One product, one panel, one record.
Besenify Men's Probiotics, 500 Billion CFU, 12 Strains, 60 ct (Amazon B0CH9PW1JC) — label audit
The only legible copy of this product's Supplement Facts found anywhere is a photograph a customer took of the carton and uploaded to the reviews carousel. The seller publishes no panel, and the product has no record in the US government's own label database under six query forms. Everything below rests on that one customer photograph.
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
- No NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record is on file for this product in this teardown.
- 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.
- What did not survive verification
- Part of this page was refuted or could not be reproduced Every number on this page comes from a single customer's photograph of the carton, transcribed by eye. The seller publishes no Supplement Facts panel, no DSLD record exists under six query forms, and no second source exists against which the transcription could be checked. Three further things are specifically not quotable from this record: the product has no price at all, so no cost per day may be stated or estimated; the PRD 07/2023 / EXP 06/2026 stamp is on one customer's 2023 unit and must not be read as evidence that current stock is expired; and while the listing carries no FDA disclaimer, the carton's disclaimer text was not legible in any photograph, so no claim is made about the carton. The identity of the organism printed "Lactobacillus lactis" is also unresolved — see the caveat on that finding.
The Label Verifiability Score for this product
31.8 out of 100
Rank 116 of the 154 products in this audit the rubric can score. This rank is shared with 4 other products — 5 products sit on 31.8 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 | 0 of 12 organism slots carry a printed strain designator. | 0 / 12 = 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| Per-organism amount printed | 0.20 | 12 of 12 organism slots have an amount of its own; the rest are inside a blend total. | 12 / 12 = 1.0000 | 0.2000 |
| What the CFU count is measured against | 0.22 | Potency basis "none-stated": 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 | 0 of 12 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. | 0 / 12 = 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| 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 |
0.273333 — the last column added up — divided by 0.86, the weight this record could answer, is 0.3178. Multiplied by 100 and rounded to one decimal, that is the 31.8 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 | 500 Billion CFU per 2-capsule serving |
| What that count is measured against | No basis stated |
| Strain designators | None — species only |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 12 — the full panel |
| Marketed as | Marketed to men |
A CFU number appears with no temporal basis of any kind. A count with no basis is not a quantity; there is no date at which it is claimed to be true.
The panel names species only, with no strain designator anywhere. A species name is not a claim: the trials in this field are of strains, and a species can contain thousands.
| Organism as printed | Designator as printed | Quantity as printed | What the designator resolves to | The query we ran |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lactobacillus acidophilus | — none printed | 60 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium lactis | — none printed | 40 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus rhamnosus | — none printed | 10 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus casei | — none printed | 10 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis | — none printed | 80 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus plantarum | — none printed | 40 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium longum | — none printed | 30 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium infantis | — none printed | 30 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus paracasei | — none printed | 50 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus lactis | — none printed | 50 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium bifidum | — none printed | 50 Billion CFU | No designator printed | — |
| Bifidobacterium breve | — none printed | 50 Billion CFU | 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.
- Photograph of the printed panel — 71DjsE2D2LL.jpghttps://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DjsE2D2LL.jpg — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured A customer-uploaded review photograph of the carton — the only legible copy of this product's Supplement Facts found anywhere. The seller publishes no panel. Transcribed by eye, with no second source to check it against. The CFU arithmetic in the transcription is internally consistent: 60+40+10+10+80+40+30+30+50+50+50+50 = 500 billion.
- Dated capture of the brand’s own page — amazon-B0CH9PW1JC-2026-07-31https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CH9PW1JC — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured Live listing, HTTP 200, 2.7 MB. ASIN B0CH9PW1JC, MPN S-BES-N-HYY-1P, Best Sellers Rank #21,050 Health & Household / #218 Probiotic Nutritional Supplements, 4.6 stars from 1,472 ratings, Amazon's Choice — and zero purchasable offers. Source for the 2x per-capsule contradiction, the "clinically proven" claim, the organ-blend copy and the missing FDA disclaimer.
