One product, one panel, one record.
Align Probiotic Pro Formula (63 capsules) — label audit
The panel guarantees 1 x 10⁷ probiotic cells at the best-by date — one per cent of its own at-manufacture number, and one log below the only dose that beat placebo in P&G's own pivotal dose-ranging trial. The label's word for 1 x 10⁷ is "an effective level".
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
- Addendum — outside the founding denominators Torn down 2026-07-31, after the founding cohort of 27 was frozen. It sits outside every D27 denominator the site publishes.
- 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
100.0 out of 100
Rank 1 of the 154 products in this audit the rubric can score. This rank is shared with 18 other products — 19 products sit on 100.0 and are tied. They hold the position jointly; no tiebreaker is applied, because every tiebreaker available here would be a number the rubric deliberately refused to weigh, smuggled back in to make a list look tidier.
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 1 organism slot carries a printed strain designator. | 1 / 1 = 1.0000 | 0.2400 |
| Per-organism amount printed | 0.20 | 1 of 1 organism slot has an amount of its own; the rest are inside a blend total. | 1 / 1 = 1.0000 | 0.2000 |
| What the CFU count is measured against | 0.22 | Potency basis "both-endpoints": CFU figure printed yes, single basis stated yes, basis reaches expiry yes — 3 of 3. | 3 / 3 = 1.0000 | 0.2200 |
| Printed designators that lead to a human trial | 0.20 | 1 of 1 checked organism slot resolves 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 / 1 = 1.0000 | 0.2000 |
| Certification confirmed at the issuer’s own register | 0.14 | No certifier register has been queried for this product. Not checked is not the same as holds nothing. | Not answered | — excluded from the divisor, not counted as nought |
0.8600 — the last column added up — divided by 0.86, the weight this record could answer, is 1.0000. Multiplied by 100 and rounded to one decimal, that is the 100.0 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 | 1 x 10⁹ CFU when manufactured; 1 x 10⁷ probiotic cells until the "best by" date |
| What that count is measured against | Both endpoints printed |
| Strain designators | All organisms coded |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 1 — the full panel |
| Marketed as | Unisex |
Panel footnote, verbatim: "† Contains one billion (1 x 10⁹ CFU) probiotic cells when manufactured, and provides 1 x 10⁷ probiotic cells until the 'best by' date." The format is honest — both numbers, both labelled, and an at-expiry basis actually printed, which most of this category simply omits. The ratio is the story: a hundredfold guaranteed decay, not 30% and not 66%, but two orders of magnitude. It is dual-sourced. NIH's independent transcription of the same formula at another count, DSLD 278084, reads "Contains 1x10 9 (one billion) live bacteria/ CFU when manufactured, and provides an effective level of bacteria (1 x 10 7 CFU), until at least 'best by' date", and DSLD 179074 from 2018 reads the same. The identical footnote appears on the 14-count (DSLD 278088) and on the Extra Strength 21-count (DSLD 278089) — the latter carrying 17.5 mg of the same organism against 10 mg here, with the same 1 × 10⁹ to 1 × 10⁷ claim. "Extra Strength" buys more milligrams of blend, not more guaranteed CFU.
The panel’s own words on potency, verbatim.
The panel prints both a manufacture figure and an expiration figure, so the decline over shelf life is readable off the label itself.
Every organism on the panel carries a printed strain designator. Whether those designators lead anywhere is a separate question, answered below.
| Organism as printed | Designator as printed | Quantity as printed | What the designator resolves to | The query we ran |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum | 35624™ | 10 mg | Human RCT | "Bifidobacterium infantis 35624"[All Fields] → 38; "Bifidobacterium longum 35624"[All Fields] → 8; 35624[All Fields] AND probiotic[All Fields] → 47; ("Bifidobacterium infantis 35624" OR "Bifidobacterium longum 35624") AND randomized controlled trial[pt] → 8 (36089255, 27845337, 23842110, 23549409, 23426454, 22052061, 16863564, 15765388); the same AND "irritable bowel syndrome"[All Fields] → 19; AND (bloating OR flatulence) → 11; AND constipation → 5; AND ("prostate" OR "testosterone" OR "male"[MeSH]) → 14, screened, none a male-specific trial; "Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum 35624"[All Fields] → 0; "NCIMB 41003"[All Fields] → 0; NCIMB41003[All Fields] → 0 |
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.
