Official product information
Maxforce Reviews and How to Read Them
No customer quote and no star rating of ours, because the supplied pack calls its own review block layout copy. Here is the evidence, the arithmetic and a scorecard instead.
Written and reviewed by the Maxforce Editorial Desk · Last updated October 29, 2026
Quick answer
No Maxforce customer reviews or star ratings are shown on this page yet.
Reviews are shown only once they are linked to real orders, so no quotes or scores appear for now.
Read the label line by line instead.
1 sentence from the seller settles it
Why this page publishes no customer review
The seller calls its own reviews, star scores and order counts layout copy.
There is no customer review on this page, and that is a decision. A review block arrived with the rest of the Maxforce material: eight named buyers with ages and cities, a written-review count, an order count, a star split and an average score. None of it is published here.
We are not publishing the customer reviews supplied with this product, and the clearest reason is written in the supplied pack itself. Its own precautions block ends: “Reviews, star scores, and order counts in this pack are layout copy only.” That is the seller’s instruction to whoever builds the website, and it says the numbers are placeholders.
That is the party who supplied the reviews calling them layout copy —
placeholder text. So no star rating of this desk’s appears anywhere here, and no
AggregateRating or Review markup sits in the structured data.
8 named buyers, sharing 3 sentences
Eight named buyers, three sentences, and two men called Omar W.
A duplicated name, a pull-quote on the wrong review, three sentences for eight people.
Three things in the block confirm it without needing that sentence. Eight named buyers share three sentences between them — three of the eight carry one sentence word for word, three carry a second and two carry a third. We are not reproducing them here, because reproducing placeholder copy is how it turns into testimony. Two different buyers are both called Omar W. — one 49 in Dallas, one 66 in Pittsburgh. And the pull-quote attributed to “Vince, 60” reads “Desk answered”, while the review attributed to Vince D., 60, says nothing about the desk at all.
Two men called Omar W.
The duplicate name needs no interpretation. One Omar W. is 49 and in Dallas. The other is 66 and in Pittsburgh. Either the same man aged seventeen years and moved nine hundred miles between two reviews of a thirty-day jar, or a name was reused from a list. The pull-quote is the same error the other way round: a line of praise lifted for a headline and attached to a buyer whose review does not contain it.
4.46 weighted average, against a printed 4.6
66/21/8/3/2 weights to 4.46, and the printed figure is 4.6
The arithmetic in full, then the seller’s figures reproduced once and attributed as the seller’s.
The arithmetic does not close either. Weight the star split the block prints — 66% five-star, 21% four, 8% three, 3% two, 2% one — and it averages 4.46, which rounds to 4.5. The figure printed above it is 4.6. Here is the working.
| Rating | Share of reviews | Contribution |
|---|---|---|
| 5 star | 66% | 5 × 0.66 = 3.30 |
| 4 star | 21% | 4 × 0.21 = 0.84 |
| 3 star | 8% | 3 × 0.08 = 0.24 |
| 2 star | 3% | 2 × 0.03 = 0.06 |
| 1 star | 2% | 1 × 0.02 = 0.02 |
| Weighted average | 100% | 4.46 |
Two figures printed on the same supplied block, describing two different sets of reviews.
The seller’s figures, not ours
The one figure worth working out
The supplied block prints a star split and, above it, an average. We publish neither as a rating, because the pack itself calls them layout copy. We publish the split here for one reason only: it is the evidence for the arithmetic under it.
And what we would not print
We are not publishing the customer reviews supplied with this product, and the clearest reason is written in the supplied pack itself. Its own precautions block ends: “Reviews, star scores, and order counts in this pack are layout copy only.” That is the seller’s instruction to whoever builds the website, and it says the numbers are placeholders.
How we source a fact2 images supplied, and not published
The second and third withheld items: a generated portrait, and five bare stars
One invents a person, the other a measurement.
The review block is the first withheld item. Two more are pictures rather than words.
One supplied image is a photograph-styled portrait of a man holding the jar. It is not published on this site, and the reason is in its own filename: it contains “magnific”, the name of an AI image upscaler, and “retrato fotografico hiper”, which is Portuguese for “hyper photographic portrait”. It was generated to look like a photograph of a customer.
A second image is not published either: a five-star graphic with nothing attached to it. No count, no source, no reviews behind it. The supplied pack states in its own words that the star scores in it are layout copy. A rating graphic with no rating behind it is the cheapest claim on a sales page.
They fail differently: the portrait invents a person, the graphic a measurement. FDA names the family the first belongs to: “Success stories, such as, ‘It cured my diabetes’ or ‘It immediately stopped my COVID-19 infection,’ are easy to make up and are not a substitute for scientific evidence.”
Neither file is on this site’s disk.
4 things a usable review needs
What a useful review of a supplement would have to contain
A start date, a dose, one measurable thing chosen in advance, and a stop date.
Refusing to publish somebody else’s testimony is the easy half. A review of a thirty-day gummy is a measurement, and a measurement needs four things before anybody else can use it.
A start date
Not “a while”. A date. Without one there is no telling a fortnight from a season.
The dose actually taken
One gummy daily is the instruction, and a review is only about this product if it says so.
One measurable thing, chosen in advance
The hardest of the four. Pick something you can write down without interpreting it, and choose it before day one; chosen afterwards, any measure agrees with what you already believe.
A stop date, and what happened after it
The half nobody writes. A change that persists and one that reverses are two different findings.
