One product, one panel, one record.
Jarrow Formulas Ideal Bowel Support® LP299V®, 10 Billion CFU, 30 Veggie Caps — label audit
This is the only label in the project that gets four things right at once — a full strain designator, the current post-2020 genus, a machine-readable panel with its footnotes actually defined, and a dose that matches the pivotal trial's dose exactly. The one thing that does not check out is the IPRO seal: the issuer's own register does not list this SKU, and it does list eight other Jarrow products.
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 this site publishes and changes none of them.
- 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
86.0 out of 100
Rank 23 of the 154 products in this audit the rubric can score. This rank is shared with 3 other products — 4 products sit on 86.0 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 the whole rubric: this record answers all five questions below, so nothing is renormalised away and the divisor is the full 1.00. That share travels with every score on this site and is never dropped — a score over part of the rubric’s 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 "through-expiry": 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 | 1 claimed certification queried at the issuer’s register and not listed there. | 0 / 1 = 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
0.8600 — the last column added up — divided by 1.00, the weight this record could answer, is 0.8600. Multiplied by 100 and rounded to one decimal, that is the 86.0 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 | 43.5 mg (10 Billion CFU) |
| What that count is measured against | Through expiry |
| Strain designators | All organisms coded |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 1 — the full panel |
| Marketed as | Unisex |
The panel footnote, identical on the page and in the DSLD transcription: "Minimum 10 billion viable cells at time of consumption, under recommended storage conditions and within Best Used Before date." Read it clause by clause, because it does more work than "at expiry" does: "Minimum" is a floor rather than a typical value; "viable cells" is a live count rather than a total; "at time of consumption" is any point at which the consumer swallows it rather than a single endpoint; "within Best Used Before date" is bounded by a printed date; and "under recommended storage conditions" is the standard, and fairly stated, condition. Storage is given with an actual threshold: "No refrigeration necessary... Avoid storage at temperature above 77°F (25°C). Refrigeration, however extends shelf life."
The panel’s own words on potency, verbatim.
The panel guarantees the count through the expiration or best-by date. This is the only basis that is falsifiable by a reader holding the bottle.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lactiplantibacillus plantarum | 299v | 43.5 mg (10 Billion CFU) | Human RCT | ("Lactobacillus plantarum 299v" OR "Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 299v" OR "LP299V" OR "DSM 9843") AND "Randomized Controlled Trial"[Publication Type] |
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 307621 (opens in a new tab) captured NIH's transcription of the physical label, on-market. UPC cross-check: DSLD 7 90011 03028 7 equals the Shopify variant barcode 790011030287 — a match, so the panel reported here is tied to the exact SKU on sale. Source for the IPRO seal statement, the minimum-viable-cells footnote, the Probi AB trademark statement and the min/max daily servings.
- Dated capture of the brand’s own page — jarrow-ideal-bowel-support-2026-07-31https://jarrow.com/products/ideal-bowel-support-lp299v-10-billion-cfu-30-veggie-caps — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured The live brand page, HTTP 200 to a plain request, plus its Shopify product JSON. The Supplement Facts are real text in the page HTML — serving size, milligrams, CFU, footnote and Other Ingredients are all in the DOM, so a screen reader, a price-comparison bot and a regulator's crawler can all read them. Source for the price, the dangling superscript, the "1 Month Supply" headline, the ConsumerLab footnote and the claim set.
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
$0.83 a day at the dose the label itself instructs.
- Price
- $24.99 USD
- What that buys
- 30-capsule bottle, one capsule daily (the label permits one to two times daily)
- Price checked
- — the source we read it fromhttps://jarrow.com/products/ideal-bowel-support-lp299v-10-billion-cfu-30-veggie-caps — 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 |
|---|---|---|
| IPRO™ (International Probiotic Standards, SGS Nutrasource) | Absent from register | 31 July 2026 |
| ConsumerLab (2021 Survey of Supplement Users) | Not checked | 31 July 2026 |
| Label formulation claims: Non-GMO, Gluten free, Dairy free, Vegan | Not checked | 31 July 2026 |
IPRO™ (International Probiotic Standards, SGS Nutrasource)
The register was queried and this product is not listed on it.
