One product, one panel, one record.
1MD Nutrition Complete Probiotics Platinum — label audit
Every efficacy percentage on the product page traces to a compensated customer survey, not a trial. Five separately numbered footnotes, all 2021, all of repeat customers, all compensated — presented under the headings "What to expect" and "Real, Powerful Results".
This page is an audit of a label. It records what this product’s panel discloses, what of that could be checked against a primary record, and what could not. The score below ranks this product on that disclosure and on nothing else.
The record this page rests on
- NIH label record
- Label read on
- The most recent dated artefact behind this page. Labels change; this is how old our reading of it is.
- Cohort
- D₂₇ founding teardown One of the 27 products taken apart at label level. That cohort is frozen and dated, so the audit’s published percentages cannot silently move.
- How deep this went
- Full forensic teardown Panel transcribed, every strain designator queried, every certification chased to its issuer’s own register, and the literature behind each marketing claim opened and read.
The Label Verifiability Score for this product
13.2 out of 100
Rank 144 of the 154 products in this audit the rubric can score.
The score measures one thing: how much of what you are buying this company tells you, and how much of that survives being checked against a source that is not the company. It does not measure whether the product works — this site holds no efficacy data of its own, and 0 of 294 organism slots in the founding cohort carry a strain with a human randomised trial for any male-specific outcome, so nobody in this category has evidence that would support a ranking by effect.
Computed over 86% of the rubric by weight — the share of the five questions below this record could answer. The remaining question is unanswered, and unanswered is not nought: it leaves the divisor rather than dragging the score down. That share travels with the number and is never dropped — this score over 86% of the weight and the same score over all of it are different claims.
| Component | Weight | What was counted, and where | Fraction | Weight × fraction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strain identity printed on the panel | 0.24 | 1 of 11 organism slots carry a printed strain designator. | 1 / 11 = 0.0909 | 0.021818 |
| Per-organism amount printed | 0.20 | 0 of 11 organism slots have an amount of its own; the rest are inside a blend total. | 0 / 11 = 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| What the CFU count is measured against | 0.22 | Potency basis "through-expiry-off-label-only": CFU figure printed yes, single basis stated no, basis reaches expiry no — 1 of 3. | 1 / 3 = 0.3333 | 0.073333 |
| Printed designators that lead to a human trial | 0.20 | 1 of 11 checked organism slots resolve to at least one human randomised trial under the designator exactly as printed. This counts whether the identity leads to a trial, never what the trial found. | 1 / 11 = 0.0909 | 0.018182 |
| Certification confirmed at the issuer’s own register | 0.14 | Every certification on this record is brand-asserted with the register unreachable, or not yet queried. An unreachable register is a fact about the verification infrastructure, not about this brand, so it may not move its position. | Not answered | — excluded from the divisor, not counted as nought |
0.113333 — the last column added up — divided by 0.86, the weight this record could answer, is 0.1318. Multiplied by 100 and rounded to one decimal, that is the 13.2 above.
See this product’s row in the full ranking, alongside the other 153 scored products, or read what each of the five components asks and how to check it .
What this label discloses
Everything in this table is what the product itself states — on the printed panel, on the brand’s own page, or in the label record the manufacturer filed. Nothing in it is checked yet; checking is the next section.
| Disclosure | As recorded |
|---|---|
| CFU as printed | 51 Billion CFU (Complete Probiotic Blend, 308 mg) |
| What that count is measured against | Through expiry — off-label only |
| Strain designators | Some organisms coded |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 11 — the full panel |
| Marketed as | Unisex |
Nothing on the label. Across all three label generations, every statement field DSLD records — Formula re: Contains, Formulation re: Other, Storage, Suggested Use — contains no "at time of manufacture", no "at expiration" and no potency-guarantee language of any kind. The through-expiry claim exists only on the website FAQ: "The product is designed with guaranteed potency through the expiration date, and the website does not list refrigeration as a requirement for maintaining its 51 billion CFU count.""
The panel’s own words on potency, verbatim.
The brand page promises a through-expiry count. The printed panel does not. Only the panel is a label claim.
