One product, one panel, one record.
Renew Life Ultimate Flora Men's Once Daily Probiotic 65 Billion (SKU RN27502) — label audit
All 31 organisms carry a printed designator, which looks like the most transparent label in its batch. Thirty of the 31 are UF- codes that return zero PubMed records, verified with a second spelling. The only organism with a real evidence base is L. rhamnosus GG, and its dose is one of 21 strains sharing a 32.5 billion pool.
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.
The Label Verifiability Score for this product
54.4 out of 100
Rank 85 of the 154 products in this audit the rubric can score.
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 | 26 of 26 organism slots carry a printed strain designator. | 26 / 26 = 1.0000 | 0.2400 |
| Per-organism amount printed | 0.20 | 0 of 26 organism slots have an amount of its own; the rest are inside a blend total. | 0 / 26 = 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| 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 26 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. | 1 / 26 = 0.0385 | 0.007692 |
| 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 |
0.467692 — the last column added up — divided by 0.86, the weight this record could answer, is 0.5438. Multiplied by 100 and rounded to one decimal, that is the 54.4 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 | 65 Billion CFU (32.5 billion Lacto/Lactococcus/Streptococcus, 32.5 billion Bifidobacterium) |
| What that count is measured against | Through expiry |
| Strain designators | All organisms coded |
| Organism slots transcribed here | 26 — the full panel |
| Marketed as | Marketed to men |
"Quality, purity and potency guaranteed through expiration." Panel footnote 1 — "At Expiration Date under recommended storage conditions. Refrigeration not required." The page draws the contrast itself: "Some probiotic supplements guarantee potency and live cultures at time of manufacturing. We guarantee through the expiration date."
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lactobacillus plantarum | UF-217 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus acidophilus | UF-01 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus plantarum | UF-987 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactococcus lactis | UF-23 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus fermentum | UF-120 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus rhamnosus | GG | — not stated separately | Human RCT | "ATCC 53103" |
| Lactobacillus fermentum | UF-226 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus rhamnosus | UF-11 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus acidophilus | UF-5 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus casei | UF-431 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus gasseri | UF-2055 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-2055" |
| Lactobacillus paracasei | UF-19 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus reuteri | UF-14 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus plantarum | UF-115 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus casei | UF-121 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus brevis | UF-35 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus helveticus | UF-142 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-142" |
| Lactobacillus salivarius | UF-862 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-862" |
| Streptococcus thermophilus | UF-336 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-336" |
| Lactobacillus bulgaricus | UF-563 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Lactobacillus bulgaricus | UF-165 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Bifidobacterium lactis | UF-12, UF-IM04, UF-DG19, UF-07, UF-50, UF-26 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Bifidobacterium bifidum | UF-910 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-910" |
| Bifidobacterium breve | UF-3 | — not stated separately | No records | — |
| Bifidobacterium infantis | UF-019 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-019" |
| Bifidobacterium longum | UF-536 | — not stated separately | No records | "UF-536" |
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 — RN27502_C_THUMBNAILS_20_NewLook-02.jpghttps://www.renewlife.com/products/ultimate-flora-mens-once-daily-probiotic-65-billion-30-acid-resistant-vegan-capsules-rn27502 — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured The brand's own 1800x1800 Supplement Facts JPEG, transcribed by hand. Transcription confidence check — the independently counted total of 31 matches the brand's own on-page prose ("31 diverse strains"), and the same method applied to the women's comparator gives 26 against the brand's stated 26.
- Dated capture of the brand’s own page — renewlife-rn27502-2026-07-31https://www.renewlife.com/products/ultimate-flora-mens-once-daily-probiotic-65-billion-30-acid-resistant-vegan-capsules-rn27502 — Address given, not linked: this site does not link out to the products it audits. captured HTTP 200 to a plain request with a desktop user agent — renewlife.com did not block automation this session. Source for price, GTIN-12 850068583089, and every verbatim marketing quotation.
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
$1.11 a day at the dose the label itself instructs.
- Price
- $33.32 USD
- What that buys
- 30-capsule bottle (30 servings, 1 capsule daily). $29.99 on Subscribe & Save.
- Price checked
- — the source we read it fromhttps://www.renewlife.com/products/ultimate-flora-mens-once-daily-probiotic-65-billion-30-acid-resistant-vegan-capsules-rn27502 — 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 | not checked |
| Renew Life lot-level test-result portal | Brand-asserted, unverified | 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 is claimed on this page. No Non-GMO Project mark, no NSF, no USP, no Informed Choice. The page claims "Non-GMO, gluten & dairy free" as an attribute, which is a self-declaration, not a certification.
Renew Life lot-level test-result portal
The badge is displayed, but the register could not be reached to confirm it. We call this unverified, not false.
Credit where due — almost no competitor offers lot-level results at all. But the scope is narrow: the portal's own sample result shows four heavy metals (lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium) and no CFU potency result, no strain-identity confirmation and no wider contaminant panel. It requires a lot number from a bottle you have already bought, so it cannot inform a purchase decision. No actual COA was retrieved.
