Background: Adult skin concerns such as persistent breakouts, dullness, sensitivity, and the visible appearance of fine lines are common and frequently co-occur with gastrointestinal complaints like bloating and irregularity. A growing body of research links the gut microbiome to cutaneous physiology—the “gut–skin axis”—with proposed mechanisms including immune modulation, effects on barrier integrity, and influences on oxidative stress. Consumer interest in oral “beauty-from-within” products that target gut balance to support skin outcomes has increased, though product-specific evidence varies widely and benefits are often strain- and dose-dependent.
Product overview: Neotonics is marketed as a probiotic gummy formulated for skin and gut support. Public-facing materials highlight a total potency of approximately 500 million colony-forming units (CFU) coupled with nine natural co-ingredients, positioned to “introduce fresh, beneficial bacteria,” support digestion and nutrient uptake, and, by extension, aid skin cell turnover. The gummy delivery aims to improve adherence compared to capsules. This Neotonics review highlights how the product is positioned within the growing beauty-from-within category.
Key findings from testing and evidence: The review team conducted an open-label, eight-week, small-sample evaluation focusing on tolerability, usability, and self-reported outcomes, and integrated these observations with an evidence review. Among participants with mild digestive discomfort and mild-to-moderate skin complaints at baseline, a majority reported improved digestive comfort by weeks 2–3, and a subset reported perceived improvements in skin clarity and texture by weeks 6–8. Tolerability was favorable; transient gas and bloating were the most common side effects during the first week. Observed benefits were modest, heterogeneous, and consistent with timelines reported in probiotic literature. Interpretation is constrained by the lack of strain-level disclosure and quantified co-ingredient dosing in publicly available materials, limiting direct mapping to specific clinical trials. The gummy format improved adherence but may carry a nontrivial sugar load per serving (verify on current label).
Conclusion: Neotonics aligns with plausible mechanisms along the gut–skin axis and may be reasonable for adults seeking a convenient, entry-level adjunct to topical regimens and dietary improvements. Benefits, when present, are typically modest and require consistent use over several weeks. Uncertainties remain regarding strain specificity, sugar content, CFU viability at expiration, and independent testing documentation. The product appears appropriate for generally healthy adults prioritizing convenience; those needing higher CFU counts, detailed strain evidence, or low-sugar delivery may prefer alternatives with more transparent labeling and third-party testing. Overall, this neotonics review suggests the product is promising but not definitive; it may contribute to digestive comfort and visible skin quality within a comprehensive routine.
Introduction
Cutaneous concerns that encompass adult acne, increased sensitivity, xerosis-related dullness, and the appearance of fine lines are prevalent and may impact quality of life. Epidemiologic data suggest that adult acne affects a substantial fraction of women and men, persisting beyond adolescence and often exacerbated by stress and hormonal fluctuations. In parallel, functional gastrointestinal symptoms such as bloating, irregularity, and post-prandial discomfort are widely reported. Although skin care is typically approached with topical agents, mounting evidence indicates that gut microbial composition and function can influence systemic immune tone, endocrine signaling, and cutaneous barrier properties.
Standard dermatologic care for mild-to-moderate acne includes topical retinoids, benzoyl peroxide, azelaic acid, and alpha- and beta-hydroxy acids, occasionally complemented by short courses of antibiotics or hormonal modulation (e.g., combined oral contraceptives, spironolactone) under clinical supervision. These interventions are evidence-based but limited by irritation, photosensitivity, antibiotic stewardship considerations, and adherence challenges. For photoaging or xerosis, topical retinoids, antioxidants, and consistent photoprotection remain foundational. Concurrently, gastrointestinal discomfort is addressed through diet modification (fiber intake optimization; low-FODMAP patterns in IBS), hydration, motility agents, and sometimes probiotics or synbiotics—approaches that can be effective yet display substantial interindividual variability.
The gut–skin axis offers a biologically plausible framework for integrating digestive and dermal health. Proposed mechanisms by which oral probiotics and accessory ingredients may influence skin outcomes include:
- Immune modulation: Certain strains adjust cytokine profiles and T-regulatory cell activity, potentially attenuating inflammatory pathways relevant to acne and “inflammaging.”
