One product, one panel, one record.
Omni-Biotic Stress Release — label audit
Nine organisms, every one of them printed with a real strain code — and one aggregate 7.5 billion CFU across all nine, with no per-strain allocation and no basis for the number. Full identity, zero allocation: the same opacity as a proprietary blend, arrived at from the opposite direction.
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 Audited 2026-07-31, outside the frozen founding cohort of 27 and outside every D27 denominator.
- How deep this went
- Label audit — the lighter pass What the label says, what basis it gives for its CFU number, whether the strains are coded, whether a government label record exists — checked and published. No full claim inventory was written for this SKU. It is a real result, and it is a shallower one than the teardowns above it, which is why the page says so before you weigh it against them.
- What did not survive verification
- Part of this page was refuted or could not be reproduced The evidence chain on this page does not close, and nothing on either side of it is quotable. The product page presents three studies as "Clinical studies … using the final formulation of Omni-Biotic Stress Release." The only one that names a product names "OMNi-BiOTiC® Stress Repair", while the brand's own FAQ gives this SKU's European name as "SR 9"; the equivalence is asserted nowhere and could not be established, so this page publishes neither "same product" nor "different product". A third cited item — "CLINICAL STUDY #3 — Alzheimer's: Intestinal microbiome provides evidence of disease, Published 2022" — carries no author, journal or DOI, could not be identified, and has nothing attributed to it. The label facts here are solid and independently transcribed from the brand's own panel photograph; the claim that those facts have clinical trials behind them is the part that did not survive.
The Label Verifiability Score for this product
47.5 out of 100
Rank 98 of the 154 products in this audit the rubric can score. This rank is shared with 1 other product — 2 products sit on 47.5 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 66% of the rubric by weight — the share of the five questions below this record could answer. The remaining 2 questions are unanswered, and unanswered is not nought: they leave the divisor rather than dragging the score down. That share travels with the number and is never dropped — this score over 66% 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 | 9 of 9 organism slots carry a printed strain designator. | 9 / 9 = 1.0000 | 0.2400 |
| Per-organism amount printed | 0.20 | 0 of 9 organism slots have an amount of its own; the rest are inside a blend total. | 0 / 9 = 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| 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 | No designator on this panel has been searched yet. | Not answered | — excluded from the divisor, not counted as nought |
| 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 |
0.313333 — the last column added up — divided by 0.66, the weight this record could answer, is 0.4747. Multiplied by 100 and rounded to one decimal, that is the 47.5 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 | 7.5 Billion CFU (Probiotic blend, 58 mg) |
| What that count is measured against | No basis stated |
| Strain designators | All organisms coded |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 9 — the full panel |
| Marketed as | Unisex |
There is nothing to quote. The panel reads "Probiotic blend 58 mg (7.5 Billion CFU) †" with no temporal qualifier of any kind. The nearest thing the brand offers is in its FAQ rather than on the label — that the product "is shelf stable through the expiration date at room temperature" and that shelf life is 12 to 18 months. That is a stability statement about the product, not a guarantee that 7.5 billion cells are there at the end of it, and it is not treated as one here.
The panel’s own words on potency, verbatim.
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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lactobacillus casei | W56 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Lactococcus lactis | W19 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Lactobacillus acidophilus | W22 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Bifidobacterium lactis | W52 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Lactobacillus paracasei | W20 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Lactobacillus plantarum | W62 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Bifidobacterium lactis | W51 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Bifidobacterium bifidum | W23 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
| Lactobacillus salivarius | W24 | — not stated separately | Not yet checked | — |
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 — omnibiotic-stress-release-side-panelhttps://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0567/5057/1655/files/stress-release-side.jpg — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured The brand's own label photograph, transcribed by reading the image; panel text is not present as HTML text on the product page. "Serving Size: 1 sachet (3 g) · Servings per container: 28 · Calories 10 · Sodium 20 mg (<1%) · Total carbohydrates 2 g (<1%); Probiotic blend 58 mg (7.5 Billion CFU) †" with nine nested organisms — Lactobacillus casei W56, Lactococcus lactis W19, Lactobacillus acidophilus W22, Bifidobacterium lactis W52, Lactobacillus paracasei W20, Lactobacillus plantarum W62, Bifidobacterium lactis W51, Bifidobacterium bifidum W23, Lactobacillus salivarius W24. Other ingredients: non-GMO corn starch, maltodextrin, inulin, potassium chloride, plant protein (rice), magnesium sulfate, fructo-oligosaccharides (FOS), amylase, manganese sulfate.
- Dated capture of the brand’s own page — omnibioticlife-stress-release-2026-07-31https://omnibioticlife.com/products/omni-biotic-stress-release-probiotic — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured Fetched directly, HTTP 200, no bot-blocking. SKU OBSR; manufactured in the Netherlands for AllergoSan USA, 181 Westchester Ave, Port Chester NY 10573; developed by Institut AllergoSan, Austria; European name per the brand's own FAQ, "Omni-Biotic SR 9". Source of the $68.00 price, the three study cards, the "83% versus 7%" and "#1 in Europe" claims, the AB 10 copy-paste error in the dosing instructions, and the rendered "Liquid error (snippets/price line 95): divided by 0" where the unit price belongs. The catalogue check omnibioticlife.com/products.json returned 26 SKUs with no gendered titles.
