For retailers, the implication is clearer: a store that can explain NSF Certified for Sport will win the prenatal shopper. A competitor stocking only uncertified products will struggle to defend that choice. The certification window is open now. In eighteen months, it may become table stakes.

What happened

In late July, Thorne announced that its Basic Prenatal became the first prenatal with a bioactive form of folate to earn NSF Certified for Sport status. The formula itself did not change. What changed is the verification behind it. Every production lot is now screened for lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic, checked against California’s Proposition 65 thresholds, and tested to confirm the label matches what is in the bottle. The company made the announcement alongside a wave of certified women’s health launches covering perimenopause, libido and skin.

The brand is one data point. The pattern is the story. This certification exists for one reason: to protect drug-tested athletes from a failed doping test. A prenatal customer will never face a doping control officer. So when a company pays for that level of scrutiny on a pregnancy product, it is not selling to athletes. It is betting that expectant mothers now shop the way athletes do — by demanding proof.

Why this was coming

The prenatal category earned its scrutiny. In April 2025, researchers at the University of Miami, working with the Clean Label Project, published a study in Environmental Research that tested 156 over-the-counter prenatal supplements. They found detectable lead in 83 per cent of products, cadmium in 73 per cent, and phthalates in more than a quarter. Fifteen per cent exceeded California’s legal threshold for lead. Prescription products fared little better, and a 2023 U.S. Government Accountability Office review had already found lead in half the prenatals it sampled.

Lawmakers responded quickly. Last October, California passed SB 646, the first law in North America requiring prenatal multivitamin makers to test for the four major heavy metals and publish the results online, product by product. It takes effect January 1, 2027, and because almost every major brand sells into California, it will reshape the entire continental supply chain.

Put the study and the law side by side and the certification news reads differently. Mandatory disclosure is arriving in the category’s largest market within eighteen months. Brands that get verified now can present transparency as a philosophy. Brands that wait will be explaining that a law forced their hand. In front of a customer making the most risk-averse purchase of her life, that difference is worth real market share.

The Canadian advantage nobody mentions

Canada quietly holds a strong position here, and almost no one tells the story at shelf level. Every prenatal legally sold in this country carries a Natural Product Number, and Health Canada’s quality rules impose contaminant limits, including heavy metals, before a licence is ever issued. In other words, the baseline California just legislated toward is close to where the Canadian framework already stands. That is a genuine selling point sitting unused in nearly every natural health store in the country.

An honest caveat belongs beside it. A licence confirms a product met its specifications; it does not publish this batch’s lead result for a shopper to read. Third-party programs fill that gap, which is why they carry commercial weight even in a regulated market. And since the major contamination studies are American, the accurate claim is that Canadian products face stricter pre-market controls — not that they are proven cleaner.

One compliance warning rounds out the picture. Imported marketing language such as “athlete-grade” or “certified pure” does not automatically match the claims authorized on a Canadian licence. Any brand manager bringing U.S. copy north should check every statement against the NPN first, because a credibility campaign that triggers a Health Canada advertising complaint defeats its own purpose.

The play for retailers

Start on the floor. The prenatal shopper researches harder than anyone else in the store, and she is increasingly reading about heavy metals before she walks in. Train staff to answer three questions plainly: what an NPN already guarantees, what third-party testing adds, and why tablets performed worse than gummies and softgels in the contamination studies. A store that answers those questions wins her — and likely keeps her through the postpartum repurchase cycle, the fastest-growing corner of a global women’s supplement market that Grand View Research pegs at US$57.4 billion in 2024, heading to US$77.5 billion by 2030.

Then look upstream. Category managers should put three questions to every prenatal supplier: do you test each lot for heavy metals beyond what licensing requires, will you share certificates of analysis, and how will you respond when SB 646-style disclosure takes effect? As IHR argued in its analysis of the claim-substantiation market, proof is becoming a condition of listing. The prenatal set is where that standard lands first, because the cost of getting it wrong is highest.

