L. Brevis

L. Brevis appears in 7 indexed US food products. No FDA SAFFA status or CSPI rating is attached in this snapshot, so this page reports prevalence rather than a safety verdict.

What the data can answer

L. Brevis appears in 7 catalogued products, but this snapshot has no FDA SAFFA status or CSPI Chemical Cuisine rating attached to it. This page therefore cannot answer whether the ingredient is safe from those sources. It can show how often it occurs, where it tends to sit on labels, and which kinds of products contain it.

7
catalogued products
#19,546
usage rank of 247,206
3
named brands represented
66%
average depth down ingredient lists

Catalog prevalence comes from Open Food Facts ingredient lists. FDA SAFFA and CSPI Chemical Cuisine labels are shown only when the source record contains them.

L. Brevis sits in the busiest tenth of the catalog (#19,546 / 247,206)

Usage rank
#19,546
of 247,206 ingredients that appear in at least one catalogued product, tied with 2,185 others that also appear in exactly 7 products.
Typical depth in an ingredient list
66%
Mean relative depth 66% across 7 parsed labels, slot 15.7 on average. L. Brevis tends to sit in the lower half of the list. Depth is location on the label, not a measured dose.

Ranks use Open Food Facts ingredient rows on this site’s refresh cycle. 247,206 ingredients with ≥1 product appearance enter the ranking. Prevalence and list depth are catalog facts, not toxicology.

Reading this ingredient record

A clean co-occurrence count is not a safety clearance

No linked product currently contains a separately flagged ingredient, but zero co-occurrence is an absence-of-evidence result, not regulatory approval. The practical reading is about use: L. Brevis reaches 3 named brands, most often appears under Dairies, and typically sits in the lower half of the list. Product examples include Banana Cream Pie Probiotic Coconut Yogurt; Coconut Cult Probiotic Coconut Yogurt Harvest Strawberry; Coconut Cult Wild Passion Fruit. Check the current label and authoritative source databases when the decision involves allergies, dosage, pregnancy, or a medical condition.

0% of linked products currently carry a separately flagged ingredient

Most NOVA-tagged examples land in Group 4 (1 of 1), yet the products span unrelated categories. That contrast matters: processing class can describe how a food was made while saying nothing decisive about this ingredient's regulatory status. Use the linked examples to understand formulation context, and leave the unanswered toxicology or individual-sensitivity question unanswered.

Next check: verify the unresolved source rating directly instead of converting zero co-flags into reassurance.

How do the sampled products compare?

Each point is one of the 7 sampled products listed below: its overall safety score against how many separately flagged ingredients its label carries. Bubble size is the number of ingredient rows the label actually resolved to.

Safety score vs. flagged-ingredient count for products containing L. Brevis

Per-product safety score and flagged-ingredient count from the same sampled listings shown below. Bubble size = linked ingredient rows. Source: Open Food Facts labels x FDA SAFFA x CSPI Chemical Cuisine. 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 7 entities by Safety score (X) and Flagged ingredients on label (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. High score, still flaggedLow score, more flaggedHigh score, fewer flaggedLow score, fewer flagged 99.9100.0100.0100100.0100.0100.1 00.00.00.1 Safety score Flagged ingredients on label Safety score vs. flagged-ingredient count for products containing L. Brevis Banana Cream Pie Probiotic Coconut YogurtCoconut Cult Probiotic Coconut Yogurt Harvest StrawberryCoconut Cult Wild Passion FruitCoconut Cult Wild Passion FruitVanilla Cookie Meal Replacement ShakeVanilla Recipe Non-Dairy Probiotic Coconut Gelato, Vanilla RecipeBlueberries
Per-product safety score and flagged-ingredient count from the same sampled listings shown below. Bubble size = linked ingredient rows. Source: Open Food Facts labels x FDA SAFFA x CSPI Chemical Cuisine.

High-volume peers for L. Brevis

High-volume peers for L. Brevis: 7 products, mean screening score 100/100. Axes below stay distinct so count-neighbors do not duplicate score-neighbors.

Similar mean product score

Score-axis peers only, mean screening score among ingredients with ≥50 scored products, not a second count list.

What to do with this L. Brevis record

7 product rows plus any FDA/CSPI fields on L. Brevis are the evidence base — drill into the listings that matter for your decision.

  • Review the sampled product records that list L. Brevis to see how the ingredient appears in actual labels. Browse linked labels
  • Browse another ingredient record and keep the same FDA/CSPI and prevalence fields in view. Open a peer record
  • See the join rules behind screening scores before reading them as dietary advice. See source joins

This page describes published source classifications and product-label coverage. It is not dietary, allergy, or medical advice.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is there no FDA/CSPI verdict on L. Brevis?

This snapshot has no FDA SAFFA status or CSPI Chemical Cuisine rating attached to L. Brevis, so PlainFoodSafe does not present a source-backed safety verdict. The page reports catalog prevalence (#19,546 of 247,206 ingredients) and label position instead.

Which product shelves show up most often with L. Brevis?

L. Brevis ranks in the top decile by product count (#19,546 of 247,206), appearing in 7 indexed products led by Dairies. The sample list below is a slice of that footprint, not the full universe.

Why is L. Brevis so common on ingredient lists?

The source record does not name a technical effect, yet L. Brevis appears in 7 products (#19,546 usage rank). High prevalence here describes formulation frequency, not an approved use level.

Regulatory status: FDA SAFFA (L. Brevis). Safety ratings: CSPI Chemical Cuisine; product presence: Open Food Facts via PlainFoodSafe (September 2026). Figures are computed from those sources, no editor-typed counts. Methodology · State regulations.