The DSLD label transcription lists a "Seals/Symbols: IPRO" on this product. The issuer's register is public and queryable, and it does not list this SKU. Positive control first, to prove the method works: GetFilteredBrands?forCertification=&byName=Jarrow returns total=1, "Jarrow Formulas Inc." (brand id JRRW); the same query with byName=Jarro returns the same record; and forCertification=IGEN&byName=Jarrow returns total=1. Then the IPRO queries: forCertification=IPRO&byName=Jarrow returns total=0; the full IPRO brand list returns 8 brands and Jarrow is not among them; the full IPRO product list returns 24 products and no Jarrow product; GetFilteredProducts?byName=Ideal Bowel returns 0; byName=LP299V returns 0. In the brand-card markup the register returns, Jarrow's IGEN badge renders style="display:block" and its IPRO badge renders style="display:none". Jarrow's own register page lists exactly 8 certified products — B-Right, DIM + CDG, Jarro-Dophilus EPS 10 Billion CFU, Jarro-Dophilus Ultra 50 Billion CFU, Neuro Optimizer, Red Yeast Rice, Ultra BoneUp and Vitamin D3 2500IU — and Ideal Bowel Support is not one of them, though two sibling probiotics are. Scope trap from the issuer's own description: "IPRO™ tests for microbes, heavy metal count, disintegration for capsules and total probiotic count." Strain identity is not on that list.
ConsumerLab (2021 Survey of Supplement Users)
We have not queried this register for this product. It does not mean the product holds nothing.
No register was queried because this is not a certification. The footer footnote is accurate and credit is due for it: "†Ratings based on results of the 2021 ConsumerLab.com Survey of Supplement Users. More information at www.consumerlab.com/survey." The product's internal Shopify tag is literally ConsumerLab2021. The footnote correctly identifies this as a user survey rather than a lab test; a shopper who sees the name and infers laboratory verification is making an inference the footnote does not support. ConsumerLab's review bodies are paywalled, so nothing here is an absence claim about ConsumerLab's testing.
Label formulation claims: Non-GMO, Gluten free, Dairy free, Vegan
We have not queried this register for this product. It does not mean the product holds nothing.
Verified as plain formulation claims rather than certifications. Jarrow does not claim GFCO certification, and the GFCO register accordingly returns nothing for the brand or for UPC 790011030287. That absence is expected and is not a defect — it is what it looks like when a brand does not claim a mark it does not hold.
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.
Every finding on this page, with the record behind it
Finding 1 the-ipro-seal-is-not-in-the-issuers-current-register-for-this-sku
The label carries an IPRO seal. SGS Nutrasource's public register does not list this product under it. Five negative queries, run against a working positive control: the brand is found under IGEN (total=1) but returns total=0 under IPRO; the full IPRO brand list is 8 brands and Jarrow is not among them; the full IPRO product list is 24 products and no Jarrow product is in it; and searches for "Ideal Bowel" and for "LP299V" both return 0. The register's own brand-card markup renders Jarrow's IGEN badge visible and its IPRO badge hidden. Jarrow's register page lists eight certified products, two of them sibling probiotics, and this is not one of them.
The record: SGS Nutrasource register endpoints GetFilteredBrands and GetFilteredProducts at certifications.nutrasource.ca, five negative queries plus three positive controls, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://certifications.nutrasource.ca/ — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 2 a-citation-marker-with-no-citation-behind-it
The claim that LP299V supports "gut barrier integrity by promoting mucus production and junctional proteins" carries a superscript (1). No footnote text for it exists anywhere on the page — every other instance of "(1)" on the page is a navigation counter. A citation marker with no citation is worse than no marker at all, because it advertises evidence that is never produced.
