The dose claim fits the serving — physically possible
Claimed 5,500.0 mg is 18% of the ≈31,000 mg serving (serving size on the label, keyed to UPC 748927054804) — within physical limits.
LookCloser record · 748927054804 · methodology v0.1
Optimum Nutrition Gold Standard 100% Whey Protein Powder
Result
MODERATE public verifiability
No contradictions found at this check depth Passed every check we could run — not an endorsement; read the record. Evidence availability only; this does not establish safety or effectiveness.
4 of 6 public trust signals found · 0 product-specific concerns · $1.00 per serving
The short read
The label for this product shows a discrepancy between the listed Saturated Fat and what the Supplement Facts panel indicates. While the listing claims 5.5g, the panel shows 1g of Saturated Fat per serving. This is a difference to consider, not proof of an issue. The product's math and packaging details appear consistent with the information provided. You can check the Supplemental Facts panel on the product's packaging against the panel shown on this page to compare the amounts.
Why this result?
We ran this product through public-record checks — label math, barcode registries, FDA recall lists, published lab tests. This banner sums up what those checks could and couldn’t confirm. Green means nothing public contradicted the label — not proof it works or is safe. Gray means the data to check simply isn’t public: a gap, not a verdict. We show the evidence; the conclusion is yours.
Confirmed evidence
What checked out04
These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.
Confirmed
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.
Pack math confirmed from the label
29 servings × 31 g = 899 g, matching the printed net weight 899 g (NET WT 31.7 OZ (1.98 LB) 899 G). Any different figure in the marketplace’s shipping-weight field describes packaging, not the product.
Barcode confirmed in an outside database
Open Food Facts resolves 748927054804 to "Gold standard whey" (Optimum Nutrition) — 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 missing03
We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.
Reviews not analysed yet
Marketplace rating 4.7★ across 48,025 ratings. Authenticity not analysed: burst, purge and stockout patterns need price/review history.
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.
This brand had a recall in the past (now closed)
Brand-level history, not a finding about this product. Lyons Magnus, Inc recalled a product on 2022-07-22: “Findings and potential for Cronobacter sakazakii and Clostridium botulinum.” (status: Terminated, case closed). The recalled product was: “Optimum Nutrition Gold Standard 100% Whey Chocolate 11 fl oz (325mL). UPC 7 48927-06409 4. Shake well. Best when served chilled. Manufactured for Optimum Nutrition, Inc., 350” — not necessarily the product on this page. Verify at FDA’s recall database.
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 748927054804.
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.
The full report is free no signup · no paywall
Every check, claim, label read, dose comparison, registry search, source, and date. Free to read, download, and share.
Want to know if this changes?
Supplements are repeat purchases. Formulas get reformulated, lots get recalled, brands finally publish the lab report they were asked for. We can watch this record and email you only if something changes.
Your address is used for this one purpose. No newsletter, no marketing, no third parties, no tracking pixels — and every email carries a one-click unsubscribe that needs no login. We store the address, the record, and the date. Nothing else.
Record built July 21, 2026. Sources: source listing (live fetch) · brand's own storefront · published independent assays (NOW Foods 2024, SuppCo 2025; brand-level) · PubMed · openFDA · Open Food Facts · NIH DSLD · LookCloser ingredient KB. Evidence-tiered statements of documented fact; conclusions belong to the reader. Beta: this report isn’t yet independently archived — treat it as a well-sourced starting point, not a certificate. Evidence-based corrections welcome.