Plenty of studies have confirmed the positive effects of creatine supplementation. One meta analysis...read more
G-Bomb 2.0 by Scitec Nutrition Review
G-Bomb 2.0 is a post-workout supplement manufactured by Scitec Nutrition. It ranks 440 out of 486 post-workout supplements and earned an overall thumbs-down recommendation based on seven factors including nutrition label transparency, ingredients, dosing, claims, research rating, and ranking.
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down recommendation. This recommendation is based on the criteria listed below. To earn an overall thumbs-up recommendation, a product must earn a thumbs-up in at least four of the seven areas below. Click on a graded area for an in-depth analysis.
|Graded Area||Thumb Up or Down|
|Nutrition Label Transparency|
|Ranking Within Category|
1 to 5 Star Rating Votes Votes for products are cast in two ways. First, visitors can rate each product with a 1 to 5 star rating. These votes are cast on a product's rating page (this page - below).
There have been no 1 to 5 star votes cast on G-Bomb 2.0; add yours below.
Add Your Vote
No email or registration required; click a button below and move on with your life!
Comparison Votes Visitors can also vote on which product works better on comparison pages. Comparison pages are a side-by-side analysis between two supplement products. The votes below illustrate whether visitors prefer G-Bomb 2.0, or the products listed in the table below. The number next to the thumb up is how many votes G-Bomb 2.0 won; the number next to the thumb down is how many votes it lost to the other product.
There have been no comparison votes cast for G-Bomb 2.0.
- Simple Report
- Detailed Report
- Ranking Within Category
The detailed report provides an in-depth analysis of the product's rating. In addition to showing ratings for each area, this report also provides the required criteria for a thumbs-up in each section.
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-up in this category because its effectiveness rating is 1.86. A product's effectiveness rating must be at least 1.5 to receive a thumbs-up in this area. This effectiveness rating means G-Bomb 2.0 is made up of a mix of both high and low-quality ingredients and may lead to some positive results.
This category illustrates how well a product works based on what the research says about its ingredients. Researchers conduct studies on supplement ingredients to gauge effectiveness. The database grades products on how effective their ingredients are. The effectiveness rating of supplement products is evaluated on a 3 point scale: 3.0 is the most effective, 1.0 is the least effective.
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down in this category because it contains 0% extremely and/or moderately effective ingredients. A product must contain at least 75% extremely and/or moderately effective ingredients to receive a thumbs-up in this area.
This category rates a product's ingredient makeup. A product should contain mostly extremely and/or moderately effective ingredients with little or no ineffective ones. The database categorizes ingredients as extremely, moderately, or ineffective based on conclusions from research articles.
G-Bomb 2.0 contains:
- unrated ingredients: 2 (the database does not contain information on these ingredients)
- total ingredients: 7
The following table lists all ingredients found in this product as well as their effectiveness ratings and amounts (if listed).
|Folic Acid 30.2mcg||3 out of 3|
|Naringin 45mg||2 out of 3|
|Glutamine Amount not listed.||1.9 out of 3|
|Black Pepper Fruit Extract (Piperine) 5mg||1.4 out of 3|
|L-Alanine 10mg||1 out of 3|
|Glutamic Acid*||not rated|
|Calcium AKG*||not rated|
|Product Effectiveness Rating||1.86|
Note: These ingredients are accurate as of March 27, 2021.
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down in this category because 0% of its ingredients are dosed within the effective range. Seventy-five (75)% of product's ingredients must be dosed within the effective range to receive a thumbs-up in this area.
This category compares a product's ingredient dosing to effective doses found in research articles and doses used in other products. When researchers study the efficacy of supplement ingredients, they use specific doses. Manufacturers should create products with ingredient doses that fall within established effective ranges.
G-Bomb 2.0 Dosing Compared to Research
This section is a comparison of ingredient doses found in G-Bomb 2.0 to amounts used in research articles. The first column contains the name of the ingredient as well as the amount. The second column contains the range of effective doses for that ingredient. Note: not all ingredients in the database contain dosing information; only ingredients with scientific dosing information are included in this analysis.
A green checkmark is shown if the ingredient amount falls within the effective range.
A down arrow is shown if an ingredient amount is lower than the effective range.
|Ingredient & Amount||Effective Range|
|Black Pepper Fruit Extract (Piperine) 5mg||60mg|
G-Bomb 2.0 Dosing Compared to Other Products
This section is a comparison of ingredient doses found in G-Bomb 2.0 to amounts used in other products. The first column displays the ingredient and amount. The second column displays the average amount of the ingredient found across all products in the database. The final column displays the range found across all products in the database.
