However, after WIRED sent Shabanov details about how SuppCo conducted its tests, he conceded that it\u2019s possible there may have been quality control issues with some of the product and says the company is launching an internal investigation and had already made a decision to switch to a different manufacturer for some products. \u201cThere\u2019s always a non-zero chance that manufacturers screwed up,\u201d he says. \u201cWorst-case scenario, we\u2019ll have to get the whole batch out of Amazon.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to Amazon spokesperson Juliana Karber, the company requires dietary supplement sellers to submit third-party testing results to prove that they contain the ingredients on the label and are free from harmful contaminants. For the four products that failed SuppCo\u2019s test, she says \u201cthree have valid test reports verifying their compliance with relevant standards and that they contain the advertised amount of creatine.\u201d She noted that Amazon is going to do its own test of the products. \u201cOur teams are investigating the remaining product in question, and if we conclude it does not comply with Amazon\u2019s policies, it will be removed from the store,\u201d Karber said in a statement. Amazon declined to share which of the supplements had not proffered a valid test report.<\/p>\n
Creating effective gummy supplements is a difficult task, since it requires distributing active ingredients evenly throughout individual gelatinous sweets. According to Shabanov, Ecowise spent months refining its processes because it was so hard to create a product that had the appropriate amount of creatine and also tasted good.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s more, since most methods of creating gummy candies involve heat, active ingredients can get damaged in the process. \u201cSince creatine gummies are often like other gummies, requiring moisture and heat to produce and having citric acid lowering the pH of the gummy, creatine can degrade faster than it would when just manufactured as a dry, unflavored powder,\u201d says Kamal Patel, cofounder of the nutrient and supplement database Examine.com. Patel describes the task of making a good creatine gummy as \u201ca lot harder\u201d than formulating a powder product.<\/p>\n
SuppCo also had the creatine gummies tested for levels of creatinine, a waste product created when creatine breaks down. All of the gummies that contained creatine also contained elevated amounts of creatinine, indicating that some of the active ingredients had been degraded. When the lab tested popular powdered creatine products, none had this issue.<\/p>\n
SuppCo\u2019s test wasn\u2019t the first attempt to gauge the potency of creatine gummies. In fact, testing competing brands of gummies has become a kind of tradition in the world of supplements. Last year, the supplement manufacturer NOW Foods tested<\/a> a dozen popular creatine gummies brands and reported nearly as dismal results to the SuppCo findings\u20145 of the 12 samples failed, showing very little or no active ingredients. Earlier this year, fitness influencer James Smith sent a sample of gummies from a company called Ovrload that he had previously attempted to invest in out for tests. (Smith claims the investment offer fell through, after which point the company allegedly continued to use his image to promote the brand.) He posted a YouTube video<\/a> detailing the failed results. Another British supplement company conducted<\/a> a similar third-party test and also found that Ovrload gummies failed, leading the company to pause sales<\/a>. (Ovrload didn’t respond to requests for comment, but the founder recently posted on Instagram that he plans to resume sales, and will add a transparency portal where users can see exactly what is in the gummies).<\/p>\n