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 · barcode not publishedDymatize · observed 2026-07-21🇺🇸 USPTO wordmark owner · DYMATIZE ENTERPRISES, INC. · ['TEXAS, USA', 'DELAWARE, USA']
Quick read · Dymatize
Dymatize Elite 100% Whey Protein Powder, Vanilla
Marketing check: 2 remain partly or independently unverified.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 23, 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
US manufacturing or origin language
Evidence →“Made in USA” can describe only final bottling. Ingredient-sourcing records were not located for this product.
Quick read · 2 useful findings
What is worth knowing.
Headlines first. Open evidence only when you want the source trail.
Needs explanationAny trouble on the record?
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.
Evidence and sources
Brand-level context only, not a finding about this product. Belmont Confections Inc recalled a different or not-exactly-bound product on 2013-01-15: “Belmont was notified by their customer, Dymatize, that a consumer complained on an allergic reaction after eating the product. The…
Locked evidence record →Open the full source-linked findingChecks outIs the label honest?
Every declared ingredient has an amount · 15 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 findingWho owns the brand wordmark?
🇺🇸
DYMATIZE ENTERPRISES, INC.['Corporation', 'Limited Liability Company'] · exact supplement-class mark for DYMATIZE
Filed address
13737 North Stemmons Freeway, Farmers Branch, TEXAS 75234, UNITED STATES
USPTO identifies the public owner or applicant behind this brand wordmark. This does not by itself identify the product manufacturer or prove where the product was made. Open USPTO source ↗
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.
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.
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.
Exact trademark owner identified
USPTO lists DYMATIZE ENTERPRISES, INC. (['CORPORATION', 'LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY']) in ['TEXAS, USA', 'DELAWARE, 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.
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.
Listed amounts fit the serving
Technical check only: the panel’s 6 actives sum to 1,770 mg, which fits inside the ≈34,000 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
67 servings × 34 g = 2278 g, matching the printed net weight 2300 g (NET WT 5 LB (2.3 kg)). 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 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.
FDA recall appears in this brand's history
Brand-level context only, not a finding about this product. Belmont Confections Inc recalled a different or not-exactly-bound product on 2013-01-15: “Belmont was notified by their customer, Dymatize, that a consumer complained on an allergic reaction after eating the product. The consumer is allergic to peanuts & peanut protein.” (status: Terminated). The recalled product was: “DYMATIZE NUTRITION ELITE Gourmet Cookies & Cream 6-LAYER HI-PROTEIN BAR Label reads in part "NET WT***INGREDIENTS: Elite Protein Blend***Distributed by: Dymatize Enterprises, Inc. ” — not necessarily the product on this page. Verify at FDA’s recall database.
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.
180-day review-count history is on file
Exact-listing history records written-review counts from 635 on 2026-01-28 to 687 on 2026-07-14 (net +52). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.
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
What is the product’s UPC or GTIN?
The barcode is how a product gets matched to outside records — certification registries, label databases, recall data. Without it, almost nothing can be cross-checked.
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.
3
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
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.