LookCloser record · lc-3546b159 · methodology v0.1
Dose claim exceeds the serving's physical weight 1 documented contradiction — the evidence is below; the conclusion is yours. Evidence availability only; this does not establish safety or effectiveness.
2 of 6 public trust signals found · 3 product-specific concerns · $0.83 per serving
The dosage claimed for these gummies doesn't fit within the physical weight of a single serving. This means the stated amount of creatine may not be present in each gummy as described. We also couldn't verify the claim of "third-party testing" because no lab was named. You can check the "Supplement Facts" panel on the product bottle and compare the listed serving size and milligrams to the claims made on the packaging.
Confirmed evidence
These checks found support in the public record. They confirm specific facts, not the product as a whole.
Nothing in this listing contradicts how these ingredients were studied (creatine monohydrate). For example, creatine monohydrate: studied as a daily supplement — the effect comes from muscle saturation over weeks, not from timing a dose before a workout. Sources: NIH ODS — Exercise & Athletic Performance fact sheet, ISSN position stand on creatine (PubMed).
Documented concerns
These are documented contradictions or claims that need more evidence. They are separate from missing data.
Claimed 5,000.0 mg vs. serving mass ≈5,000 mg from listing net weight ÷ servings — 100% of total mass. A gummy is typically ≥60% non-active matrix; as stated, the claim can't physically fit.
label claims 2500 mg/serving — below the range commonly used in research (3–5 g/day maintenance across trials (short loading phases use more)). A lower dose is not necessarily useless — but it is not the amount the research used. Sources: NIH ODS — Exercise & Athletic Performance fact sheet, ISSN position stand on creatine (PubMed).
The listing claims third-party testing without naming any lab or certifier, so the claim can't be verified as stated.
Unresolved public record
We looked for these signals but could not settle them from public sources. A gap is not a strike.
Marketplace rating 4.6★ across 394 ratings. Authenticity not analysed: burst, purge and stockout patterns need price/review history.
At 1.0 serving(s) a day to reach the low end of the studied range (3000–5000 mg), this product runs roughly $25 per month. A price observation, not a recommendation.
Creatine is stable as dry powder but degrades toward inactive creatinine in moist, acidic media like gummies — the documented cause of widespread failures in published testing.
What to ask and check
Ask the brand or seller
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.
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.
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.
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.
Why is the creatine monohydrate amount below the dose used in published research?
There can be good answers — a more bioavailable form, a different intended use. Ask for the reasoning and any data behind 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
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.
The full report is free no signup · no paywall
Every check, claim, label read, dose comparison, registry search, source, and date. Free to read, download, and share.
Want to know if this changes?
Supplements are repeat purchases. Formulas get reformulated, lots get recalled, brands finally publish the lab report they were asked for. We can watch this record and email you only if something changes.
Your address is used for this one purpose. No newsletter, no marketing, no third parties, no tracking pixels — and every email carries a one-click unsubscribe that needs no login. We store the address, the record, and the date. Nothing else.
Record built July 21, 2026. Sources: source listing (live fetch) · brand's own storefront · published independent assays (NOW Foods 2024, SuppCo 2025; brand-level) · PubMed · openFDA · Open Food Facts · NIH DSLD · LookCloser ingredient KB. Evidence-tiered statements of documented fact; conclusions belong to the reader. Beta: this report isn’t yet independently archived — treat it as a well-sourced starting point, not a certificate. Evidence-based corrections welcome.