- Photograph of the printed panel — 81nat5CQLqLhttps://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81nat5CQLqL._AC_SL1500_.jpg — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured The Supplement Facts image for the 63-count, recovered through the archive capture of the marketplace listing and transcribed verbatim. "Serving Size: 1 Capsule — Servings Per Container: 63; Amount Per Capsule; Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum 35624™† — 10 mg — ††", with footnote † reading "Contains one billion (1 x 10⁹ CFU) probiotic cells when manufactured, and provides 1 x 10⁷ probiotic cells until the 'best by' date." Other ingredients: microcrystalline cellulose, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose; less than 2% of magnesium stearate, caramel (color). Distributed by Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH 45202, per the panel.
- Internet Archive capture — 20260331210949 (opens in a new tab) captured The archive capture the panel and the price were recovered through, and the source of the "guaranteed to deliver an effective level of probiotics through the best by date" bullet, the "Probiotics for Women and Men" title, the ProVoice footnote, the 84-servings attribute error, and the A+ images 71lH26m34IL (2X concentrated), 71Rv9BRtZ9L (the 35634 misprint) and 81DJiGNbs0L (the "Bifodobacterium" misprint). Live Amazon returns a CAPTCHA page to automation.
- NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record — DSLD 278084 (opens in a new tab) captured NIH label record for the same formula at 28 count, UPC 0 37000 14343 7 — the independent, government transcription that dual-sources the footnote on this page. It reads "Contains 1x10 9 (one billion) live bacteria/ CFU when manufactured, and provides an effective level of bacteria (1 x 10 7 CFU), until at least 'best by' date", and transcribes the organism as "Bifidobacterium longum longum 35624". Its sibling records carry the same footnote at other counts: DSLD 278088 (14 ct), DSLD 278089 (Extra Strength, 21 ct, 17.5 mg of the same organism, identical CFU claim) and DSLD 179074 (28 ct, 2018 vintage, same UPC, and still recording "Bifantis" as an alternate name). One discrepancy that is not resolved: this record gives 4 mg of 35624 per capsule while the brand's current 28-count panel image gives 10 mg, with an identical CFU footnote in both.
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
$0.75 a day at the dose the label itself instructs.
- Price
- $46.99 USD
- What that buys
- 63-capsule bottle at $0.71 a count one-time, $44.64 on Subscribe & Save; serving is 1 capsule daily, 63 servings per container ($46.99 ÷ 63 = $0.7459, or $0.71 on subscription). Measured against what the label actually guarantees rather than what it contains when made, that is $74.59 per guaranteed billion CFU per day. Amazon's own attribute table on the same page reports "Total Servings Per Container 84" for a 63-capsule, one-per-day product — a structured-data error on the marketplace, not a label error, but it makes marketplace attributes unusable for comparison. A reseller listed the same 63-count at $110.49 (was $149.49), which is not a real market price. Live Amazon returns a CAPTCHA to automation, so this price is of-date, not current.
- Price checked
- — the source we read it from (opens in a new tab)
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.
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.
Compared against Align Women's Dual Action Probiotic (28 count). Diffed .
