Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Oct. 01, 2016
Contingencies [Abstract]
Contingencies	NOTE G – CONTINGENCIES The Company is involved in various lawsuits, claims and other legal matters from time to time that arise in the ordinary course of conducting business, including matters involving our products, intellectual property, supplier relationships, distributors, competitor relationships, employees and other matters. The Company records a liability when a particular contingency is probable and estimable. The Company has not accrued for any contingency at October 1, 2016 as the Company does not consider any contingency to be probable nor estimable. The Company faces contingencies that are reasonably possible to occur; however, they cannot currently be estimated. While complete assurance cannot be given to the outcome of these proceedings, management does not currently believe that any of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, liquidity or results of operations. In August 2014, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the Third Judicial District Court of Salt Lake County, State of Utah (James Robert Rawcliffe v. Robert Anciaux, et al.,) against certain of the Company’s directors and officers. The derivative complaint, which also names USANA as a nominal defendant but is asserted on USANA's behalf, contains claims of breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment against the defendant directors and officers in connection with certain equity awards granted by the Compensation Committee of the Company's Board of Directors in February 2014. In October 2014, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and, in March 2015, the court granted that motion and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. In May 2015, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Utah Supreme Court. The Supreme Court remanded the Company's case to the Utah Court of Appeals. The plaintiff and the Company have each filed their appellate brief with the court and oral arguments have been scheduled to take place in January 2017. The Company believes that the claims in the complaint are without merit and will continue to vigorously defend this suit. The Company continues to believe, based on information currently available, that the final outcome of this suit will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations or consolidated financial position.

NOTE G – CONTINGENCIES

The Company is involved in various lawsuits, claims and other legal matters from time to time that arise in the ordinary course of conducting business, including matters involving our products, intellectual property, supplier relationships, distributors, competitor relationships, employees and other matters. The Company records a liability when a particular contingency is probable and estimable. The Company has not accrued for any contingency at October 1, 2016 as the Company does not consider any contingency to be probable nor estimable. The Company faces contingencies that are reasonably possible to occur; however, they cannot currently be estimated. While complete assurance cannot be given to the outcome of these proceedings, management does not currently believe that any of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, liquidity or results of operations.

In August 2014, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the Third Judicial District Court of Salt Lake County, State of Utah (James Robert Rawcliffe v. Robert Anciaux, et al.,) against certain of the Company’s directors and officers. The derivative complaint, which also names USANA as a nominal defendant but is asserted on USANA's behalf, contains claims of breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment against the defendant directors and officers in connection with certain equity awards granted by the Compensation Committee of the Company's Board of Directors in February 2014. In October 2014, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and, in March 2015, the court granted that motion and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. In May 2015, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Utah Supreme Court. The Supreme Court remanded the Company's case to the Utah Court of Appeals.

The plaintiff and the Company have each filed their appellate brief with the court and oral arguments have been scheduled to take place in January 2017. The Company believes that the claims in the complaint are without merit and will continue to vigorously defend this suit. The Company continues to believe, based on information currently available, that the final outcome of this suit will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations or consolidated financial position.