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, 0 organism slots carry 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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| No certification is claimed by this product | Not checked | 31 July 2026 |
No certification is claimed by this product
We have not queried this register for this product. It does not mean the product holds nothing.
No register was queried because nothing is claimed. No NSF, no USP, no Informed Choice, no Non-GMO Project, no named third-party laboratory and no cGMP claim appears anywhere on the listing or the carton. The only quality-adjacent descriptors are "Non-GMO Vegetable Cellulose (Capsule)", which is an ingredient descriptor rather than a certification, and Amazon's "Diet Type: Gluten Free" attribute, which is seller-entered metadata. Claiming no certification is more honest than claiming an unverifiable one, and it is scored that way here.
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 twelve-strains-contains-two-duplicate-organisms
Bifidobacterium lactis (40 billion, Lung Care Blend) and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis (80 billion, Liver Care Blend) are the same organism listed twice — B. lactis is not a separate species, it is the subspecies B. animalis subsp. lactis. Bifidobacterium infantis (30 billion) and Bifidobacterium longum (30 billion) are also the same species listed twice; B. infantis was reclassified as B. longum subsp. infantis. Both the strain count and the CFU total are inflated by double-listing. Strip the duplicates and the honest figure is 380 billion CFU across 10 taxa — still one of the largest doses on any label in this audit, but 24% below the number on the front of the bottle.
The record: Carton photograph 71DjsE2D2LL.jpg, transcribed 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DjsE2D2LL.jpg — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 2 lactobacillus-lactis-is-not-a-valid-species-name
50 Billion CFU — 10% of the headline number — is assigned to "Lactobacillus lactis", which this teardown records as not a valid species name, reading the intended organism as presumably Lactococcus lactis, a different genus.
The record: Carton photograph 71DjsE2D2LL.jpg, transcribed 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DjsE2D2LL.jpg — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 3 listing-overstates-its-own-label-by-two-times
The label says 500 Billion CFU per 2-capsule serving. The listing bullet says, verbatim: "High-potency probiotic offer 60 capsules in a shelf-stable bottle and 500 Billion CFUs in each capsule." Per capsule it is 250 billion, not 500 billion. Both statements appear on the same page.
The record: Amazon B0CH9PW1JC bullet copy versus carton photograph 71DjsE2D2LL.jpg, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CH9PW1JC — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 4 cfu-basis-wholly-unstated-on-a-thirty-five-month-shelf-life
No CFU basis appears anywhere — not "at manufacture", not "at expiry", not "at time of expiration", and no potency-guarantee language of any kind on the panel, the bottle or the listing copy. The unit photographed carries PRD 07/2023 and EXP 06/2026: an approximately 35-month shelf life across which nothing is guaranteed at any point.
The record: Carton photograph 71DjsE2D2LL.jpg and full listing text, 2026-07-31
Finding 5 zero-strain-designators-with-clinically-proven-asserted-anyway
No ATCC, DSM, CNCM, NCIMB, CECT or proprietary code appears anywhere on the panel or the listing, across all twelve organisms. The listing asserts "clinically proven 12 probiotic stains" [sic] — efficacy grammar of the strongest available kind, attached to organisms identified only to species, two of which are duplicates and one of which is misnamed.
The record: Amazon B0CH9PW1JC bullet copy and carton photograph, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CH9PW1JC — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 6 prostate-care-blend-with-no-prostate-evidence
The male-specificity rests on a blend heading, three botanicals (cranberry 200 mg, turmeric 200 mg, goji 100 mg) and the word MEN'S on the bottle. No human RCT was found supporting a prostate outcome for L. paracasei at any dose or strain. The nearest trial, PMID 31527377, tested cranberry + goji + an undisclosed probiotic (Bifiprost®) with both arms also receiving 320 mg Serenoa repens — which this product does not contain — in 120 men with diagnosed NIH type II chronic bacterial prostatitis, on a disease-recurrence endpoint. It cannot substantiate a prostate blend sold to healthy men.
