LookCloser.aipublic supplement evidence
What checks out · LIQUIDHEALTH

LIQUIDHEALTH USDA Organic Nascent Iodine Liquid Drops

The panel states lodine 250 mcg per serving.

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.

Specific fact confirmed

Exact trademark owner identified

USPTO lists LIQUID HEALTH INC (CORPORATION) in NEVADA, 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.

Panel, decoded

What the label discloses

1declared rows
1separately quantified
0combined blend totals

The listing-image panel publishes an amount for each of its 1 declared row. That supports ingredient-by-ingredient review; it does not verify the contents.

Panel rowAmount%DVWhat to notice
lodine250 mcg

vision:google/gemini-flash-1.5 Amounts are shown as declared panel data, not independently lab-tested contents.

Public ownership record
🇺🇸
LIQUID HEALTH INCCorporation · exact mark owner for LIQUIDHEALTH

783 CIMARRON COURT, MESQUITE, NEVADA 89027, UNITED STATES

Registered2020-08-04
AssignmentsNo transfers recorded

Filed address
783 CIMARRON COURT, MESQUITE, NEVADA 89027, UNITED STATES

This is the USPTO owner of the brand wordmark. It tells a shopper who is behind the brand, but does not by itself identify the manufacturer or prove where this product was made.

Review history
/ 5
not shownvisible ratings

Review counts rose gradually. Written-review counts rose from 274 to 303 across the observed period. That describes count movement, not review authenticity or product quality. A variation family may share some public counts.

Keepa exact-listing history · counts do not prove authenticity · variation family may share counts

What would settle the biggest open question?

Do the labeled amounts reconcile with the stated serving and container? Evidence that would settle it: identity-bound Supplement Facts panel.

Read / share full evidence →
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.

Confirmed

Exact trademark owner identified

USPTO lists LIQUID HEALTH INC (CORPORATION) in NEVADA, 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.

Confirmed

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, unit count, 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.

No data

Photo-read pack math is internally consistent

429 servings × 0.14 g = 60.06 g, matching the printed net weight 60 g (2 fl. oz. 1 60 ml). This checks agreement within the photo read; it is not an independent contents test.

No data

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 data

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.

No data

180-day review-count history is on file

Exact-listing history records written-review counts from 274 on 2026-02-16 to 303 on 2026-07-07 (net +29). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.

No data

UPC valid, no independent record

Check digit passes; no third-party database record found yet. Coverage gaps are common — not a strike.

No data

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.

2

Where are the ingredients sourced, and where is the product manufactured?

“Made in USA” can describe only the final bottling step. Ask which country the actives came from and whether the facility is audited.

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 810161720538.

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.