DHA · 850 mg per serving
Evidence →The same-name panel row declares 850 mg per serving, matching the 850 mg listing claim.
Exact product checked · barcode not publishedNutricost · observed 2026-07-24Package says manufactured for: nutricost · 351 E 1750 N, Vineyard, UT 84059
Quick read · Nutricost
Nutricost Omega 3 Fish Oil
Marketing check: 1 checks out, 2 remain partly or independently unverified.
Rebuilt from public sources on July 24, 2026 · evidence availability is not a safety or effectiveness verdict.
120softgels · 40 servings
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.
✓Checks out1
?Couldn’t verify independently2
GMP or manufacturing-quality language
Evidence →Facility-level claims can be accurate and still say nothing about this product’s contents. No registration document was located.
“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 · 1 useful finding
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 findingResearch 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.
Dose vs research
2.05 g declared
The panel declares 2,050 mg EPA + DHA per serving, above one studied 300–1800 mg/day context. The fish-oil concentrate total is not substituted for EPA + DHA.
Declared dose sits within the cited study context
Buying options
Where you can check or buy it
Open related seller leads before buying, then confirm the flavor, count, and serving size. Their prices are visible, but LookCloser does not claim savings until the pages share a UPC/GTIN.
Amazon
Submitted listingNo price confirmed
No current offer was available via Keepa on 2026-07-24.
View on Amazon ↗Brand website
Official storefrontNo price confirmed
Open the brand storefront to search manually.
No defensible same-product page was retained from the brand catalog.
Check brand website ↗iHerb
Not confirmedNo price confirmed
No matching product page was confirmed in the current record. Search results cannot be attached as this product until the UPC/GTIN matches.
Search iHerb ↗Target
Not confirmedNo price confirmed
No matching product page was confirmed in the current record. Search results cannot be attached as this product until the UPC/GTIN matches.
Search Target ↗Walmart
Not confirmedNo price confirmed
No matching product page was confirmed in the current record. Search results cannot be attached as this product until the UPC/GTIN matches.
Search Walmart ↗Prices and stock are point-in-time observations. Related pages are never used as product evidence. No affiliate links; LookCloser earns nothing from these sellers.
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 caution02
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.
Dose is higher than studies used
label claims 2500 mg/serving — above the range commonly used in research (one randomized dose-response trial used 300–1,800 mg/day of EPA + DHA; omega-3 study doses vary widely). Sources: NIH ODS — Omega-3 Fatty Acids fact sheet, PubMed dose-response trial.
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.
“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.
EPA + DHA dose is above one studied range
The panel declares 2,050 mg EPA + DHA per serving (3 Softgels). One randomized dose-response trial used 300–1,800 mg/day; omega-3 studies vary widely. This is research context, not a recommendation or safety verdict.
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.
Research context is available for the listed ingredients
Published sources describe how omega-3 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 — Omega-3 Fatty Acids fact sheet, PubMed dose-response trial.
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 0 on 2026-02-14 to 0 on 2026-02-14 (net +0). 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
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
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.
3
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
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.