The use the label states, quoted from it. No plain-language version of this sentence has been written.
The use the label states, quoted from it. It is written for a clinician, not for a reader without medical training.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 33 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Biomarker
A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.
Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.
What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.
A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.
Placebo
A placebo is a dummy treatment given so the real one can be compared with it.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A placebo is like a blank control in an experiment.
Where that stops being true. A blank does nothing. People given a placebo often do get better.
What people get wrong. A placebo effect is read as imaginary. The improvement is measured and real.
An inactive intervention matched in appearance to the test intervention, used to control for non-specific effects.
Comparator
A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like the other runner in a race.
Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.
What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.
The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Primary outcome: Detection rate of premalignant conditions and malignant lesions, defined as the total number of lesions in the esophagus, stomach, or duodenum detected per randomisation group, confirmed by histological evaluation (if necessary)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06696209
How many people
1290
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
comparison of mucosal visibility between 4 groups
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06581783
How many people
1200
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Adenoma detection rate
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07696793
How many people
818
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Difference in the proportion of patients with adequate visibility score between the no intervention and the water plus simethicone solution, water plus N Acetyl cysteine solution, water plus simethicone and N Acetyl cysteine solution
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05951712
How many people
800
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
adenoma detection rate
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT02540239
How many people
590
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Adenoma detection rate (ADR).
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07501975
How many people
498
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Temporarily: reduces fever relieves minor aches and pains which may be associated with the common cold, flu, headache, sore throat or toothache. Uses Relieves discomfort of infant gas frequently caused by excessive swallowing of air or certain formulas or food Uses –Helps loosen mucus secretions to aid aspiration and removal from nose and sinuses, allowing for easier breathing.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Prescription only
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Oral
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as tablet, tablet, chewable, given by the oral route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Oral
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
238 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 235 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 76fa24d0-731e-4fde-9ad6-c4c890b816b4 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human otc drug.
US prescribing information · 76fa24d0-731e-4fde-9ad6-c4c890b816b4 · read 2026-08-29
SIMETHICONE is oral at HOW SUPPLIED Simethicone Chewable Tablets, 80 mg are white, round, tablets, debossed with "44 & 137" on one side and are supplied as: NDC 57896-791-01 in bottle of 100 chewable tablets NDC 57896-791-08 in bottle of 80 c…, recorded as fda label in effect 2025-01-10 in the United States.
US prescribing information · 5df94be7-0bc9-4be1-9982-8193e3a3c8ef · read 2026-08-30
Recorded price in US: 0.03189–0.05298 USD per one unit as the pricing file counts it — a tablet, capsule, patch or single item, across 3 priced products whose strengths and pack forms differ, as of 2026-08-26, paid by retail pharmacies buying the product, as surveyed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It is not a list price, an insurance price, or what anyone pays at a counter..
Recorded source · 2026-08-26 · read 2026-08-28
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Dimethicone, Unspecified studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Dimethicone, Unspecified are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
92RU3N3Y1O
RxNorm concept
314221
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Quoted from a stored source.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✗ Not passed
Safety mode resolved
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
Withdrawn in United States, 2016, for "Microbial Contamination of Non-Sterile Products: contamination with the bacteria, Burkholderia cepacia." (openFDA drug enforcement Class I recall)
What the approval register records
10 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA020606, approved 19970626 to J AND J CONSUMER INC.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
9 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
How close this is to real life — found nothing in the sources checked.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (7)
Q1
On the Dimethicone, Unspecified label: indicated for what?
"Uses Temporarily protects and helps relieve chafed, chapped or cracked skin. Helps protect from the drying effects of wind and cold weather.": indications and usage on Dimethicone, Unspecified's label. DailyMed label · 59c6da39-b5f1-8253-e063-6394a90a0e8f · 2026-08-24
Q2
31 registered trials of Dimethicone, Unspecified — at which phases?
"Study did not meet required enrollment numbers"; 3 of 31 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT02217982
terminated; "Study did not meet required enrollment numbers"
NCT02523911
withdrawn; "investigator graduated and is not longer at this institution"
NCT02534129
terminated; "Insufficient dermatitis was seen in the controls to allow any determination of protection by Difinsa53"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Dimethicone, Unspecified used Simethicone 80 MG — over how long?
Human studies of Dimethicone, Unspecified used "Simethicone 80 MG". ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
4 recorded entries; human; also "Simethicone 20 MG", "Simethicone 150mg", "Simethicone 150mg plus N Acetyl cysteine 600 mg"
Show the evidence
human
NCT03429621
Simethicone 80 MG
NCT03467334
Simethicone 20 MG
NCT05951712
Simethicone 150mg
NCT05951712
Simethicone 150mg plus N Acetyl cysteine 600 mg
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Which 15 trials of Dimethicone, Unspecified posted no result?
Posted no result
15 of 15 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00615303, NCT01209806, NCT01243736, NCT01653171, NCT01790139 and NCT01914627, and 9 more
Completion dates
oldest 2007-12; newest 2022-11-04
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00615303
2007-12
NCT01209806
2012-09
NCT01243736
2013-11
NCT01653171
2013-11
NCT01790139
2014-01
NCT01914627
2014-01
9 further recorded trials
NCT02161367
2015-07
NCT01361893
2015-09
NCT02357303
2016-01
NCT03410524
2018-10-31
NCT03662113
2018-11-01
NCT03429621
2019-03-31
NCT03467334
2019-06-15
NCT04186936
2019-12-26
NCT05951712
2022-11-04
Q6
At the median, Dimethicone, Unspecified's trials enrolled 120 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
120
Largest enrolment
3000
Registered trials counted
31
Q7
What do 1962 spontaneous reports say about Dimethicone, Unspecified — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Dimethicone, Unspecified appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 1962 reaction mentions were counted: diarrhoea 284; gastrooesophageal reflux disease 239; somnolence 236; coma 205. FAERS via Open Targets · CHEMBL2108200 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
diarrhoea
284
gastrooesophageal reflux disease
239
somnolence
236
coma
205
pain
189
pneumonia aspiration
185
4 more recorded rows
constipation
169
milk-alkali syndrome
159
hypercalcaemia
158
abdominal pain
138
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registered
Where it’s registered
Withdrawn in United States, 2016, for "Microbial Contamination of Non-Sterile Products: contamination with the bacteria, Burkholderia cepacia." (openFDA drug enforcement Class I recall)
Extra Strength Gas Relief, Fevia Gas Control, Gas Relief Extra Strength, Gas-X Extra Strength, Gas Relief Ultra Strength, Infants Gas Relief Drops, Infants, Scarzen, Best Choice, DAILY MOISTURIZING, AMAZON EXTRA STRENGTH, Kroger Extra Strength
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work · openFDA enforcement — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 6 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.