What the two panels differ by
- The women's panel adds a Feminine Health Probiotic Blend — Lactobacillus acidophilus La-14® plus Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus HN001™ — at 33 mg, with no split between the two organisms. Align Pro Formula panel image 81nat5CQLqL via Wayback 20260331210949 against Align Women's Dual Action panel image 8_00030772032565_Label_Facts.png on the brand's own CDN, both read 2026-07-31
- The women's panel adds Chaste Tree (Vitex-agnus castus L.) berry extract at 42 mg. Nothing is added on this side. The same two panels, read 2026-07-31
- The women's panel guarantees 6 × 10⁹ CFU at best-by as a blend total; this SKU guarantees 1 × 10⁷ — six hundred times less, from the same brand, printed in the same typeface. The same two panels, read 2026-07-31
- This SKU discloses its at-manufacture figure, 1 × 10⁹. The women's panel discloses no at-manufacture figure at all. Two different disclosure regimes on two panels from one brand. The same two panels, read 2026-07-31
What is identical across the pair
- Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum 35624™ at 10 mg on both panels
Every finding on this page, with the record behind it
Finding 1 guaranteed-at-expiry-potency-is-one-percent-of-the-at-manufacture-claim
The panel footnote reads "Contains one billion (1 x 10⁹ CFU) probiotic cells when manufactured, and provides 1 x 10⁷ probiotic cells until the 'best by' date." That is a hundredfold guaranteed decay, and 1 × 10⁷ is one log below the only dose that beat placebo in the brand's own pivotal dose-ranging trial. PMID 16863564 — Whorwell PJ et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101(7):1581-90, n=362, in the encapsulated form this product uses — randomised patients to "1 x 10(6), 1 x 10(8), or 1 x 10(10) cfu/mL for 4 wk" and found that "B. infantis 35624 at a dose of 1 x 10(8) cfu was significantly superior to placebo and all other bifidobacterium doses", while "Two other doses of probiotic (1 x 10(6) and 1 x 10(10)) were not significantly different from placebo". Lay the product against that: the guaranteed 1 × 10⁷ was never tested and sits one log above the arm that failed; the at-manufacture 1 × 10⁹ was never tested either. The trial's own closing sentence asks manufacturers not to do this — "The lack of benefits observed with the other dosage levels of the probiotic highlight the need for clinical data in the final dosage form and dose of probiotic before these products should be used in practice."
The record: PMID 16863564, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00734.x, quoted verbatim; panel image 81nat5CQLqL via Wayback 20260331210949; DSLD 278084, all read 2026-07-31 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 2 an-effective-level-is-the-labels-own-term-for-one-times-ten-to-the-seventh
The Amazon bullet reads "2 MONTH SUPPLY: ProFormula comes in an easy-to-swallow capsule and is guaranteed to deliver an effective level of probiotics through the best by date." Technically true and materially uninformative: "an effective level" is P&G's own label wording for 1 × 10⁷, as NIH's transcription of the same footnote shows verbatim. It is the same fact with the number deleted.
The record: Wayback 20260331210949 of amazon.com/dp/B08B7BWHJ8, bullet quoted verbatim, against DSLD 278084 "provides an effective level of bacteria (1 x 10 7 CFU)"
Finding 3 seventy-four-dollars-per-guaranteed-billion-cfu-per-day
$46.99 for 63 capsules at one a day is $0.75 a day, and against what the label guarantees rather than what it contains at manufacture, that is $74.59 per guaranteed billion CFU per day — roughly 620 times the cost-efficiency of another product torn down in the same batch, on guaranteed numbers.
The record: Wayback 20260331210949 price against the panel footnote's 1 x 10⁷ guarantee
Finding 4 two-x-concentrated-formula-measures-milligrams-not-cfu
A+ image 71lH26m34IL reads "NEW 2X CONCENTRATED FORMULA^ … Before 20mg → After 10mg … ^Vs. Previous Align Pro Formula." What doubled is concentration in milligrams of blend; the CFU claim is unchanged at 1 × 10⁹ and 1 × 10⁷. The mg figure is a fill weight, not a potency. A shopper reading "2X" as "twice the probiotic" is reading it wrong, and nothing on the pack prevents that.
The record: A+ image 71lH26m34IL via Wayback 20260331210949, quoted verbatim, against the unchanged panel footnote
Finding 5 extra-strength-carries-the-identical-cfu-claim
DSLD 278089, the Extra Strength 21-count, carries 17.5 mg of the same organism against 10 mg here and the same 1 × 10⁹ to 1 × 10⁷ footnote. Extra milligrams, same guaranteed CFU.
The record: DSLD 278089 against DSLD 278084 and the 63-count panel image, all read 2026-07-31
Finding 6 the-brands-own-artwork-misprints-the-strain-number-and-the-genus
Two errors, both on marketing assets a buyer actually reads rather than on the regulated panel. A+ image 71Rv9BRtZ9L, headlined "UNIQUE PROBIOTIC, PROTECTIVE CAPSULE", reads verbatim "Unique probiotic strain B. longum 35634 developed by gastroenterologists and backed by 20 years of research" — 35634, a digit transposition, confirmed by cropping and upscaling the original 1500 × 1500 asset. A+ image 81DJiGNbs0L, the "CHOOSE THE BEST CAPSULE FOR YOU" comparison chart, prints "Bifodobacterium 35624™" in all three product columns. This is not pedantry: a strain designator with a transposed digit is a different string, and this brand's entire differentiation rests on the proposition that the exact string matters — on the same page that says "there's more to probiotics than just more CFUs".