The record: PMID 31527377 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 7 the-on-point-human-evidence-for-these-two-species-is-null
McMullen MH et al., J Altern Complement Med 2006, PMID 17109580 — 31 men, randomised, placebo-controlled, two months of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium longum, measuring testosterone, DHT, androstanediol glucuronide, androstenedione, DHEAS, SHBG and leptin. Verbatim conclusion: the intervention "did not significantly alter equol excretion, plasma hormone, or leptin concentrations." Both species are in this product, at 60 billion and 30 billion CFU. This is the cleanest available human evidence against male-hormone marketing built on these two organisms.
The record: PMID 17109580 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 8 organ-named-blend-headings-and-diarrhea-health-with-no-fda-disclaimer-on-the-listing
"Lung Care Blend", "Liver Care Blend", "Prostate Care Blend" and "Immune Care Blend" are printed panel headings, not marketing copy. Amazon's structured Product Benefits attribute reads "Digestive Health, Gut Health, Diarrhea Health, Bloating Health, Stomach Health, Immune Health" — naming a symptom, not a structure or function. And no FDA structure/function disclaimer appears anywhere on the listing: not in the bullets, not in the A+ content, not in the item details.
The record: Carton photograph 71DjsE2D2LL.jpg and Amazon B0CH9PW1JC attributes and A+ content, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CH9PW1JC — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 9 supplement-facts-published-only-by-a-customer
The seller publishes no Supplement Facts panel. The only legible copy located anywhere is a photograph a customer took of the carton and uploaded to the reviews carousel. The product also has no DSLD record under six query forms. A panel that exists only inside a review photograph disappears the moment the review does.
The record: Panel source: m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DjsE2D2LL.jpg, a customer review photograph, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DjsE2D2LL.jpg — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 10 amazons-choice-badge-on-a-listing-with-zero-purchasable-offers
An Amazon's Choice badge and a 4.6-star, 1,472-rating social-proof stack are displayed on a product that cannot currently be bought at any listed price. Amazon's own explainer renders on the same page: "'No featured offers available' means no offers currently meet all of these expectations." The badge and the review count persist independently of purchasability, which is exactly the failure mode that makes marketplace listings unreliable as evidence that a product currently exists as sold.
The record: Amazon B0CH9PW1JC buybox and amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0CH9PW1JC (0 offers), 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CH9PW1JC — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
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.
- No certification is claimed by this product status
- No register was queried because nothing is claimed. No NSF, no USP, no Informed Choice, no Non-GMO Project, no named third-party laboratory and no cGMP claim appears anywhere on the listing or the carton. The only quality-adjacent descriptors are "Non-GMO Vegetable Cellulose (Capsule)", which is an ingredient descriptor rather than a certification, and Amazon's "Diet Type: Gluten Free" attribute, which is seller-entered metadata. Claiming no certification is more honest than claiming an unverifiable one, and it is scored that way here.
- A US retail price, and therefore the cost per day
- No price exists. The listing shows "No featured offers available" and "See 0 options with no featured offers"; the only priceAmount values anywhere in the 2.7 MB page belong to competitor products in the carousel. No Wayback snapshot of the ASIN exists (archive.org/wayback/available returned archived_snapshots: {}), so no historical price could be recovered either. Cost per day is unverifiable and is not estimated.
- A Supplement Facts panel published by the seller
- The seller publishes none. The only legible copy found anywhere is a customer-uploaded review photograph of the carton (m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DjsE2D2LL.jpg), transcribed by eye. There is no second source against which to check that transcription.