Two developments deserve watching through 2027. The first is whether disclosure laws spread — to other states, and eventually as pressure on Ottawa to add public batch results to the NHP framework. The second is whether rival certifiers follow NSF into everyday women’s products. If they do, verification stops being a differentiator and becomes table stakes, and the advantage moves to whoever explained it to customers first. That window is open now.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does NSF Certified for Sport certification actually verify?
The program tests every certified production lot for more than 280 substances banned by major athletic organizations, confirms that label claims match actual contents, and screens for contaminants including lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic. Built for drug-tested athletes, it is increasingly used as a general consumer trust mark.

Are prenatal vitamins sold in Canada already tested for heavy metals?
Yes, at the licensing stage. Every legal prenatal carries a Natural Product Number, and Health Canada’s quality rules impose contaminant limits, including heavy metals, before a licence is issued. What licensing does not provide is batch-by-batch public disclosure of results — the gap that certification programs and new disclosure laws are built to fill.

What is California’s SB 646 and does it affect Canadian businesses?
SB 646 takes effect January 1, 2027. It requires prenatal multivitamin makers selling in California to test for arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury and post the results publicly online. It has no legal force in Canada, but brands selling into both markets will comply continent-wide, and Canadian consumer expectations will likely follow.

How should retailers respond to heavy-metal concerns in the prenatal category?
Stock products with transparent testing, whether third-party certification or published certificates of analysis, and train staff to explain what an NPN covers. Ask suppliers for lot-level heavy-metal data. Avoid purity claims that go beyond what a product’s licence authorizes, since advertising must match the approved NPN claims.

This is independent editorial analysis from IHR Magazine. It references Thorne’s Basic Prenatal certification as one example of a broader industry trend toward third-party verification in women’s health, not as an endorsement of any company or product. Retailers and brands should verify current NPN status and licensed claims before making purchasing or marketing decisions.

Retailers Want Inventory AI. Almost None Have It.

By
Olivier Felicio
-
0

New research from inFlow Inventory measures an inventory AI gap that falls hardest on the independents least able to absorb the cost.

What is the inventory AI adoption gap? It is the distance between the 81 per cent of inventory operators who intend to adopt artificial intelligence and the 11 per cent who use it today. inFlow Inventory measured both figures in its State of Inventory Management 2026. The report blames access rather than appetite.

Toronto-based inFlow released the study on July 28. Research firm OvationMR conducted it in March 2026, surveying 400 full-time warehouse, inventory, supply chain and operations professionals across 33 industries.

The company then checked those answers against its own books. Roughly 4,000 structured observations from 293 inFlow customers, recorded between February and June, back up the survey results.

The headline finding is a mismatch. Intent to adopt AI runs at better than four in five operators. Actual use sits at one in nine.

Between those numbers lies the working reality of most stockrooms. Spreadsheets remain the primary inventory tool for 84.8 per cent of respondents. Among companies with more than 500 employees, 53 per cent still rely on them.

What operators want from inventory AI is narrower than what is being sold

The most useful detail here is not the adoption rate. It is the specification behind it.

Asked what they wanted AI to do, operators did not describe assistants or analytics layers. They described a buyer.

“Operators aren’t asking for general intelligence,” said Jared Plumb, lead content creator at inFlow. “They’re asking for a tool that tells them what to buy and when.”

Two capabilities came up repeatedly: demand forecasting and automated replenishment. One respondent asked for forecasting “that suggests purchase order quantities based on sales velocity.” That is an experienced buyer’s judgement, rendered in software.

Why the inventory AI barrier is structural

The specification also explains the gap. Forecasting accuracy depends on data volume, and one location’s sales history is a thin dataset.

Automated replenishment raises a second obstacle. It needs live connections between point of sale, stock records and supply. A business running on spreadsheets and email has none of them.

Larger operators buy their way past both problems. Smaller ones have generally judged the implementation cost higher than the visible pain. However, the report suggests that judgement rests on incomplete information.

