GMP or manufacturing-quality language
Evidence →Facility-level claims can be accurate and still say nothing about this product’s contents. No registration document was located.
Exact product checked · GTIN 810014675268Nutricost · observed 2026-07-24🇺🇸 USPTO wordmark owner · eSupplements, LLC · UTAH, USAPackage says manufactured for: nutricost · 351 E 1750 N, Vineyard, UT 84059
Quick read · Nutricost
Nutricost Biotin (Vitamin B7) 10,000mcg (10mg)
Marketing check: 2 remain partly or independently unverified.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 24, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.
240capsules
240servings per container
Marketing claims, checked
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.
?Couldn’t verify independently2
“Third-party tested”
Evidence →No named laboratory or lot-specific certificate was found for this exact product. No exact brand product page was available for a document check. NSF, IFOS, USP, and Informed-Sport were not checked in this record. This is a public-evidence limit, not a finding that testing did not occur.
Quick read · 3 useful findings
What is worth knowing.
Headlines first. Open evidence only when you want the source trail.
Checks outIs the label honest?
Every declared ingredient has an amount · 1 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 findingChecks outWho is behind it?
The barcode identity checks out · 810014675268.
The outside identifier points to this product, so the other checks are less likely to be about a look-alike.
Evidence and sources
Open Food Facts resolves 810014675268 to "Biotin" (Nutricost) — consistent with this listing.
Locked evidence record →Open the full source-linked findingChecks outCan you trust the review pattern?
Written reviews moved 1,272 → 1,340 from 2026-01-30 to 2026-07-13 without one large burst.
Gradual growth is more ordinary; a sudden burst deserves a closer look. Neither pattern proves whether individual reviews are genuine.
Evidence and sources
Written reviews grew from 1272 to 1340 across 2026-01-30 – 2026-07-13 with no single manufactured spike (largest 30-day gain ~18).
Locked evidence record →Open the full source-linked findingWhat remains open 1
- No identity-bound public label filing is retained in this record.
These are evidence gaps, not strikes against the product.
Who owns the brand wordmark?
🇺🇸
eSupplements, LLCLimited Liability Company · exact supplement-class mark for NUTRICOST
Filed address
UTAH, USA) DBA Nutricost; 351 E 1750 N, VINEYARD, UTAH 84059, UNITED STATES
USPTO identifies the public owner or applicant behind this brand wordmark. This does not by itself identify the product manufacturer or prove where the product was made. Open USPTO source ↗
Where it sells
Price check for this exact product
Amazon
Exact UPC/GTIN match$9.99
$0.04 per labeled serving
matching UPC/GTIN · observed 2026-07-24T10:30:22.560572+00:00
View on Amazon ↗iHerb
Exact UPC/GTIN match$14.95
$0.06 per labeled serving
matching UPC/GTIN · observed 2026-07-24
View on iHerb ↗Target
Not confirmedNo exact listing retained
Search results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.
Search Target ↗Walmart
Not confirmedNo exact listing retained
Search results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.
Search Walmart ↗Same UPC/GTIN observed across 2 sellers. Amazon was lowest at $9.99; iHerb was highest at $14.95 — a $4.96 range at check time.
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 out04
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.
Exact trademark owner identified
USPTO lists eSupplements, LLC (LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY) in UTAH, USA for the exact brand wordmark. This identifies the USPTO mark owner or applicant; it does not by itself prove who manufactures or sells this product.
Barcode confirmed in an outside database
Open Food Facts resolves 810014675268 to "Biotin" (Nutricost) — consistent with this listing.
Reviews accumulated gradually
Written reviews grew from 1272 to 1340 across 2026-01-30 – 2026-07-13 with no single manufactured spike (largest 30-day gain ~18).
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.
The listing doesn't publish enough to check the math
The retained listing evidence does not establish net weight, per-serving dose, servings per container, so the dose claim cannot yet be checked against serving arithmetic. This is a neutral evidence gap, not a pass or strike.
“Lab tested” claimed, but no lab or report named
The observed listing claims third-party testing without naming a lab or certifier. No product-bound report is retained, so the claim cannot be verified as stated. NSF, IFOS, USP, and Informed-Sport were not checked in this record.
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.
180-day review-count history is on file
Exact-listing history records written-review counts from 1,272 on 2026-01-30 to 1,340 on 2026-07-13 (net +68). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.
Package and trademark records name different responsible entitie
The package says manufactured for: nutricost, 351 E 1750 N, Vineyard, UT 84059. USPTO names eSupplements, LLC as the exact wordmark owner. That can be a normal distributor, manufacturer, or licensing relationship; the retained records do not establish the relationship.
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
Can you send the certificate of analysis (COA) for the lot number on my bottle?
A real COA names the testing laboratory, the test date, the lot it covers, and what was measured. “Third-party tested” with no document behind it is a marketing sentence.
2
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 810014675268.
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 24, 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.