This article was displayed on the ChosunBiz RM Report website at 5:21 a.m. on Oct. 1, 2025.
The so-called "vanadium rice," sold in the market as rice effective for blood sugar control, has been embroiled in a controversy over its efficacy. Critics say functional agricultural products fall into a blind spot of government oversight.
According to related industries on the 1st, sales of vanadium rice have been fully suspended at offline stores such as department stores and large supermarkets in recent days. Vanadium is an ingredient known to help control blood sugar through insulin-like action. However, vanadium rice has such a low vanadium content that it is difficult to expect a blood sugar–lowering effect.
Contrary to advertisements for vanadium rice that read as if it had diabetes treatment efficacy and had been verified by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, such as "blood sugar lowering," "blood sugar care," and "MFDS certification," recent test results from an accredited institution showed that its blood sugar control effects fell short of expectations. An MFDS official said, "It is not true that some products have MFDS certification (verification) written as promotional phrases. We have not verified them."
Consumers have been harmed. Consumer A said, "Even though it was two to three times more expensive than regular rice, I bought and ate vanadium rice for about a year, thinking it might help my father, who has diabetes," and added, "After reports that it is ineffective, I only felt sorry." Consumer B also said, "I returned it immediately after hearing that it has no efficacy."
This is because advertising for functional rice falls into a blind spot of government management and oversight. Vanadium rice is classified as a "raw agricultural product" because it is sold after enhancing the vanadium component during rice cultivation and then milling. However, by touting functionality, it overlapped with the nature of processed foods. As a result, the management system between the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety has become unclear.
An official at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs said, "Because vanadium rice is functional rice, it falls under the purview of the MFDS in terms of managing efficacy labeling and advertising." In contrast, the MFDS says there is currently no pre-review system for advertising the functionality of agricultural products. False or exaggerated advertising about the functionality of foods, such as efficacy and effects, is prohibited by law. However, there is no regulation that can directly restrict efficacy claims for agricultural products (raw materials). That is why vanadium rice could be distributed in the market without verification.
The MFDS belatedly said it would review system improvements. An MFDS official said, "Advertisements promoting disease prevention or treatment efficacy by highlighting specific components in agricultural products are increasing," and added, "We will prepare institutional improvement measures through discussions with relevant ministries, consumer groups, and producer groups." The official continued, "We will strictly crack down on advertisements that are inconsistent with the facts, like vanadium rice, or that could be mistaken for or confused with pharmaceuticals."
Experts advise that at least a legal baseline should be established to prevent a recurrence. In Japan, to advertise functional foods such as blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol control, products must pass the government's pre-review called FOSHU (Foods for Specified Health Uses). In the United States, if agricultural products want to promote efficacy such as "blood sugar control," they must submit scientific evidence and pass a prior review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Seo Yong-gu, a professor of business administration at Sookmyung Women's University, said, "Food is a sensitive issue, so thorough verification and oversight are essential," and added, "To prevent the same problem from recurring, monitoring should be strengthened and expressions that could mislead consumers should be fundamentally restricted."