The record: jarrow.com/products/ideal-bowel-support-lp299v-10-billion-cfu-30-veggie-caps, fetched HTTP 200 on 2026-07-31; page searched for the footnote text — open ithttps://jarrow.com/products/ideal-bowel-support-lp299v-10-billion-cfu-30-veggie-caps — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 3 supports-regularity-rests-on-a-non-significant-trend-in-forty-people
"Supports regularity" appears on the label at the same strength as the bloating and discomfort claims, which are far better supported. The evidence behind it is Niedzielin 2001, which reports "a trend towards normalization of stools frequency ... P = 0.17" in forty patients — not significant. Ducrotté 2012 measured stool frequency as a secondary endpoint. The bloating and pain claims rest on a 214-patient trial at this exact dose; the regularity claim does not, and the label presents them as equals.
The record: PMID 11711768 (Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2001;13(10):1143-7, n=40, P=0.17) against the label's claim set — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 4 the-gut-barrier-claim-is-mechanistic-evidence-in-a-clinical-benefits-list
The barrier claim is written in explicitly mechanistic language — "promoting mucus production and junctional proteins" — which is accurate to its evidence class, and that deserves credit. The evidence class is animal and in-vitro: mucin transcription in goblet cells, cited in Ducrotté's own introduction, and permeability protection in Sprague-Dawley rats, where the authors note that "L. plantarum 299v itself did not change the intestinal passage of mannitol" — it blocked an E. coli challenge rather than improving a baseline. It sits in a benefits list next to clinical claims, and a consumer will read it as one.
The record: PMID 11911334 (Dig Dis Sci 2002;47(3):511-6, rats, Ussing chambers) and the mucin work cited in PMID 22912552 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 5 one-month-supply-holds-only-at-the-minimum-of-a-one-to-two-a-day-range
The page headline reads "10 Billion CFU / 30 Veggie Caps / 1 Month Supply" while the Suggested Use permits one capsule one to two times a day. At the upper end the bottle lasts fifteen days and costs $1.67 a day. This is a category habit rather than a Jarrow quirk — the Metagenics SKU in the same batch does the same thing — but it is on this page too.
The record: jarrow.com product page headline against its own Suggested Use, and DSLD 307621 which records minDailyServings 1 and maxDailyServings 2 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 6 the-pivotal-trial-is-funded-by-the-strain-owner-named-on-this-label
Ducrotté 2012 states its funding verbatim: "Supported by Rosell-Lallemand Institute, France and Probi AB, Sweden." Probi AB owns the strain and is named on this label ("LP299V and Probi are registered trademarks of Probi AB"), and Rosell-Lallemand supplied the study product. Retrieved from the full text, not inferred. It is not a reason to discard the trial. It is a reason to print the funder next to the result every time the result is used.
The record: PMID 22912552 (World J Gastroenterol 2012;18(30):4012-8), funding statement quoted verbatim from the article footnotes — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 7 the-acg-guideline-suggests-against-the-class-for-global-ibs-symptoms
Any page presenting LP299V as settled science has to survive one sentence from the American College of Gastroenterology's 2021 IBS guideline: "We suggest against probiotics for the treatment of global IBS symptoms. Conditional recommendation; very low level of evidence." Read it precisely — it is about global IBS symptoms, it is conditional, and it rests on very low quality evidence, so it is not a finding that LP299V does nothing for bloating. The honest framing is that the largest trial of this strain is positive on subjective symptom scores, is industry-funded, and the ACG still does not recommend the class.