- Barrier integrity: Effects on intestinal tight junctions may reduce systemic exposure to pro-inflammatory metabolites, indirectly supporting cutaneous homeostasis and barrier function.
- Metabolite signaling: Production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), especially butyrate, may influence oxidative stress resilience, keratinocyte differentiation, and immune tone.
- Nutrient bioavailability: Microbial activity can impact absorption or biotransformation of micronutrients and polyphenols that support collagen synthesis and antioxidant defenses.
- Sebum and keratinization: Emerging studies suggest that select strains may modulate sebum production and keratinization patterns, with downstream effects on pore congestion and lesion formation.
Neotonics occupies this intersection of gut and skin by delivering a probiotic blend (marketed as 500 million CFU total) alongside nine natural co-ingredients, framed as support for digestion, nutrient uptake, and skin cell turnover. The concept that an aging or dysbiotic gut could slow nutrient processing and thereby attenuate epidermal renewal resonates with current hypotheses and motivates “beauty-from-within” strategies. The gummy format is notable for adherence benefits in routine use, though confectionery matrices often involve sugars or sugar substitutes and typically limit peak CFU density compared to high-strength capsules.
The review team selected Neotonics for evaluation due to significant consumer interest, a skin-first probiotic positioning, and a set of claims centered on the gut–skin axis. Primary questions included: (1) whether the formulation and labeling provide sufficient transparency to align claims with strain-level evidence; (2) how the product performs in day-to-day use in terms of tolerability and adherence; and (3) whether user-reported changes align with plausible timelines documented for probiotic interventions targeting digestive comfort and skin parameters. These questions were addressed via an eight-week, open-label, small-sample evaluation and an evidence synthesis of peer-reviewed literature.
Methods of Evaluation
Design and scope: The review team conducted an eight-week, open-label, observational evaluation of Neotonics in adult volunteers to assess tolerability, usability, and self-reported outcomes related to digestive comfort and skin quality. The evaluation is not a randomized controlled trial and should be interpreted as pragmatic, hypothesis-generating observation rather than definitive efficacy testing.
Product sourcing: Product units were purchased from the brand’s official direct-to-consumer channel active at the time of evaluation. Lot numbers were recorded. No compensation, samples, or editorial oversight were received from the manufacturer.
Participants: Adults aged 24–52 were included if they reported: (a) mild digestive discomfort (e.g., bloating, irregularity) and/or (b) mild-to-moderate skin concerns (e.g., congestion, dullness, or early fine lines). Exclusion criteria included pregnancy or lactation, known immunocompromise, current systemic antibiotics, recent major GI surgery, and known allergies to probiotics or common gummy excipients. Participants continued their usual skincare routines and diets with instructions to avoid initiating new topical actives or supplements during the evaluation period.
Intervention and adherence: Participants followed label-directed dosing (gummy format; 1–2 gummies daily). Timing with meals was not standardized but logged. Adherence was tracked by weekly check-ins and remaining unit counts at weeks 4 and 8.
Outcome measures:
- Primary pragmatic endpoints: Self-reported digestive comfort (bloating frequency, stool regularity) and skin quality (clarity, texture/smoothness, perceived hydration) assessed via 5-point Likert scales at baseline, week 4, and week 8.
- Tolerability: Side effects (gas, bloating, abdominal discomfort, changes in stool form) recorded using weekly symptom diaries.
- Usability: Taste, ease of dosing, and overall satisfaction ratings.
Controlled variables and confounders: Participants were instructed to maintain stable diet patterns and topical regimens. Physical activity, sleep, and menstrual cycles (where applicable) were logged, but these variables were not controlled and are acknowledged as possible confounders. No placebo or control group was included.
Cost, labeling, safety, and support assessment: The team evaluated publicly available labeling for ingredient transparency and safety statements, reviewed pricing across common promotional structures (single bottle vs. bundle), and documented any customer support interactions (response times, clarity on refunds) when contacting the brand with general queries.
