lookcloser.ai full report

Full record · lc-26cc84a8 · back to the summary

BioGaia Prodentis Oral Probiotics for Teeth & Gums and Bad Breath

1 concrete dimensions confirmed · 4 still open · built July 26, 2026

Exact product image from the source listing
Exact product checkedGTIN not published · checked 2026-07-26

Free to read, download and share — no signup, no paywall, no ads.

Download / print this report (free) ← Simple view
How to read this report

What this is. We compare what a listing claims against what public records show — label arithmetic, barcode registries, NIH’s label catalog, FDA enforcement data, certification registries, and published research. Every statement below traces to one of those.

What the states mean. Confirmed = an outside source agrees. Contradicted = an outside source disagrees. Caution = something needs explaining. No data = we looked and found nothing — a gap, not a strike.

What it is not. A clean record is not an endorsement and never proof a product works. A thin record is not an accusation. We publish evidence and gaps; the conclusion is yours. Nothing here is medical advice.

Something wrong? Every figure is meant to be checkable — sources are named and linked. Send a correction and we’ll fix the record.

Every check we ran

Confirmed evidence

What checked out2

These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.

Exact trademark owner identified

USPTO lists BioGaia AB (aktiebolag (ab); SWEDEN) (OTHER) in SWEDEN 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.

Confirmed

The review count moved gradually, not in one burst

Written reviews rose from 303 to 380 between February 1 and July 22, 2026. The largest rise inside any single 30-day window was about 37, so the count moved in steps rather than in one burst.

Confirmed

Documented concerns

What needs caution0

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 missing5

We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.

The listing doesn't publish enough to check the math

The saved listing evidence does not establish net weight, unit count, per-serving dose, servings per container, so the dose claim cannot yet be checked against serving arithmetic. This is a neutral evidence gap, not a pass or strike.

No data

No recall found — which is not the same as being tested

This means only that no enforcement record matched the brand name — it does not mean the product was tested, reviewed, or cleared by FDA. New and untested products also have no recall records.

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 301 on 2026-01-27 to 380 on 2026-07-22 (net +79). Count movements can reflect sales, listing variants, collection resets, or moderation; this history does not establish whether reviews are authentic.

No data

Package and trademark records name different responsible entitie

The package says manufactured by: BioGaia, P.O. Box 3242.10 Stockholm Sveda. USPTO names BioGaia AB (aktiebolag (ab); SWEDEN) as the exact wordmark owner. That can be a normal distributor, manufacturer, or licensing relationship; the saved records do not establish the relationship.

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

Which specific study supports this claim — and was it run on this exact formula?

Ask for the citation, how many people took part, the dose used, and whether the study tested this product or just one ingredient in it. Ingredient research is not product evidence.

2

Can you send a clear photo of the full Supplement Facts panel?

It’s the one part of the label required to state what’s inside and how much. A seller who won’t show it before purchase is asking for trust the label would have earned.

3

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.

4

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.

5

Were the endorsing professionals compensated, and what exactly did they review?

An endorsement can be genuine and still not mean the product was tested. Ask whether they reviewed the formula, the manufacturing, or only the marketing.

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

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.

What the listing promises — claim by claim

Why is this shown?
A listing’s promises are the reason people buy. Each one gets its own row: what was promised, what evidence would settle it, and what we could actually find. We never call a claim false — only whether proof proportionate to it exists on the public record.
ClaimStatusWhat we found
Clinical-evidence claim
“…Hygienist Recommended Oral Probiotic Brand+ Clinically proven to promote healthy gums & teeth* 30 MINT fla…”
No evidence located
We looked for: a named, citable clinical study of this product or formula
We found no named, citable study of this product or formula. The claim may rest on ingredient research rather than a trial of this product.
Professional-endorsement claim
“…elt in your mouth after brushing & flossing. #1 RECOMMENDED PROBIOTIC Healthy Gums & Teeth* #1 Dental Hy…”
Marketing credential
We looked for: who the professionals are, whether they were compensated, and what the endorsement covers
A professional endorsement is a marketing credential, not clinical evidence. Public sources don’t establish who was consulted, whether they were paid, or what specifically they reviewed.
Benefit claim
“…roblems and keep the mouth fresh & healthy.* PROMOTES HEALTHY GUMS & TEETH: Brushing & flossing ar…”
Not checked yet
We looked for: whether the ingredient doses on the label match the doses used in published research
Ingredient-level evidence for this formula isn’t in our knowledge base yet. Recorded as not checked yet — not as a negative.

“No evidence located” does not mean a claim is false — it means the seller has not put evidence proportionate to the claim on the public record, and we could not find any. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

Verifiability profile — 1 of 6 public signals

✓ Brand's own store found· Per-serving dose established — not published· UPC / GTIN published — not published· Supplement Facts visible in photos — not published· Found in NIH's label catalog (DSLD) — not published· Third-party lab named or registry-certified — not published

What this listing gives the public to check. Publishing these signals doesn't prove quality — but withholding them means claims can only be taken on faith.

Identity

LookCloser record IDlc-26cc84a8 (internal — no barcode published, which limits cross-checking)
BrandBioGaia
Source listing identifierB07JC27112
USPTO brand ownerBioGaia AB (aktiebolag (ab); SWEDEN) · OTHER · SWEDEN
Owner filed addressSWEDEN); 2900 Brannon Ave., St. Louis, MISSOURI 63139, UNITED STATES

From the label (photo-read)

Pack statementx 30 Lozenges
Badges printed on pack#1 RECOMMENDED PROBIOTIC

No Supplement Facts panel appears in the listing photos — the full per-ingredient table isn't shown to buyers before purchase. Recorded as a transparency gap, not a strike.

Claims printed on the packaging:

“#1 RECOMMENDED PROBIOTIC” · “Healthy Gums & Teeth*” · “#1 Dental Hygienist Recommended” · “Oral Probiotic Brand+” · “Clinically proven to promote healthy gums & teeth*” · “30 MINT flavored” · “PROBIOTIC SUPPLEM” · “These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.”

Read by a vision model from 8 listing photos — verbatim extraction; OCR errors possible. Spot a mistake? It will be corrected on review.

Where it sells

We found a brand storefront, but we could not match any price on it to this exact product when we checked.

Brand store biogaia.com: 18 supplement products (+5 merch items) — a single-category catalog.

Reference links for identification only — LookCloser has no affiliate relationships and earns nothing from any link on this page.

Ingredient science

No knowledge-base entry yet for this formula's active ingredients — entries are added as the KB grows. Absence of a science card is a coverage gap, not a judgment.

Record lc-26cc84a8 · built July 26, 2026 · lookcloser.ai · corrections@lookcloser.ai