Since little information was disclosed about the products, the products were dissolved and examined for CFUs as well as living and total cells. Even though the expiry dates were always more than a year out, fifteen of the examined products did not contain the specified doses of living cells, and none provided the declared number of CFUs. Despite the possibility of underestimation and despite receiving the same treatment, significant differences between products were identified. While the promised CFUs per dose were roughly within a 1.5 Log range (from 2 × 108 up to 7 × 109 CFU per dose), the viable, total and actual CFUs differed several Log values between products, ranging from close to the expected dose to no CFU detected. This is in line with previous research identifying major differences in the quality of various probiotic products with drastic differences in CFUs per dose of commercial products (Zawistowska-rojek et al., 2016).
Additionally, while lyophilized probiotics allow for optimal shelf life, their adhesive potential is limited in comparison to their fresh or reactivated counterparts. For example, only the in vitro adhesion to saliva-coated hydroxyapatite, as a proxy for teeth, was examined. The probiotics’ adherence to oral soft tissues, to which they may attach better, was not evaluated due to lack of a suitable soft tissue model. However, for the probiotic to have a direct effect on cariogenic and periodontal biofilms, it must adhere to the hard dental surfaces. However, a reactivated probiotic will likely also colonize soft tissues better, which may serve as a source of probiotic diffusion or indirect/proximal probiotic impact on the oral ecology. To confirm if reactivated probiotics are superior to their non-reactivated lyophilized form, additional clinical trials are necessary.
One day after lyophilization, lyomedium 1 showed a significantly lower probiotic viability compared to the fresh probiotic (8.76 ± 0.1 versus 9.06 ± 0.06 log (cells/aliquot)). The viability in lyomedium 2 (8.82 ± 0.14) was also lower, but this difference was not statistically significant. The viability of probiotics in lyomedium 3 (9.03 ± 0.05) did not differ from that of fresh probiotics, and the addition of ascorbate (lyomedium 4; 9.01 ± 0.09) did not improve the probiotics’ short-term viability.
Consumers are increasingly turning to probiotics as a way to improve their gut health and overall well-being. With the market flooded with various brands claiming to offer the best probiotic supplements, it can be challenging to separate fact from fiction. One company that gained a lot of attention in recent years is Seed, which promised groundbreaking clinical study results for its seed probiotics over a year ago. However, many are left wondering, where are these results?
When Seed announced its plans to conduct a clinical study to demonstrate the efficacy of its probiotic supplements, consumers were eager to see the outcome. The company claimed that its product was backed by science and would revolutionize the industry. However, as time passed, there has been little to no information regarding the progress or completion of the study.
Many consumers who invested in Seed probiotics based on the promise of forthcoming clinical study results are now feeling frustrated and misled. The lack of transparency from the company has raised concerns about the legitimacy of their claims and the efficacy of their products. Without concrete evidence to support their assertions, Seed’s reputation in the probiotics market may be at risk.
However, a subset of participants, the probiotic responders, did exhibit decreases in triglycerides and diastolic blood pressure over the course of the intervention with the decrease in triglycerides significant relative to the placebo group. The probiotic non-responders increased blood glucose and insulin levels over time, with the increase in glucose significant relative to the placebo group. These data are consistent with some participants improving with probiotic supplementation and others faring worse relative to no probiotic intervention.
As the demand for probiotics continues to grow, consumers are becoming more discerning about the products they choose to incorporate into their daily routines. Companies like Seed that make bold claims without providing the necessary scientific evidence may find themselves losing credibility and trust among consumers. It remains to be seen whether Seed will deliver on their promises and release the long-awaited clinical study results.
The serving size of DS-01 is two capsules daily, meant to be taken all at once and preferably on an empty stomach as advised by the brand. Seed recommends taking just one capsule for the first three days, and then increasing to the full two capsule dose on the fourth day. Seed DS-01 Daily Synbiotic is a popular two-in-one probiotic and prebiotic supplement for adults. Synbiotics are considered a mixture of probiotics (beneficial gut bacteria) and prebiotics (non-digestible fibers that feed probiotics) that work together in the digestive tract.