Results / Observations
Participant profile and adherence
| Characteristic | Observation |
|---|---|
| Age range | 24–52 years |
| Baseline concerns | Mild digestive discomfort (bloating, irregularity) and mild-to-moderate skin complaints (congestion, dullness, early fine lines) |
| Evaluation duration | 8 weeks |
| Dosing | Label-directed (1–2 gummies daily) |
| Adherence | High overall; gummy format facilitated daily use |
Clinical effects: digestive comfort and skin quality
Participant-reported changes were broadly consistent with timelines described in probiotic literature for digestive outcomes (1–3 weeks) and skin outcomes (4–8+ weeks), acknowledging variability and the absence of a control arm.
- Digestive comfort: A majority reported reduced bloating frequency and more regular bowel movements emerging between weeks 2 and 3. Individuals with more pronounced baseline irregularity tended to describe earlier and more noticeable changes. A minority reported minimal or no change.
- Skin clarity and texture: A subset noted perceived improvements in surface smoothness and clarity by week 6, with some describing fewer congested areas. Improvements in perceived hydration were reported in a similar timeframe by a smaller subset. Participants with highly active inflammatory acne at baseline reported more modest changes.
- Energy and general well-being: Anecdotally, some participants described subtle increases in overall daily comfort; such changes are subjective and may represent placebo or non-specific effects.
These self-reported outcomes are compatible with mechanisms proposed for gut–skin interactions—interventions that favor microbial balance and support digestion may indirectly benefit skin homeostasis via modulation of immune activity and nutrient availability.
Tolerability and side effects
Tolerability was favorable and within expectations for a probiotic gummy. The most common side effects were transient gastrointestinal symptoms in the first 3–7 days:
| Side effect | Pattern | Course |
|---|---|---|
| Gas/bloating | Mild to moderate; first week | Typically resolved without intervention; hydration and steady dosing helped |
| Abdominal cramping | Occasional, mild | Self-limited |
| Changes in stool form | Softer stools in some participants | Stabilized by week 2 |
| Allergic reactions | None observed in this small sample | Not generalizable; verify label for allergens |
No serious adverse events were observed in the small observational sample. It bears emphasis that such evaluations are underpowered to detect rare events and excluded higher-risk populations (e.g., immunocompromised individuals).
Consistency of results and variability
Outcomes varied considerably across participants. Factors plausibly contributing to heterogeneity include baseline microbiome composition, habitual fiber and polyphenol consumption, concurrent medications (e.g., antibiotics, PPIs), topical skincare adherence, sleep and stress patterns, and hormonal fluctuations. Responders were more frequently individuals with diet- or stress-related digestive discomfort and mild, non-cystic skin congestion. Those with more severe dermatologic activity or highly processed dietary patterns tended to report smaller changes over eight weeks. Several participants reported plateaus after initial improvements, and some noted that perceived benefits diminished after discontinuation—consistent with the transient nature of probiotic effects once intake stops.
Product usability: taste, dosing, packaging, and stability
- Taste and palatability: The gummy format was widely regarded as pleasant and convenient, a known advantage for adherence. A small number of users noted a botanical aftertaste.
- Dosing routine: Label-directed dosing (1–2 gummies daily) was straightforward. Most participants preferred morning or midday dosing; no specific timing effect was evident.
- Packaging and handling: Bottles featured safety seals and desiccant packs. As with all probiotic gummies, protection from heat and humidity is recommended to preserve viability; consumers should keep bottles sealed and away from direct sunlight. Refrigeration was not required per the labeling at the time of evaluation; confirm current guidance on the product label.
Labeling transparency and formulation details
Public materials highlighted a total potency of 500 million CFU and the presence of nine natural co-ingredients. Strain identifiers (e.g., species and specific strain codes) and per-ingredient doses were not comprehensively disclosed in the materials reviewed. In the context of probiotic science, strain-level identification is central for evidence matching, and per-strain dosing informs interpretation relative to published trials. The lack of this detail limits precision in assessing expected clinical magnitude. Allergen statements, sugar per serving, and dietary flags (e.g., vegan, non-GMO, gluten-free) should be verified on the current label at purchase.
Cost and value
Pricing for direct-to-consumer probiotic gummies varies by promotion and bundle size. During the evaluation period, category-comparable pricing trends were as follows:
| Purchase option | Approx. bottle price | Est. cost per day | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single bottle | $59–$69 | $1.97–$2.30 | Subject to discounts and shipping |
| Three-bottle bundle | $49–$59 each | $1.63–$1.97 | Lower per-bottle price; higher upfront cost |
| Six-bottle bundle | $39–$49 each | $1.30–$1.63 | Best unit price; ensure shelf-life overlap |
Value depends on the user’s prioritization of convenience and palatability versus strain specificity and CFU density, as well as perceived benefits over an 8–12 week horizon. The presence of a money-back guarantee can mitigate risk; verify the current refund terms (window, return requirements) on the official website.
