One product, one panel, one record.
Onnit Total GUT HEALTH — label audit
Onnit publishes no Supplement Facts panel for this product in any form. The string "CFU" appears zero times on either product page, four of the seven advertised probiotic strains are not named even to species, and no ingredient in the product carries a milligram amount.
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
- D₂₇ founding teardown One of the 27 products taken apart at label level. That cohort is frozen and dated, so the audit’s published percentages cannot silently move.
- How deep this went
- Full forensic teardown Panel transcribed, every strain designator queried, every certification chased to its issuer’s own register, and the literature behind each marketing claim opened and read.
The Label Verifiability Score for this product
No score and no rank
No Label Verifiability Score is published for this product, and none is estimated. A score must rest on at least 50% of the rubric by weight; this record answers 22%, so a number here would present an average of one or two components as a summary of five.
The product stays in the audit and stays on this site. It is listed, unranked, on the label audit, and it is absent from the ranking rather than placed at the bottom of it: an unanswered question is not a bad answer, and ranking it as though it were would be a number about our reach dressed up as a fact about the product.
| Component | Weight | What was counted, and where | Fraction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strain identity printed on the panel | 0.24 | The panel is not fully transcribed — 7 organism slots are on this record and they are the ones a cleared finding named. A share computed over them would describe our transcription, not the label. | Not answered |
| Per-organism amount printed | 0.20 | The panel is not fully transcribed — 7 organism slots are on this record and they are the ones a cleared finding named. A share computed over them would describe our transcription, not the label. | Not answered |
| What the CFU count is measured against | 0.22 | Potency basis "no-cfu-number": CFU figure printed no, single basis stated no, basis reaches expiry no — 0 of 3. | 0 / 3 = 0.0000 |
| Printed designators that lead to a human trial | 0.20 | The panel is not fully transcribed — 7 organism slots are on this record and they are the ones a cleared finding named. A share computed over them would describe our transcription, not the label. | Not answered |
| 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 |
This record answers 22% of the rubric by weight, below the 50% floor a published score requires. Scoring it would present an average of one or two components as a summary of five. Listed, unranked, and the components it did answer are shown above.
The ranking of the 154 products that can be scored is on the home page, with what the score measures and what it does not.
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 | No CFU figure recorded |
| What that count is measured against | No CFU figure |
| Strain designators | None — species only |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 7 — partial; the panel is not fully transcribed |
| Marketed as | Unisex |
No CFU figure appears anywhere on the panel.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacillus subtilis | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Bacillus coagulans | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Lactobacillus rhamnosus (correct name: Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus) | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Saccharomyces boulardii | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Unnamed strain 5 | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Unnamed strain 6 | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
| Unnamed strain 7 | — none printed | — not stated separately | No designator printed | — |
What of that is verifiable
A disclosure is verifiable when a reader can open a record that neither we nor the brand controls and see the same thing. Below is every dated artefact this page rests on. What is absent from this list is not verified, however reasonable it sounds.
- Dated capture of the brand’s own page — onnit-total-gut-health-120ct-2026-07-30https://www.onnit.com/products/total-gut-health-120-ct — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured The live product page, read in full and re-read during the audit. It is the only label artefact that exists for this product: there is no Supplement Facts panel, no DSLD record for the current formula, and no label image. The absence is the evidence.
- Dated capture of the brand’s own page — onnit-total-gut-health-60ct-2026-07-30https://www.onnit.com/products/total-gut-health-60-ct — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured The 60-count SKU, confirming the four-capsule serving and the fifteen-day supply.
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. That count was made against a panel this record has not fully transcribed, so treat it as provisional.
A word on what a designator has to clear before it counts here. The organism must be named with the exact strain code that appears in the trial, the trial must be in humans, and the code must return that trial when a reader searches it. A species name does not qualify: the trials in this field are of strains, and a species contains thousands of them.
What it costs per day
$1.50 a day at the dose the label itself instructs.
- Price
- $44.99 USD
- What that buys
- 120-capsule bottle (30 days at four capsules daily)
- Price checked
- — the source we read it fromhttps://www.onnit.com/products/total-gut-health-120-ct — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
What certification it holds, checked at the issuer’s own register
A badge on a bottle is a claim like any other. Every row below was checked — or not checked — at the certifier’s own public register, never at the badge. Across the frozen founding cohort, 2 of 27 products hold a certification we could confirm at the issuer — a founding-cohort figure, not a count over every teardown on this site.
| Programme | Status at the issuer | Checked |
|---|---|---|
| None claimed | Not checked | not checked |
None claimed
We have not queried this register for this product. It does not mean the product holds nothing.
A token census across the full HTML of both product pages returns zero for third-party, third party, tested, NSF, Informed, Labdoor, cGMP, GMP, Non-GMO and IGEN. Onnit makes no testing or certification claim of any kind on the product page. There is nothing to verify at an issuer because nothing is asserted — honest by omission, and it also means a buyer has zero potency or purity assurance for a product whose potency is never stated. An Amazon listing title for the product includes "IGEN Non-GMO Tested", but that claim does not appear on Onnit's own site, was not independently verified, and is not counted.
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 no-supplement-facts-panel-published-at-all
Not a proprietary blend — no panel. A proprietary blend at least names its constituents and gives a blend total. Onnit gives neither the constituents nor a total. This is the most serious disclosure failure in its batch.
