Vitamins & Supplements · Probiotic
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG)
Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (ATCC 53103) · also called LGG, Lactobacillus GG, L. rhamnosus GG
LGG is a named probiotic strain, a live gut bacterium sold in capsules, powders and some foods. The best evidence is for preventing diarrhoea in children taking antibiotics. For other uses the evidence is mixed, weak or against it, including eczema. It can cause serious infection in premature babies and very ill people, so ask a doctor first.
General information, not medical advice. Last substantive update · Not medically reviewed. A named clinician has not signed off on this page. How this page is made
About Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG)
LGG is one of the most studied probiotic strains. The strongest result is for preventing diarrhoea caused by antibiotics in children. Many other uses are mixed or show no effect. Serious infection is rare but can happen in premature babies and very ill people.
What LGG is
LGG is a named strain of a gut bacterium. A 2015 review says it was isolated from a stool sample of a healthy adult and chosen because it stuck to gut cells, survived stomach acid and acted against germs in the lab. It is a live organism, not a nutrient, and it is not essential.
The species is now called Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (NCBI Taxonomy, after the 2020 renaming). Most papers still say Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG. Probiotic effects are strain-specific, so these results are for LGG only.
Where LGG comes from
LGG is added to some yogurt-type foods and drinks and is sold as capsules, powders and sachets. It is not a nutrient, so there are no standard amounts per food portion from USDA or the NIH.
Food products and capsules are not interchangeable with the products used in trials. The NHS says there is likely a big gap between trial-grade probiotics and many products on shop shelves.
What research shows
Antibiotic diarrhoea: a guideline from the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition strongly recommends LGG or Saccharomyces boulardii for children at higher risk. A 2015 meta-analysis found diarrhoea fell in children (RR 0.48) but not significantly in adults overall.
Stomach bugs in children: pooled trials show about 0.85 day shorter diarrhoea, but the largest US trial found no benefit. Tummy ache and IBS in children: three small trials favour LGG.
Allergy and eczema: five trials found no reduction in eczema risk and one infant trial found no treatment effect. The NHS says there is no evidence probiotics treat eczema.
Premature babies
Pooled randomised trials linked LGG with less severe necrotising enterocolitis (RR 0.50), but non-randomised studies did not, and a 2026 open-label trial of 236 very low birth weight infants found no benefit. The FDA warns that premature infants given probiotics are at risk of invasive, potentially fatal disease and that no probiotic is approved for infants.
This is a hospital decision made by a neonatal team, never a home one.
At a glance
Traditional uses history, not proof
- Not a traditional remedy: it was isolated from a healthy adult and developed as a probiotic
- Added to yogurt-type foods, drinks, capsules and sachets
Studied for research
- Antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in children, moderate certainty
- Short-lived infectious diarrhoea in children, mixed
- Tummy ache and IBS in children, low certainty
- Hospital-acquired diarrhoea in children, low certainty
- Premature babies' bowel disease (NEC), mixed
- Cow's milk allergy tolerance, low certainty
- Eczema prevention and treatment, evidence against
- General gut balance and immune boosting, insufficient
Main compounds
- Whole live bacteria (strain ATCC 53103)
Common forms
- Capsules, powders and sachets
- Chewables and gummies
- Yogurt-type foods and drinks with added LGG
Research links: 2016 ESPGHAN guideline: probiotics to prevent antibiotic diarrhoea in children · 2015 meta-analysis: LGG for antibiotic diarrhoea in children and adults · 2018 NEJM trial: LGG for stomach bugs in 971 children · 2018 meta-analysis: LGG does not prevent eczema · 2024 meta-analysis: LGG in premature infants · Research Library · Genes & Biomarkers Library
What it is and its history
- Accepted scientific name
- Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (also written Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, LGG; strain collection number ATCC 53103)
- Naming authority
- Species: (Hansen 1968) Zheng et al. 2020 (NCBI Taxonomy). The strain 'GG' is a named strain of this species.
- Synonyms
- Lactobacillus rhamnosus; Lactobacillus casei subsp. rhamnosus; Lactobacillus GG
- Common names
- LGG (English); Lactobacillus GG (English); Lactobacilo GG (Spanish)
- Family or group
- A lactic-acid bacterium (a bacterium that makes lactic acid), grouped with the Lactobacillus-type probiotics. Higher ranks not read.
- Classification
- Bacteria > Lacticaseibacillus > rhamnosus
- Habitat
- Human gut (source of the original isolate, per a 2015 review). Also present as an added ingredient in some foods and supplements.
- Look-alikes and adulterants
- Name: Other Lactobacillus rhamnosus strains; Note: Same species but different strains; probiotic effects are said to be strain-specific, so LGG results do not carry over.; Name: Saccharomyces boulardii; Note: A probiotic yeast, a different organism; ESPGHAN recommends LGG or S. boulardii for preventing antibiotic diarrhoea in at-risk children. It has its own page.; Name: Lactobacillus reuteri and L. acidophilus; Note: Other Lactobacillus-type probiotics with their own evidence and pages.
Traditional use and history history, not clinical proof
| Tradition or era | Documented use | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Isolation from a healthy adult (year not given in the review) | A 2015 review says LGG was isolated by Goldin and Gorbach from a stool sample of a healthy adult, chosen because it stuck well to gut cells in the lab, resisted stomach acid, and acted against germs such as Salmonella in the lab. It was developed as a probiotic, not as a traditional remedy. | p26657927 |
| 2020 renaming | The genus Lactobacillus was split into several genera; NCBI Taxonomy now lists the species as Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus. | s-ncbi-taxonomy-47715 |
Traditional use shows how it was used. It does not show that it works or is safe today.
What is inside, and how it may work
What it contains and how those compounds act in cells and animals. Laboratory and animal mechanisms are not proven effects in people.
Main compounds
| Compound | Family | Where it is concentrated | Activity studied | Level of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whole live bacteria (the strain itself) | live probiotic microorganism | Amount is stated as colony-forming units (living bacteria) on products; trial amounts are in the studies table. Not a nutrient. | The strain, not a single chemical, is what was tested in the trials. 9 2 | Human data |
Mechanisms, receptors and pathways
| Target or pathway | Gene or receptor | What was found | Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gut survival and attachment | Not stated | A 2015 review says LGG was picked in the lab for sticking to gut cells, resisting stomach acid and bile, and acting against Salmonella, and that it persists well in the human gut. These are lab and early human findings; they do not show how LGG helps any condition. 5 | In vitro and human |
| Effects on faecal calprotectin and gut bacteria in colic | Not stated | In one small trial of colicky breastfed infants, faecal calprotectin fell and Lactobacillus counts rose with LGG. This is a marker, not proof of a mechanism. 8 | Human data |
Absorption, metabolism and elimination
- Distribution
- Gut. Bacteria can reach the blood in rare cases in very ill people (case review).
- Elimination
- Not read.
Isolated compounds versus whole extracts
LGG is a single named strain of a bacterium. Foods that contain live bacteria (yogurt-type products) and probiotic capsules are different things. The NHS says there is likely a big difference between pharmaceutical-grade probiotics in trials and products sold in shops, and that one probiotic type's results do not carry over to others. Food sources: the strain is not a nutrient and has no standard amount per portion; the 2015 review says it is sold as freeze-dried pills, in yogurt, and as sachets. No USDA or NIH amounts exist for it.
Nutritional composition
LGG is not a nutrient and is not essential. No USDA or NIH nutrient amounts per food portion exist for it. The NIH Office of Dietary Supplements fact sheet could not be read (blocked).
1 moderate certainty2 mixed findings5 low certainty2 not enough evidence2 evidence against
What was looked at
The 12 benefits and uses checked for Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG), each with how strong the evidence is. Tap one to open it.
- Diarrhoea caused by antibiotics (prevention)Moderate certainty
- Short-lived infectious diarrhoea in children (treatment)Mixed findings
- Long-lasting tummy ache and irritable bowel syndrome in childrenLow certainty
- Diarrhoea picked up in hospital (children)Low certainty
- Necrotising enterocolitis in premature babies (hospital use only)Mixed findings
- Tolerance in children with cow's milk allergyLow certainty
- Preventing eczema in babiesEvidence against
- Treating eczema in babiesLow certainty
- Wheeze and asthma in young children at riskEvidence against
- Colds, ear infections and antibiotic use in childrenLow certainty
- Infant colicNot enough evidence
- General gut balance and immune boostingNot enough evidence
Lab markers tracked in the studies
Rate of antibiotic-associated diarrhoeaHow long diarrhoea lasts (days)Children whose stomach pain easedDiarrhoea picked up in hospitalNecrotising enterocolitis, stage II or worseChildren who tolerate cow's milkEczema in the first years of lifeEczema severity score (SCORAD)Acute ear infections in childrenDaily crying time in colic
What is Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) good for?