The record: Lacy BE, Pimentel M, Brenner DM, Chey WD, Keefer LA, Long MD, Moshiree B. ACG Clinical Guideline, Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Am J Gastroenterol 2021
Finding 8 if-the-science-isnt-there-the-product-doesnt-ship-is-unfalsifiable
The science page carries a brand-level promise: "Every Jarrow formula begins with peer-reviewed research, not what's trending on social media... If the science isn't there, the product doesn't ship." It sits on a site whose own footer describes its ConsumerLab reference as a user survey and whose IPRO seal is not in the issuer's current register. It is not a false claim. It is an unfalsifiable one. Two smaller inconsistencies sit beside it: "Following facts, not fads, since 1977" on the science page against "an innovator of consumer probiotics since 1986" on the label — both may be true, of different things, and they are left unreconciled.
The record: jarrow.com/pages/science against the label statements transcribed in DSLD 307621, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://jarrow.com/pages/science — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 9 no-male-outcome-evidence-exists-for-this-strain-and-the-brand-claims-none
Searched across the fetched page text for men, male, prostate, testosterone and man: 0 hits. Two independent PubMed formulations for a male outcome on this designator both return zero. Jarrow's own taxonomy files this product under "Digestive & Feminine Health"; its sex-specific probiotic is Fem-Dophilus®; there is no men's counterpart in the navigation. Third instance of the same asymmetry in this batch — a brand builds a women's probiotic and does not build a men's one.
The record: Word-boundary search of the fetched jarrow.com page text (0 hits) plus two PubMed formulations returning 0, run 2026-07-31
Finding 10 panel-typo-and-a-grammatical-error-on-the-label-itself
The panel uses a single dagger next to the amount and defines a double dagger — a one-character footnote mismatch on an otherwise complete footnote block. The label's own claim text reads "The benefits of L. plantarum 299v has been observed in studies pertaining to intestinal health", and the grammatical error is reproduced in the DSLD transcription, which means it is on the physical label. This is the level of nitpick that only becomes available once a label has got everything larger right.
The record: DSLD 307621 transcription and the jarrow.com panel, both 2026-07-31 — open it (opens in a new tab)
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.
- ConsumerLab (2021 Survey of Supplement Users) status
- No register was queried because this is not a certification. The footer footnote is accurate and credit is due for it: "†Ratings based on results of the 2021 ConsumerLab.com Survey of Supplement Users. More information at www.consumerlab.com/survey." The product's internal Shopify tag is literally ConsumerLab2021. The footnote correctly identifies this as a user survey rather than a lab test; a shopper who sees the name and infers laboratory verification is making an inference the footnote does not support. ConsumerLab's review bodies are paywalled, so nothing here is an absence claim about ConsumerLab's testing.
- Label formulation claims: Non-GMO, Gluten free, Dairy free, Vegan status
- Verified as plain formulation claims rather than certifications. Jarrow does not claim GFCO certification, and the GFCO register accordingly returns nothing for the brand or for UPC 790011030287. That absence is expected and is not a defect — it is what it looks like when a brand does not claim a mark it does not hold.
- A men’s-versus-women’s label diff
- The same brand’s women’s SKU has not been compared against this panel.
- A men's-versus-women's panel diff for this brand
- It cannot be run, because only one side exists. Jarrow's own site taxonomy files this product under "Digestive & Feminine Health"; the brand's sex-specific probiotic is Fem-Dophilus®, which surfaces repeatedly in this page's own cross-sell rails; and there is no men's counterpart anywhere in the navigation. The Fem-Dophilus panel was not pulled this pass, so no diff is published here — but the diff this site normally runs has no men's side to run it against, and that absence is the finding.
- Whether ConsumerLab has tested this product
- In the ConsumerLab pages captured for this project neither this product nor the Metagenics SKUs in the same batch appear, but ConsumerLab's review bodies are paywalled. Nothing here is an absence claim about ConsumerLab's testing.
- Whether the IPRO listing lapsed or is scoped per SKU
- The register is reachable and returns a positive record for the brand under a different programme, which makes this stronger than "unverifiable" — but a 2020 SGS Nutrasource announcement of Jarrow joining the IPRO programme still exists, so the defensible reading is a lapsed or per-SKU-scoped listing rather than a mark that was never held. What is established is that the seal on the label is not currently backed by the issuer's public record for this product.
