LookCloser record · 840050600863 · methodology v0.1
This product can't be verified from public data Neither good nor bad — the checks below show what this listing publishes and what it withholds. Verifiable products publish more. Evidence availability only; this does not establish safety or effectiveness.
3 of 6 public trust signals found · 0 product-specific concerns
The documentation confirms that each ingredient's amount is clearly listed, which is helpful for understanding what's in the product. However, details like the total weight and number of servings are not available, meaning the exact dose cannot be verified against the label claims. Currently, the authenticity of customer reviews for this product hasn't been analyzed. You can compare the "Supplement Facts" panel on the bottle to the listing's details to ensure they match.
Confirmed evidence
These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.
Nothing in this listing contradicts how these ingredients were studied (multivitamin / greens blend). For example, multivitamin / greens blend: research evaluates multivitamins ingredient-by-ingredient — blend-level health claims outrun what blend-level evidence can show. Sources: NIH ODS — Multivitamin/mineral supplements fact sheet, PubMed search: multivitamin supplementation outcomes.
The panel gives a per-ingredient amount rather than hiding quantities inside a proprietary blend, so each one can be compared to published research.
UPCitemdb resolves 840050600863 to "Beet Root Capsules 2000mg | 220 Pills | Non-GMO and Gluten Free | by Horbaach" (Horbaach) — consistent with this listing.
Documented concerns
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
We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.
What this means: the listing doesn't publish net weight, unit count, per-serving dose, servings per container, so the dose claim can't be checked against physics from public data. That's neither a pass nor a strike — but it does mean you're taking the label on faith. Checkable products publish these numbers.
The NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database has no matching label yet. Ingestion lags the market — recorded as a gap, not a strike.
Exact-listing history records written-review counts from 545 on 2026-01-28 to 633 on 2026-07-08 (net +88). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.
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.
What to ask and check
Ask the brand or seller
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.
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 840050600863.
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.
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.