The studied uses of LGG and how strong the human evidence is for each. Almost all trials are in children, and the results are for this strain only.
Benefits, one by one
Each card is a research question, not a promise. Tap a goal to filter. Open a card to see the studies, doses and limits.
Diarrhoea caused by antibiotics (prevention)
Moderate certaintyIn children given antibiotics, LGG lowered the chance of getting diarrhoea. A European children's gut-health society gives it a strong recommendation for children at higher risk. In adults the result was not clear.
3 studiesLGG capsules, powders and fortified foods were studied across trials;…
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2016 guideline from the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) recommended LGG or Saccharomyces boulardii for children at higher risk of antibiotic diarrhoea (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). A 2015 meta-analysis of 12 randomised trials (1,499 people) found diarrhoea fell from 22.4% to 12.3%. In children (5 trials, 445 children) the result was significant; in adults (6 trials, 863 people) it was not, except in people given antibiotics as part of treatment for Helicobacter pylori (4 trials, 280 people).
Results
Moderate certainty for children; low for adults. The evidence is for prevention, not treatment, and for this strain only.
Effect sizes as reported
Children: RR 0.48 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.89). Adults: RR 0.48 (0.20 to 1.15). Adults treated for H. pylori: RR 0.26 (0.11 to 0.59).
Why this rating
Moderate in children because a guideline panel and a meta-analysis (GRADE moderate) agree. Low in adults because the adult result was not statistically significant overall.
Form and dose studied
LGG capsules, powders and fortified foods were studied across trials; products and amounts varied. Trial amounts are in the studies table only.
Who was studied
Mostly children given antibiotics for any reason; adults in smaller trials.
Limits
The 2015 review pools different products and amounts. The same lead author (Szajewska H) wrote both the guideline and the 2015 review. The ESPGHAN recommendation applies to children only and only to this strain (or S. boulardii).
Why researchers looked
Antibiotics can upset the gut and cause loose stools. LGG is one of the most studied strains for this.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
Generally well tolerated in the trials read. See the Safety tab for people with weak immune systems and premature babies.
Short-lived infectious diarrhoea in children (treatment)
Mixed findingsResults are mixed. A pooled analysis of 18 trials said LGG shortened diarrhoea by under a day, but a large US trial of 971 children found no benefit at all.
2 studiesOne product and short courses in the US trial; products and amounts v…
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2019 update pooled 18 trials (4,208 children): LGG had no effect on stool volume but diarrhoea lasted 0.85 day less (15 trials). Effects were larger in European countries. The authors warn the trials differ a lot. The largest trial, in 10 US emergency departments (971 children aged 3 months to 4 years), found moderate-to-severe illness in 11.8% with LGG and 12.6% with placebo, and no difference in how long diarrhoea lasted (about 50 hours in both groups).
Results
Mixed. Some pooled trials show a small benefit; the best-designed large trial shows none. The treatment of a stomach bug is not the same use as preventing antibiotic diarrhoea.
Effect sizes as reported
2019 meta-analysis: diarrhoea 0.85 day shorter (95% CI 1.15 to 0.56 days shorter). US trial: RR 0.96 (0.68 to 1.35).
Why this rating
The pooled result and the large trial disagree, and the pooled trials differ a great deal (high heterogeneity, as the authors say).
Form and dose studied
One product and short courses in the US trial; products and amounts varied in the pooled trials.
Who was studied
Children with infectious diarrhoea, mostly in hospital or clinics.
Limits
The pooled review notes methodological limitations. Possible differences by country, illness cause or product could explain the gap; this is not shown.
Why researchers looked
Parents and doctors ask whether a probiotic can shorten a stomach bug.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
No harms reported in the trials read.
Long-lasting tummy ache and irritable bowel syndrome in children
Low certaintyIn three small trials, more children had less pain with LGG, especially children with irritable bowel syndrome. There is no matching evidence here for adults.
2 studiesProducts and amounts varied by trial.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2011 meta-analysis of 3 randomised trials (290 children) found more children responded (no pain or less pain) with LGG than with placebo (RR 1.31, number needed to treat 7). In the IBS group (3 trials, 167 children) the response was larger (RR 1.70, number needed to treat 4). Pain intensity fell, and pain frequency fell in the IBS group. There was no difference for functional abdominal pain or functional dyspepsia alone. The NHS says some probiotics may ease IBS symptoms but little is known about which types work.
Results
Low certainty. Only three small trials, in children.
Effect sizes as reported
All children: RR 1.31 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.59). IBS subgroup: RR 1.70 (1.27 to 2.27).
Why this rating
Few, small trials in a review from 2011. The strain-specific adult evidence was not read.
Form and dose studied
Products and amounts varied by trial.
Who was studied
Children with Rome II or III functional gastrointestinal disorders.
Limits
Small trials; no later children's or adults' LGG trials were read for this page.
Why researchers looked
Long-lasting tummy ache with no clear cause is common in children and has few treatments.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
No safety signal reported in the abstract.
Diarrhoea picked up in hospital (children)
Low certaintyIn three trials in children staying in hospital, LGG given during the stay lowered the rate of diarrhoea, including diarrhoea from rotavirus.
1 studiesGiven for the length of the hospital stay.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2011 meta-analysis of 3 randomised trials (1,092 children aged 1 month to 18 years) found less diarrhoea (2 trials, n = 823, RR 0.37) and less symptomatic rotavirus diarrhoea (3 trials, n = 1,043, RR 0.49) with LGG during the hospital stay. There was no difference in symptom-free rotavirus infection, hospital stay or length of diarrhoea. No harms were reported.
Results
Low certainty: only three trials, from before 2011.
Effect sizes as reported
Diarrhoea RR 0.37 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.59). Symptomatic rotavirus RR 0.49 (0.28 to 0.86).
Why this rating
Small number of trials; results may not match children in hospital today.
Form and dose studied
Given for the length of the hospital stay.
Who was studied
Hospitalised children.
Limits
Older review; only three trials.
Why researchers looked
Children in hospital can catch stomach infections from others.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
No harms reported in the three trials.
Necrotising enterocolitis in premature babies (hospital use only)
Mixed findingsIn pooled randomised trials, LGG was linked with less severe bowel inflammation in premature babies, but a 2026 trial found no benefit and the FDA warns about probiotics in premature babies. This is a hospital decision, never a home one.
3 studiesHospital-supervised use only; amounts and products varied.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2024 strain-specific meta-analysis of randomised trials in which LGG was the only probiotic (5 trials, 851 infants) found less NEC stage II or worse (RR 0.50). It found no difference in late-onset sepsis (7 trials, 1,037 infants), death (3 trials, 207 infants), time to full feeds or hospital stay. Non-randomised studies showed no effect. A 2026 open-label trial of 236 very low birth weight infants found no benefit on the combined outcome of sepsis, NEC or death (30.4% with LGG versus 27.2% without; RR 0.85).
Results
Mixed. Pooled trials favour LGG for NEC; observational studies and the newest trial do not.
Effect sizes as reported
NEC RR 0.50 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.93). Late sepsis RR 1.08 (0.84 to 1.39). Death RR 0.99 (0.42 to 2.33). 2026 trial: RR 0.85 (0.48 to 1.50).
Why this rating
Randomised and observational results disagree, there are few trials, and the 2026 trial was open-label. The FDA says no probiotic is approved for infants and warns of serious infection risk.
Form and dose studied
Hospital-supervised use only; amounts and products varied.
Who was studied
Very small premature babies in neonatal units.
Limits
Small trials; the FDA statement covers probiotics in general, not LGG by name.
Why researchers looked
Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) is a serious bowel illness of very small premature babies.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
FDA: invasive, potentially fatal infection has been reported in premature infants given probiotics. See the Safety tab.
Tolerance in children with cow's milk allergy
Low certaintyIn a pooled analysis of 10 studies, children with cow's milk allergy who took LGG were more likely to tolerate milk. It did not change eczema scores. It does not prevent allergy.
