Breathizen: Questions And Answers

A dietary supplement sold as a liquid oral spray for breathing comfort. One bottle is 2 oz / 60 mL and the stated serving is 4 pumps (0.60 mL) once daily, which makes a bottle 100 days. Five ingredients are named: mullein leaf extract 10:1, ginger root extract, bromelain powder, organic lemon extract and organic Cordyceps militaris. No Supplement Facts panel was supplied to this desk and no amount is published for any of them.

No. It is a dietary supplement, and the bottle says so. It has not been approved by the FDA for any use, it is not a treatment for any disease, and it is not an inhaler or a rescue medicine. If you have asthma, COPD or any diagnosed airway condition, NCCIH's position is direct: “Evidence does not support using complementary health approaches instead of proven medical management for asthma.”

This is the question this desk cannot answer for you, and it is the sharpest problem with the product. The directions say “shake well, spray 4 pumps (0.60 mL)”. Every photograph supplied to us shows a rubber-bulb dropper. The bottle's own front panel lists Fast-Acting Spray as a claim, and the brand's How Breathizen Works graphic shows a spray icon and a dropper icon in the same picture. You cannot take four pumps with a pipette. Ask the order desk what four pumps means in drops before you take any of it.

As supplied to this desk: shake well, then spray 4 pumps (0.60 mL) into the mouth or onto the tongue once daily, morning before the first meal preferred. Confirm against the bottle that actually arrives — and see the spray-versus-dropper question above, because the instruction may not match the closure you receive.

Neither. It is a liquid taken by mouth. There is no capsule and no gummy form in anything supplied to this desk.

There isn't one. No Supplement Facts panel was supplied to this desk with this product, and none appears in any artwork we were given — not on the bottle front, and no photograph of the back or wrap was supplied at all. The brand's own How Breathizen Works graphic contains a tile labelled SUPPLEMENT FACTS, illustrated with a generic document icon.<p>This is the largest single absence this desk has encountered, and most of this site follows from it.</p>

Not published. Five ingredients are named and not one carries a weight. We cannot tell you, the sales page does not tell you, and without a panel nobody outside the company can. It is worth being exact about what this means: it does not mean the amounts are low. It means they are unknown.

It is a concentration ratio, not a dose. It says ten parts of raw leaf were reduced to one part of extract. It tells you nothing about how much of that extract is in the bottle. A 10:1 extract at 5 mg and a 10:1 extract at 500 mg are the same ratio and completely different products. Without a weight beside it, the ratio is decoration.

Not published. No other-ingredients list was supplied, so the carrier, the preservative and any sweetener or flavouring are unknown. On a 60 mL liquid this is not a small gap — and it is also what the vegetarian, gluten-free, dairy-free and non-GMO seals would turn on.

We do not know, and we will not guess at a motive. What we can say is what the absence costs you: you cannot compare this product with another, you cannot set any ingredient against the dose its own research used, you cannot judge whether you are paying for a meaningful quantity, and you cannot give a clinician a straight answer about what you are taking.

No published trial exists on this combination, and because no amounts are printed, the usual check cannot be run at all. What we can report is what the reference sources say about the named ingredients, and on human breathing outcomes they are thin to adverse. The EMA approves mullein for traditional use only, for sore throat, and for the flower rather than the leaf in this bottle. NCCIH's ginger page covers nausea, cramps and knee osteoarthritis. The cordyceps summary says “doctors haven't studied them to see if they work.”

Not a question we answer with a yes or a no, because the honest answer is a list. There is a real company, a real refund line, a stated 60-day window, two postal addresses and published prices — more than many. There is also no panel, no amounts, no caution statement, no other-ingredients list, no visible FDA disclaimer, a Doctor formulated seal with no doctor named, and a dosing instruction the bottle cannot follow. We print all of it.

No, and no dietary supplement is. The FDA does not approve supplements for safety or effectiveness before sale. Any page claiming FDA approval for a supplement is wrong. A product made in an FDA-registered facility is not an approved product — registration means the facility is on a list, not that anything in it was tested or endorsed.

Nothing in the pack supplied to this desk mentions Shark Tank, any television appearance or any celebrity endorsement. We looked because people search for it. If you have seen a page claiming it, that page is not this one, and we would treat everything else on it with the same suspicion.

The front of the bottle says Fast-Acting. The review summary supplied by the same company says most people wait three to six weeks. Both of those came to this desk in the same delivery. Two of the ten supplied reviews say in their own words that it was slower than the page led them to expect.

No caution or warning panel was supplied with this product at all — nothing on pregnancy, nursing, under-18s, medical conditions or interactions. That absence is itself the finding, because two of the five named ingredients carry documented interaction notes in the sources we opened.

From the sources we opened, yes — two of the five named ingredients carry interaction notes. Bromelain: preclinical work suggests it “may increase the risk of bruising and bleeding” with warfarin, and it “may increase blood and urine levels” of tetracycline antibiotics. Cordyceps: it “may increase the adverse effects of antidiabetic or anticoagulant/antiplatelet drugs” and “can also lower blood sugar levels and may cause harm.” Because no amounts are published, nobody can say whether the quantities here are enough to matter. Take the ingredient list to whoever manages your prescriptions.

No. NCCIH is explicit: “Evidence does not support using complementary health approaches instead of proven medical management for asthma.” This is a dietary supplement, not a rescue medicine. Two of the ten supplied reviews make the same point unprompted — one reports that her clinic told her to keep the inhaler.

