Confidence: 84%
B09L8NP49Z
View on Amazon →SuppScoreLab compares supplement products for informational purposes. We do not sell products directly, and some links may take you to third-party retailers.
Decision summary
A middling option. It may be usable, but weaker ingredient form quality 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 care a lot about label clarity and want fewer unknowns.
Score breakdown
Tap a module to see what it measures. A 0 can reflect missing disclosure, not just a negative result.
Dosage quality
6.2/10Acceptable 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
The supporting evidence profile is relatively strong. The main limitation is that proprietary blend prevents independent dose verification.
Strengths
Weaknesses
Final verdict
A middling option. It may be usable, but weaker ingredient form quality 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 strong supporting evidence
Solid but not a standout: Clinical dosing guidance is limited for this ingredient.
Scientific evidence
King et al. meta-analysis probiotics and respiratory tract infections
British Journal of Nutrition • 2014
PMID: 25047331.0
Ritchie & Romanuk meta-analysis probiotic supplementation and GI health
PLOS ONE • 2012
PMID: 23961244.0
ℹ Dose is within established clinical ranges, but lacks direct studies
A clear drag on the formula: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength. The declared form is not one of the better-absorbed options.
Clinical dosing guidance
Based on established dosing ranges used in clinical practice.
⚠ Strong evidence exists, but dose is below effective threshold
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.
Scientific evidence
Tang et al. meta-analysis calcium supplementation and fracture risk
BMJ • 2007
PMID: 17720017.0
Important label or formulation details that may affect how this product should be interpreted.
Proprietary blend limits dose transparency
Exact ingredient amounts cannot be verified clearly.
Calcium dose looks below clinically effective levels
Declared amount falls below ranges used in human trials.
Calcium form is not clearly declared
Exact ingredient form is not disclosed on the label.
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 Probiotics supplements ranked with the same methodology, or keep exploring the database.