1 studiesOften given with a special infant formula; products and amounts varie…
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2021 meta-analysis of 10 studies in children with diagnosed cow's milk allergy found more children tolerated milk with LGG (RR 2.22, moderate-quality evidence). There was no difference in the eczema score SCORAD (very low-quality evidence), and blood in stool may have fallen (RR 0.36, low-quality evidence). The authors say the finding must be treated with caution and ask for larger trials.
Results
Moderate-quality for tolerance by the reviewers' own rating, but the abstract gives no child numbers and the authors urge caution.
Effect sizes as reported
Tolerance RR 2.22 (95% CI 1.86 to 2.66). SCORAD mean difference 1.41 (-4.99 to 7.82). Blood in stool RR 0.36 (0.14 to 0.92).
Why this rating
The reviewers rated tolerance 'moderate', but the number of children is not given in the abstract and the authors call for larger, more powerful trials. We rate the whole picture low until that is clearer.
Form and dose studied
Often given with a special infant formula; products and amounts varied.
Who was studied
Children with cow's milk allergy diagnosed by a doctor.
Limits
Only for children whose allergy a doctor has diagnosed. Not a way to prevent allergy.
Why researchers looked
Cow's milk allergy is common in infants, and doctors look for ways to help children outgrow it.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
Allergy care in children must be supervised by a doctor.
Preventing eczema in babies
Evidence againstFive trials tested LGG taken in pregnancy or after birth to prevent eczema. The reviewers found it did not lower the risk.
2 studiesTaken by mothers in pregnancy and/or given to babies; amounts varied.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2018 meta-analysis of 5 randomised trials (889 participants) found high-to-moderate certainty evidence that LGG, whatever the timing, did not reduce the risk of eczema, and no consistent effect on other allergy outcomes. The NHS says there is no evidence that probiotics treat eczema.
Results
Evidence against. The reviewers say it does not support a general recommendation to use probiotics to prevent eczema.
Effect sizes as reported
No reduction in eczema risk (numbers not in the abstract).
Why this rating
Pooled randomised trials with high-to-moderate certainty of no effect.
Form and dose studied
Taken by mothers in pregnancy and/or given to babies; amounts varied.
Who was studied
Pregnant women and babies at risk of allergy.
Limits
The authors declare speaker fees from makers or distributors of LGG and other products.
Why researchers looked
Some health guidance has suggested probiotics might lower the chance of eczema in babies.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
Not applicable.
Treating eczema in babies
Low certaintyOne 12-week trial in 102 infants with mild-to-moderate eczema found LGG worked no better than placebo.
1 studiesStudied as a food supplement in infants.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
In a trial of 102 infants aged 3 to 12 months, eczema and rescue-ointment use improved over 12 weeks in both groups, with no significant difference between LGG and placebo. IgE and new sensitisation did not differ either.
Results
One small trial found no effect.
Effect sizes as reported
No significant group difference at 4, 8 or 12 weeks.
Why this rating
Single small trial; null result.
Form and dose studied
Studied as a food supplement in infants.
Who was studied
Infants 3 to 12 months with mild-to-moderate eczema.
Limits
One trial only.
Why researchers looked
Parents look for ways to ease eczema in babies.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
Not applicable.
Wheeze and asthma in young children at risk
Evidence againstOne trial in 131 young children with repeated wheezing and allergy in the family found no effect on eczema or asthma events.
1 studiesTaken for 6 months; amounts in the studies table.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
In a trial of 131 children aged 6 to 24 months with at least two wheezing episodes and a close relative with allergy, 6 months of LGG made no significant difference to eczema or asthma-related events. In a subgroup that was already sensitised, asthma complaints were even slightly worse. Allergy blood tests showed fewer new sensitisations to airborne allergens. The treatment was well tolerated and no severe adverse events occurred.
Results
One small trial: no clinical benefit.
Effect sizes as reported
No difference in clinical outcomes; fewer new airborne sensitisations (P = 0.027 and 0.03).
Why this rating
One trial found no clinical benefit and a hint of worse asthma in a subgroup.
Form and dose studied
Taken for 6 months; amounts in the studies table.
Who was studied
Young children with recurring wheeze and a family history of allergy.
Limits
One trial only.
Why researchers looked
Probiotics have been suggested as a way to calm allergic disease.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
A slightly worse asthma signal in one subgroup; chance cannot be ruled out.
Colds, ear infections and antibiotic use in children
Low certaintyA pooled analysis of 4 trials found fewer ear infections and less antibiotic use with LGG, but no change in overall respiratory infections.
1 studiesProducts and amounts varied.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
A 2013 meta-analysis of 4 randomised trials (1,805 children) found fewer ear infections (RR 0.76, number needed to treat 17), fewer upper respiratory infections (1 trial, 281 children, RR 0.62) and less antibiotic use (RR 0.80). There was no difference in overall or lower respiratory infections. In two trials of children over 1 year, overall respiratory infections were lower (RR 0.73). Side effects were similar and none was serious.
Results
Low certainty: few trials, and one result rests on a single trial.
Effect sizes as reported
Ear infections RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.91). Antibiotic use RR 0.80 (0.71 to 0.91).
Why this rating
Few trials; mixed results across outcomes; older review.
Form and dose studied
Products and amounts varied.
Who was studied
Children, many in day care.
Limits
Older review; the overall respiratory result was not significant.
Why researchers looked
Children catch many colds and ear infections.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
No serious adverse events reported.
Infant colic
Not enough evidenceOne small trial in 45 breastfed babies found less crying with LGG, but the mothers also removed cow's milk from their diet, so the benefit cannot be credited to LGG alone.
1 studies28 days of LGG; amount in the studies table only.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
In a trial of 45 breastfed babies with colic, median full-force crying after 28 days was 104 minutes a day with LGG versus 242 with placebo (P < 0.001). Faecal calprotectin fell (P = 0.026). Mothers also avoided cow's milk. The authors ask for a larger trial.
Results
Insufficient: one very small trial with two changes at once.
Effect sizes as reported
Crying 104 versus 242 minutes a day (median).
Why this rating
Very small, and the milk-free maternal diet is a second change.
Form and dose studied
28 days of LGG; amount in the studies table only.
Who was studied
Breastfed babies with colic.
Limits
Only 45 babies.
Why researchers looked
Colic means long crying spells in an otherwise healthy baby; parents look for help.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
Not applicable.
General gut balance and immune boosting
Not enough evidenceMarketing often says probiotics restore gut balance or boost immunity. The sources read tie LGG to specific conditions only; none shows a general boost in healthy people.
1 studiesNot applicable.
Studies, doses and limits
What the trials found
The NHS says probiotics are thought to help restore the natural balance of gut bacteria but there is little evidence for many health claims, and results for one type do not carry over to others. No trial read for this page tested LGG for general immune support in healthy adults.
Results
No trial read supports a general boost in healthy people.
Why this rating
No LGG-specific evidence read for healthy adults.
Who was studied
Healthy adults.
Limits
Absence of evidence in what was read is not proof of no effect.
Why researchers looked
Many people take probiotics hoping for general wellness.
Traditional use
LGG is a named bacterial strain found by scientists in the 1980s, not a traditional remedy. It has no long folk-medicine history.
Proposed mechanism Not established
Not shown in people for this use. Lab work suggests the strain sticks to gut cells and survives stomach acid, but that does not prove how a result happens.
A proposed mechanism does not show that the effect happens in people.
Not applicable.
Connections to the rest of health
How Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) connects to the rest of our health knowledge graph. Every link says what kind of connection it is. A safety link (for example to the liver) is a warning, not a benefit. A study that merely mentions a topic never creates a benefit link.