- Any record of this product in DSLD
- Six query forms, all zero or non-matching: the three declared UPCs 755833454253, 755833046083 and 755833023176 (0 each), "Besenify" (0), "besenify" lowercase (0), and "Besenify Probiotic" (7,262 fuzzy hits, none bearing the brand name). The product is invisible to the US government's own label database.
- Any price at all
- The listing carries zero purchasable offers and no Wayback snapshot exists for the ASIN, so no current or historical price could be recovered. Cost per day is unverifiable and is not estimated.
- Whether the carton carries the FDA structure/function disclaimer
- The disclaimer is absent from the listing — not in the bullets, not in the A+ content, not in the item details. The carton shows an asterisk against the botanical rows, but the disclaimer text was not legible in any photograph. The publishable statement is that the listing omits it. It cannot be said that the carton does.
- Which organism the row printed "Lactobacillus lactis" refers to
- This teardown records the name as invalid and reads the intended organism as presumably Lactococcus lactis, a different genus. A separate teardown in this corpus, of a near-identical panel on a different ASIN, put the same printed name to LPSN and got back Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. lactis, with the explicit finding that it is NOT Lactococcus lactis. The two readings are not reconciled, and neither is published here as the answer. What both agree on, and what is safe to publish, is that 50 billion CFU — 10% of the headline number — is assigned to a name a reader cannot resolve to a defined organism.
- What the "PRD 07/2023 / EXP 06/2026" stamp says about current stock
- Nothing. That stamp is on one customer's unit from a 2023 production run and is not evidence about what is on sale now. It is usable only as evidence that the brand runs an approximately 35-month shelf life while guaranteeing potency at no defined point within it. It must not be published as "this product is sold expired".
- The strain composition of Bifiprost®, the comparator in the one on-topic prostatitis trial
- Not stated in the PMID 31527377 abstract, and full text was not pulled. Even the comparator's strain identity is unestablished, so no dose or strain match can be asserted in either direction.
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.
The finding that frames every other finding on this page: the seller does not publish this product’s Supplement Facts. The only legible copy located anywhere is a photograph a customer took of the carton and uploaded to the reviews carousel. There is no DSLD record — six query forms, including all three declared UPCs. There is no brand website. There is no PubMed footprint. Everything below was read off one stranger’s photograph, and nothing exists to check it against.
Read on that basis, the panel contains three hard defects.
Bifidobacterium lactis (40 billion) and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis (80 billion) are the same organism, listed twice under two different blend headings. Bifidobacterium infantis (30 billion) and Bifidobacterium longum (30 billion) are the same species, listed twice. And “Lactobacillus lactis” at 50 billion CFU is a name that does not resolve to a defined organism.
So “12 Strains” is at best 10 distinct taxa, one of them misnamed. Strip the duplicates and the honest number is 380 billion CFU across 10 taxa — still one of the largest doses on any label in this audit, but 24% below the number on the front of the bottle. Zero of the twelve carry a strain designator of any kind, and the listing claims “clinically proven 12 probiotic stains” [sic] anyway.
Then the label and its own advert disagree. The panel says 500 billion CFU per 2-capsule serving; the bullet says “500 Billion CFUs in each capsule”. That is a 2× overstatement, on the same page. And across a 35-month shelf life, nothing is guaranteed at any point: no “at manufacture”, no “at expiry”, no potency language at all.
The male-specific content is a blend heading called “Prostate Care Blend”, three botanicals, and the word MEN’S. No human RCT supports a prostate outcome for its one organism at any dose or strain. Worse for the premise, the two most-studied species on this panel — L. acidophilus and B. longum — are the exact pair in PMID 17109580: 31 men, randomised, placebo-controlled, two months, and no significant change in testosterone, DHT, DHEAS, SHBG or anything else measured.
One last thing, and it is about marketplaces rather than about this brand. The listing carries an Amazon’s Choice badge and 1,472 ratings at 4.6 stars — and zero purchasable offers. The badge and the social proof persist independently of whether the product can be bought at all.