Myprotein Informed Sport review: is it worth it for lifters?

What the logo on the tub certifies and what it does not, traced from the lot number to the database in five steps

A large UK sports nutrition brand's batch-tested range, sold under the banned-substance certification programme's logo, is reviewed here by its lot number rather than by its catalogue, because the logo is a statement about a batch and the lot number is the only thing that connects the tub in a lifter's hand to the statement. What the programme certifies is exact and worth reading exactly: that batch of that product was sampled and tested by an accredited laboratory for substances on the prohibited list, at the laboratory's detection limits, and the result was published against the lot number in the programme's public database, with the laboratory group running the programme accredited to the laboratory standard and the brand's manufacturing site audited for the contamination risks that produce positive tests, shared equipment, raw material sourcing and cleaning between runs. That is a real and specific assurance, the only one in sport that reduces the risk strict liability creates, and the brand pays for it per batch. What the logo does not certify is equally exact. It does not test for efficacy or dose, so a certified protein's grams per serving and a certified creatine's purity are read by the ordinary five reads like any other product. It does not test for heavy metals, microbes or amino spiking, which are different analytes on a different certificate. It does not extend to the brand's other ranges: a brand with a certified range and an uncertified one has made one promise about the first and none about the second, and the uncertified tub beside the certified one on the same website carries exactly the risk of any uncertified product. And it does not, in the anti-doping agency's own wording, guarantee that any supplement is free of prohibited substances; it reduces the risk by the one method that reduces it, and the athlete still answers for whatever is in their sample.

The review is therefore a five-step check that takes two minutes. Step one: find the lot number on the tub, usually printed with the best-before date on the base or the seam. Step two: open the programme's public database, which lists certified products and the batches tested for each. Step three: search the product by brand and name, not by range, since certification attaches to the specific product. Step four: match the lot number on the tub against the certified batches listed; a tub whose lot number is absent is a tub the programme has not tested, whatever the logo on the range's marketing says, and it is returned or treated as uncertified. Step five: keep the tub, or a photograph of its lot number, and the database record, until any test window has passed, because a positive test months later is defended with the paperwork of what was taken and when, and a lifter who threw the tub away has thrown away the defence. A lifter who has run the five steps has reviewed the product the only way it can be reviewed, since the logo is a property of a batch, the batch is identified by the lot number, and the lot number is the review.

The three lifters and what the certified range is worth to each, the premium priced as insurance, the quality reads that the logo does not replace, and the benchmark

Worth it for lifters depends entirely on which of three lifters is asking, and the sorting is the useful part of the review. The first is the tested athlete: anyone in a sport under the anti-doping code, from a national squad to a drug-tested powerlifting federation, who can be sampled in or out of competition and who, under strict liability, is responsible for any prohibited substance found regardless of how it got there, with contaminated supplements a documented source of UK anti-doping violations and of bans that ended careers. For this lifter, a certified range is the only part of any brand's catalogue worth buying, the premium over the uncertified version of the same product is the cheapest insurance in sport, and the five-step lot number check is run on every tub without exception, including the ones that look identical to last month's. The second is the lifter who might be tested: a club competitor in a tested federation, a masters athlete, a student in a university programme, anyone whose sport has a testing pool they could be entered into; this lifter buys as if they will be tested, because the cost of the premium is pence a serving and the cost of a positive test is the sport, and because the habit of checking lot numbers is easier to build before it matters than after. The third is the lifter who will never be tested, which is most of the people reading, and for this lifter the honest answer is that the logo buys nothing the five quality reads do not: a certified whey is still read for grams of protein per serving against the high protein threshold and for the amino spiking that inflates it, a certified creatine is still read for its purity statement, and the premium paid for the banned-substance test is money that could have gone on the identity, purity and potency documents that the logo does not include. That is not a mark against the certified range; it is a statement of what the certification is for, and a lifter who is not tested and pays for it has bought insurance against a risk they do not carry.

