LookCloser.aipublic supplement evidence
Exact product checked · GTIN 886790327271Benefiber · observed 2026-07-23
The useful read · Benefiber

Benefiber Prebiotic Fiber Supplement Gummies for Digestive…

FDA recall appears in this brand's history

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

126gummies · 30 servings
Needs explanation

FDA recall appears in this brand's history

An exact-product recall is a direct signal. A different product from the same firm is company context, not a strike against this item.

Checks out

Every declared ingredient has an amount · 3 quantified rows.

You can compare each declared dose with research instead of guessing what is hidden inside a blend.

Public context

Research links are available for prebiotic fiber.

Use the linked research to check whether the ingredient and outcome you care about are actually connected. Ingredient evidence does not verify this product.

Shopper scorecard

The useful findings, in decision order.

Only product facts and comparisons earn a card. Pipeline gaps stay collapsed.

01

Is the label honest?

Checks outNIH / published research

Every declared ingredient has an amount · 3 quantified rows.

The panel gives a per-ingredient amount rather than hiding quantities inside a proprietary blend, so each one can be compared to published research.

Why it mattersYou can compare each declared dose with research instead of guessing what is hidden inside a blend.

Open the source-linked finding
03

Any trouble on the record?

Needs explanationFDA public records

FDA recall appears in this brand's history

Brand-level context only, not a finding about this product. Novartis Consumer Health recalled a different or not-exactly-bound product on 2013-08-06: “The lot number and/or expiration date may be illegible on the outer plastic bottle packaging.” (status: Terminated). The recalled…

Why it mattersAn exact-product recall is a direct signal. A different product from the same firm is company context, not a strike against this item.

Open the source-linked finding
05

Will it do what you want?

Public contextNIH / published research

Research links are available for prebiotic fiber.

Published sources describe how prebiotic fiber 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 — Fiber overview (MVMS context), PubMed search: inulin prebiotic randomized tr…

Why it mattersUse the linked research to check whether the ingredient and outcome you care about are actually connected. Ingredient evidence does not verify this product.

Open the source-linked finding
What remains open 3
  • Not yet in NIH's public label registry.
  • 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.

Relevant research · quick links

Read the ingredient evidence directly

These links provide the public research context used alongside the captured panel. They do not establish safety, effectiveness, or product quality.

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 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.

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.

No data

Multi-ingredient formula — panel read, serving weight unknown

We read the full Supplement Facts panel from the listing-image panel (below), but the label doesn’t state a serving weight, so the arithmetic can’t run. A gap in the label’s information, not evidence of a problem.

No data

Research context is available for the listed ingredients

Published sources describe how prebiotic fiber 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 — Fiber overview (MVMS context), PubMed search: inulin prebiotic randomized trial.

No data

FDA recall appears in this brand's history

Brand-level context only, not a finding about this product. Novartis Consumer Health recalled a different or not-exactly-bound product on 2013-08-06: “The lot number and/or expiration date may be illegible on the outer plastic bottle packaging.” (status: Terminated). The recalled product was: “Benefiber, Fiber plus Calcium Supplement, Wild Berry Chewables 90ct, sugar free, chewable tablets bottle. Novartis Consumer Health, Inc, Parsippany, NJ.” — not necessarily the product on this page. Verify at FDA’s recall database.

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

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 886790327271.

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.