Almost no published review has all four, for structural rather than dishonest reasons: they are written once, at the end, from memory, on a form that asks for stars and a sentence. FDA adds the separate problem: “Reviews found on popular online marketplaces and social media can be fake.”
So read the panel, not the stars. On this jar that is unusually rewarding, and the label deserves the credit. The panel is complete, it lists all nine blend members in descending order of weight as FDA requires, and one — caffeine, at 5 mg — carries its own figure. From those two facts, the four ingredients below caffeine can each be no more than 5 mg. That took one printed number.
3.9 out of 10, across nine rows
What this desk publishes instead
Eight credits, ten criticisms, and an overall 3.9 out of 10.
+What we rate
- A complete Supplement Facts panel, printed legibly, with the blend total, all nine members and all three footnotes.
- The members are listed in descending order of weight as FDA requires — which is what makes the 5 mg cap on the last four derivable at all.
- Caffeine is itemised at 5 mg inside the blend rather than hidden in the total. That single figure is the most useful thing on the package.
- The front-label claims are hedged (“May Support”), asterisked, and resolved to the FDA disclaimer in its own ruled box.
- A complete other-ingredients line, and apple pectin rather than gelatin, so the vegetarian mark is genuinely supported.
- A warning panel naming pregnancy, nursing, medication and medical conditions, plus a full storage and tamper-seal line.
- A named distributor with a city, a state, a ZIP and a phone number.
- Three prices were supplied, which is more than most products in this series provided, so the cost per day can actually be calculated.
−What we do not
- 82 mg of blend across nine ingredients — before any question of what any of them does.
- Four of the nine can be no more than 5 mg each, derivable from the panel’s own ordering and its one printed figure.
- NIH ODS discusses arginine at 2 to 20 grams a day; this one is capped at 5 milligrams.
- NCCIH: “No complementary health approaches have been shown to be safe and effective for sexual enhancement or treating erectile dysfunction.”
- Five of the nine ingredients have no federal consumer page at all — muira puama, maca, catuaba, tribulus terrestris and horny goat weed.
- The “567 mg of dry powders” footnote is a whole-blend equivalence with no per-ingredient ratio behind it.
- The sales copy escalates the jar’s wording: may support becomes effectively support.
- The marketing card omits four ingredients the panel declares, including caffeine.
- No manufacturer is named, and the certificate reference is described by the pack itself as a draft label.
- The supplied pack labels its own reviews as layout copy, and one supplied image is a generated portrait of a man holding the jar.
The columns are not symmetrical: the credits are about a document, the criticisms almost all about one quantity.
Maxforce editorial score
| What we scored | Mark | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Label completeness | 7.5/10 | A full Supplement Facts panel, a complete other-ingredients line, a warning panel, a storage line, the FDA disclaimer in its own box, a named distributor with a city and a phone, and a GMP statement. On what it prints, this label is one of the better ones in this series. |
| Dose transparency | 2.5/10 | Nine ingredients share one number. Only caffeine carries a figure of its own. What saves this row from lower is that the one figure it does print makes the rest partly derivable. |
| Amounts against research | 1.5/10 | 82 mg across nine ingredients. Four of them are capped at 5 mg by the panel’s own ordering. NIH ODS discusses arginine at 2 to 20 grams a day; this one is capped at 5 milligrams. |
| Evidence behind the formula | 2.0/10 | NCCIH: “No complementary health approaches have been shown to be safe and effective for sexual enhancement or treating erectile dysfunction.” Two of the nine have a federal consumer page; five have none. |
| Claim discipline on the jar | 7.0/10 | “May Support”, three asterisks, and a disclaimer in a ruled box. The jar does this properly. The sales page does not, which is why this row is not higher. |
| Ingredient list agreement | 3.0/10 | The panel names nine, the pack text names six and the marketing card shows five. Unusually, the label is the most complete of the three. |
| Seals and marks | 3.5/10 | Eleven marks, one with the verb wrong in both halves of the roundel, one claiming a doctor nobody names. The vegetarian mark is genuinely supported by apple pectin, which is worth a point on its own. |
| Reviews | 1.5/10 | The supplied pack labels its own review block as layout copy. Eight named buyers share three sentences, two different buyers are both called Omar W., and a pull-quote is attributed to a review that does not contain it. |
| Buying and returns | 6.5/10 | Three prices supplied, a 60-day window from purchase, a stated refund sequence, two named addresses and two phone numbers. What is missing is which pack each price belongs to, and any carrier or delivery window. |
Label completeness scores 7.5 and amounts against research scores 1.5 — this product in two figures. The label is careful; what it tells you is that 82 mg is being asked to cover nine ingredients.
References
Sources for this page
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 6 Tip-offs to Rip-offs: Don’t Fall for Health Fraud Scams. www.fda.gov. Accessed September 25, 2026.
- NIH Office of Dietary Supplements. Dietary Supplements: What You Need to Know. ods.od.nih.gov. Accessed September 25, 2026.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Dietary Supplement Labeling Guide: Chapter IV, Nutrition Labeling. www.fda.gov. Accessed September 25, 2026.
See Maxforce on the official sales page
30 gummies a jar, one a day, thirty days a jar. A 82 mg proprietary blend of nine ingredients, one of which carries a figure of its own. 60 days from purchase to change your mind. Sales line +1 (302) 200-3480.
Price shown at checkout · 60-day window from the date of purchase · ships from inside the US · sales line +1 (302) 200-3480