DisclosureWe earn commission on partner links; ranking is set by our evidence-based methodology — not advertisers. Read policy
The average U.S. household spends about $131 a year on nonprescription vitamins, according to federal spending data, and use varies sharply by age, sex, and region. We mapped the government and industry data behind the country's $69 billion supplement habit.
The average U.S. household spends about $131 a year on nonprescription vitamins, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey ($130.96 per consumer unit, 2022). Across the country, supplements have grown into a $69.3 billion U.S. market (Nutrition Business Journal, 2024). The more useful story is in the variation: who buys, how much, and where differs sharply by age, sex, and region.
This article is informational and educational. It summarizes population-level patterns in public spending and health-survey data; it does not diagnose any condition or provide medical advice. Decisions about supplements should be made with a qualified clinician.
The clearest dollar figure comes from the BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey, which tracks what American "consumer units" (essentially households) spend on everyday goods. In 2022, the most recent year for which the nonprescription-vitamins line item is published, the average household spent $130.96 on these products.
That figure has risen over the past decade-plus, reflecting both higher prices and broader use, though the exact size of the increase depends on the base year chosen. Either way, supplements now read as a routine line in many household budgets rather than an occasional purchase.
Spending on vitamins sits inside a larger healthcare category. In 2023, healthcare accounted for 8.0% of total household spending (unchanged from 2022); in 2024 it was 7.9%, and total average annual expenditures reached $78,535 (BLS).
Two independent surveys show how mainstream supplements have become, though they measure it differently.
The gap between the two (75% vs. 60%) is expected. CRN counts any self-reported use, while the CDC's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey uses a recent-use (past 30 days) definition among adults 20 and older. Both point to the same conclusion: supplement use is the norm, not the exception.
Federal data show supplement use rises with age and skews female.
Older, more often female households are therefore the demographic engine behind the per-household average.
The BLS does not publish a state-by-state ranking for vitamins specifically, so this article cannot say which state spends the most. Geographic comparisons run only through the survey's four Census regions: Northeast, Midwest, South, and West - and even there, vitamins are not broken out separately from the broader healthcare category.
A frequently cited claim is that households in the Midwest and South devote a larger share of their budgets to healthcare than those in the Northeast and West. That finding comes from an archived BLS report whose underlying data are from the late 1990s (1987-1997), so it should not be read as a current snapshot. More recent per-capita figures point the other way: regions including New England and the Mid-Atlantic show some of the highest per-capita personal health-care spending, while parts of the Mountain West and Southwest show some of the lowest. In short, the regional evidence on health spending is mixed and partly out of date, and none of it isolates supplements.
For supplements specifically, the more reliable driver is who lives where rather than geography itself: areas with older populations and higher proportions of women would be expected to show heavier per-household supplement use, consistent with the national age and sex patterns above. That is an inference from demographics, not a measured state ranking.
The data tell a consistent story: supplement use is broad, durable, and concentrated among older and more often female consumers. The roughly $131 household average is best read as a blended figure - it averages heavy users (older adults taking multiple products) with non-users who spend nothing, so a typical 60-plus household's real outlay is often higher.
For consumers, the practical takeaway is that supplements are a meaningful recurring expense, and more spending does not equal better health. Federal health agencies note that supplements are not a substitute for a balanced diet and that benefits beyond correcting a documented deficiency are often unproven. Talking with a clinician before adding products - especially multiple products, the pattern common among older adults - remains the evidence-based step.
These figures come from surveys and industry estimates, each with constraints. The BLS Diary Survey relies on households recording purchases, which can undercount irregular buys. CRN's self-reported usage runs higher than the CDC's recent-use definition. BLS publishes vitamins spending nationally and healthcare by region, but not a granular state-level vitamins line - so "where Americans spend most" is necessarily a regional and demographic answer, not a precise state ranking, and the most pointed regional claim relies on decades-old data. Market-size estimates from private analysts vary by methodology. None of these figures is medical advice.
This analysis draws on federal and industry data sources. Household spending figures come from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE), which collects nonprescription vitamin and drug spending and reports averages per "consumer unit" (roughly a household); the most recent published value for the nonprescription-vitamins line item is $130.96 (2022), with total-expenditure and healthcare-share figures from the 2023 and 2024 CE releases. Usage rates come from two independent surveys: the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) 2024 Consumer Survey on Dietary Supplements, fielded online by Ipsos on August 7-12, 2024 among 3,194 U.S. adults (2,332 users, 862 non-users); and the CDC National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Data Brief No. 561, based on NHANES (August 2021-August 2023). Market size is from Nutrition Business Journal (NBJ), 2024. Important limitations: BLS does not publish a state-by-state line item for vitamins/supplements, so this article cannot rank states. The regional discussion relies on the CE four-region framework (Northeast, Midwest, South, West) and on an archived BLS report whose underlying data are from the late 1990s; that report is clearly dated in the text because more recent per-capita health-spending data point in a different direction. Self-reported survey usage and diary-based spending each carry recall limitations, and survey-based usage rates differ from lab-verified rates by design. All figures are cited inline; no numbers were estimated or extrapolated. This article is informational and does not constitute medical advice.
Data source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey; Council for Responsible Nutrition consumer survey
Fair use: journalists, educators, and researchers are welcome to reference the data and visuals from this study in any medium. We only ask that you credit HealthVetted with a link back to this page so readers can see the full methodology.
HealthVetted. (2026). Where Americans Spend the Most on Dietary Supplements. HealthVetted. https://healthvetted.com/research/us-supplement-spending-by-state
"Where Americans Spend the Most on Dietary Supplements." HealthVetted, 2026, https://healthvetted.com/research/us-supplement-spending-by-state.
<p>Source: <a href="https://healthvetted.com/research/us-supplement-spending-by-state">Where Americans Spend the Most on Dietary Supplements</a> by <a href="https://healthvetted.com">HealthVetted</a>.</p>
<iframe src="https://healthvetted.com/embed/study/us-supplement-spending-by-state" width="540" height="420" style="border:1px solid #e5e7eb;border-radius:12px;max-width:100%" loading="lazy" title="Where Americans Spend the Most on Dietary Supplements — HealthVetted"></iframe>