Explore every connection: goals, body systems, organs, symptoms, genes
A. Wellness goals
| Connected to | Kind of connection | Evidence status | Context | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digestive Support | Moderate certainty | Diarrhoea caused by antibiotics (prevention): In children given antibiotics, LGG lowered the chance of getting diarrhoea. A European children's gut-health society gives it a strong recommendation for children at higher risk. In adults the result was not clear. | 13 12 19 | |
| Digestive Support | Mixed findings | Short-lived infectious diarrhoea in children (treatment): Results are mixed. A pooled analysis of 18 trials said LGG shortened diarrhoea by under a day, but a large US trial of 971 children found no benefit at all. Necrotising enterocolitis in premature babies (hospital use only): In pooled randomised trials, LGG was linked with less severe bowel inflammation in premature babies, but a 2026 trial found no benefit and the FDA warns about probiotics in premature babies. This is a hospital decision, never a home one. | 15 9 1 10 17 | |
| Digestive Support | Low certainty | Long-lasting tummy ache and irritable bowel syndrome in children: In three small trials, more children had less pain with LGG, especially children with irritable bowel syndrome. There is no matching evidence here for adults. Diarrhoea picked up in hospital (children): In three trials in children staying in hospital, LGG given during the stay lowered the rate of diarrhoea, including diarrhoea from rotavirus. | 3 20 11 | |
| Immune Support | Low certainty | Tolerance in children with cow's milk allergy: In a pooled analysis of 10 studies, children with cow's milk allergy who took LGG were more likely to tolerate milk. It did not change eczema scores. It does not prevent allergy. Preventing eczema in babies: Five trials tested LGG taken in pregnancy or after birth to prevent eczema. The reviewers found it did not lower the risk. | 16 14 20 4 | |
| Immune Support | Low certainty | Treating eczema in babies: One 12-week trial in 102 infants with mild-to-moderate eczema found LGG worked no better than placebo. Wheeze and asthma in young children at risk: One trial in 131 young children with repeated wheezing and allergy in the family found no effect on eczema or asthma events. | 2 6 | |
| Digestive Support | Not enough evidence | Infant colic: One small trial in 45 breastfed babies found less crying with LGG, but the mothers also removed cow's milk from their diet, so the benefit cannot be credited to LGG alone. | 8 | |
| Immune Support | Not enough evidence | General gut balance and immune boosting: Marketing often says probiotics restore gut balance or boost immunity. The sources read tie LGG to specific conditions only; none shows a general boost in healthy people. | 20 | |
| Digestive Support | Not enough evidence | General gut balance and immune boosting: Marketing often says probiotics restore gut balance or boost immunity. The sources read tie LGG to specific conditions only; none shows a general boost in healthy people. | 20 |
B. Body systems
| Connected to | Kind of connection | Evidence status | Context | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digestive System | Biological association | Moderate certainty | Studied for: Diarrhoea caused by antibiotics (prevention) Studied for: Short-lived infectious diarrhoea in children (treatment) | 13 12 19 15 9 3 20 11 1 10 17 8 |
| Gut Health | Biological association | Moderate certainty | Studied for: Diarrhoea caused by antibiotics (prevention) Studied for: General gut balance and immune boosting | 13 12 19 20 |
| Immune System | Biological association | Low certainty | Studied for: Tolerance in children with cow's milk allergy Studied for: Preventing eczema in babies | 16 14 20 2 4 |
| Respiratory System | Biological association | Evidence against | Studied for: Wheeze and asthma in young children at risk Studied for: Colds, ear infections and antibiotic use in children | 6 4 |
E. Health conditions
| Connected to | Kind of connection | Evidence status | Context | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antibiotic-associated diarrhoea | Moderate (children) | A European guideline strongly recommends LGG or S. boulardii to prevent it in at-risk children. Preparation or compound: LGG |
13 12 | |
| Acute gastroenteritis (children) | Mixed findings | Pooled trials show a small benefit; the largest trial shows none. Preparation or compound: LGG |
15 9 | |
| Necrotising enterocolitis | Mixed findings | Pooled trials suggest less NEC but the FDA warns about probiotics in premature infants. Preparation or compound: LGG |
1 10 17 |
I. Biomarkers
| Connected to | Kind of connection | Evidence status | Context | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rate of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea | Biological association | Moderate certainty | Measured in trials: lower. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 12 13 |
| How long diarrhoea lasts (days) | Biological association | Mixed findings | Measured in trials: shorter in pooled trials; no change in the largest trial. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 15 9 |
| Children whose stomach pain eased | Biological association | Low certainty | Measured in trials: higher. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 3 |
| Diarrhoea picked up in hospital | Biological association | Low certainty | Measured in trials: lower. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 11 |
| Necrotising enterocolitis, stage II or worse | Biological association | Mixed findings | Measured in trials: lower in pooled trials; no benefit in a 2026 trial. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 1 10 17 |
| Children who tolerate cow's milk | Biological association | Low certainty | Measured in trials: higher. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 16 |
| Eczema in the first years of life | Biological association | Evidence against | Measured in trials: no change. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 14 |
| Eczema severity score (SCORAD) | Biological association | Low certainty | Measured in trials: no change. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 2 16 |
| Acute ear infections in children | Biological association | Low certainty | Measured in trials: lower. A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 4 |
| Daily crying time in colic | Biological association | Not enough evidence | Measured in trials: lower (one trial). A lab change is not the same as a health benefit. | 8 |
K. Biological pathways
| Connected to | Kind of connection | Evidence status | Context | Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saccharomyces boulardii | Preliminary mechanism | Guideline | The other probiotic named with LGG in the ESPGHAN recommendation for antibiotic diarrhoea in at-risk children. | 13 |
| Lactobacillus reuteri | Preliminary mechanism | None | Another Lactobacillus-type probiotic studied in infants; each strain has its own evidence. |
L. Active compounds
Each connection is stored with the ingredient, the connected record, the kind of connection, the evidence status, the supporting studies, the preparation or compound involved, and a review date (last reviewed October 26, 2026).
Evidence at a glance: what the research found for 12 outcomes
Each outcome below is one thing researchers measured. Certainty is how far the evidence can be trusted, not how well it works. The full studies are on the next tab.
The evidence
The research centre for Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG). Every record here was checked against PubMed or the publisher's page; we never list a study we have not verified.
Evidence by outcome
Bars show how many studies we found for each outcome, not how well it works. People are added up across trials only (reviews are not added, to avoid double counting).
How we rate evidence
High certainty
Several well-run trials or reviews agree; further research is unlikely to change the picture much.
Moderate certainty
Good trials point the same way, but some doubt remains.
Low certainty
Small, short or inconsistent trials. The finding could change with better research.
Very low certainty
Very little or very weak human data. Treat as a possibility only.
Mixed findings
Trials or reviews disagree with each other.
Not enough evidence
Not enough human research to say either way.
Evidence against
Good research found no benefit, or found harm.
We take the reviewers' own risk-of-bias and GRADE statements where they exist, and otherwise judge from study size, design, consistency, directness and whether a product matches what is sold. Many publications do not make evidence high. Method note: We started from our existing LGG summary, re-read PubMed abstracts for the guideline, meta-analyses and trials listed, and read the NHS, NCCIH and FDA pages. Only abstracts were read for studies. The NIH Office of Dietary Supplements page was blocked and is marked unread.