The record: A+ images 71Rv9BRtZ9L and 81DJiGNbs0L, served on the live listing and recovered via Wayback 20260331210949, both read 2026-07-31
Finding 7 a-p-and-g-authored-rct-of-this-capsule-reported-no-impact-on-ibs-symptoms
PMID 23549409 — Charbonneau D, Gibb RD, Quigley EM, Gut Microbes 2013;4(3):201-11, first-author affiliation "Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH, USA" — ran the encapsulated form in 39 IBS patients on supplement, 37 on placebo and 41 healthy adults on supplement for 8 weeks. Verbatim result: "No impact on IBS symptoms was observed." Also verbatim: "Fecal levels of the probiotic declined and approached baseline once dosing ceased, documenting that colonization is transient." A manufacturer-run trial of its own capsule reporting a null symptom result is never mentioned in the marketing.
The record: PMID 23549409, title, affiliation and results read verbatim via NCBI E-utilities 2026-07-31
Finding 8 ncimb-41003-the-actual-deposit-appears-nowhere
The strain's real, public deposit is NCIMB 41003, lodged 13 January 1999 per patent EP2176299B1. It appears nowhere on the label, nowhere on the brand's own education page about the strain, and nowhere in PubMed — "NCIMB 41003" returns 0 records and the unhyphenated spelling returns 0 as well. The public-looking number on the pack, 35624, is a trademark the brand controls.
The record: EP2176299B1 (PrecisionBiotics Group Ltd / Procter & Gamble Co, priority 2007-05-04); "NCIMB 41003"[All Fields] → 0 and NCIMB41003[All Fields] → 0, both run 2026-07-31
Finding 9 number-one-doctor-recommended-rests-on-the-provoice-paid-survey
"Recommended by Gastroenterologists two times more than any other probiotic brand, Align is the #1 doctor and gastroenterologist recommended probiotic brand‡". The ‡ resolves to a ProVoice survey — a paid market-research instrument measuring self-reported recommendation, not clinical or comparative efficacy, with a denominator restricted to physicians who already recommend some probiotic brand.
The record: Wayback 20260331210949 of amazon.com/dp/B08B7BWHJ8 and the brand-site ProVoice footnotes, both quoted verbatim 2026-07-31
Finding 10 supplement-facts-recoverable-only-from-an-archived-marketplace-jpeg
There is no NIH record for the 63-count and no text panel on any page selling it. The Supplement Facts exist only inside Amazon image 81nat5CQLqL, recovered through an archive capture. A screen reader, a price-comparison bot or an LLM shopping agent cannot read what is in this bottle — and every fact needed to catch the dose problem is on that panel.
The record: Amazon image 81nat5CQLqL via Wayback 20260331210949; four DSLD queries returning no 63-count record, all 2026-07-31
Finding 11 the-marketplace-attribute-table-reports-84-servings-for-a-63-capsule-product
Amazon's own attribute table on the same page reports "Total Servings Per Container 84" against a 63-capsule, one-capsule-a-day product whose panel says 63 servings. A structured-data error on the marketplace rather than a label error, and the kind of noise that makes marketplace attributes unusable for comparison.
The record: Wayback 20260331210949 of amazon.com/dp/B08B7BWHJ8, attribute table against the panel image 81nat5CQLqL
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.
- Third-party certification
- No certifier register has been queried for this product. An empty certification list on this page means not checked — it does not mean the product holds nothing.
- The product's UPC
- 0 37000 60953 7 appears in a reseller product page and an eBay listing title independently, and was not confirmed against any P&G source. Probable, not verified, and not published as this product's UPC.
