Loading…
We use essential cookies (authentication, your saved goals/stack) by default. With your permission we'll also enable privacy-respecting analytics (Vercel Web Analytics, anonymous load-time metrics) and error-replay diagnostics (Sentry — DOM snapshots only when an error fires) so we can fix bugs faster. Learn more
Head-to-head evidence comparison — which supplement is right for you?
Probiotics wins 1 of 3 categories. Both are solid choices — the best pick depends on your specific goals.
Verdict
Likely helps
11 of 14 studies with measurable effects showed benefit.
Top outcomes
Verdict
Probably helps
18 of 26 studies with measurable effects showed benefit.
Top outcomes
100-200mg daily
Morning with food, Can be divided into two doses
Pycnogenol (standardized extract)
10-20 billion CFU
With or without food (strain-dependent), Same time daily for consistency
Capsules with multiple strains
4-8 weeks
6-12 weeks
4-8 weeks
Initial use
2-4 weeks
4-8 weeks
4-8 weeks
First 1-2 weeks
Phlebotonics for venous insufficiency
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2020) · Meta analysis · n=7690
Pooled data suggest that phlebotonics probably increase adverse events slightly, compared to placebo (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.27; 37 studies; 5789 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).
Pine bark (Pinus spp.) extract for treating chronic disorders
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2020) · Meta analysis · n=1641
In a mixed group of participants with type 1 and type 2 DM we do not know whether pine bark extract decreases HbA1c (MD -0.20 %, 95% CI -1.83 to 1.43; one study; 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence).
Effect of pycnogenol supplementation on blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials
Phytotherapy research : PTR (2020) · Meta analysis · n=922
Pooled analysis suggested that pycnogenol supplementation can reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP) of (-3.22 mmHg; 95% CI [-5.52, -0.92]) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP; -1.91 mmHg; 95% CI [-3.64, -0.18]).
Preventive Effect of Probiotics on Oral Mucositis Induced by Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
International journal of molecular sciences (2022) · Meta analysis · n=708
Three trials using Lactobacilli-based probiotics reported that the incidence of oral mucositis in the probiotic group was significantly low (risk ratio [RR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.77−0.93, p = 0.0004).
Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2020) · Meta analysis · n=12127
Effect size was similar in the sensitivity analysis and marked heterogeneity persisted.
Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2017) · Meta analysis · n=9955
A complete case analysis (i.e. participants who completed the study) among trials investigating CDAD (31 trials, 8672 participants) suggests that probiotics reduce the risk of CDAD by 60%.
Based on meta-analyses showing modest reductions in systolic (-3.22 mmHg) and diastolic (-1.91 mmHg) blood pressure. Effects are clinically small and studies show heterogeneity.
Based on meta-analyses showing benefits for IBS and digestive symptoms. Effect sizes varied considerably between studies with low to very low certainty of evidence. Initial GI symptoms common when starting but typically resolve within 1-2 weeks.
AI-estimated from published studies. Interpret as directional guidance.
Probiotics has a higher evidence score (9/10 vs 9/10) and wins in 1 of 3 categories.
For reduce inflammation, Probiotics has a higher relevance score (95 vs 75).
No known interactions between Pine Bark Extract and Probiotics have been documented in our database. However, always consult a healthcare provider before combining supplements.