Gelatine Sculpt Blog
Six of twenty-three: reading an advert against its own label
Two documents came out of the same folder. The Gelatine Sculpt Supplement Facts panel names 23 substances; the seller’s Inside Gelatine Sculpt graphic shows 6 of them. The 17 it leaves out include three of the four ingredients our sources attach safety language to. This post sets out the difference, what it is fair to conclude, and a five-step method you can run on any product.
By the Gelatine Sculpt Editorial Desk · Last updated September 24, 2026
Two documents out of the same folder
Two documents arrived with this stock in the same folder. One is the Supplement Facts panel printed on the label. The other is a marketing graphic headed Inside Gelatine Sculpt, showing framed ingredient cards around a photograph of the bottle.
The panel names 23 substances. The graphic shows 6. That is the whole finding, and it took no expertise to make: two numbers off two pieces of paper that came from the same sender on the same day.
What follows is what the difference is made of, what it is fair to conclude, and how to run the same comparison on a product this site has never seen.
- Two documents out of the same folder
- The six the graphic puts on screen
- The seventeen it leaves out
- Where the safety language lives
The six the graphic puts on screen
The six
The graphic shows chromium and five members of the blend, and in the panel’s declared order those five sit at positions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7.
| On the graphic | Where the panel puts it | At most | Amount on the graphic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chromium (as chromium picolinate) | Its own line, outside the blend | 0.7 mcg printed | Not published |
| Maca (Lepidium mevenii) Root Extract | Position 1 of 22 | 200 mg or less | Not published |
| Grape (Vitis vinifera) Seed Extract | Position 2 of 22 | 100 mg or less | Not published |
| Guarana (Paullinia cupana) Seed Extract | Position 3 of 22 | 66.7 mg or less | Not published |
| African Mango (Irvingia gabonesis) Seed Extract | Position 4 of 22 | 50 mg or less | Not published |
| Green Tea (Camellia sinensis) Leaf Extract | Position 7 of 22 | 28.6 mg or less | Not published |
The first thing to say about that table is in the seller’s favour. These are real ingredients that really are on the label, and four of the five blend members shown are among the heaviest in it. A graphic picking names off the bottom of the list would be doing worse.
The second is the right-hand column. Not one card carries a weight, so the graphic is a list of names with pictures attached, and a name without an amount cannot be checked against anything.
The third is a detail rather than a finding. The panel spells maca’s species mevenii; the graphic spells it meyenii, the accepted spelling. The two documents disagree about the name of the largest ingredient in the product, and we leave the label’s spelling as printed, because a site that silently corrects a label has stopped quoting it.
The seventeen it leaves out
Which leaves 17 substances that are on the bottle and in none of the marketing supplied with it. They are not trace additions somebody overlooked; they are ingredients the manufacturer put in the formula and printed on the panel.
In the panel’s own order they are: Eleutherococcus Senticosus Root Extract, Astragalus Root Extract, Gymnema Leaf Extract, Coleus Forskohlii Root Extract, Capsicum Annuum Fruit Extract, Grapefruit (Citrus paradisi) Fruit Extract, Panax Ginseng Aerial Extract, Raspberry Ketones, L-Glutamine, L-Tyrosine, L-Arginine Base, Beta-Alanine, Monoammonium Glycyrrhizinate, GABA (Gamma amino butyric acid), L-Ornithine HCL, L-Typtophan and L-Carnitine Base.
Six of those are amino acids, one is an amino-acid derivative and one is a neurotransmitter taken by mouth. The rest are botanical extracts, and three of them are the reason the next section exists.
Where the safety language lives
The pattern
Four ingredients on this label have safety language attached to them in the sources we opened. Three of those four are in the 17 the graphic leaves out. The fourth is on the graphic, on a card carrying neither an amount nor a caution.
Monoammonium glycyrrhizinate, position 18
NCCIH: “Even small amounts of glycyrrhizin from licorice root products have been linked to severe adverse effects in people who consume a lot of salt, in people with hypertension, and in people with heart or kidney conditions.”
Ceiling 11.1 mg, amount not published. Not on the graphic and in no marketing in this pack.
Panax ginseng aerial extract, position 12
NCCIH: “Short-term oral use (by mouth, up to 6 months) of Asian ginseng in recommended amounts appears to be safe for most people.”