Study library: every study we checked 21
| Study | Design | People | Product, dose, length | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ananthan 2024 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG as a probiotic for preterm infants: a strain specific systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr · PMID 39060543 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
851 Preterm infants; randomised trials and non-randomised studies where LGG was the only probiotic |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, sole probiotic Probiotic (hospital use) Varied by trial Varied by trial · vs No probiotic or placebo |
In randomised trials, LGG was linked with less NEC stage II or worse (5 trials, n = 851, RR 0.50). No significant difference in late-onset sepsis (7 trials, n = 1037, RR 1.08), death (3 trials, n = 207, RR 0.99), time to full feeds or hospital stay. In non-randomised studies there was no effect on NEC, sepsis or death. NEC RR 0.50; late sepsis RR 1.08; death RR 0.99 (NEC 0.26 to 0.93; sepsis 0.84 to 1.39; death 0.42 to 2.33) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Necrotising enterocolitis stage II or worse (NEC); late-onset sepsis; death; time to full feeds; hospital stay Limitations: Small number of trials; randomised and observational results disagree. Hospital use under medical care only; see the FDA warning in the Safety tab. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Registered PROSPERO CRD42022324933. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022324933 Read: abstract |
| Gruber 2007 Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG as treatment of atopic dermatitis in infancy. Allergy · PMID 17919141 · DOI |
Randomised controlled trial |
102 Infants aged 3 to 12 months with mild-to-moderate eczema (SCORAD 15 to 40) and no current anti-inflammatory treatment |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic food supplement 5 x 10^9 colony-forming units twice a day (studied in the trial) 12 weeks · vs Placebo |
Both groups improved over time with no significant difference between LGG and placebo at 4, 8 or 12 weeks. No difference in rescue medicine, IgE or new sensitisation. The authors conclude there was no treatment effect of LGG on mild-to-moderate eczema in infancy. No significant group difference (Not in the abstract) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Eczema severity and rescue-ointment use (symptom load); IgE; new allergic sensitisation Limitations: Small trial; infants with mild-to-moderate eczema only. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Horvath 2011 Meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for abdominal pain-related functional gastrointestinal disorders in childhood. Aliment Pharmacol Ther · PMID 21507030 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
290 Children with long-lasting stomach-ache disorders (functional abdominal pain, irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia); 3 randomised trials |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic Varied by trial Varied by trial · vs Placebo |
More children responded with LGG overall (3 trials, n = 290, RR 1.31, number needed to treat 7) and in the IBS subgroup (3 trials, n = 167, RR 1.70, number needed to treat 4). No difference for functional abdominal pain or functional dyspepsia. Pain intensity fell overall and in the IBS group; pain frequency fell in the IBS group only. Overall RR 1.31; IBS subgroup RR 1.70 (Overall 1.08 to 1.59; IBS 1.27 to 2.27) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Treatment responders (no pain or less pain); pain intensity; pain frequency Limitations: Only 3 small trials; children only; a 2011 review. Results cannot be applied to adults. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Liu 2013 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG supplementation for preventing respiratory infections in children: a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials Indian Pediatr · PMID 23665598 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
1805 4 randomised placebo-controlled trials in children |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic Varied by trial Varied by trial · vs Placebo |
Less acute otitis media with LGG (4 trials, n = 1805, RR 0.76, number needed to treat 17), fewer upper respiratory infections (1 trial, n = 281, RR 0.62) and less antibiotic use (RR 0.80). No difference in overall respiratory infections or lower respiratory infections. In two trials of children over 1 year, overall respiratory infections were lower (RR 0.73). Side effects were similar and no serious adverse events were reported. Otitis media RR 0.76; antibiotic use RR 0.80 (Otitis media 0.64 to 0.91; antibiotics 0.71 to 0.91) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Ear infections (acute otitis media); upper and lower respiratory infections; antibiotic use; side effects Limitations: Only 4 trials; the upper-respiratory result rests on one trial. An older review (2013). Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Pace 2015 Probiotics in digestive diseases: focus on Lactobacillus GG. Minerva Gastroenterol Dietol · PMID 26657927 |
Narrative review |
Review of animal and human research on probiotics in digestive diseases up to 2014 | Lactobacillus GG (LGG) Probiotic (pill, yogurt, sachet) |
Says LGG was isolated more than 20 years before the review by Goldin and Gorbach from a stool sample of a healthy adult, chosen for sticking to gut cells in the lab, surviving stomach acid, and acting against germs such as Salmonella in the lab. Also says it has been well documented in clinical research and is a prototypical probiotic strain. No numbers used here (Not applicable) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Overview of digestive uses; where LGG came from Limitations: A narrative review (not systematic); read from the abstract only. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Rose 2010 Efficacy of probiotic Lactobacillus GG on allergic sensitization and asthma in infants at risk. Clin Exp Allergy · PMID 20604800 · DOI |
Randomised controlled trial |
131 Children 6 to 24 months old with at least two wheezing episodes and a close relative with allergy |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic 10^10 colony-forming units (studied in the trial) 6 months, then 6 months of follow-up · vs Placebo |
No significant difference in eczema or asthma-related events. In a subgroup with earlier allergic sensitisation, asthma complaints were even slightly worse. Fewer sensitisations to airborne allergens after 6 months (P = 0.027) and after follow-up (P = 0.03). Well tolerated; no severe adverse events. No clinical effect; mild effect on sensitisation (Not in the abstract) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Eczema and asthma-related events; allergy blood tests Limitations: One small trial in a high-risk group. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Salminen 2004 Lactobacillus bacteremia, clinical significance, and patient outcome, with special focus on probiotic L. rhamnosus GG. Clin Infect Dis · PMID 14679449 · DOI |
Case series |
89 89 patients with Lactobacillus in the blood (bacteremia) |
Lactobacillus species including L. rhamnosus GG |
Of 89 patients, 11 had a strain identical to the probiotic L. rhamnosus GG. In 82% of all patients there were severe or fatal underlying illnesses. Risk factors were weakened immunity, long hospital stay and earlier surgery. Death rate was 26% at 1 month and 48% at 1 year; severe underlying disease predicted death (odds ratio 15.8) and treatment with an antibiotic that worked in the lab was linked with fewer deaths (odds ratio 0.22). Mortality 26% at 1 month; 48% at 1 year (Not in the abstract) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Risk factors and outcome of Lactobacillus bloodstream infection Limitations: A review of cases from one setting (the abstract does not name it) with no control group; it cannot show how often LGG itself causes infection. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Savino 2020 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (ATCC 53103) for the Management of Infantile Colic: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Nutrients · PMID 32517123 · DOI |
Randomised controlled trial |
45 Breastfed infants with colic in Italy; mothers also avoided cow's milk |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (ATCC 53103) Probiotic 5 x 10^9 colony-forming units a day (studied in the trial) 28 days · vs Placebo |
Median full-force crying fell with LGG (104 versus 242 minutes a day, P < 0.001) and faecal calprotectin fell (P = 0.026). The authors say a larger double-blind trial is needed. The mothers also removed cow's milk from their diet, so the result cannot be credited to LGG alone. Median crying 104 versus 242 minutes (Not in the abstract) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Daily crying time; faecal calprotectin; gut bacteria counts Limitations: Only 45 infants; the maternal milk-free diet is a second change; larger trial needed, say the authors. Funding and conflicts: No conflicts of interest declared. Read: abstract |
| Schnadower 2018 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG versus Placebo for Acute Gastroenteritis in Children. N Engl J Med · PMID 30462938 · DOI |
Randomised controlled trial |
971 Children aged 3 months to 4 years with acute gastroenteritis, seen in 10 US children's emergency departments |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic 1 x 10^10 colony-forming units twice a day (studied in the trial) 5 days · vs Matching placebo |
No benefit. Moderate-to-severe illness: 11.8% with LGG versus 12.6% with placebo (RR 0.96). Median diarrhoea 49.7 versus 50.9 hours. No difference in vomiting, day-care absence or household spread. RR 0.96 for the main outcome (95% CI 0.68 to 1.35 (P = 0.83)) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis in the next 14 days (modified Vesikari score 9 or more); length of diarrhoea and vomiting; day-care absence; household spread Limitations: Children in US emergency departments; one product and one short course. Funding and conflicts: Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others (abstract). Registration: NCT01773967 Read: abstract |
| Shah 2026 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG to Reduce Necrotising Enterocolitis, Sepsis, and Mortality in Very Low Birth Weight Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Indian Pediatr · PMID 41533318 · DOI |
Randomised controlled trial |
236 Very low birth weight infants born at 32 weeks or earlier, fed by mouth, in an Indian hospital |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, single probiotic Probiotic (hospital use) From first feeds until 35 weeks corrected age · vs No probiotic (breast milk only); open-label |
No benefit on the combined outcome: 30.4% with LGG versus 27.2% without (RR 0.85). Time to full feeds, return to birth weight, hospital stay, ventilation and antimicrobial use did not differ. RR 0.85 for the combined outcome (95% CI 0.48 to 1.50 (P = 0.592)) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Combined outcome of sepsis, NEC or death; time to full feeds; hospital stay Limitations: Open-label (no placebo, so staff and parents knew who got LGG); one hospital; 236 infants. Funding and conflicts: No conflict of interest declared in the abstract. Registration: CTRI/2021/03/031724 Read: abstract |