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.
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
$2.43 a day at the dose the label itself instructs.
- Price
- $68.00 USD
- What that buys
- 28 sachets, net weight 3.2 oz / 90 g, 1 sachet (3 g) daily, 28 servings ($68.00 ÷ 28 = $2.4286). Cost per billion CFU per day, $0.32.
- Price checked
- — the source we read it fromhttps://omnibioticlife.com/products/omni-biotic-stress-release-probiotic — 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Any third-party certification | Not checked | 31 July 2026 |
Any third-party certification
We have not queried this register for this product. It does not mean the product holds nothing.
None claimed for this SKU, so there was no issuer register to query. The brand's FAQ says "We prioritize quality and adhere to strict cGMP and European Union standards with frequent allergen testing" — no laboratory named, no certification body named. The only mark on the box is the brand's own "HYPOALLERGENIC · NON-GMO · VEGAN" roundel, which is a self-asserted formulation claim rather than a third-party mark. A separate brand-level claim, "NutraIngredients 2021 Probiotic of the Year", was not independently verified this pass and is recorded as brand-asserted.
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 full-strain-identity-and-zero-dose-allocation
Nine of nine organisms carry a strain designator — which is better than almost anything else in this project — and the panel then gives one aggregate 7.5 billion CFU across all nine, with no per-strain figure. The result is the same opacity as a proprietary blend reached from the opposite direction: you know exactly what is in the sachet and not how much of any of it.
The record: Supplement Facts transcribed from the brand's own label image, cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0567/5057/1655/files/stress-release-side.jpg, 2026-07-31 — open ithttps://omnibioticlife.com/products/omni-biotic-stress-release-probiotic — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 2 the-cfu-basis-is-unstated
"Probiotic blend 58 mg (7.5 Billion CFU) †" with no temporal qualifier at all. The FAQ's shelf-stability sentence is about the product, not about the count, and does not fill the gap.
The record: Panel image and brand FAQ, both read 2026-07-31
Finding 3 eighty-three-percent-versus-seven-percent-with-no-citation-method-or-comparator
"Omni-Biotic ensures that 83% of good bacteria reach the gut alive and active, compared to an average of 7% in other top US probiotics" — a hard comparative claim about named competitors' category, repeated twice on this page and appearing on all three Omni-Biotic SKU pages audited, with no citation, no method, no test protocol and no named comparator. The single most aggressive uncited claim in its batch.
The record: Product page copy, verbatim, read 2026-07-31; the same sentence appears on the Balance and Power pages
Finding 4 number-one-probiotic-brand-in-europe-with-no-basis-given
"#1 Probiotic Brand in Europe. #2 Probiotic Worldwide." No measurement basis, no period, no data source.
The record: Product page copy, verbatim, 2026-07-31
Finding 5 the-lead-clinical-result-is-n-equals-ten-uncontrolled-and-open-label
The IBS result the page leads with comes from PMID 30251020 (Moser AM et al., Eur J Nutr 2019;58:2767-78) — a single-arm, open-label, before-and-after study in ten people with no control group. It reported IBS-SSS falling from 237 to 54 (p=0.002) and faecal zonulin from 67 to 36 ng/ml (p=0.035). The brand renders these as "80% reduction in IBS symptom severity" (the actual figure is 77.2%) and "46% reduction in Zonulin" (which matches). The design is stated nowhere on the product page.
The record: PMID 30251020, abstract retrieved and read 2026-07-31, against the product page's own study cards
Finding 6 improves-memory-and-cognition-cited-to-a-study-with-no-cognitive-endpoint
The claim is footnoted to PMID 29850990 (Bagga D et al., Eur J Nutr 2019;58(5):1821-27), a resting-state functional-connectivity and diffusion-imaging study, n=45 across three arms. The outcome measured is functional connectivity, not memory or cognition, and the abstract states verbatim "No significant structural differences were observed between the three groups." No cognitive endpoint is reported.
The record: PMID 29850990, abstract retrieved and read 2026-07-31, against the numbered claim on the product page
Finding 7 the-cited-study-names-a-differently-named-product
The one paper that identifies a product names "OMNi-BiOTiC® Stress Repair". The SKU sold here is Stress Release, and the brand's own FAQ gives its European name as "SR 9". Nowhere on the site is the equivalence asserted or explained. This page does not publish either "same product" or "different product" — it publishes the mismatch.
The record: PMID 30251020 title and abstract against the brand's own product page and FAQ, all read 2026-07-31
Finding 8 the-dosing-instructions-name-a-different-product
A copy-paste error on this SKU's own page: the directions read "Omni-Biotic AB 10 is best consumed on an empty stomach…" — the wrong product named in its own dosing instructions.
The record: Product page directions, verbatim, 2026-07-31
Finding 9 a-visible-template-error-where-the-unit-price-belongs
"Liquid error (snippets/price line 95): divided by 0" renders on the page in place of the per-serving unit price, on this and both other Omni-Biotic pages audited. The buyer is shown no cost per serving at all.