Ceiling 16.7 mg. The phrase to notice is in recommended amounts, a quantity this label does not print.
Grapefruit fruit extract, position 11
FDA: “When there is too much drug in the blood, you may have more side effects.”
Ceiling 18.2 mg. That page is about juice in glassfuls and we will not pretend it is about a fruit extract inside a blend. If you take prescription medicine, ask your prescriber.
Green tea leaf extract, position 7
NCCIH: “Although uncommon, liver injury has been reported in some people who used green tea products, primarily green tea extracts in tablet or capsule form.”
Ceiling 28.6 mg. This one is on the graphic, on a card with no amount and no caution. Shown is not the same as explained.
Read those four panels together and the shape is hard to miss: the ingredients our sources have the most to say about are, with one exception, the ingredients the marketing has nothing to say about. The cautions page takes every one of them at length.
A subset is not an accusation
Nothing in the pack says why those six were chosen, and an ordinary explanation fits every fact here. This post reports a shape in two documents, not an intention, because no document we hold contains one.
What this does not prove
Here is what that does not establish, and it is worth as much as the finding.
It does not establish intent. Nothing in the pack says why those six were chosen. Six cards is a plausible number for a graphic that has to be legible on a phone, and a designer with limited space picking recognisable names is an ordinary explanation that fits every fact here. This site does not know which explanation is right, and says so rather than picking the one that makes a better sentence.
It does not establish that anything is unsafe. Not one source we opened says this product is dangerous, and not one of them tested it. No published trial on the finished Gelatine Sculpt formula appears in anything we have read, so every source on this site describes a single ingredient or the product category rather than this bottle. Every ceiling in this post is a maximum, most of them are small, and a small maximum is not a finding of harm.
It does not establish that the graphic is wrong. Everything on it is on the label.
What it does establish is a shape: a marketing document that is a strict subset of a regulatory one, with the subset chosen somewhere other than at random. A reader is entitled to notice the shape and go and read the longer document.
The method, written for any product
The method
The comparison generalises and it needs no expertise. Five steps, of which the first four are counting.
Find the regulatory document
The Supplement Facts panel, off the bottle or the label artwork. Not the product page, not the ingredient graphic, not a screenshot of either.
Count what it names
Every substance with a line of its own, plus every member of any proprietary blend. Here that count is 23.
Count what the marketing names
Every ingredient the seller’s own graphics and copy mention by name. Here that count is 6.
List the difference and read it
Not the number, the names. Then look each one up in a source you can open yourself, and notice whether the omitted ones have anything attached to them.
Write down what you cannot conclude
A subset is evidence about a document, not about a company’s intentions or a product’s safety. That distinction is the whole of the honesty in the exercise.
Run end to end here: panel 23, graphic 6, difference 17, and exactly one published amount among the 23 — chromium. The other 22 carry a ceiling rather than a weight, so none of the cautions attached to them can be weighed. If an ingredient is the reason you are buying, check that it is on the panel rather than the advert, and check where in the declared order it sits. The panel is transcribed as printed, misspellings included, on the label page.
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
Try Gelatine Sculpt with 60 days to change your mind
Three bottles is $59 each with free US shipping, and the guarantee runs 60 days from purchase.
Order desk +1 (925) 231-0148 · opening hours not published
References
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Licorice Root. https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/licorice-root
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Asian Ginseng. https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/asian-ginseng
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Grapefruit Juice and Some Drugs Don't Mix. https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/grapefruit-juice-and-some-drugs-dont-mix
Every source above was opened and read on September 24, 2026. None of them tested Gelatine Sculpt itself. They describe the named ingredients and the product category, which is a different thing from testing this finished formula.
Keep reading
Next on this site
What a proprietary blend actually tells you, and what it does not
The descending-order rule in 21 CFR 101.36(c)(2), the 200 divided by n ceiling worked through on this blend, and the four things it cannot tell you.
What not published means on a supplement label
Standardisation, caffeine totals, dropper volumes, dates and certificates: the absences on this label, and the check each one closes off for a reader.
All twenty-three, one at a time
Every substance the panel names, its position in the declared order, its ceiling and what the sources we opened actually say about it.