An orange up or down arrow is shown if the ingredient amount is higher or lower than the average.
An equal sign is shown if the ingredient amount is equal to the average.
|Ingredient & Amount||Average||Range|
|Folic Acid 0.0302mg||0.97mg||0.02mg - 100mg|
|Naringin 45mg||130.87mg||1mg - 600mg|
|L-Alanine 0.01g||0.67g||0.01g - 2.2g|
|Calcium AKG 0.01g||0.28g||0.01g - 1g|
|Black Pepper Fruit Extract (Piperine) 0.01g||0.02g||0g - 5g|
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down in this category because 59% of its claims are rated as either extremely or moderately effective. Seventy-five (75)% of a product's claims must be rated as extremely or moderately effective to receive a thumbs-up in this area.
The product’s effectiveness rating is an overall picture of how well a product does or doesn't work. Individual studies research an ingredient's effects on certain claims. For example: does creatine monohydrate increase strength, or does beta alanine improve running performance?
The Supplement Database compiles the conclusions of these studies, and based on a product's ingredient makeup, calculates how well a product does on various claims. The claims below are organized by effectiveness (extremely, moderately, ineffective).
G-Bomb 2.0 is extremely effective at:
G-Bomb 2.0 is moderately effective at:
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down in this category because its research rating is 16. A product's research rating must be at least 60 to receive a thumbs-up in this area.
A research rating of 16 means there is an insufficient amount of research on the product's ingredients to ensure its effectiveness rating is valid.
The research rating is a measure of how much research has been conducted on a product's ingredient makeup. Manufacturers often rely on ingredients without adequate research backing. They may do this to compete with other products that are already using poorly researched ingredients. They may also only use a very small amount of cherry-picked research as a poor justification to use certain ingredients.
The amount of research contained in the database on a product's ingredients determines its research rating. Products with higher ratings are made up of thoroughly researched ingredients.
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down in this category because it discloses 71% of its ingredient amounts. A product must disclose all ingredient amounts to receive a thumbs-up in this area.
Nutrition label transparency refers to how many ingredients are listed with amounts on the product label. Many supplement manufacturers hide ingredient amounts under the guise of great-sounding proprietary blends such as "Maximum Muscular Size Enhancer" or "Anabolic Cell Strength Matrix."
When manufacturers use proprietary blends, they can hide ingredient amounts making it difficult for consumers to know whether a product is effective.
G-Bomb 2.0 contains:
- total ingredients: 7
- ingredients with amounts listed: 5
- ingredients without amounts listed: 2
- percent of ingredient amounts disclosed: 71%
The label below was generated from the information contained in the database about the product's ingredients and amounts. Actual product labels may differ in appearance.
G-Bomb 2.0 earned a thumbs-down in this category because it ranks 440 out of 486 in the post-workout supplement category (bottom third). A product must be ranked in the top two-thirds of its category to receive a thumbs-up in this area.
G-Bomb 2.0 ranks 440 out of 486 in the Post-Workout Supplements category and 4,039 out of 4,483 in the entire database. The table below lists comparisons with similarly ranked post-workout supplement. Click on a link for an in-depth comparison between the two.
|G-Bomb 2.0 vs Green Bulge|
|G-Bomb 2.0 vs Protesamine|
|G-Bomb 2.0 vs Elite POST Workout|
|G-Bomb 2.0 vs Cell K.E.M.|
|G-Bomb 2.0 vs Anafuse|
G-Bomb 2.0 vs Other Scitec Nutrition Post-Workout Supplements
Manufacturers often create multiple products within the same category. These products are sometimes similar but marketed to different consumers with varying prices. The following table allows you to compare G-Bomb 2.0 against its sister products; products manufactured by Scitec Nutrition within the post-workout supplements category.
|G-Bomb 2.0 vs Amino 5600|
See more comparisons: Is G-Bomb 2.0 the best post-workout supplement?
|Effectiveness Rating||rating is greater or equal to the required 1.5|
|Ingredients||less than 75% of ingredients are rated as effective|
|Ingredient Dosing||less than 75% of ingredients are dosed properly|
|Claims||less than 75% of claims are rated as effective|
|Research Rating||research rating is lower than the required 60|
|Nutrition Label Transparency||does not disclose all ingredient amounts on label|
|Ranking Within Category||ranks in the bottom third of category|
|Overall Recommendation||received a thumbs down in the majority of areas|