How it differs from the same brand’s women’s version
Across the fourteen same-brand men’s-versus-women’s label diffs run inside the frozen founding cohort, zero men’s or default formulas contain a probiotic strain, identified by designator, that was selected on male-specific evidence. In eight of the fourteen the sex-specific differentiator is a botanical or a mineral, and in five of the fourteen the women’s SKU is better-specified, cheaper, or both — “better-specified” meaning the panel that discloses more, never the panel with more in it. The rule behind each of those counts, and all fourteen pairs classified against it , are published in full. Diffs run on teardowns added since sit outside this fourteen, and outside the sentence above.
Compared against Ultimate Flora Women's Once Daily Probiotic 65 Billion (RN27491). Diffed .
What the two panels differ by
- The men's blend is 120 mg; the women's is 155 mg. Same $33.32, same 65 billion CFU claim, same 100 mg prebiotic. The men's buyer pays the same price for 22.6% less blend material. Panel JPEGs RN27502_C_THUMBNAILS_20_NewLook-02.jpg versus RN27491_C_Thumbnails_NewLook-02.jpg
- Four strains appear only on the women's panel — L. crispatus UF-88, L. jensenii UF-522, L. acidophilus UF-BV14 and L. rhamnosus UF-BV1. L. crispatus and L. jensenii are dominant species of the healthy human vaginal microbiome, and BV is the standard abbreviation for bacterial vaginosis. Every one of the four has an articulable rationale for being in a women's product. Panel JPEG RN27491_C_Thumbnails_NewLook-02.jpg
- Nine strains appear only on the men's panel, and no male rationale can be articulated for any of them. Five are not even new species — they are second and third strains of species already in the blend, inflating the "31 strains" headline without adding an organism. Panel JPEG RN27502_C_THUMBNAILS_20_NewLook-02.jpg
What is identical across the pair
- Price $33.32 buy-once, identical
- 30 capsules, 1 per day, identical
- 65 Billion CFU at expiry, identical
- 32.5 B Lacto/Strep to 32.5 B Bifido split, identical
- Organic prebiotic fiber blend 100 mg — acacia, oat hull, rice extract, rice fiber — identical
Every finding on this page, with the record behind it
Finding 1 thirty-of-thirty-one-designators-return-nothing
Every UF- code queried returns zero PubMed records. The second-spelling check required before any absence claim was run and inspected: unhyphenated forms return non-zero counts, and every top hit is unrelated tokenizer noise — hospital mortality prediction, a phosphoribosylformylglycinamidine synthase assay, a uterine-lavage organoid platform. The codes map to no ATCC, DSM, CNCM, NCIMB or CECT deposit that PubMed indexes. They are supplier-internal identifiers.
The record: PubMed E-utilities exact-phrase queries: "UF-2055", "UF-536", "UF-910", "UF-019", "UF-336", "UF-142", "UF-862" — all 0
Finding 2 printing-a-code-is-not-disclosure
This is the most instructive label in its batch precisely because it looks like the best one. Rank the batch by how many strain codes the label prints and this product is first; rank it by how much of the product is backed by published human evidence and it is last, at 1 of 31. A designator is only disclosure if it resolves to a public culture-collection deposit.
The record: 31 designators printed, 1 resolving — versus sibling SKU RN1530124, 0 printed, ~10 of 12 resolving
Finding 3 proprietary-blend-hides-the-only-evidenced-strain
120 mg, 31 organisms, no per-strain CFU. L. rhamnosus GG — the one organism with a real evidence base — shares a 32.5 billion subtotal with 20 other strains. Its actual dose is undisclosed and unknowable from the label.
The record: Panel JPEG RN27502_C_THUMBNAILS_20_NewLook-02.jpg
Finding 4 strain-count-inflated-by-duplicate-species
"31 strains" counts six B. lactis, three L. plantarum, and two each of acidophilus, rhamnosus, fermentum, casei and bulgaricus as separate strains. The count is accurate as a count of strains and misleading as a signal of breadth.
The record: Panel JPEG, 31 rows transcribed
Finding 5 find-and-replace-corrupted-a-factual-claim
The page says regular capsules have a "10-65 min release". The brand's 50 Billion and 90 Billion men's pages say "10-30 min". "Regular capsules" is a fixed external referent — it cannot release in 10-30 minutes on one page and 10-65 on another. The 30 was overwritten with 65 when the 65-Billion pages were built from a template. Confirmed on two pages, contradicted by two others from the same brand.
The record: RN27502 and RN27491 pages versus RN1530124 and RN1550161 pages, all fetched 2026-07-31
Finding 6 two-guarantee-periods-on-one-page
The buy box says "60-Day Money Back Guarantee". The body copy, about 600 words away, says "we offer a one-year money back guarantee". Present on all three Renew Life pages examined.
