What I took from the article is that its author would like supplements with drug-like effects regulated as drugs. That generally means they'd need clinical tria

What I took from the article is that its author would like supplements with drug-like effects regulated as drugs. That generally means they'd need clinical trials demonstrating that they're safe and effective for treating a specific disease, with extra-strong requirements to be sold without a prescription. I don't want that. In his conclusion, he advocates milder measures for enforcement of purity and policing dubious advertising claims, but his use of "at least" implies he wants more rules.