Some organisms carry a printed strain designator and some are named by species only.
| Organism as printed | Designator as printed | Quantity as printed | What the designator resolves to | The query we ran |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LactoSpore | LactoSpore | — not stated separately | Human RCT | — |
| Lactobacillus acidophilus | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium animalis lactis | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium longum | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium bifidum | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus plantarum | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus bulgaricus | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus casei | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus salivarius | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus gasseri | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus rhamnosus | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
What of that is verifiable
A disclosure is verifiable when a reader can open a record that neither we nor the brand controls and see the same thing. Below is every dated artefact this page rests on. What is absent from this list is not verified, however reasonable it sounds.
- NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record — DSLD 309806 (opens in a new tab) captured Entered 2024-03-22, on-market. The current label: Complete Probiotic Blend 308 mg / 51 billion CFU across eleven organisms, NutraFlora 50 mg, and no potency-basis statement in any field.
- NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record — DSLD 274796 (opens in a new tab) captured Entered 2022-11-22. Carries the ten house codes, and is coded for "Women (not pregnant or lactating)".
- NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record — DSLD 246726 (opens in a new tab) captured Entered 2021-03-25. Carries the ten house codes and NutraFlora at 100 mg.
How many of its strains have a human trial for what it is sold for
Across the frozen founding cohort, 0 of 294 organism slots (0.0%) carry an organism with a human randomised controlled trial for any male-specific outcome. Not for this product — for all 27 of the founding teardowns, taken together. That is the number to hold against any men’s probiotic, including this one.
Two further founding-cohort figures for context: only 43 of 294 organism slots carry a strain with any human RCT at all under the exact code printed on the label, and only 2 of 27 products have a published human trial of the finished formula — the thing actually in the bottle. All three figures divide by the frozen cohort of 27 teardowns and 294 organism slots, never by every teardown on this site.
For this product specifically, 1 organism slot carries a strain with a human RCT under the exact designator printed on the label.
A word on what a designator has to clear before it counts here. The organism must be named with the exact strain code that appears in the trial, the trial must be in humans, and the code must return that trial when a reader searches it. A species name does not qualify: the trials in this field are of strains, and a species contains thousands of them.
What it costs per day
$1.63 a day at the dose the label itself instructs.
- Price
- $49.00 USD
- What that buys
- 30-capsule bottle (30 servings, 1 capsule per serving)
- Price checked
- — the source we read it fromhttps://1md.org/products/complete-probiotics-platinum — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
What certification it holds, checked at the issuer’s own register
A badge on a bottle is a claim like any other. Every row below was checked — or not checked — at the certifier’s own public register, never at the badge. Across the frozen founding cohort, 2 of 27 products hold a certification we could confirm at the issuer — a founding-cohort figure, not a count over every teardown on this site.
| Programme | Status at the issuer | Checked |
|---|---|---|
| None claimed | Not checked | not checked |
None claimed
We have not queried this register for this product. It does not mean the product holds nothing.
A search of the full product page text for NSF, USP, Informed, "third party", "third-party", "tested" and "certificate of analysis" returns nothing. What the page does claim is "Manufactured in the USA from globally-sourced ingredients" and a GMP seal — cGMP compliance being a legal baseline under 21 CFR 111, not a third-party certification. Recording the absence is the finding: this is the most expensive product in its batch, at $1.63 to $1.83 a day, with no independent verification offered.
How it differs from the same brand’s women’s version
Across the fourteen same-brand men’s-versus-women’s label diffs run inside the frozen founding cohort, zero men’s or default formulas contain a probiotic strain, identified by designator, that was selected on male-specific evidence. In eight of the fourteen the sex-specific differentiator is a botanical or a mineral, and in five of the fourteen the women’s SKU is better-specified, cheaper, or both — “better-specified” meaning the panel that discloses more, never the panel with more in it. The rule behind each of those counts, and all fourteen pairs classified against it , are published in full. Diffs run on teardowns added since sit outside this fourteen, and outside the sentence above.
This brand sells no women’s counterpart to this product, so there is no diff to run.