| Szajewska 2011 Meta-analysis: the effects of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG supplementation for the prevention of healthcare-associated diarrhoea in children. Aliment Pharmacol Ther · PMID 21899584 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
1092 3 randomised trials in children aged 1 month to 18 years in hospital |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic Given during the hospital stay Duration of hospital stay · vs Placebo or no intervention |
Hospital-acquired diarrhoea was lower with LGG (2 trials, n = 823, RR 0.37) and so was symptomatic rotavirus gastroenteritis (3 trials, n = 1043, RR 0.49). No difference in symptom-free rotavirus infection, hospital stay or length of diarrhoea. LGG was well tolerated; no harms were reported in the trials. Diarrhoea RR 0.37; symptomatic rotavirus RR 0.49 (Diarrhoea 0.23 to 0.59; rotavirus 0.28 to 0.86) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Diarrhoea picked up in hospital; symptomatic rotavirus diarrhoea; asymptomatic rotavirus infection; hospital stay; duration of diarrhoea Limitations: Only 3 trials, the oldest results; hospital settings only. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Szajewska 2015 Systematic review with meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in children and adults. Aliment Pharmacol Ther · PMID 26365389 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
1499 12 randomised trials; children and adults treated with antibiotics for any reason |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic (various products) Varied by trial Varied by trial · vs Placebo or no additional treatment |
LGG lowered the risk of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea from 22.4% to 12.3% overall (11 trials, RR 0.49, low quality of evidence). In children alone the result was significant (5 trials, n = 445, RR 0.48, moderate quality). In adults alone it was not significant (6 trials, n = 863, RR 0.48, low quality), except in a subset given antibiotics as part of Helicobacter pylori treatment (4 trials, n = 280, RR 0.26, low quality). Overall RR 0.49; children RR 0.48; adults RR 0.48; adults treated for H. pylori RR 0.26 (Overall 0.29 to 0.83; children 0.26 to 0.89; adults 0.20 to 1.15; H. pylori subset 0.11 to 0.59) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Antibiotic-associated diarrhoea Limitations: Quality of evidence moderate to low (the authors rated it by GRADE). Children and adults pooled in the headline figure; read the children and adults results separately. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Szajewska 2016 Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhea in Children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr · PMID 26756877 · DOI |
Guideline systematic review |
Children given antibiotics; review of earlier systematic reviews plus newer randomised trials. Treatment of antibiotic diarrhoea is not covered. | Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (named strain) Probiotic (strain-specific recommendation) · vs Placebo or no probiotic |
If a probiotic is considered to prevent AAD because of risk factors (class of antibiotic, duration, age, hospital stay, other illnesses, earlier AAD), the working group recommends L. rhamnosus GG (moderate quality of evidence, strong recommendation) or Saccharomyces boulardii (moderate, strong). For C. difficile diarrhoea it suggests S. boulardii (low, conditional). Other strains had too little evidence. Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence (GRADE) (Not applicable) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) and C. difficile diarrhoea Limitations: Recommendations only when at least 2 randomised trials of a named strain existed. Children only. A guideline, not a new trial. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract; several authors are members of a society working group. Read: abstract |
| Szajewska 2018 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in the Primary Prevention of Eczema in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients · PMID 30231505 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
889 5 randomised trials (7 publications); LGG taken in pregnancy and/or after birth to prevent eczema |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic Varied by trial Varied by trial · vs Placebo |
High to moderate certainty evidence that LGG, whatever the timing, did not reduce the risk of eczema. No consistent effect on other allergy outcomes. The authors say it does not support a general recommendation to use probiotics to prevent eczema. No reduction in eczema risk (Not in the abstract) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Eczema (primary prevention); other allergy outcomes Limitations: Pooled 5 trials; heterogeneity not given in the abstract. Funding and conflicts: Declared in the paper: first author has been a speaker for Dicofarm, Vitis Pharma and Bayer (makers and/or distributors of LGG); second author for Nutricia, Mead Johnson and Vitis Pharma. Read: abstract |
| Szajewska 2019 Systematic review with meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for treating acute gastroenteritis in children - a 2019 update. Aliment Pharmacol Ther · PMID 31025399 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
4208 18 randomised trials in children with acute gastroenteritis (diarrhoea and vomiting from infection) |
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic (various products) Daily amounts of 10 billion colony-forming units or more, and fewer, were both studied Short courses during illness · vs Placebo or no treatment |
No effect on stool volume. LGG was linked with shorter diarrhoea (15 trials, n = 3820, 0.85 days shorter) and with a shorter hospital stay. The effect was larger in European countries than elsewhere. One large trial found no effect on the total severity score at 14 days. The authors say the trials differ a lot and have method limitations. Mean difference -0.85 day for duration of diarrhoea (95% CI -1.15 to -0.56) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Stool volume; how long diarrhoea lasted; hospital stay Limitations: High heterogeneity and methodological limitations of included trials, as the authors say. Published after the large US trial reversed the picture. Funding and conflicts: Not stated in the abstract. Read: abstract |
| Tan 2021 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for Cow's Milk Allergy in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Pediatr · PMID 34746056 · DOI |
Systematic review meta analysis |
10 studies in children with cow's milk allergy | Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Probiotic Best amount and treatment time not established, the authors say Varied by study · vs Controls or placebo |
More children tolerated milk with LGG (RR 2.22, moderate-quality evidence). No difference in SCORAD eczema scores (very low-quality evidence). Blood in stool may have improved (RR 0.36, low-quality evidence). The authors say this must be treated with caution and ask for more powerful trials. Tolerance RR 2.22; SCORAD mean difference 1.41; fecal occult blood RR 0.36 (Tolerance 1.86 to 2.66; SCORAD -4.99 to 7.82; fecal occult blood 0.14 to 0.92) Methods, limits and fundingOutcomes: Tolerance of cow's milk; eczema severity score (SCORAD); blood in stool Limitations: The abstract does not give the number of children. Authors call for larger trials. Funding and conflicts: Authors declare no commercial or financial relationships. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021237221 Read: abstract |
| s-fda-preterm FDA: Risk of Invasive Disease in Preterm Infants Given Probiotics Formulated to Contain Live Bacteria or Yeast (content current as of 2023-09-29) · Source |
Reference database n/a |
Methods, limits and fundingRead: full-text | ||
| s-ncbi-taxonomy-47715 NCBI Taxonomy: Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (taxid 47715) · Source |
Reference database n/a |
Methods, limits and fundingRead: database-record | ||
| s-nccih-probiotics NCCIH (US NIH): Probiotics: Usefulness and Safety (last updated August 2019) · Source |
Reference database n/a |
Methods, limits and fundingRead: full-text | ||
| s-nhs-probiotics NHS (UK): Probiotics (page last reviewed 24 November 2022) · Source |
Reference database n/a |
Methods, limits and fundingRead: full-text | ||
| s-ods-probiotics NIH Office of Dietary Supplements: Probiotics fact sheet for health professionals · Source |
Reference database n/a |
Methods, limits and fundingRead: not-read |
What we do not know yet
- No LGG-specific trial in healthy adults for general gut health or immune support was read.
- Adult irritable bowel syndrome results for LGG alone were not read.
- No LGG-specific pregnancy or breastfeeding safety advice was found.
- How often LGG causes infection is not known; only case reviews exist.
- The NIH Office of Dietary Supplements fact sheet was blocked and not read; the AGA 2020 guideline has no abstract text and was not used.
- Typical amounts in foods and products were not read from a source.
How new research is added
New studies are found by a saved PubMed search and placed in a review queue before the page changes.
Lab markers
What changed in blood or saliva tests during trials. A changed number is not the same as feeling or being healthier, and we give no "normal ranges".
Other 10
Rate of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea
Lower in trials
How many people on antibiotics get loose, frequent stools.
Moderate certaintyResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG lowers diarrhoea during antibiotic treatment.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
A real, clinically relevant outcome in children.
Safety implication
See the Safety tab for people with weak immune systems.
How long diarrhoea lasts (days)
Shorter in pooled trials; no change in the largest trial in trials
Days from the start of a stomach infection until loose stools stop.
Mixed findingsResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG shortens a stomach bug.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
The pooled trials and the largest trial disagree.
Safety implication
None found in these trials.
Children whose stomach pain eased
Higher in trials
Share of children with no pain or less pain after the treatment period.
Low certaintyResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG helps children with long-lasting tummy ache.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
Small trials; no difference in functional abdominal pain or dyspepsia alone.
Safety implication
No safety signal reported in the abstract.
| Study | Result | People | Product |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | RR 1.31 overall; RR 1.70 in IBS (number needed to treat 4) | 3 trials, 290 children | LGG versus placebo |
Diarrhoea picked up in hospital
Lower in trials
Share of hospitalised children who develop diarrhoea during the stay.
Low certaintyResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG protects children from stomach bugs on the ward.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
Older, small trials.
Safety implication
No harms reported.
| Study | Result | People | Product |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | RR 0.37 for diarrhoea; RR 0.49 for symptomatic rotavirus | 3 trials, 1,092 children | LGG during hospital stay versus placebo or nothing |
Necrotising enterocolitis, stage II or worse
Lower in pooled trials; no benefit in a 2026 trial in trials
Serious inflammation of a premature baby's bowel that needs medical treatment.