The record: renewlife.com RN27502, fetched 2026-07-31
Finding 7 most-studied-strain-claim-dated-2022
The GG footnote is, to the brand's credit, honest about what it measures — "Based on the number of scientific and clinical studies of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for a range of benefits as of January 2022." That is a claim about literature volume, not efficacy, and not about men. It is presented in the present tense in 2026.
The record: renewlife.com RN27502, footnote, verbatim
Finding 8 two-product-names-on-one-page
The title, URL and size selector say "30 Acid Resistant Vegan Capsules"; the H1 subtitle and the panel say "Delayed Release Vegan Capsule".
The record: renewlife.com RN27502, fetched 2026-07-31
Finding 9 no-male-outcome-evidence-for-gg
"Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG" AND (prostate OR testosterone OR "male fertility") returns 4 records, and the most recent is a study of testicular DNA methylation in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. There is no human male-outcome RCT for GG in this product's territory.
The record: PMID 42310035 — 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.
- Any third-party certification status
- None is claimed on this page. No Non-GMO Project mark, no NSF, no USP, no Informed Choice. The page claims "Non-GMO, gluten & dairy free" as an attribute, which is a self-declaration, not a certification.
- Renew Life lot-level test-result portal status
- Credit where due — almost no competitor offers lot-level results at all. But the scope is narrow: the portal's own sample result shows four heavy metals (lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium) and no CFU potency result, no strain-identity confirmation and no wider contaminant panel. It requires a lot number from a bottle you have already bought, so it cannot inform a purchase decision. No actual COA was retrieved.
- A machine-readable Supplement Facts panel
- It exists only as a JPEG on a Shopify CDN. There is no Supplement Facts in the page HTML, in embedded JSON, or in structured data — the string "Servings Per Container" appears zero times in the page source. Every ingredient number here comes from reading the brand's own image.
- A government label record to cross-check the brand's JPEG against
- There is none. Established by enumerating the brand rather than by a UPC miss: 6 query strings across 3 pagination pages yielded 325 distinct Renew Life DSLD records, of which exactly four are men's products and all four are 90-Billion SKUs. DSLD's free-text search does not index UPCs — querying a known-good UPC from DSLD's own record returns zero exact matches — so a UPC miss proves nothing and was not treated as evidence. This is a provenance limit, not a compliance failure.
- Per-strain CFU for any of the 31 organisms
- Not disclosed. Structurally unavailable from the label, not a search failure.
- An actual certificate of analysis
- Renew Life's COA portal is gated behind a lot number from a bottle you already own.
How to check every line of this page yourself
Nothing on this page requires trusting us. Every claim above resolves to a record you can open:
- Open the NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database record linked at the top of this page. It is the label the manufacturer filed, not our transcription of it.
- Compare the CFU line and the suggested-use line against the disclosure table above. If they disagree with us, we are wrong and we want to know.
- Take any strain designator from the panel and run the query printed beside it. The query is published precisely so you can get a different answer than we did.
- Divide the price by the number of days the label’s own dose instructions make the container last. That arithmetic is the whole of the cost-per-day row.
- Search the certifier’s own register for this product, not for the brand. A company can participate in a programme without this product being on its list.
This is the label that teaches the test.
Thirty-one organisms, and every one of them carries a printed strain code. Set beside a bare species list
that is materially better disclosure practice, and on first read this looks like the most transparent
panel Renew Life prints. Then you paste a code into PubMed. UF-2055 returns nothing. UF-536 returns
nothing. UF-910, UF-019, UF-336, UF-142, UF-862 — nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing.
Drop the hyphen and you get hits, all of which turn out to be PubMed’s tokenizer matching unrelated
papers about cardiogenic shock and organoid platforms. The UF- codes are supplier-internal identifiers.
They resolve to no public culture-collection deposit.
One organism on this panel resolves: L. rhamnosus GG, which is ATCC 53103 and genuinely the most-studied probiotic strain there is. Its dose is one of twenty-one strains sharing a 32.5 billion subtotal, so the label cannot tell you whether you are getting a studied dose or a token one.
The women’s counterpart is the control. RN27491 is matched on everything that normally confounds this comparison — same $33.32, same 30 capsules, same 65 billion at expiry, same 32.5/32.5 split, same 100 mg prebiotic. Two things differ. The women’s blend weighs 155 mg to the men’s 120 mg, so the men’s buyer pays the same money for 22.6% less material. And the four strains found only on the women’s panel are L. crispatus, L. jensenii, and two codes containing the letters BV — dominant species of the healthy vaginal microbiome, and the standard abbreviation for bacterial vaginosis. You can say in one sentence why each of those is in a women’s product. You cannot do that for a single one of the nine strains unique to the men’s, five of which are simply extra strains of species already in the blend.
Real credit, stated plainly. Potency is guaranteed through expiration and printed on the label, with the contrast to at-manufacture competitors drawn explicitly in the brand’s own copy. Lacto and Bifido subtotals are disclosed rather than one opaque number. Delayed release is specified, the serving arithmetic is correct, there are no disease claims, and this is the cheaper of the brand’s two men’s SKUs per day. The failure here is not deception about what the product does. It is that the disclosure is decorative.