Supplement evidence

072 / 575Probiotic strain

Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis

View my plan →

The short answer

Selected strains may improve stool frequency or transit in constipation; effects cannot be generalized across strains.

Evidence and scope: Conditional or population-specific
This status does not grade the ingredient for every goal, outcome, or person.
Important limitation: Benefit depends on the population, formulation, baseline status, and objective; results should not be generalized.
Before deciding: Key concern: Severe immunocompromise, critical illness, and central lines require clinical review.

01 / PRACTICAL GUIDE

Dose, absorption, and combinations

These are indication-specific reference or studied ranges—not a personalized prescription. Start with the objective, then check the form, label, medicines, and health conditions.

Reference range by objective

ConstipationStrain-specific trials commonly use 10^9–10^10 CFU/day

Reference or studied range—not a personalized prescription. The product label or a clinician may specify a different dose.

Dose source ↗

More is not automatically better. A clinician or product label may specify a different amount.

Absorption / solubilityFat/water classification is not the key factor

Fat/water solubility is not the useful decision point; preparation, fluid, timing, or strain identity matters more.

How it is commonly taken

Match strain code, viable count, and storage to the study.

Do not combine casually

Severe immunocompromise, critical illness, and central lines require clinical review.

Dose and use source ↗

Dose and use links lead to primary or official source material. Search links are discovery tools, not proof that every returned paper applies.

02 / EVIDENCE

What the research says

We keep supportive, mixed, negative, safety, and contextual findings together. The headline never replaces the underlying papers.

2research papers in this ledger

2unique primary studies represented

457unique participants represented

These are audited counts for this JIVANA collection, not search-result totals. Participants are counted once when multiple papers use the same cohort; review papers are not added again to participant totals.

Open the research timelineResearch timeline

Entries are ordered by publication year. A study period appears only when the source reports it.

2024

Does not support the tested claimPMID 39356506 · ChiCTR2000029215

Eight-week supplementation with Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 and functional constipation

Weekly complete spontaneous bowel movements increased in both groups, with no meaningful between-group difference. The tested HN019 dose did not outperform placebo.

Published: 2024Duration: 8 weeks after a 2-week run-inn=229 participants

Study design and methods

Design: Randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial
Population: 229 adults with Rome III functional constipation at five hospitals in Shanghai
Intervention: B. animalis subsp. lactis HN019, 7.0 billion CFU/day initially and 4.69 billion CFU/day at study end, versus maltodextrin placebo
Outcome: Complete spontaneous bowel movements and constipation symptoms

Funding or conflict note: Several authors were affiliated with International Flavors & Fragrances or Danisco; one author reported probiotic-related patents licensed to DuPont Nutrition & Bioscience.

Open research record ↗

2018

Does not support the tested claimPMID 29227175

Effects of 28-day Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis HN019 supplementation on functional constipation

Neither dose improved the prespecified primary or secondary outcomes. A post hoc subset of 65 people with at most three bowel movements weekly showed higher frequency and less straining, but this exploratory finding does not establish efficacy for the full population.

Published: 2018Duration: 28 daysn=228 participants

Study design and methods

Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging trial
Population: 228 adults with Rome III functional constipation
Intervention: HN019 at 1 billion or 10 billion CFU/day versus placebo
Outcome: Colonic transit time, bowel frequency, symptoms, quality of life, and harms

Funding or conflict note: Two authors were affiliated with DuPont Nutrition and Health.

Open research record ↗

Unscreened discovery appendix—not evidence24 candidate publicationsSearch run: Aug 21, 2026

Complete for the displayed PubMed query at the search timestamp—not for all databases or every possible synonym. Candidates can be irrelevant, duplicate the same study, or report negative findings. They are never summed as evidence or participants until screened.

03 / SOURCES

Start with the source material

Official evidence overviewPubMed bounded human-evidence search Live PubMed discovery searchNational Library of Medicine

The live search is for discovery only. Search-result counts change and are not included in the audited totals above.

Recent PubMed discovery recordsDirect links to the first 12 records returned by the reproducible search. These are discovery candidates—not reviewed summaries or a count of supportive findings.

04 / EXPERT CONTEXT

Expert context—not evidence

Expert positions are dated context—not scientific evidence. They never raise the evidence status or become consensus by repetition.

No direct, source-verified endorsement is currently recorded. Research authorship or discussion alone is not treated as endorsement.