Published research exists for ingredients in this formula — see Related research below. Whether this product’s doses match those studies could not be confirmed.

Juicy Splash Sugar Free Electrolytes Powder w/Natural…
Marketing check: 1 remains partly or independently unverified.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 23, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.
Does the marketing hold up?
Couldn’t verify means public proof was not found; it is not a mark against the product. Ingredient research is not treated as a trial of this exact product.
◐Partly confirmed1
Marketing language, not scored
SUPERIOR
What is worth knowing.
Headlines first. Open evidence only when you want the source trail.
Every declared ingredient has an amount · 10 quantified rows.
You can compare each declared dose with research instead of guessing what is hidden inside a blend.
Evidence and sources
The panel gives a per-ingredient amount rather than hiding quantities inside a proprietary blend, so each one can be compared to published research.
Locked evidence record →Open the full source-linked findingWhat remains open 3
- No identity-bound public label filing is retained in this record.
- Barcode checksum is valid; no independent product record was found.
- No dated review-history series is on file yet.
These are evidence gaps, not strikes against the product.
Dose and research context
Ingredient context used alongside the captured panel. These sources do not test this product or establish safety or effectiveness.
Price check for this exact product
Amazon
Exact UPC/GTIN match$0.62 per labeled serving
matching UPC/GTIN · observed 2026-07-24T03:29:44.464788+00:00
View on Amazon ↗Walmart
Not confirmedSearch results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.
Search Walmart ↗iHerb
Not confirmedSearch results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.
Search iHerb ↗Only one exact price was available at build time; prices change by date, seller, and promotion.
No official brand storefront is confirmed in this record. That is neutral, but it prevents a direct brand-price, label, review, and document check.
Reference prices only · no affiliate links · every compared seller must publish the matching UPC/GTIN.
Want to inspect the evidence?
The full report shows every source, the exact unresolved question, and the documentation that would settle it.
Open the full evidence trailSources, edge cases, and every unresolved check
Confirmed evidence
What checked out01
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.
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 missing07
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.
Photo-read pack numbers need confirmation
Our image read produced 16 × 10 g = 160 g versus net weight 52 g. OCR or variant mixing can cause this; check the physical package before treating it as a contradiction.
Listed amounts fit the serving
Technical check only: the panel’s 9 actives sum to 513 mg, which fits inside the ≈10,000 mg serving. This means the numbers are physically possible — it does not mean the formula was validated or the contents confirmed.
Research context is available for the listed ingredients
Published sources describe how magnesium, zinc 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.
Public label filing not retained
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 item belongs to a catalog variation family
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.
UPC valid, no independent record
Check digit passes; no third-party database record found yet. Coverage gaps are common — not a strike.
What to ask and check
What would settle the open questions
Why is this shown?
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 700937725808.
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.