- Funding and author conflicts for two of the supporting LP299V trials
- Funding for Niedzielin 2001 (PMID 11711768) and Krammer 2021 (PMID 33556972) was not retrieved and is recorded as unverified. Funding for the pivotal Ducrotté 2012 trial was retrieved from the full text and is quoted in the findings below.
- Compensation or conflicts for the named Scientific Advisory Board
- jarrow.com/pages/science names a board with real credentials, including two genuine microbiome scientists — Kimberly Capone, PhD and Joseph Petrosino, PhD — plus Emily Ho PhD, Luca Tiano PhD, James Brooks PhD and four sleep-medicine physicians. No compensation or conflict-of-interest disclosure for any board member was found on the page. Naming a real board is a meaningful step up from "developed with doctors" with no doctors named; the disclosure that would complete it is missing.
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.
Across everything this audit has opened, this is the label that gets the most right at once.
One organism. A full designator — 299v — with a public deposit behind it, DSM 9843. The current post-2020 genus, Lactiplantibacillus, which nothing else in this audit uses and which the other brand selling the identical organism does not. A Supplement Facts panel that exists as real text in the page HTML rather than as a JPEG, with its footnotes actually defined. And the strongest CFU guarantee wording located anywhere in the project:
“Minimum 10 billion viable cells at time of consumption, under recommended storage conditions and within Best Used Before date.”
Take that apart clause by clause and it outperforms “at expiry” at every one. Minimum, not typical. Viable cells, not total count. At time of consumption, not at a single endpoint. Within Best Used Before date, bounded by something printed on the bottle. Use it as the benchmark other labels are measured against.
Then the dose. Ducrotté 2012 dosed 10 billion CFU a day in 214 IBS patients. Krammer 2021 confirmed the same convention in 221. This capsule delivers 10 billion CFU a day. Across four batches of teardowns this is the first time a product’s stated dose has matched its cited trial’s dose exactly — and it costs $0.83 a day to hit it here, against $1.90 a day at Metagenics for twice the dose of the same strain.
Two things must be said next to all of that, because they are what this site is for.
The first is the seal. The label carries an IPRO mark. The issuer’s own register — SGS Nutrasource, public and queryable — does not list this product under it. Five negative queries, run against a working positive control: the register finds Jarrow Formulas Inc. under IGEN, lists eight Jarrow products including two sibling probiotics, and returns nothing for this one. In the register’s own markup, the IGEN badge renders visible and the IPRO badge renders hidden. Say it exactly: the seal on the label is not currently backed by the issuer’s public record for this product — not that Jarrow does not hold IPRO. A 2020 announcement of the brand joining the programme still exists, which makes a lapsed or per-SKU listing the defensible reading. And note what IPRO covers even where it applies: “microbes, heavy metal count, disintegration for capsules and total probiotic count.” Not strain identity. Jarrow names the strain anyway; the seal was never the reason to believe it.
The second is the evidence behind the trial. Ducrotté 2012 is industry-funded by the strain owner named on this very label — “Supported by Rosell-Lallemand Institute, France and Probi AB, Sweden” — its endpoints are subjective scores, it ran four weeks in two Indian centres, and the ACG’s 2021 IBS guideline still “suggests against probiotics for the treatment of global IBS symptoms.” That is not a reason to discard the trial. It is the sentence any page selling this strain has to survive.
None of this is a men’s product. Searched across the page for men|male|prostate|testosterone|man:
0 hits. Jarrow’s own taxonomy files it under “Digestive & Feminine Health”, its sex-specific
probiotic is Fem-Dophilus®, and there is no men’s counterpart in the navigation to diff against.
Third brand in this batch, third women’s probiotic, third absent men’s one.