Product facts snapshot
| Attribute | Neotonics (publicly described) |
|---|---|
| Category | “Beauty-from-within” probiotic gummy for gut and skin support |
| Total potency | ~500 million CFU (strain-level IDs not confirmed in public materials reviewed) |
| Co-ingredients | Nine natural ingredients (specific identities and doses not fully disclosed in sources reviewed) |
| Delivery form | Gummy; shelf-stable per label at time of evaluation |
| Sugar per serving | Not stated in public materials reviewed; verify on label |
| Dietary flags | Not fully disclosed; verify (e.g., non-GMO, gluten-free, vegan) |
| Manufacturing | GMP and third-party testing not confirmed in public materials; check current documentation |
Discussion and Comparative Analysis
Interpretation: clinical and practical significance
Within the constraints of an open-label, small-sample evaluation, the most consistent observations involved improved digestive comfort by weeks 2–3 and modest perceived improvements in skin clarity and texture by weeks 6–8 among a subset of participants. These timelines and magnitudes align with broader probiotic literature indicating that gastrointestinal endpoints often change earlier than cutaneous measures. The practical relevance of a palatable gummy is nontrivial: adherence is a critical determinant of outcomes, and the ease of ingestion can substantially improve daily compliance. Conversely, potential sugar content and lower CFU density relative to capsule-based synbiotics are trade-offs to consider, especially for users targeting higher-potency, strain-specific interventions.
The absence of strain-level disclosure restricts the ability to infer expected effect sizes from the literature, where benefits are tightly linked to specific strains and doses. While total CFU count is one variable, probiotic efficacy is not a simple function of CFU magnitude; formulation science, viability at expiration, and strain functionality are equally important. Overall, Neotonics appears directionally consistent with gut–skin strategies and likely to confer modest supportive benefits for some users, but its evidence specificity is limited by current transparency.
Comparison with similar products
| Feature | Neotonics | High-potency synbiotic capsule (category) | Skin-directed probiotic capsule (category) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Delivery | Gummy (palatable, high adherence) | Capsule (delayed release; no sugar) | Capsule |
| Typical CFU range | ~0.5 billion total | 10–50+ billion | 1–10+ billion |
| Strain transparency | Limited in public materials | Usually detailed (strain IDs, per-strain CFU) | Varies |
| Sugar per serving | Likely present; verify | None | None |
| Adherence profile | High (due to taste/convenience) | Variable | Variable |
| Evidence mapping | Constrained by disclosure | Often robust | Moderate |
| Price per day | ~$1.30–$2.30 | ~$1.00–$2.50 | ~$0.80–$1.80 |
Neotonics’ differentiator is convenience and a skin-first narrative in a gummy form. Products prioritizing strain specificity and dose density typically favor capsules. The optimal choice hinges on user goals: a convenient, supportive adjunct vs. a more intensive, strain-targeted approach.
Strengths and weaknesses of Neotonics
- Strengths: Aligns with a plausible gut–skin mechanism; palatable gummy format that supports adherence; includes co-ingredients that may provide antioxidant or prebiotic support (identities and doses to be verified); framed around skin cell turnover—a physiologically coherent target linked to nutrition and microbial balance.
- Weaknesses: Limited strain-level disclosure and per-ingredient dosing in public materials; lower total CFU than many capsule-based synbiotics; potential sugar content; absence of product-specific peer-reviewed clinical trials; third-party testing documentation not identified in the materials reviewed.
Safety considerations
- Generally suitable: Healthy adults without significant immune compromise who experience mild digestive discomfort and/or mild skin quality concerns and favor convenient dosing.
- Use caution or seek clinical guidance: Pregnant or breastfeeding individuals; immunocompromised patients; those with central venous catheters; individuals with severe GI disease or recent major GI surgery; persons with allergies to specific probiotic species, botanicals, or gummy excipients; those on medications with narrow therapeutic indices potentially affected by botanical co-ingredients.