- An NIH label record for the 63-count
- Four queries returned none: "Align Pro Formula" gave 30 hits whose Align records are the 14, 21 and 28-count capsules, Chewables and Kids gummies; "Pro Formula probiotic" gave 30 hits with no Align product at all; "Align" gave 30 hits, the same set; "Bifidobacterium 35624" gave 30 hits, the same set. The formula is in the database at other counts and this pack size is not. Since the footnote is identical across all of them, DSLD 278084 is used as a valid independent source for the panel and the 63-count's own absence is recorded as a completeness note rather than a red flag.
- What the milligram figure on these labels means
- DSLD 278084, transcribed in 2022, records 4 mg of 35624 per capsule for the 28-count; the brand's current 28-count panel image records 10 mg — with an identical CFU footnote in both. Either the fill weight changed without a CFU change, or one transcription is stale. Both are reported and only the safe conclusion is drawn: the milligram figure on these labels is not a potency figure. The Extra Strength 21-count makes the same point from the other direction, carrying 17.5 mg of the same organism under the same 1 × 10⁹ to 1 × 10⁷ claim.
- Any certification register
- usp.org 403, nsf.org 403, nongmoproject.org 404. No NSF, USP, Informed Choice, Non-GMO Project or GFCO mark is claimed on the pack or the archived page, so no specific claim is outstanding, and the absence of a listing was not proven either. The pack's claims are Gluten Free, Vegetarian, No Refrigeration Required, Guaranteed Potency and "#1 Doctor Recommended‡" — of which "Guaranteed Potency" is technically satisfied by the footnote, since the guaranteed potency is 1 × 10⁷. A reseller listing adds "soy-free, alcohol-free, non-GMO, vegan", which is reseller copy rather than brand copy and is not verified.
- The dose that the brand's own trials identified as effective, anywhere on this label
- Neither of the product's two stated CFU figures is the dose that worked in PMID 16863564. The at-manufacture figure sits one log above it; the guaranteed at-expiry figure sits one log below it, and one log above the arm that failed. Nothing on the pack or the page acknowledges the gap.
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.
This is what full disclosure looks like when the product still does not deliver the dose. Every fact needed to catch the problem is printed on the label. Nobody reads it, because the label is a JPEG.
The strain line is the cleanest in its batch. One organism. No blend. No “and other cultures”. Full subspecies-level nomenclature in current taxonomy: Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum 35624™, 10 mg. The evidence base behind it is genuinely strong — 8 RCT-tagged records, 19 on IBS, and a 2026 meta-analysis naming 35624 first among the strains with demonstrated efficacy on IBS symptoms. The CFU basis is actually printed, which most of this category simply omits.
Then read the footnote. “Contains one billion (1 x 10⁹ CFU) probiotic cells when manufactured, and provides 1 x 10⁷ probiotic cells until the ‘best by’ date.” That is a hundredfold guaranteed decay. Not 30%. Not 66%. Two orders of magnitude.
Now lay it against the trial that made the strain famous. PMID 16863564 — Whorwell 2006, n=362, in the encapsulated form this product uses — is P&G’s own pivotal dose-ranging study. It ran three arms:
- 1 × 10⁶ — not different from placebo
- 1 × 10⁸ — “significantly superior to placebo and all other bifidobacterium doses”
- 1 × 10¹⁰ — not different from placebo
This product’s guaranteed figure is 1 × 10⁷: never tested, and one log below the only arm that worked — one log above the arm that failed. Its at-manufacture figure is 1 × 10⁹: also never tested. Neither of the product’s two stated numbers is the dose that beat placebo. The trial’s own closing sentence asks manufacturers not to do exactly this: “the need for clinical data in the final dosage form and dose of probiotic before these products should be used in practice.”
Marketing’s rendering of that footnote is “guaranteed to deliver an effective level of probiotics through the best by date” — where “an effective level” is the label’s own term for 1 × 10⁷. It is the same fact with the number deleted, and it is the sentence pattern worth learning to distrust.
Three smaller things. “2X Concentrated Formula” measures milligrams of fill, not CFU; the potency claim did not change. The brand’s own A+ artwork misprints its own strain number as 35634 and its own genus as “Bifodobacterium”, on the same page arguing that the exact string is what you are paying for. And a P&G-authored trial of this very capsule (PMID 23549409) reported “No impact on IBS symptoms was observed” — never mentioned in the marketing.
The problem is not that Align picked a bad strain. It is that the product does not guarantee the dose that made the strain worth picking.