The satisfaction figure and what sits underneath it

Consider what respondents said about their own systems. Fully 92 per cent described themselves as satisfied with their current approach to inventory.

The same respondents then listed the problems. Inventory accuracy needs the most improvement, said 49.5 per cent. Supplier reliability is the biggest challenge, said 52 per cent.

Stockouts tell a similar story. They occur at least monthly for 44 per cent of operators. Fewer than a quarter called themselves stockout-free or close to it.

The report’s authors read this as a benchmarking problem. Operators “anchor their satisfaction to the world they know rather than the performance they’re missing.”

That observation travels well to independent retail. An out-of-stock never appears in the accounts. Therefore the customer who wanted a missing product does not file a complaint or send an invoice, and the loss stays invisible.

Cost pressure sharpens the timing

Meanwhile, three cost lines are squeezing operators at once. Materials, freight and labour were each named as the sharpest pressure by roughly 22 to 23 per cent of respondents.

The trend is not easing. Around two-thirds reported increases in both freight and materials over the past year.

Priorities for the next twelve months follow from that. Technology integration ranked first at 60 per cent, narrowly ahead of inventory accuracy. Fulfilment speed came third at 50.8 per cent.

A second shift is running in parallel on the demand side, where AI agents are already shaping what shoppers consider. Retailers therefore face the same technology on both sides of the counter.

A network answer to the inventory AI gap

One response is to attack the problem collectively rather than site by site. That is the approach behind the IHR Plugin (ihrplugin.com), a decentralized health commerce platform built by the RGM Group for natural health food retailers.

Its premise is straightforward. Each participating store operates as a micro-warehouse, and stock stays visible across the network in real time.

The routing follows from that visibility. When a customer orders an item a store does not hold, the order moves to the closest node that does. That retailer ships it, the selling store keeps the customer, and both are credited.

Applied to the survey, the mechanism touches two findings directly. First, an out-of-stock becomes a routing decision rather than a lost sale. Second, dependence on any one supplier thins, because the network holds a wider pool of stock.

The catalogue effect addresses a third. A member store can present the network’s full assortment without warehousing it. Committing capital to a speculative line therefore stops being a precondition for offering the product.

What it asks of the retailer

Integration cost is the barrier the survey identifies most clearly, and it is the one the platform works hardest to avoid. Orders arrive through manual entry, Shopify or WooCommerce. Nothing needs rebuilding.

Suppliers keep commercial control. Brands can set minimum advertised prices and choose which retailers carry their goods. In short, that distinction separates a curated network from an open marketplace, where wider distribution is usually paid for in margin.

Two caveats matter. The platform is in beta ahead of a September 2026 launch, and the subscription is free. Its capabilities are previews of what the network is being built to deliver, not tools in general release.

Whether shared inventory proves a durable answer to the forecasting problem is a question the next year will settle. Still, the research itself makes a narrower point, and a harder one to argue with. The operators who most need better inventory intelligence hold the least data to build it from. Every month that gap stays open is billed quietly to the shelf.

Key takeaways

  • inFlow Inventory surveyed 400 operators and found 81 per cent intend to adopt inventory AI while 11 per cent use it now.
  • Operators want two specific capabilities: demand forecasting and automated replenishment.
  • Spreadsheets remain the primary system for 84.8 per cent of respondents, including 53 per cent of large employers.
  • Satisfaction sits at 92 per cent while 44 per cent stock out monthly, which the report attributes to benchmarking against familiar performance.
  • Technology integration ranked as the top twelve-month priority at 60 per cent.

Frequently asked questions

How was the research conducted?
inFlow Inventory commissioned OvationMR to survey 400 full-time warehouse, inventory, supply chain and operations professionals in March 2026. The questionnaire ran to 38 questions across six topic areas and 33 industries. Results were then checked against roughly 4,000 structured observations from 293 inFlow customers.