The record: Token census of both Onnit product pages, re-run 2026-07-30; every count reproduced exactly — open ithttps://www.onnit.com/products/total-gut-health-120-ct — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits.
Finding 2 no-cfu-count-stated
Not "unstated basis" — no number. "CFU" appears zero times in the HTML of both the 60-count and 120-count product pages and zero times in the archived capture. There is no potency guarantee, no "at time of manufacture", no "through expiry", and no published expiration-date policy.
The record: Token census of both Onnit product pages, re-run 2026-07-30
Finding 3 four-of-seven-strains-not-named-to-species
Onnit advertises "7 Strains of Probiotics" and names three: B. subtilis, B. coagulans, L. rhamnosus. Strains four through seven are not identified at all.
The record: onnit.com product pages, verified live 2026-07-30
Finding 4 sixty-count-bottle-is-a-fifteen-day-supply
Onnit's own "How to Use" on both SKUs reads: "Adults, take four capsules with your largest meal of the day." At four capsules a day the 60-count bottle is fifteen days, not a month. The bottle front says "60 CAPSULES"; nothing on the product page flags that this is half a month at the directed dose. The 120-count is also 6% cheaper per day.
The record: onnit.com product pages, verified live 2026-07-30; 60 ct $23.99, 120 ct $44.99
Finding 5 product-identity-has-churned
"Total GUT HEALTH" previously named a multi-packet system whose components are separately archived in DSLD from 2016 — Onnit Probiotic 66808, Prebiotic 66807, Betaine HCl 66806, DigesTech 64465, Saccharomyces boulardii 66805, most flagged off-market. The current product is a different dosage form with a different formula and no DSLD record. Any review or listicle citing the old packet formula is describing a product that is no longer sold.
The record: DSLD records 66805, 66806, 66807, 66808, 64465 — open it (opens in a new tab)
Finding 6 no-third-party-testing-of-any-kind
None claimed and none held. Honest by omission, and equally uninformative to a buyer.
The record: Token census of both Onnit product pages, re-run 2026-07-30
What we could not verify
Every gap below is published rather than deleted. Most are derived automatically from the empty fields in this page’s own record, so a gap cannot be hidden by leaving a box blank.
- The CFU figure on the panel
- No CFU figure was recorded for this product. Either the panel prints none or it was not transcribed; this teardown does not yet distinguish between the two.
- The full Supplement Facts panel
- Only 7 organism slots are transcribed here, and they are the ones a cleared finding named. The rest of the panel has not been read into this record, so no per-product percentage may be computed from it.
- None claimed status
- A token census across the full HTML of both product pages returns zero for third-party, third party, tested, NSF, Informed, Labdoor, cGMP, GMP, Non-GMO and IGEN. Onnit makes no testing or certification claim of any kind on the product page. There is nothing to verify at an issuer because nothing is asserted — honest by omission, and it also means a buyer has zero potency or purity assurance for a product whose potency is never stated. An Amazon listing title for the product includes "IGEN Non-GMO Tested", but that claim does not appear on Onnit's own site, was not independently verified, and is not counted.
- The Supplement Facts panel
- There is none. No panel is published on either product page, in the archived capture, or in any DSLD record for the current product. The strain list above is assembled from Onnit's own marketing prose, which names three of seven organisms.
- The CFU count
- Not stated anywhere. "CFU" appears zero times in the HTML of both SKUs.
- Any ingredient quantity
- None is published — not for the probiotics, not for Betaine HCl.
- The IGEN Non-GMO Tested claim on the Amazon listing
- Not present on Onnit's own site and not independently verified.
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.
There is no panel.
That is the whole finding, and it is worth stating in the flattest possible terms. Onnit sells this product for $44.99 and publishes no Supplement Facts panel for it in any form — not as a table, not as an image, not in structured data, not in the Internet Archive’s capture. The string “CFU” appears zero times in the HTML of both product pages. No ingredient in the product carries a milligram amount, including the betaine hydrochloride.
What Onnit does publish is prose: “7 Strains of Probiotics — A blend of key gut-friendly bacteria—including B. subtilis, B. coagulans, L. rhamnosus, and more.” Three of seven organisms named to species. The other four are “and more”.
This is worse than a proprietary blend. A proprietary blend at least names its constituents and gives a blend total. Here there is neither.
The consequence for evidence is structural rather than empirical. No PubMed query was run for these strains, because none can be run — there is no designator to query. And the near misses are instructive: two of the three species Onnit does name have designator-level meta-analytic support in IBS, for specific strains — L. rhamnosus GG, B. coagulans Unique IS2 and MTCC 5856 — that Onnit does not claim to use. The evidence exists next door and this label cannot reach it.
One practical trap worth flagging separately: the directed dose is four capsules a day, so the 60-capsule bottle is a fifteen-day supply. The bottle front says “60 CAPSULES”. Nothing on the product page says “half a month”.
In fairness, two things. Onnit’s claim copy is the most conservative in its batch — everything is hedged structure/function with the FDA disclaimer, “occasional bloating” is correctly qualified, and there is no disease claim anywhere. And Onnit asserts no certification at all, which means it is not claiming anything it cannot back. The regulatory exposure here is not the claims. It is the absence of a panel.