Mixed findingsResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG in hospital lowers the rate of this illness.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
Pooled and observational data disagree.
Safety implication
FDA warning of serious infection in premature infants given probiotics.
Children who tolerate cow's milk
Higher in trials
Share of children with milk allergy who can drink milk without a reaction.
Low certaintyResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG helps children outgrow milk allergy.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
Reviewers' rating moderate, but the abstract gives no child numbers and the authors urge caution.
Safety implication
Allergy care needs a doctor.
| Study | Result | People | Product |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | RR 2.22 (95% CI 1.86 to 2.66), moderate-quality evidence | 10 studies in children with cow's milk allergy | LGG versus controls |
Eczema in the first years of life
No change in trials
Share of children who develop eczema.
Evidence againstResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG lowers eczema risk when given in pregnancy or infancy.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
The reviewers found no effect.
Safety implication
Not applicable.
| Study | Result | People | Product |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14 | No reduction in eczema risk (high-to-moderate certainty) | 5 trials, 889 participants | LGG versus placebo |
Eczema severity score (SCORAD)
No change in trials
A doctor-rated score of how bad eczema is.
Low certaintyResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG calms existing eczema.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
No effect in either source.
Safety implication
Not applicable.
Acute ear infections in children
Lower in trials
Share of children who get a middle-ear infection.
Low certaintyResults and what it means
Daily crying time in colic
Lower (one trial) in trials
Minutes of full-force crying per day.
Not enough evidenceResults and what it means
Why it was measured
To see whether LGG shortens crying spells.
Statistical vs. clinical meaning
One small trial with a second change in diet.
Safety implication
Not applicable.
| Study | Result | People | Product |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Median 104 versus 242 minutes a day (P < 0.001) | 45 breastfed infants | LGG 28 days, with maternal cow's milk avoidance |
Safety
What studies and official sources say about side effects, medicines and who should check first. Each point shows what kind of evidence it comes from.
Main points to know 3
- Premature babies: the FDA warns of serious, even fatal, infection. The US FDA says premature infants given probiotics (live bacteria or yeast) are at risk of invasive, potentially fatal disease caused by the organisms in the product. It reminds doctors that no probiotic is approved for use as a drug in infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics, quoted by the FDA, says current evidence does not support routine, universal probiotics for premature infants, especially those under 1,000 g. The FDA statement covers probiotics in general; the case it describes involved a Bifidobacterium product, not LGG. Any use in a neonatal unit is a doctor's decision. Regulator statement 17 19 1
- People who are very ill or have weak immune systems: rare bloodstream infection. A review of 89 patients with Lactobacillus in the blood found 11 whose bacteria matched the probiotic strain LGG. In 82% of all 89 patients there were severe or fatal underlying illnesses, and weakened immunity, long hospital stays and earlier surgery were risk factors. Mortality was 26% at one month. This is a case review, so it cannot say how often LGG causes harm. NCCIH says the risk of harm from probiotics is greater in people with severe illness or weak immune systems, and the NHS tells people with a weakened immune system to talk to a doctor first. Case series and authoritative guidance 7 19 20
- For most healthy people, trials found few side effects. In the trials and reviews read, LGG was well tolerated: no harms in three hospital trials in children, no serious adverse events in four trials on respiratory infections, and no severe adverse events in a trial of 131 young children. NCCIH adds that few studies have looked at probiotic safety in detail, so how often and how severe side effects are is not well known. The NHS says that for people with a healthy immune system probiotics shouldn't cause unpleasant side effects. Meta analysis and authoritative guidance 11 4 6 19 20
Side effects 4
| Effect | How often | Severity and recovery | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| No side effects reported in most trials These trials were in children; adverse events are often counted loosely in short trials. | Respiratory-infection trials: side effects similar to placebo. Hospital trials: no harms reported. | None serious reported Not applicable | Meta-analysis 4 11 |
| Bloodstream infection (bacteremia) with the probiotic organism Cannot give a rate because the review has no count of how many people took LGG safely. | No frequency found. 11 of 89 Lactobacillus bacteremia cases matched LGG in one review. | Can be severe or fatal, almost always in people who were already very ill Treatment with an antibiotic that works against the organism was linked with fewer deaths (odds ratio 0.22) | Case series 7 |
| Invasive infection in premature infants The FDA letter covers all probiotics; the example case was a Bifidobacterium product. | No frequency found for LGG | Potentially fatal (FDA, for probiotics in general) Not stated | Regulator statement 17 |
| Slightly worse asthma complaints in one subgroup of young children A subgroup finding that could be chance; the main trial found no clinical effect. | Subgroup of one trial of 131 children already sensitised to allergens | Slight Not reported | Randomised trial subgroup 6 |
Liver
No liver injury from LGG was found in the sources read. A liver-safety reference (LiverTox) was not opened for this page.
How often. No frequency was found.
Monitoring. No agency monitoring advice was found.
This is a safety connection. It is not evidence that Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) supports liver health.
Medicines and supplements 3
| With | Why it matters | Importance | Evidence | What to do |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medicines or illnesses that weaken the immune system (for example chemotherapy, steroids, transplant medicines, HIV) prescription and condition | A weakened immune system makes it easier for live bacteria in a probiotic to reach the blood (NCCIH; case review). | NCCIH says the risk of harm from probiotics is greater in people with severe illnesses or compromised immune systems. The bacteremia review lists weakened immunity as a risk factor. Which exact medicines raise the risk with LGG was not shown in the sources read. | Authoritative guidance and case series Low certainty 19 7 20 | Ask your doctor or pharmacist before using any live-bacteria probiotic. |
| Antibiotics taken at the same time prescription | Not described in the sources read. | In the trials read, LGG was given alongside antibiotics to prevent diarrhoea, and this was the use that was studied. NCCIH says people given probiotics with antibiotics had no more side effects. Whether the antibiotic lowers the probiotic's effect was not shown. | Meta analysis and authoritative guidance Low certainty 12 19 | Ask a pharmacist how to space doses if you use both. |
| Other medicines and supplements other | No LGG-specific drug interaction was found in the sources read. This is absence of evidence, not proof of safety. | Not found Not enough evidence | Tell your doctor or pharmacist about every supplement you use. |
Who should check first 5
| Situation | Advice | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Premature infants | Do not give any probiotic to a premature baby unless the neonatal team decides to. The FDA warns of invasive, potentially fatal infection. | Regulator statement 17 19 |
| Weakened immune system or serious illness | NCCIH and the NHS advise caution and talking to a doctor first. Cases of LGG-matching bacteria in the blood were mostly in people with severe illnesses. | Authoritative guidance and case series 19 20 7 |
| Pregnancy and breastfeeding | No source read gave pregnancy or breastfeeding safety advice for LGG. Trials of LGG taken in pregnancy to prevent eczema in babies are in the Benefits tab and found no benefit. Ask a doctor or midwife before using it. | Not found 14 |
| Children | Most LGG trials were in children and reported few side effects. A child's use for diarrhoea or colic should be talked through with a doctor or pharmacist. | Meta-analysis 4 11 8 |
| Allergy to milk or other ingredients in a product | Some products have extra ingredients. None of the sources read described LGG product ingredients. Read the label and ask a pharmacist if you have allergies. | Label reading advice 20 |
Overdose, product quality and regulators
Summary. LGG is a live bacterium, not a chemical, so the risk is infection rather than poisoning. Infection is rare and mostly in very ill people or premature infants. No upper limit or overdose figure exists for it in the sources read.
Animal. Not reviewed.
High dose or long term signals. No source read described harm from long use. NCCIH says few studies have looked at probiotic safety in detail.
Overdose response. Not described in the sources read. Seek medical help if someone becomes unwell after taking probiotics.
Genotoxicity. Not researched.
The NHS and NCCIH both say probiotic products can differ from their labels.