Why is adoption so far behind stated intent?
The report points to structural barriers rather than reluctance. Useful inventory AI depends on data volume that single sites lack. Automated replenishment needs system integration that spreadsheets cannot support. Enterprise platforms solve both, but at costs smaller operators have judged prohibitive.

Is the 92 per cent satisfaction figure at odds with the findings?
The report treats it as a benchmarking effect. Operators judge their systems against performance they have experienced, not against outcomes they have never seen. Losses from stockouts and poor accuracy are real, but they are rarely itemized, so they seldom register as dissatisfaction.

How does a shared retail network change the stockout equation?
It makes stock visible beyond one location. On a network such as the IHR Plugin, an unavailable item routes to the nearest participating retailer holding it. The network absorbs the shortfall instead of the sale ending. Collective depth substitutes for individual forecasting accuracy.

What does the IHR Plugin cost, and when is it available?
The subscription is free. The platform is in beta ahead of a launch scheduled for September 2026. Its features are therefore best understood as previews of the network at launch, rather than functionality available to every retailer today.

Does a wider network put supplier pricing at risk?
Suppliers can set minimum advertised prices and decide which retailers carry their products. That control is the operative difference from an open marketplace. There, broader availability commonly triggers price competition that erodes margin across the channel.

The IHR Plugin (ihrplugin.com) is a decentralized health commerce platform for natural health food retailers, built by the RGM Group. It is currently in beta, with a full launch scheduled for September 2026.

AI Agents Now Shop at Scale: What Agentic Commerce Means for Natural Health Retail

By
Olivier Felicio
-
0

AI shopping agents completed more than 120 million transactions in a single week in China, according to a new NielsenIQ report. Analysts now size agentic commerce at US$3–5 trillion by 2030. For Canada’s natural health trade, the immediate stakes sit in AI recommendations rather than automated checkouts.

The week the numbers changed

For two years, agentic commerce lived in conference keynotes. NielsenIQ’s new global report, The Commerce Revolution: Where East Meets West, moves it into the operating column.

Indeed, the evidence comes from Asia. Ant Group reports that Alipay’s AI Pay processed more than 120 million transactions during a single week in February. Alibaba’s Qwen assistant reached 100 million monthly active users within two months of launch.

As NIQ’s Emilie Darolles put it, in parts of Asia AI is “quietly completing purchases at a scale most boardrooms haven’t registered.”

Meanwhile, capital has registered it. McKinsey values the global opportunity at US$3–5 trillion by 2030. Morgan Stanley expects agents to drive US$190–385 billion of American e-commerce by the same year, or up to a fifth of the total.

NIQ’s consumer data supplies the brake. Roughly 34 per cent of shoppers now use AI to research products, and 23 per cent use it to summarize reviews. Only about 8 per cent have ever let an AI complete a purchase.

Influence therefore runs well ahead of automation. Everything a Canadian retailer or brand should do next follows from that gap.

Discovery is where supplements are won

Natural health sits closer to this shift than most categories. That is because a supplement purchase begins as a research question.

Which form of magnesium absorbs best? Does an ingredient interact with a medication? What separates one omega-3 from another? Consumers now hand exactly this homework to AI tools first.

In fact, the traffic already shows it. Adobe Analytics measured a 1,200 per cent rise in visits from generative AI sources to US retail sites between July 2024 and February 2025.

Those visitors also behave differently. They read more pages and bounce less than almost any other channel, though they convert less for now. AI is sending people who are still deciding.

In a category that sells on evidence, that matters. Whoever the AI cites during the decision gets the sale.

Why a citation is not a ranking

Citation works differently from a search ranking. An assistant answers “best vitamin D for someone on a statin” with three products. The old path from impression to click to cart collapses into a single answer.

As a result, vague specifications carry a steeper penalty here. A brand with inconsistent listings, or with details locked inside PDFs, does not simply rank lower. It never appears at all.