Priced as insurance, the premium is simple arithmetic for the first two lifters: the difference in pence per serving between the certified and uncertified versions of the same product, multiplied by the servings in a season, against the value of the season itself, and there is no sport in which the sum comes out the other way. What the certified range does not replace, for all three lifters, is the quality reads that apply to every product on every shelf: elemental or protein dose against its threshold, form, pence per day at the labelled serving, the batch certificate for the analytes the category is exposed on, and the claims on the listing against the register, since a certified product may still state a claim that is not on the register and a lifter reads the listing the same way whatever logo sits beside it. The benchmark is stated plainly, because a review that sends tested athletes to the database must say where its own worked example sits: {FL} is batch tested for lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium with the certificate on request, UK made under GMP and BRC, 300mg elemental at 80% NRV, 180 capsules for £19.99 at 22p a day, and it is not certified under a banned-substance programme, so a tested athlete treats it as an uncertified product, which for a single-ingredient mineral from a UK GMP facility is a low risk and still a risk the athlete weighs for themselves against their federation's guidance. The verdict is the sorting: worth it, without question, for the tested athlete and for anyone who might become one; not worth the premium for the lifter who never will be, who spends it on the reads instead; and for all three, certified is a property of a batch and not of a brand, and the lot number is the review.

What to check on the label

Questions people also ask

Is Myprotein Informed Sport worth it for lifters?

For a tested athlete or anyone who might become one, yes without question: the certified range is the only part of any brand's catalogue worth buying under strict liability, the premium over the uncertified version is the cheapest insurance in sport, and the five-step lot number check is run on every tub; for the lifter who will never be tested, the logo buys nothing the five quality reads do not, since it covers prohibited substances rather than dose, metals or protein quality, and the premium is better spent on the identity, purity and potency documents the certification does not include.

What does the Informed Sport logo actually guarantee?

Nothing, by the anti-doping agency's own wording, which states that no supplement can be guaranteed free of prohibited substances; what the programme certifies is that a specific batch of a specific product was tested by an accredited laboratory for substances on the prohibited list at its detection limits, with the result published against the lot number and the manufacturing site audited for contamination risks, which reduces the risk by the only method that reduces it; it does not test efficacy, dose, heavy metals or amino spiking, and it does not extend to the brand's uncertified ranges.

How do I check if my tub is actually a certified batch?

Find the lot number printed with the best-before date on the base or seam of the tub, open the certification programme's public database, search for the product by brand and product name rather than by range, and match your lot number against the certified batches listed for it; a lot number absent from the database belongs to a batch the programme has not tested, whatever logo the range carries in its marketing, and the tub is returned or treated as uncertified; keep the tub or a photograph of the lot number and the database record until any test window has passed.

Do I need Informed Sport products if I am not a tested athlete?

No; the certification exists to reduce the risk that strict liability creates for athletes who can be sampled, and a lifter who will never be tested carries no such risk, so the premium paid for the banned-substance test is insurance against a risk they do not have; the quality reads that matter to an untested lifter, grams of protein per serving against the high protein threshold, creatine's purity statement, the batch certificate for heavy metals on a mineral, and the claims against the register, are not part of the certification and are what the premium is better spent on.

Can a certified supplement still cause a failed drug test?

Yes, which is why the programme and the anti-doping agency both say the risk is reduced rather than removed: certification tests a sample of a batch at the laboratory's detection limits for the substances on the list at the time, and a contaminant below those limits, a substance added to the list later, or a product bought from a batch that was not the tested one can still produce a positive; the defence is the paperwork, the tub, the lot number and the database record kept until the test window has passed, and the habit of buying only lot numbers that appear in the database.

Sources

1. UK Anti-Doping guidance on supplements: strict liability means an athlete is responsible for any prohibited substance in their sample regardless of how it got there, contaminated supplements have produced UK anti-doping violations, and batch testing under a recognised programme is the risk-reduction step the agency describes while stating no supplement can be guaranteed free of prohibited substances. https://www.ukad.org.uk/athletes/supplements
2. The Informed programmes' operator: Informed Sport and Informed Choice are run by LGC, an accredited laboratory group whose sports-supplement testing operates under ISO 17025 laboratory accreditation, with certified products and batches published on a public database. https://sport.wetestyoutrust.com/about
3. The sports supplement certification programmes: Informed Sport, Informed Choice, BSCG and NSF Certified for Sport test products or batches for banned substances, the assurance competing athletes rely on. https://sport.wetestyoutrust.com/
4. The World Anti-Doping Code and the strict liability principle: athletes are responsible for any prohibited substance found in their sample regardless of intent, with contaminated supplements a documented source of positive tests. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/prohibited-list

Related answers

• What is Informed Sport and do recreational lifters need it?
• Nature's best supplements review: is it worth it for lifters?
• British Supplements or Nutrition Geeks review: is it worth it for lifters?
• Boots sleep supplements review: is it worth it for lifters?
• Best supplements for muscle gain holland and Barrett review: is it worth it for lifters?
• Supplements for Sleep Holland and Barrett review: is it worth it for lifters?