The record: Product pages for Stress Release, Balance and Power, all rendering the same string, 2026-07-31
Finding 10 pre-2020-nomenclature-throughout
The panel uses Lactobacillus naming that predates or ignores the genus split of Zheng et al. 2020, which divided Lactobacillus into 25 genera. Legal on US labels; it indicates a panel that has not been revisited.
The record: Panel image against Zheng J et al., Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020, PMID 32293557, DOI 10.1099/ijsem.0.004107
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.
- 9 strain designators not looked up
- These designators are printed on the panel and have not been searched. They are unchecked, not empty.
- Any third-party certification status
- None claimed for this SKU, so there was no issuer register to query. The brand's FAQ says "We prioritize quality and adhere to strict cGMP and European Union standards with frequent allergen testing" — no laboratory named, no certification body named. The only mark on the box is the brand's own "HYPOALLERGENIC · NON-GMO · VEGAN" roundel, which is a self-asserted formulation claim rather than a third-party mark. A separate brand-level claim, "NutraIngredients 2021 Probiotic of the Year", was not independently verified this pass and is recorded as brand-asserted.
- Whether the study that names a product is a study of this product
- Three studies are cited on the page as "Clinical studies … using the final formulation of Omni-Biotic Stress Release." The only one that names a product names "OMNi-BiOTiC® Stress Repair" — not Stress Release, and not "SR 9", which is the brand's own stated European name for this SKU. The equivalence is asserted nowhere on the site and could not be established. Neither "same product" nor "different product" is published here.
- What the page's third cited study is
- The card reads "CLINICAL STUDY #3 — Alzheimer's: Intestinal microbiome provides evidence of disease, Published 2022" and gives no author, no journal and no DOI. It could not be identified and nothing is attributed to it.
- The per-strain CFU of any of the nine organisms
- One aggregate figure — 58 mg, 7.5 billion CFU — covers all nine. The average would be about 0.83 billion each, and nothing on the label prevents one inexpensive organism carrying 7 billion of it. No allocation is disclosed anywhere.
- What the 7.5 billion CFU is measured against
- No temporal qualifier appears on the panel. The FAQ's shelf-stability sentence is a statement about the product's stability, not a potency guarantee at expiry, and is not treated as one.
- Any government label record for this product, or for this brand
- None exists, and the absence is brand-wide rather than per-SKU. Six spellings were queried against NIH's label database: Omni-Biotic → 0, Omni Biotic → 0 brand matches, OmniBiotic → 0, AllergoSan → 0, Caricol → 0, Omni-Logic → 0. No Omni-Biotic, Omni-Logic or Caricol product appears under any spelling tried.
- The basis for the NutraIngredients "2021 Probiotic of the Year" claim
- Not independently verified this pass. Recorded as brand-asserted.
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.
Nine organisms. Nine strain codes. One number for all of them.
Omni-Biotic does the hard part of labelling better than almost anyone in this project. Every organism on this panel carries a designator — L. casei W56, L. lactis W19, L. acidophilus W22, B. lactis W52, L. paracasei W20, L. plantarum W62, B. lactis W51, B. bifidum W23, L. salivarius W24 — Winclove codes, consistent with a label that says manufactured in the Netherlands. Nine of nine. That is the standard the rest of this category should be held to.
Then the panel gives one figure for the lot: 58 mg, 7.5 billion CFU. No per-strain allocation. The average works out at roughly 0.83 billion each, and nothing on the label stops a single inexpensive organism carrying seven of the seven and a half billion. You know exactly what is in the sachet and nothing about how much of any of it. Full identity, zero allocation — the same opacity as a proprietary blend, reached from the opposite direction. And there is no basis for the number either: no “at manufacture”, no “at expiry”. The FAQ’s line about being shelf stable through the expiration date is a statement about the product, not about the count.
The evidence chain is where this page stops being able to say things. Three studies are presented as “Clinical studies … using the final formulation of Omni-Biotic Stress Release.” The only one that names a product names “OMNi-BiOTiC® Stress Repair” — and the brand’s own FAQ calls this SKU “SR 9” in Europe. Nowhere does the site say those are the same thing. So this page will not say it either, in either direction. The third card, an Alzheimer’s study “Published 2022”, has no author, no journal and no DOI, and could not be identified at all.
The two studies that are identifiable are small and do not say what the page says they say. The IBS result the page leads with is n=10, single-arm, open-label, no control group — a design the product page never mentions — and the brand rounds its 77.2% symptom reduction to “80%”. The claim “Improves memory and cognition” is footnoted to a resting-state imaging study whose outcome is functional connectivity, with no cognitive endpoint at all and the abstract’s own line that no significant structural differences were observed.
Two more things the buyer sees. “83% of good bacteria reach the gut alive and active, compared to an average of 7% in other top US probiotics” — twice on this page, on all three Omni-Biotic pages audited, with no citation, method or named comparator. And where the per-serving price should be, the page renders “Liquid error (snippets/price line 95): divided by 0”. At $2.43 a day, the buyer is shown no unit price at all, and the dosing instructions name a different product.