The barcode identity checks out · 810139573128.
The outside identifier points to this product, so the other checks are less likely to be about a look-alike.
Exact product checked · GTIN 810139573128Nutricost · observed 2026-07-23
The useful read · Nutricost
Nutricost Vitamin D3 10
The barcode identity checks out · 810139573128.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 23, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.
Shopper scorecard
The useful findings, in decision order.
Only product facts and comparisons earn a card. Pipeline gaps stay collapsed.
Who is behind it?
Checks outBarcode / GTIN record
The barcode identity checks out · 810139573128.
UPCitemdb resolves 810139573128 to "Nutricost Vitamin D3 10 000 IU Supplement 240 Soft Gel Caps" (Nutricost) — consistent with this listing.
Why it mattersThe outside identifier points to this product, so the other checks are less likely to be about a look-alike.
Open the source-linked findingWhat remains open 1
- Not yet in NIH's public label registry.
These are evidence gaps, not strikes against the product.
Want the complete evidence trail?
The summary stops at product-specific facts. The full report preserves every source, calculation, limitation, and unresolved check for review or sharing.
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.
Testing claim names a recognized certifier
A named certifier/laboratory appears in the listing (registry cross-check pending).
Barcode confirmed in an outside database
UPCitemdb resolves 810139573128 to "Nutricost Vitamin D3 10 000 IU Supplement 240 Soft Gel Caps" (Nutricost) — 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 missing04
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, unit count, per-serving dose, so the dose claim cannot yet be checked against serving arithmetic. This is a neutral evidence gap, not a pass or strike.
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 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 166 on 2026-01-29 to 183 on 2026-07-13 (net +17). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.
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 810139573128.
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 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.