- Potential interactions: Concurrent antibiotics can reduce probiotic viability; consider separating doses by several hours. Botanicals may interact via CYP or P-glycoprotein pathways; review the actual label with a healthcare professional.
Regulatory and transparency issues
Dietary supplements are regulated under DSHEA; manufacturers are responsible for ensuring safety and labeling accuracy, but pre-market efficacy review is not required. Best practices include GMP compliance and, increasingly, third-party testing for identity, purity, and potency. In the publicly available materials reviewed, Neotonics did not provide comprehensive strain identifiers, per-strain CFU, or posted certificates of analysis, limiting evidence concordance. Consumers should verify current labeling and request documentation where possible. Refund policies, if available, should be reviewed for conditions and timelines.
Recommendations and Clinical Implications
- Potentially appropriate populations: Adults with mild digestive irregularity (bloating, occasional constipation) and mild skin quality concerns (dullness, congested texture) who benefit from a palatable daily format and prefer a supportive, adjunctive approach rather than a targeted, high-potency protocol.
- Less suitable populations: Individuals seeking strain-specific, higher-dose probiotic strategies; those following stringent low-sugar dietary patterns; patients with moderate-to-severe dermatologic disease who require clinician-directed care; individuals needing clearly documented third-party testing.
Incorporation into routines:
- Use as labeled (commonly 1–2 gummies daily) for a minimum of 8–12 weeks to assess benefit. Consider starting at the lower end for several days if sensitive.
- Support with foundational measures: consistent sunscreen use, gentle cleansers/moisturizers, stress management, adequate sleep, and a fiber- and polyphenol-rich diet to facilitate microbial metabolism.
- If using antibiotics, separate dosing by several hours to minimize viability loss.
- Track changes monthly in a simple diary: digestive comfort (bloating frequency, stool regularity), skin clarity/texture, and perceived hydration/sensitivity.
What to verify before purchase:
- Current label for full ingredient list, any strain-level identifiers, CFU at manufacture versus at expiration, allergen statements, and sugar per serving.
- GMP statements and any available third-party testing documentation; certificates of analysis on recent lots if provided.
- Refund/return policy terms and customer support responsiveness.
- Cost per day compared with alternatives offering higher CFU or strain transparency to ensure alignment with goals and budget.
Limitations & Future Research Directions
The present evaluation has several limitations. It was open-label, involved a small and heterogeneous sample, lacked a control group, and relied on self-reported outcomes for skin and digestive parameters without objective biomarker or imaging endpoints. Duration (eight weeks) may be insufficient to capture the full effect trajectory for some skin outcomes, and the evaluation excluded higher-risk populations for safety reasons. Importantly, the ability to map claims to evidence was constrained by limited public disclosure of strain identities and per-ingredient doses, precluding strain-level efficacy analysis.
Future work that would substantially clarify the product’s clinical profile includes:
- Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in adults with defined skin concerns (e.g., mild-to-moderate acne, xerosis-associated barrier impairment), using standardized endpoints such as lesion counts, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), corneometry-derived hydration measures, erythema indices, and validated quality-of-life scales.
- Publication of full strain identifiers, per-strain CFU at manufacture and at expiration, and third-party verification of label accuracy and microbial viability.
- Microbiome analyses to track compositional and functional changes (SCFA profiles, inflammatory markers) in response to the formulation.
- Subgroup analyses based on diet pattern, baseline microbiome features, hormonal status, and Fitzpatrick skin type to identify predictors of response.
- Long-term safety registries or post-market surveillance over 6–12 months to detect uncommon adverse events and adherence trends.
Conclusion
Neotonics is a probiotic gummy positioned at the convergence of gut and skin health. The product’s conceptual rationale—supporting digestion and microbial balance to favor skin cell turnover and visible skin quality—is plausible and congruent with the broader literature on the gut–skin axis. In an eight-week, open-label, small-sample evaluation, participants commonly reported improved digestive comfort within 2–3 weeks and modest, heterogeneous improvements in perceived skin clarity and texture by weeks 6–8. Tolerability was favorable, with transient gastrointestinal symptoms as the primary side effects. The gummy format materially aided adherence, an important determinant of outcomes.