Label accuracy. The NHS says that, because of how probiotics are regulated, we cannot always be sure a product has the bacteria on the label, enough bacteria to have an effect, or bacteria that survive to the gut. It notes a big difference between the pharmaceutical-grade probiotics used in trials and products sold in shops. 20
Other organisms in products. NCCIH says some probiotic products have been reported to contain organisms other than those on the label, and in some cases these contaminants may pose serious health risks. 19
Regulation. NCCIH says many probiotics are sold as dietary supplements, which do not need FDA approval before they are marketed. The FDA says no probiotic is approved as a drug for infants. 19 17
| Body | Action | Date |
|---|---|---|
| FDA (US Food and Drug Administration) (United States) | Warns healthcare providers that preterm infants given probiotics are at risk of invasive, potentially fatal disease, and that no probiotic is approved as a drug or biological product for use in infants. Some unapproved probiotics are sold to reduce NEC. source | 2023-09-29 |
| NCCIH (US National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health) (United States) | Says probiotics have an extensive history of apparently safe use in healthy people, that the risk is greater in severe illness or weak immune systems, and that severe or fatal infections have been reported in premature infants. source | 2019-08 |
| NHS (UK National Health Service) (United Kingdom) | Says probiotics appear safe for most people with a healthy immune system, that there is no evidence they treat eczema, and that people with an existing health condition or weak immune system should talk to a doctor first. source | 2022-11-24 |
When to get medical help
- A premature baby, or any baby, who has a fever, is floppy, feeds badly or looks very unwell after a probiotic: get medical help at once.
- Fever, chills or feeling very unwell while taking a probiotic, especially if you have a weak immune system, a central line or a serious illness: contact a doctor urgently.
- Severe or bloody diarrhoea, or diarrhoea with dehydration (very dry mouth, no urine for many hours, drowsiness), whether or not you used a probiotic: get medical advice.
- A rash, swelling of the face or lips, or trouble breathing after a product: call emergency services.
Stop using the product and contact a clinician or emergency service. In the US, Poison Control is 1-800-222-1222.
General information only, not medical advice. Ask a clinician or pharmacist before use, especially with medicines, in pregnancy or with a health condition. See the Natural Remedy Safety guide.
Frequently asked questions
What is Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG?
Does LGG prevent diarrhoea from antibiotics?
Does LGG shorten a stomach bug in children?
Does LGG help irritable bowel syndrome or tummy ache?
Can LGG prevent or treat eczema?
Does LGG help with cow's milk allergy?
In a pooled analysis of 10 studies, more children with diagnosed milk allergy tolerated milk with LGG. Eczema scores did not change, and the authors ask for larger trials. Ask a doctor, since allergy care needs supervision.
Is LGG safe for premature babies?
Who should be careful with LGG?
Does LGG boost immunity in healthy people?
No source read shows that. The sources tie LGG to specific conditions. The NHS says there is little evidence for many health claims about probiotics.
Is LGG found in foods?
Do all probiotics work the same way as LGG?
Explore by health goal
Editorial transparency
- Written by
- AlternativeMed editorial team. Research compiled with AI assistance, then checked against the sources listed.
- Medical review
- None. This page has not been reviewed by a physician or pharmacist.
- First published
- 2026-10-26
- Last substantive update
- 2026-10-26
- How we research
- We started from our existing LGG summary, re-read PubMed abstracts for the guideline, meta-analyses and trials listed, and read the NHS, NCCIH and FDA pages. Only abstracts were read for studies. The NIH Office of Dietary Supplements page was blocked and is marked unread.
- How we rate evidence
- See "How we rate evidence" in the Evidence tab.
- Independence
- No product is promoted on this page. No affiliate links are shown. Some authors of LGG reviews declare speaker fees from LGG makers or distributors; trial funding is not always stated in abstracts.
Sources 21
Each source was opened and checked. Where we read only the abstract, it says so. The small numbers in the text point here.
- Ananthan A, Balasubramanian H, Rath C, Muthusamy S, Rao S, Patole S. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG as a probiotic for preterm infants: a strain specific systematic review and meta-analysis.. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2024. PMID 39060543. DOI 10.1038/s41430-024-01474-0. (abstract)
- Gruber C, Wendt M, Sulser C, Lau S, Kulig M, Wahn U et al.. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG as treatment of atopic dermatitis in infancy.. Allergy. 2007. PMID 17919141. DOI 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01543.x. (abstract)
- Horvath A, Dziechciarz P, Szajewska H. Meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for abdominal pain-related functional gastrointestinal disorders in childhood.. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011. PMID 21507030. DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04665.x. (abstract)
- Liu S, Hu P, Du X, Zhou T, Pei X. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG supplementation for preventing respiratory infections in children: a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Indian Pediatr. 2013. PMID 23665598. DOI 10.1007/s13312-013-0123-z. (abstract)
- Pace F, Pace M, Quartarone G. Probiotics in digestive diseases: focus on Lactobacillus GG.. Minerva Gastroenterol Dietol. 2015. PMID 26657927. (abstract)
- Rose MA, Stieglitz F, Koksal A, Schubert R, Schulze J, Zielen S. Efficacy of probiotic Lactobacillus GG on allergic sensitization and asthma in infants at risk.. Clin Exp Allergy. 2010. PMID 20604800. DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2010.03560.x. (abstract)
- Salminen MK, Rautelin H, Tynkkynen S, Poussa T, Saxelin M, Valtonen V et al.. Lactobacillus bacteremia, clinical significance, and patient outcome, with special focus on probiotic L. rhamnosus GG.. Clin Infect Dis. 2004. PMID 14679449. DOI 10.1086/380455. (abstract)
- Savino F, Montanari P, Galliano I, Dapra V, Bergallo M. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (ATCC 53103) for the Management of Infantile Colic: A Randomized Controlled Trial.. Nutrients. 2020. PMID 32517123. DOI 10.3390/nu12061693. (abstract)
- Schnadower D, Tarr PI, Casper TC, Gorelick MH, Dean JM, Freedman SB et al.. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG versus Placebo for Acute Gastroenteritis in Children.. N Engl J Med. 2018. PMID 30462938. DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1802598. (abstract)
- Shah S, Kaul A, Pandey P, Wattal S, Nare R. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG to Reduce Necrotising Enterocolitis, Sepsis, and Mortality in Very Low Birth Weight Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial.. Indian Pediatr. 2026. PMID 41533318. DOI 10.1007/s13312-025-00252-w. (abstract)
- Szajewska H, Wanke M, Patro B. Meta-analysis: the effects of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG supplementation for the prevention of healthcare-associated diarrhoea in children.. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011. PMID 21899584. DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04837.x. (abstract)
- Szajewska H, Kolodziej M. Systematic review with meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in children and adults.. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015. PMID 26365389. DOI 10.1111/apt.13404. (abstract)
- Szajewska H, Canani RB, Guarino A, Hojsak I, Indrio F, Kolacek S et al. (ESPGHAN Working Group for Probiotics/Prebiotics). Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhea in Children.. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2016. PMID 26756877. DOI 10.1097/MPG.0000000000001081. (abstract)
- Szajewska H, Horvath A. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in the Primary Prevention of Eczema in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Nutrients. 2018. PMID 30231505. DOI 10.3390/nu10091319. (abstract)
- Szajewska H, Kolodziej M, Gieruszczak-Bialek D, Skorka A, Ruszczynski M, Shamir R. Systematic review with meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for treating acute gastroenteritis in children - a 2019 update.. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2019. PMID 31025399. DOI 10.1111/apt.15267. (abstract)
- Tan W, Zhou Z, Li W, Lu H, Qiu Z. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG for Cow's Milk Allergy in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Front Pediatr. 2021. PMID 34746056. DOI 10.3389/fped.2021.727127. (abstract)
- . FDA: Risk of Invasive Disease in Preterm Infants Given Probiotics Formulated to Contain Live Bacteria or Yeast (content current as of 2023-09-29). . . (full-text)
- . NCBI Taxonomy: Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (taxid 47715). . . (database-record)
- . NCCIH (US NIH): Probiotics: Usefulness and Safety (last updated August 2019). . . (full-text)
- . NHS (UK): Probiotics (page last reviewed 24 November 2022). . . (full-text)
- . NIH Office of Dietary Supplements: Probiotics fact sheet for health professionals. . . (not-read)
Where to buy
Check the label first. Whatever you buy, look for these:
- The amount of the active ingredient per serving, not just the front-label claim
- A third-party testing mark (USP, NSF or ConsumerLab)
- Other ingredients and allergens
- Ask a pharmacist about interactions with your medicines
Talk to a pharmacist or doctor before you start any supplement, especially if you take medicines. See the Safety tab for interactions.
Support our free guides: as an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Full disclosure.
