LookCloser.aipublic supplement evidence
Exact product checked · GTIN 850043179436Santa Cruz Paleo · observed 2026-07-23Package says manufactured by: MANUFACTURED IN THE USA
Quick read · Santa Cruz Paleo

Santa Cruz Paleo Electrolyte Powder

The retained record does not contain a marketing claim that can be scored yet; product facts and open checks follow.

Rebuilt from public sources on July 23, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.

Quick read · 2 useful findings

What is worth knowing.

Headlines first. Open evidence only when you want the source trail.

Needs explanationIs the label honest?

Panel carries documented template or translation artifacts

Template, translation, or duplicate-row artifacts are reasons to trust the printed numbers less until the brand supplies a clean, product-specific panel.

Evidence and sources

The panel carries these quoted observations: “Calories has no unit”. US-market labels are produced under cGMP controls; these are template or translation artifacts worth checking, not proof that the label is fabricated or that the product is unsafe.

Locked evidence record →Open the full source-linked finding
Checks outIs the label honest?

Every declared ingredient has an amount · 14 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 finding
What remains open 2
  • No identity-bound public label filing is retained in this record.
  • Barcode checksum is valid; no independent product record was found.

These are evidence gaps, not strikes against the product.

Research behind the findings

Dose and research context

Ingredient context used alongside the captured panel. These sources do not test this product or establish safety or effectiveness.

NIH ODS — Magnesium fact sheet ↗PubMed search: magnesium glycinate supplementation ↗
Where it sells

Price check for this exact product

Amazon

Exact UPC/GTIN match
$29.99

$1.00 per labeled serving

matching UPC/GTIN · observed 2026-07-24T04:26:42.581439+00:00

View on Amazon ↗

Walmart

Not confirmed
No exact listing retained

Search results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.

Search Walmart ↗

iHerb

Not confirmed
No exact listing retained

Search results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.

Search iHerb ↗

Only one exact price was available at build time; prices change by date, seller, and promotion.

Reference prices only · no affiliate links · every compared seller must publish the matching UPC/GTIN.

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.

Read / share full evidence →
Open the full evidence trailSources, edge cases, and every unresolved check

Confirmed evidence

What checked out01

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

Documented concerns

What needs caution01

These are documented contradictions or claims that need more evidence. They are separate from missing data.

!

Panel carries documented template or translation artifacts

The panel carries these quoted observations: “Calories has no unit”. US-market labels are produced under cGMP controls; these are template or translation artifacts worth checking, not proof that the label is fabricated or that the product is unsafe.

Caution

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.

…

Listed amounts fit the serving

Technical check only: the panel’s 10 actives sum to 2,400 mg, which fits inside the ≈5,420 mg serving. This means the numbers are physically possible — it does not mean the formula was validated or the contents confirmed.

No data
…

Photo-read pack math is internally consistent

30 servings × 5.42 g = 162.6 g, matching the printed net weight 162.6 g (Net Wt. 5.7 oz (162.6g)). This checks agreement within the photo read; it is not an independent contents test.

No data
…

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.

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 69 on 2026-03-16 to 84 on 2026-06-26 (net +15). 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.

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 850043179436.

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.