Amazon
Submitted listingExact page checked on 2026-07-23; current price was not retained.
View on Amazon ↗
The retained record does not contain a marketing claim that can be scored yet; product facts and open checks follow.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 23, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.
Headlines first. Open evidence only when you want the source trail.
These are evidence gaps, not strikes against the product.
Ingredient context used alongside the captured panel. These sources do not test this product or establish safety or effectiveness.
Open related seller leads before buying, then confirm the flavor, count, and serving size. Their prices are visible, but LookCloser does not claim savings until the pages share a UPC/GTIN.
Exact page checked on 2026-07-23; current price was not retained.
View on Amazon ↗Open the brand storefront to search manually.
No defensible same-product page was retained from the brand catalog.
Check brand website ↗No matching product page was confirmed in the current record. Search results cannot be attached as this product until the UPC/GTIN matches.
Search Walmart ↗No matching product page was confirmed in the current record. Search results cannot be attached as this product until the UPC/GTIN matches.
Search iHerb ↗Prices and stock are point-in-time observations. Related pages are never used as product evidence. No affiliate links; LookCloser earns nothing from these sellers.
The full report shows every source, the exact unresolved question, and the documentation that would settle it.
Confirmed evidence
These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.
Nothing could be independently confirmed from the available record.
Documented concerns
These are documented contradictions or claims that need more evidence. They are separate from missing data.
No contradictions or product-specific cautions were found at this check depth.
Unresolved public record
We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.
Our image read produced 60 × 3 g = 180 g versus net weight 380 g. OCR or variant mixing can cause this; check the physical package before treating it as a contradiction.
We read the full Supplement Facts panel from the listing-image panel (below), but the label doesn’t state a serving weight, so the arithmetic can’t run. A gap in the label’s information, not evidence of a problem.
Published sources describe how magnesium have been studied. This is ingredient context only; the record does not establish that this product delivers the studied dose or outcome. Sources: NIH ODS — Magnesium fact sheet, PubMed search: magnesium glycinate supplementation.
This record does not currently hold an identity-bound public label filing for the exact product. That is a LookCloser coverage gap, not evidence that no filing exists.
This means only that no enforcement record matched the brand name — it does not mean the product was tested, reviewed, or cleared by FDA. New and untested products also have no recall records.
The paid catalog links this exact item to a parent listing. Review counts on public product pages may be shared across sizes, flavors, or other variants, so the count history is listing context — not evidence that reviewers received or tested this exact variant.
Exact-listing history records written-review counts from 476 on 2026-01-25 to 590 on 2026-07-20 (net +114). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.
Open Food Facts resolves 018788103080 to "Electrolyte mix" (Re-Lyte), but that record lacks enough exact brand/product detail to confirm or contradict this listing.
What to ask and check
Ask the brand or seller
Is this label filed with NIH’s Dietary Supplement Label Database (DSLD)?
Filing is voluntary, so absence proves nothing — but a filed label puts the full ingredient table on public record where anyone can read it.
Most brands and sellers publish a contact route. A clear answer adds evidence to the record; no answer leaves the question open.
Check for yourself — no one’s permission needed
Compare the panel on the bottle in your hand to the one shown in this record.
Ours was read from listing photos and can contain reading errors. The physical label is the source of truth — if they disagree, tell us and we’ll correct the record.
Scan the barcode on the package and confirm it reads 018788103080.
A mismatch between the barcode on the box and the one on the listing is worth pausing over — it can indicate a different variant, a repack, or a counterfeit.
Check the lot number and expiry on the bottle against any COA you’re given.
A certificate that doesn’t name your lot doesn’t describe what you’re holding.
These are the open questions on this specific record — not a warning about the product, and not a suggestion to buy or avoid it. Getting them answered is how you decide for yourself.
Record built July 23, 2026. Sources: source listing observed at check time · USPTO Trademark Search · Keepa exact-listing history · NIH / published research · certification and regulator records where available. LookCloser publishes evidence and gaps; it does not advise for or against any supplement. Evidence-based corrections welcome.