Every finding on this page, with the record behind it
Finding 1 efficacy-percentages-from-compensated-customer-surveys
"Month 3: 73% of users feel less gas". "Month 3: 4 out of 5 users notice they are more regular". "Continued Use: 82% of users report significantly less bloating". Every one of these traces to a footnote reading, verbatim: "Based on a 2021 survey of [n] Complete Probiotics Platinum repeat customers. Customers were compensated for their survey participation." Five separately numbered surveys — 312, 259, 234, 241 and "over 230" respondents. Three compounding biases, none disclosed: survivor bias from surveying only repeat customers, payment bias from compensation by the brand being rated, and no control, blinding, pre-registration or placebo arm at all. The page presents them under "What to expect" and "Real, Powerful Results / What Verified Complete Probiotics Platinum Users Reported" — framing a compensated satisfaction poll as a prospective efficacy expectation.
The record: 1md.org product page, every footnote verified verbatim live 2026-07-30 — open ithttps://1md.org/products/complete-probiotics-platinum — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 2 house-codes-printed-then-deleted
The 2021 and 2022 government label records for this product carry, as ingredient rows, Lactobacillus acidophilus L61A, Bifidobacterium lactis B42L, Bifidobacterium longum B12L, Bifidobacterium bifidum B66B, Lactobacillus plantarum L23P, Lactobacillus bulgaricus L88B, Lactobacillus casei L30C, Lactobacillus salivarius L10S, Lactobacillus gasseri L22G and Lactobacillus rhamnosus L08R. Every one follows the pattern [genus initial][two digits][species initial], every one returns zero PubMed records, and to a shopper they are indistinguishable from real culture-collection accessions. The 2024 label carries the same ten organisms as bare species names — the codes are gone. Disclosure went backwards either way: first a code that led nowhere, then no code at all.
The record: DSLD 246726 · DSLD 274796 · DSLD 309806 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 3 cfu-basis-absent-from-the-label-asserted-on-the-web
No potency-basis language of any kind appears in any statement field of any of the three label generations. The website asserts a through-expiry guarantee twice — once in the FAQ and once from the brand's own gastroenterologist: "It has 11 different strains and guarantees 51 billion live cultures per capsule.""
The record: DSLD 246726, 274796 and 309806 versus 1md.org FAQ, all checked 2026-07-30
Finding 4 proprietary-blend-hides-the-only-evidenced-strain
MTCC 5856's randomised trials used 2 billion CFU/day of that strain alone. The label reveals only a pooled 51 billion across eleven organisms. There is no way to determine whether a capsule delivers the trial dose, a tenth of it, or ten times it.
The record: DSLD 309806 · PMID 26922379 · PMID 29997457 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 5 colonisation-claims
"designed to safely colonize the intestines", "helping them thrive and multiply in the gut", and the product's full name, "Microbiota Restoration Protocol". The field's own consensus body states that probiotics typically do not take up residence in the gut and may not evoke any detectable change in the microbes normally present.
The record: 1md.org product page verbatim versus the ISAPP consumer infographic
Finding 6 black-friday-sale-on-30-july
The page served a "Black Friday Sale" banner when fetched on 30 July 2026 — four months out of season. A permanent-discount pattern means the MSRP of $54.00, against which every price is discounted, is not a price anything is actually sold at.
The record: 1md.org product page, verified live 2026-07-30
Finding 7 formula-drift-in-the-prebiotic
NutraFlora was 100 mg on the 2021 label, absent from the Supplement Facts panel altogether on the 2022 label (moved to Other Ingredients as fructo-oligosaccharides), and 50 mg on the 2024 label — halved. The CFU count and strain count stayed constant at 51 billion and eleven throughout.
The record: DSLD 246726 · DSLD 274796 · DSLD 309806
Finding 8 unverifiable-social-proof
"2667 bottles sold this week" as a live counter, "Physician-recommended to rebalance and rejuvenate the natural microbiome" where the physician is 1MD's own named formulator, and "I consider this to be the most complete probiotic on the market today" from the same brand-affiliated physician.
The record: 1md.org product page, all verified verbatim live 2026-07-30
Finding 9 most-expensive-in-batch-with-least-verification
$1.63 a day one-time, $1.83 with shipping under the $80 threshold. No third-party testing is claimed or held.