Nothing supplied with this product addresses pregnancy or nursing, which is precisely why we would not tell you it is fine. Ask your clinician, and take the ingredient list with you.

The brief says adults, 18 and over. No warning panel was supplied, so there is no label statement behind that.

$89 for one bottle, $177 for three ($59 each) and $294 for six ($49 each), with struck-through figures of $179, $537 and $1,074. All of those were published in the pack supplied to this desk. Confirm at the live checkout.

$0.89, $0.59 and $0.49 for the one-, three- and six-bottle packs. Those figures depend entirely on getting the bottle life right: 60 mL at 0.60 mL a day is 100 days, not 30. Priced against an assumed monthly bottle you would be out by a factor of more than three.

They are $179, $537 and $1,074 — which is $179 multiplied by one, three and six. No date is given on which this product sold at $179 a bottle. We print them because they are on the offer, and we print this note because a crossed-out number is a claim about the past that almost nobody can check.

100 days. The bottle is 2 oz / 60 mL and the daily serving is 0.60 mL, so 60 ÷ 0.6 = 100. This is the one calculation the label lets you run, and most pages in this category assume a 30-day bottle.

We will not tell you which to buy, but the arithmetic is worth having. One bottle is $89 for 100 days and the only option that does not commit you to a year or more. Six bottles is the cheapest per day at $0.49 — and it is 600 days of a product with no published amounts, bought against a 60-day refund window. The window does not stretch to cover the supply.

A 60-day window from purchase, and the sales side also asks for at least 30 days of use before a claim. Those together leave roughly a month of real decision time. Claim by calling +1 (302) 200-3480 with the order ID. Return shipping is the buyer's cost and tracking is advised. Refunds are quoted at 3–5 business days to credit, then 5–10 days to appear on the card.

Three things we would want to know and could not find: whether an opened bottle qualifies, whether a multi-pack can be partly returned, and whether a restocking fee applies. Confirm all three on the phone before you buy a multi-pack.

No, and it is not close. The window is 60 days. One bottle is 100 days, three bottles 300 and six bottles 600. Set that beside the brand's own figure that most people wait three to six weeks to notice anything: at six weeks you are 42 days in with 18 days left to ask for your money back.

We do not know, and we say so on every card. All ten, the score, the distribution and the order count were supplied to this desk in the same pack as the artwork. We did not collect them and cannot contact anyone named. We publish them unedited and labelled, and we publish no Review or AggregateRating structured data for them anywhere on this site.

Because three were supplied. The score printed is 4.7. The star distribution given to us — 58/26/10/4/2 — works out to 4.34. The ten reviews actually published average 4.1. Rather than choose one, we show all three and the arithmetic behind them.

A fair question to ask of any brand-supplied set. The distribution says 4% are two-star and 2% one-star — about 54 of the 891 claimed. None of them is in the ten we were given. We note it rather than presenting the sample as representative.

They are reserved for reviews this desk collects itself, from buyers who ordered through this site. There are none yet, so they stay empty. Filling them with anything else would make them the same kind of evidence as the ten above, which is exactly what they exist not to be.

Less than they appear to. Not one of them names a certifying body, a certificate number or a laboratory. GMP and Manufactured in USA describe a facility, not a test of this batch. Non-GMO, gluten free, dairy free and vegetarian are composition claims with no panel or other-ingredients list to check them against. Guaranteed pure names no standard and no contaminant.

Nobody is named. No doctor appears anywhere in the pack supplied to this desk as the formulator of this product. A physician's name was supplied, but for a different job — to be printed as the medical reviewer of these pages, which he has not read. We have not printed it there either.

A reference number is given — B-1164-26-BR, against lot B-26/BR-1164 — and no certificate was supplied to this desk. We have not seen one, so we cannot tell you whether it covers heavy metals, microbials, potency, or none of those. Ask the order desk for it, in writing.

Nothing supplied to this desk says so. A GMP seal is not a third-party test of a batch, and a certificate reference without a certificate is not a result.

Through this site, which is a Breathizen authorized U.S. retailer — and we should say plainly that we earn a commission when you do, which is why the criticism on this site is above the buy button rather than below it. Orders are handled by the sales desk on +1 (302) 200-3480.

It ships from the United States unless the sales page says otherwise, and a tracking number arrives in the order email. Shipping cost, delivery speed and international availability are not published in anything supplied to this desk.

For an order you have placed — tracking, a change, a refund — call +1 (302) 200-3480 or email [email protected]. Returns go to 650 Fifth Avenue, Floor 10, New York, NY 10019. For this website, its pages or a correction, write to [email protected], Mon–Fri 9:00am–5:00pm ET.

The Breathizenres editorial desk. We are an authorized retailer of this product and we earn a commission when you buy through this site. That is the reason the missing panel is in the first screen of the home page rather than in a footnote: a site that earns on the sale has to put its criticism where it costs something.

Because a supplied name is not a review. A physician's name came with the product pack with instructions to print it as the medical reviewer of these pages. These pages were written after the pack arrived and he has not read them. Printing his name would assert a professional endorsement that has not happened — on a product sold to people with breathing problems. The slot stays vacant until a named clinician has actually read it.

A fair question. Our answer is that the sale is going to happen somewhere, and the choice is whether it happens on a page that tells you there is no Supplement Facts panel or on one that does not. We would rather lose the order to an informed decision than win it from an uninformed one. Everything we could not verify is listed in one place, and the score is 2.0.

Email [email protected] with the page address and one sentence about what is wrong. If you are correcting a citation, say which claim and which source. Corrections are the most valuable message this desk receives and they are checked the same day.