Confidence: 90%
B07JGW2JKF
View on Amazon →Decision summary
A middling option. It may be usable, but weaker formulation coherence makes better alternatives worth comparing.
Best for
Buyers comparing price and availability and okay with a middle-of-the-pack option.
Consider another option if
You want one of the best-absorbed options in this category.
Score breakdown
Tap a module to see what it measures. A 0 can reflect missing disclosure, not just a negative result.
Dosage quality
5.7/10Acceptable dosing, but not standout
Checks whether labeled ingredient amounts fall within clinically studied ranges (not just regulatory minimums). Low/0 can reflect under-dosing or missing amounts (e.g., proprietary blends).
Explore next
Dose 5.7/10 · Bioavailability 1.6/10 · Coherence 0/10
Ingredient form quality suggests suboptimal ingredient forms.
This is a multi-ingredient product. The score reflects formulation quality, not efficacy for a specific health goal.
Biotin: dose within clinically studied range (evidence B). The main limitation is that formula coherence is weak: diluted, decorative or overly complex.
Strengths
Weaknesses
Final verdict
A middling option. It may be usable, but weaker formulation coherence makes better alternatives worth comparing.
A closer look at the main ingredients, how they influence the score, and the supporting evidence when available. Tap any ingredient to expand.
✔ Clinically effective dose with moderate supporting evidence
Strong contributor: Dose is strong and within effective ranges.
Scientific evidence
Patel et al. systematic review biotin and hair/nail health
Skin Appendage Disorders • 2017
PMID: 28786550.0
ℹ Dose is below the optimal range and supported by limited evidence
Supports the formula, but not a major driver: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength.
Scientific evidence
Hodges et al. review on pantothenic acid physiology and human deficiency implications
Advances in Nutrition • 2020
⚠ Strong evidence exists, but dose is below effective threshold
This is a limiting factor: Dose is likely below clinically useful levels. The declared form is acceptable, but not among the best-absorbed options.
Scientific evidence
Singh & Das Cochrane review zinc for common cold
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews • 2011
PMID: 22553186.0
Prasad et al. RCT zinc supplementation and testosterone in elderly men
Nutrition • 1996
PMID: 8875519.0
ℹ Evidence is strong, but dose is below the optimal range
A clear drag on the formula: Dose is below the ranges usually used for stronger effects.
Scientific evidence
Zimmermann et al. review on iodine deficiency and thyroid function in human populations
Endocrine Reviews • 2009
PMID: 19357404.0
Bath et al. maternal iodine status and offspring cognitive outcomes (ALSPAC cohort)
Lancet • 2013
PMID: 23683674.0
⚠ Dose is below commonly used clinical ranges
A clear drag on the formula: Dose is likely below clinically useful levels. The label does not specify the form, so absorption quality cannot be verified.
Clinical dosing guidance
Based on established dosing ranges used in clinical practice.
⚠ Strong evidence exists, but dose may be too low to be effective
A clear drag on the formula: Dose is likely below clinically useful levels. The declared form supports strong absorption.
Scientific evidence
Martineau et al. meta-analysis vitamin D supplementation and respiratory infections
BMJ • 2017
PMID: 26864360.0
Bischoff-Ferrari et al. meta-analysis vitamin D fracture prevention
BMJ • 2009
PMID: 20198382.0
Important label or formulation details that may affect how this product should be interpreted.
Formula design looks less coherent than stronger alternatives
The formulation appears less focused than better-built options.
Vitamin A dose looks below clinically effective levels
Declared amount falls below ranges used in human trials.
Vitamin C dose looks below clinically effective levels
Declared amount falls below ranges used in human trials.
Read our methodology overview to understand how SuppScoreLab combines multiple scientific dimensions into one practical score.
View methodology →This evaluation is based on the product label and declared Supplement Facts available at review time. It does not verify laboratory-tested composition, purity, or batch-level quality. This content is educational and not medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare professional for personal health decisions. Affiliate disclosure: SuppScoreLab may earn a commission from qualifying Amazon links.
See the best Vitamin D3 supplements ranked with the same methodology, or keep exploring the database.
