Specific fact confirmed
UPC independently corroborated
Open Food Facts resolves 692991704144 to "Organic fenugreek seeds" () — consistent with this listing.
What checks out · Jiva Organics
Jiva Organic Fenugreek Seeds 7 Ounce – Non-GMO
The panel publishes 15 amounts, led by Saturated Fat 200 mg.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 22, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.
What this means for you · What checks out
What the record confirms
The panel gives a per-ingredient amount rather than hiding quantities inside a proprietary blend, so each one can be compared to published research.
Panel, decoded
What the label discloses
15declared rows
15separately quantified
0combined blend totals
The listing-image panel publishes an amount for each of its 15 declared rows. That supports ingredient-by-ingredient review; it does not verify the contents.
| Panel row | Amount | %DV | What to notice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Carbohydrate | 6 g | — | |
| Dietary Fiber | 3 g | — | |
| Protein | 2 g | — | |
| Total Fat | 0.5 g | — | |
| Saturated Fat | 0.2 g | — |
FDA rules (21 CFR 101.36) require the amount of each dietary ingredient per serving unless hidden in a declared “proprietary blend” (legal, but a transparency yellow flag). A label stating no amount at all is non-compliant — a checkable red flag. This panel states amounts; the open question is whether those declared amounts are independently verified and how they compare with relevant research.
vision:google/gemini-flash-1.5 Amounts are shown as declared panel data, not independently lab-tested contents.
Relevant research · quick links
Read the ingredient evidence directly
These links provide the public research context used alongside the captured panel. They do not establish safety, effectiveness, or product quality.
What would settle the biggest open question?
Which exact USPTO registrant is tied to this product's brand use? Evidence that would settle it: exact-wordmark ownership record.
Open the full evidence trailSources, edge cases, and every unresolved check
Confirmed evidence
What checked out02
These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.
Every ingredient amount is disclosed
The panel gives a per-ingredient amount rather than hiding quantities inside a proprietary blend, so each one can be compared to published research.
Barcode confirmed in an outside database
Open Food Facts resolves 692991704144 to "Organic fenugreek seeds" () — consistent with this listing.
Documented concerns
What needs caution00
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
What is still missing06
We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.
Review-count history: not available
Marketplace rating not shown★ — rating count unavailable. No exact-listing count history was available, so no review-pattern claim is made.
Listed amounts fit the serving
Technical check only: the panel’s 6 actives sum to 307 mg, which fits inside the ≈11,000 mg serving. This means the numbers are physically possible — it does not mean the formula was validated or the contents confirmed.
Photo-read pack math is internally consistent
18 servings × 11 g = 198 g, matching the printed net weight 200 g (NT. WT. 7 OZ (200g)). This checks agreement within the photo read; it is not an independent contents test.
Research context is available for the listed ingredients
Published sources describe how prebiotic fiber 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 — Fiber overview (MVMS context), PubMed search: inulin prebiotic randomized trial.
No label filed with NIH's public catalog
The NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database has no matching label yet. Ingestion lags the market — recorded as a gap, not a strike.
No exact supplement trademark owner found
The live USPTO search returned no exact-wordmark supplement-related registration for this brand. That is a public-record gap, not evidence that the brand has no owner or that the product is improper.
What to ask and check
What would settle the open questions
Why is this shown?
Everything we couldn’t verify is something a person can still ask about. Rather than leave gaps sitting as dead ends, we turn each one into a specific question — the exact document, citation, or number that would settle it — plus the things you can confirm yourself with the bottle in your hand.
Ask the brand or seller
1
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
1
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.
2
Scan the barcode on the package and confirm it reads 692991704144.
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.
3
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 22, 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.