Advertised health or performance benefit
Evidence →Published research exists for ingredients in this formula — see Related research below. Whether this product’s doses match those studies could not be confirmed.
Exact product checked · GTIN 850062082595NatureBell · observed 2026-07-24Package says manufactured for: Nature Bell · 4380 Mission Blvd Montclair,
CA 91763
Quick read · NatureBell
Sport Electrolytes Powder No Sugar, 500g (52 Servings)
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.
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.
◐Partly confirmed1
?Couldn’t verify independently1
“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 · 0 useful findings
What is worth knowing.
Headlines first. Open evidence only when you want the source trail.
What remains open 3
- No identity-bound public label filing is retained in this record.
- Barcode checksum is valid; no independent product record was found.
- No dated review-history series is on file yet.
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.
Where it sells
Price check for this exact product
Amazon
Exact UPC/GTIN match$14.99
$0.29 per labeled serving
matching UPC/GTIN · observed 2026-07-24T07:26:40.122210+00:00
View on Amazon ↗iHerb
Not confirmedNo exact listing retained
Search results remain unbound until this retailer publishes the matching UPC/GTIN.
Search 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 ↗Only one exact price was available at build time; prices change by date, seller, and promotion.
No official brand storefront is confirmed in this record. That is neutral, but it prevents a direct brand-price, label, review, and document check.
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 out00
These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.
Nothing could be independently confirmed from the available record.
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 missing07
We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.
Review-count history: not available
Marketplace rating not shown★ — rating count unavailable. No exact-listing count history was available, so no review-pattern claim is made.
“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.
Listed amounts fit the serving
Technical check only: the panel’s 16 actives sum to 1,351 mg, which fits inside the ≈9,500 mg serving. This means the numbers are physically possible — it does not mean the formula was validated or the contents confirmed.
Photo-read pack math is internally consistent
52 servings × 9.5 g = 494 g, matching the printed net weight 500 g (500 g (1.1 lb) POWDER). This checks agreement within the photo read; it is not an independent contents test.
Research context is available for the listed ingredients
Published sources describe how magnesium, prebiotic fiber, zinc have been studied. This is ingredient context only; the record does not establish that this product delivers the studied dose or outcome. Sources: NIH ODS — Magnesium fact sheet, PubMed search: magnesium glycinate supplementation.
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.
UPC valid, no independent record
Check digit passes; no third-party database record found yet. Coverage gaps are common — not a strike.
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 850062082595.
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.