Canadians are drawing a firm line

No Canadian data yet measures agentic commerce in natural health specifically, and that gap is worth stating plainly. Even so, the general numbers tell a coherent story.

Visa’s consulting arm finds that only 27 per cent of Canadians know what agentic AI is. Fifteen per cent use generative AI for shopping. Just half trust the AI features online retailers offer.

KPMG in Canada found that 78 per cent of consumers leaned on AI tools during holiday shopping. Yet 86 per cent insist on approving every step before an agent acts.

Read commercially, that is a sequencing instruction rather than a rejection. Canadians are adopting the research layer quickly. They are withholding the transaction layer deliberately, which makes the answer layer the battleground for 2026 and 2027.

However, independents face a specific catch. Their traditional edge is floor staff who genuinely know the products. That edge carries no weight in a channel that reads structured information instead of holding a conversation. Translating expertise into a form machines can parse is the work of the next eighteen months.

A licence becomes a language machines read

Canada’s natural health products framework hands the domestic industry an unusual asset. An NPN licence carries claims that are documented, bounded and verifiable.

In other words, those are the qualities an AI system looks for when it weighs which products to trust. In a market where machines score credibility, a monograph-backed claim beats a superlative every time.

The same mechanism cuts the other way. AI systems train heavily on American content, and Canadian rules do not permit many of the structure/function claims that circulate there.

Marketing copy that drifts beyond a licence no longer sits harmlessly on a forgotten product page. An assistant repeats it verbatim at the moment of recommendation. The same applies to “detox” or “cleanse” language, which regulators and increasingly consumers discount.

In short, compliance and visibility have long occupied separate budgets. They are now converging into one.

Time to prepare, and how to spend it

The 8 per cent figure buys the industry something rare: time, with a clear to-do list attached.

First, publish complete specifications, dosage forms, sourcing and NPN numbers as text a crawler can parse. Images and downloads do not count. Reconcile every public claim against the licence behind it.

Then add plain, self-contained answers to the questions shoppers actually ask AI tools. Finally, split out AI-referred visits in analytics. A channel nobody measures is a channel nobody defends.

Similarly, retailers face the same test one level up. In this channel, product pages and category copy stand in for the floor team.

The East has proven that consumers will eventually hand agents the transaction. Canada is still deciding which products those agents may trust. Operators who already sell on proof rather than price start that contest in front.

Frequently asked questions

What is agentic commerce?
Agentic commerce is retail in which AI agents act on a consumer’s behalf. In other words, they research, compare and, in mature markets, complete purchases. Ant Group reports Alipay’s AI Pay processed over 120 million transactions in one February 2026 week in China. In North America, agents mostly shape decisions instead of executing them.

Are AI agents buying supplements in Canada yet?
No, not at measurable scale. Canadian surveys show heavy use of AI for shopping research alongside firm resistance to autonomous purchasing. Some 86 per cent of consumers want to approve every step. The current battleground is the AI recommendation, which shapes what shoppers consider before they buy.

How does a natural health brand get recommended by AI shopping tools?
By being verifiable. Publish complete specifications as parseable text. Match claim language to the product’s NPN licence. Keep evidence-based content in extractable formats and details consistent across every listing. AI systems favour products they can confirm, and contradictory information tends to exclude a brand entirely.

What should retailers do first?
Review how product pages read to a machine rather than a person. That means accurate specifications, licensed claim wording, and self-contained answers to common questions. Then segment AI-referred traffic in analytics. Adobe recorded 1,200 per cent growth in that channel in under a year, so those visits are likely already arriving.

This is independent editorial analysis. It references NielsenIQ’s report The Commerce Revolution: Where East Meets West and other third-party research as market evidence, not as an endorsement of any company, platform, or product. Cited figures are the originating firms’ own.

123...388Page 1 of 388

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

© 2026 IHR Magazine | Canada's Natural Health Industry Authority | Le guide de l’industrie canadienne de la santé naturelle