Wheybolic

What the Data Says About Wheybolic

Wheybolic by Gnc Amp carries a composite safety score of 65/100, which we classify as "Concern" on our four-tier shelf-label framework.

Of the 20 ingredients parsed from this label, 9 are covered by a regulator or watchdog we screen against (Tocopherols, Sodium Caseinate, Silicon Dioxide and 6 others), with 8 carrying an FDA Substances Added to Food (SAFFA) status and 6 a CSPI Chemical Cuisine rating. The remaining 11 ingredients appear in neither registry, so they neither raise nor lower the score. Each additive rated caution-or-worse penalizes the composite. Product data originates from the OpenFoodFacts collaborative catalog; safety annotations come from federal regulators and the Center for Science in the Public Interest. This score is a transparent derived index we compute from that public data, not an official FDA rating or endorsement; see the Methodology page for the exact weighting.

Our scan identified 3 flagged ingredients in this product, components that at least one official source has classified as requiring caution, targeted avoidance, or further evaluation. Flagged ingredients are the items most likely to surface in FDA inspection findings, state-level ingredient bans, or outbreak-related recall notices, so the per-ingredient breakdown below is the most useful lens for anyone screening this product for a specific dietary concern.

On the NOVA processing scale, Wheybolic is classified as Group 4 (Ultra-processed). NOVA measures industrial processing intensity rather than ingredient-level safety, so it complements the SAFFA and CSPI ratings: a product can be clean on additive flags but heavily processed, or lightly processed but carry individually flagged ingredients. Combining both lenses gives a fuller picture than either alone.

How the three scores on this page were derived

This label lands in the third of four positions on the published scale. What separates that position from its neighbours is arithmetic rather than judgement: identical inputs run through the documented weighting always arrive at the same place. Anyone who works the calculation through by hand, using the methodology write-up together with the itemised ratings further down, will reproduce this number exactly — which is the reason for publishing a computed figure instead of an opinion.

Nutri-Score settled on its middle grade here, the band the algorithm produces when the penalty and credit sides of its nutrient ledger come out close to balanced. A mid-scale grade is a statement about the panel as a whole rather than about any single nutrient, and products arrive at it by very different routes: a moderate profile across every term, or high marks on some offset by heavy penalties on others. The grade is computed separately from the ingredient screen below and the two are not comparable measures.

A mid-length component list was parsed from this label. There are enough separate entries for the screen to match several independently, while each matched entry still carries visible weight in the resulting index. Lists of this size are the most common shape in the catalogue, which makes the composite here easier to place against comparable products than at either extreme.