The record: 1md.org product page and Shopify JSON, verified 2026-07-30
What we could not verify
Every gap below is published rather than deleted. Most are derived automatically from the empty fields in this page’s own record, so a gap cannot be hidden by leaving a box blank.
- None claimed status
- A search of the full product page text for NSF, USP, Informed, "third party", "third-party", "tested" and "certificate of analysis" returns nothing. What the page does claim is "Manufactured in the USA from globally-sourced ingredients" and a GMP seal — cGMP compliance being a legal baseline under 21 CFR 111, not a third-party certification. Recording the absence is the finding: this is the most expensive product in its batch, at $1.63 to $1.83 a day, with no independent verification offered.
- Any per-strain CFU allocation
- None. Fifty-one billion CFU across eleven organisms in 308 mg, so the only ingredient in the product with a citable human randomised trial is dosed invisibly and the trial cannot be used to predict what the product does.
- Whether the through-expiry guarantee is real
- It appears twice on the website and nowhere on any of three label generations. A through-expiry guarantee is the single most consequential potency disclosure a probiotic can make, and it is being made only in marketing copy, where it is not subject to labelling rules.
- The survey methodology behind every percentage on the page
- Five 2021 surveys of 312, 259, 234, 241 and "over 230" repeat customers, all compensated. No control group, no blinding, no pre-registration, no placebo arm — and surveying only repeat customers excludes everyone who tried it once and stopped.
How to check every line of this page yourself
Nothing on this page requires trusting us. Every claim above resolves to a record you can open:
- Open the NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record linked at the top of this page. It is the label the manufacturer filed, not our transcription of it.
- Compare the CFU line and the suggested-use line against the disclosure table above. If they disagree with us, we are wrong and we want to know.
- Take any strain designator from the panel and run the query printed beside it. The query is published precisely so you can get a different answer than we did.
- Divide the price by the number of days the label’s own dose instructions make the container last. That arithmetic is the whole of the cost-per-day row.
- Search the certifier’s own register for this product, not for the brand. A company can participate in a programme without this product being on its list.
Read the footnote markers on this page and follow every one of them.
“Month 3: 73% of users feel less gas^” “Month 3: 4 out of 5 users notice they are more regular^” “Continued Use: 82% of users report significantly less bloating^”
The dagger, the double-dagger, the section mark, the pilcrow and the caret all resolve to the same sentence with a different number in it:
“†Based on a 2021 survey of 312 Complete Probiotics Platinum® repeat customers. Customers were compensated for their survey participation.”
Five separately numbered surveys — 312, 259, 234, 241 and “over 230” respondents — all from 2021, all of repeat customers, all compensated by the brand being rated. There is no control group, no blinding, no pre-registration and no placebo arm. Surveying only repeat customers excludes everyone who tried the product once and stopped. And the page presents the results under the headings “What to expect” and “Real, Powerful Results”, which converts a satisfaction poll into a prospective efficacy promise.
The label has its own history. The 2021 and 2022 government records printed ten strain designators: L. acidophilus L61A, B. lactis B42L, B. longum B12L, L. plantarum L23P, L. rhamnosus L08R and five more. Every one follows the pattern [genus initial][two digits][species initial]. Every one returns zero PubMed records. To a shopper they are indistinguishable from real culture-collection accessions. On the 2024 label they are simply gone, leaving ten of the eleven organisms species-only. Disclosure went backwards in both directions at once.
One organism does have a real designator and a real literature — LactoSpore, Sabinsa’s trademark for Bacillus coagulans MTCC 5856, with seven randomised-trial records. Two caveats travel with it. Both pivotal trials are authored by Sabinsa and Sami Labs scientists, so the strain’s entire trial base is manufacturer-run. And they used 2 billion CFU/day of that strain alone, while this label discloses one pooled 51 billion across eleven organisms. The only ingredient here with a citable human trial is dosed invisibly. That is the practical cost of a proprietary blend, stated precisely.
In fairness, on the thing that is usually worst in this category: the subscription is aggressive but transparent. Cancellation is self-service, the terms are stated plainly, there is a 90-day money-back guarantee and free returns. This is not a subscription trap. The problem is the evidence base, not the billing.