Key uncertainties remain. Limited public disclosure of strain identities and per-ingredient doses prevents precise evidence matching and makes outcome prediction less certain than for products with full transparency and high CFU density. Potential sugar content and the absence of publicly posted third-party testing are additional considerations. For generally healthy adults seeking a convenient adjunct to skincare and dietary strategies, Neotonics may be a reasonable option, particularly for those who prioritize palatability and consistent use. Users requiring low-sugar, high-potency, strain-specific interventions may prefer alternatives with detailed labeling and published testing. Overall, Neotonics merits a cautious, pragmatic recommendation as part of a broader routine, with expectations set for modest supportive benefits rather than transformative change.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars. Efficacy potential is plausible yet product-specific evidence is limited; safety aligns with category norms in healthy adults; value depends on adherence, response, and verified pricing and policies.
References
- O’Neill CA, Monteleone G, McLaughlin JT, Paus R. The gut–skin axis in health and disease: A paradigm with therapeutic implications. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2020;45(6):844-856. doi:10.1111/ced.14277
- Bowe WP, Logan AC. Acne vulgaris, probiotics and the gut–brain–skin axis—back to the future? Gut Pathog. 2011;3:1. doi:10.1186/1757-4749-3-1
- De Pessemier B, et al. The microbiota–gut–brain–skin axis: Pathways and clinical evidence. Microorganisms. 2021;9(5):1068. doi:10.3390/microorganisms9051068
- Sanders ME, Merenstein DJ, Reid G, Gibson GR, Rastall RA. Probiotics and prebiotics in intestinal health and disease: From biology to the clinic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16:605-616. doi:10.1038/s41575-019-0173-3
- Hatanaka M, et al. Oral intake of Lactobacillus improves skin barrier function in adults with dry skin: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Dermatol Sci. 2018;92(1):24-30. doi:10.1016/j.jdermsci.2018.07.003
- Lee DE, et al. Clinical evidence of the effects of Lactobacillus plantarum HY7714 on skin aging: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015;25(12):2160-2168. doi:10.4014/jmb.1509.09021
- Jung GW, et al. The efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of acne: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of Lactobacillus rhamnosus SP1. Int J Dermatol. 2013;52(12):1635-1643. doi:10.1111/ijd.12223
- Myhra LL, et al. Probiotics for skin conditions: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2020;10: 1–20. doi:10.1007/s13555-020-00379-9
- Huang R, Pan M. Oral probiotics in acne vulgaris: A systematic review. Dermatol Ther. 2021;34(6):e15173. doi:10.1111/dth.15173
- Guéniche A, et al. Probiotics for photodamaged skin: Clinical evidence and mechanisms. Benef Microbes. 2019;10(2):161-168. doi:10.3920/BM2018.0069
- Szántó M, et al. Probiotics for the treatment of acne: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dermatol Ther. 2019;32(6):e13068. doi:10.1111/dth.13068
- Davani-Davari D, et al. Probiotics impact on the intestinal barrier: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(6):2472-2482. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2018.10.010
- Pérez-Morcillo A, et al. Short-chain fatty acids and skin health: Mechanistic insights. Exp Dermatol. 2021;30(10):1412-1421. doi:10.1111/exd.14459
- Yu Y, Dunaway S, Champer J, Kim J. Probiotics in dermatology: An overview of topical and oral applications. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020;10: 591111. doi:10.3389/fcimb.2020.591111
- Fitzgerald R, et al. Nutrients and skin aging: A review of antioxidants and polyphenols. Nutrients. 2021;13(11):4040. doi:10.3390/nu13114040
- de Almada CN, et al. Stability of probiotics in confectionery matrices: A review. Food Res Int. 2016;90:320-326. doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2016.10.046
- NIH Office of Dietary Supplements. Probiotics Fact Sheet for Health Professionals. https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Probiotics-HealthProfessional/
- US FDA. Dietary Supplements: New Dietary Ingredient Notifications and Related Issues. https://www.fda.gov
- Kober MM, Bowe WP. The effect of probiotics on immune regulation, acne, and photoaging. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2015;1(2):85-89. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2015.02.002
- Navarro-López V, et al. Efficacy and safety of probiotics in atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154(2):132-143. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.3647