↗ public sourceswww.addeasygroup.com/index/Animal/product.html?cid1=1&cid2=2&cid3=9· 5 studies, 4 independent/mixed
Evidence · moderate
The active substance is backed by 5 studies including meta-analyses; the verdict per claim below reflects what the literature actually shows, not the brochure. Strength reflects the active substance, not the brand.
What the manufacturer claims
Free
Captured from the product page, typed and attributed — the producer’s own statements, checked against the literature below.
Safety
Antiviral and antibacterial: disrupts pathogen (bacterial and viral) membranes for high-efficiency pathogen control
Physiological
Boosts immune response and strengthens gut barrier integrity
Performance
Improves nutrient utilisation and growth performance (a reliable non-antibiotic strategy)
Manufacturer’s own words — not independently verified. The ledger below gives the evidence verdict for each.
Claim ↔ evidence ledger
Verdict free · receipts in Power
Each claim against the studies on the active substance, with the funding split. Open a row for the studies behind the verdict.
Claim
Verdict
Evidence & funding
SafetyAntiviral and antibacterial: disrupts pathogen (bacterial and viral) membranes for h…
Supported
2 studies · 100% indep
›
Read Antibacterial (Salmonella) action is well supported; antiviral support is essentially feed-decontamination (e.g. PEDV in feed), not demonstrated in-animal antiviral protection.
2020
Medium-chain fatty acids and monoglycerides as feed additives for pig production (review)Coated caprylic acid cut Salmonella faecal shedding ≈90% (uncoated negligible); an MCFA additive inhibited Salmonella >99%; MCFA blends mitigate PEDV-contaminated feed
Systematic review and meta-analysis of organic acids reducing Salmonella colonisation in broilersMCFA (C6-C12) have greater anti-Salmonella activity than short-chain acids; organic-acid supplementation reduces crop/caecal Salmonella with variable magnitude
PhysiologicalBoosts immune response and strengthens gut barrier integrity
Supported
1 study · 100% indep
›
Read Gut microbiota/morphology support is independently shown.
2023
MCFA vs phytobiotics on broiler performance, caecum microbiota and morphologyMCFA improved aspects of microbiota and morphology comparably to phytobiotic blends
PerformanceImproves nutrient utilisation and growth performance (a reliable non-antibiotic stra…
Supported
2 studies · 50% indep
›
Read Growth benefit shown, dose-dependent and partly from a sponsor-linked meta-analysis.
2017
Short- and medium-chain fatty acids on broiler performance, carcass and jejunum morphology3% MCFA (caprylic/capric/lauric) significantly increased feed intake and weight gain in chicks
Synergistic organic-acid blend on cecal Salmonella and growth in challenged broilers (meta-analysis)Cecal Salmonella reduced 0.429 log CFU/g (p=0.011) in first 14 DPI; FCR improved 1.474 vs 1.482 (p=0.002)
Why these studies The evidence for a proprietary product is the evidence for its active substance. These are the studies (meta-analyses first) behind the verdicts above, with funding labelled.
Year
Study & effect size
Funding
Type
Access
2020
Medium-chain fatty acids and monoglycerides as feed additives for pig production (review)Coated caprylic acid cut Salmonella faecal shedding ≈90% (uncoated negligible); an MCFA additive inhibited Salmonella >99%; MCFA blends mitigate PEDV-contaminated feed
Systematic review and meta-analysis of organic acids reducing Salmonella colonisation in broilersMCFA (C6-C12) have greater anti-Salmonella activity than short-chain acids; organic-acid supplementation reduces crop/caecal Salmonella with variable magnitude
MCFA vs phytobiotics on broiler performance, caecum microbiota and morphologyMCFA improved aspects of microbiota and morphology comparably to phytobiotic blends
Short- and medium-chain fatty acids on broiler performance, carcass and jejunum morphology3% MCFA (caprylic/capric/lauric) significantly increased feed intake and weight gain in chicks
Synergistic organic-acid blend on cecal Salmonella and growth in challenged broilers (meta-analysis)Cecal Salmonella reduced 0.429 log CFU/g (p=0.011) in first 14 DPI; FCR improved 1.474 vs 1.482 (p=0.002)
728×90 — direct-sold creative, or a responsive Google AdSense unit when unsold
Analysis & tools
◆ Power
The working map a maker won’t give you — built only from the evidence on this page. Nothing here is marketing.
◆ Power view
Open the analyst workbench
Dose benchmark, the independent-vs-sponsored split, the pooled meta-analysis effects, the contradictions and the gaps — all derived from the studies above.
Dose: label vs effective trial range vs EU max
Independence-of-evidence breakdown
Pooled meta-analysis effect sizes
Compare · CSV / JSON · API
Dose benchmark
Label / recommendedNot stated on page
Effective in trials≈0.3-1% (antibacterial); ~3% for growth responses
EU maximumGoverned by feed-material/good-practice use rather than a fixed additive maximum
Coating/encapsulation strongly affects efficacy and the effective dose.
Pooled estimates from the systematic reviews/meta-analyses above — the closest thing to a settled answer.
Discussion — grounded in the evidence
Essen II is a medium-chain fatty acid (C6-C10) blend that disrupts microbial membranes lower in the gut than short-chain acids.
Independent evidence (incl. a systematic review) strongly supports the antibacterial/anti-Salmonella claim, with coated/encapsulated delivery being decisive (coated caprylic cut Salmonella shedding ≈90% where uncoated did nothing).
The 'antiviral' claim is best understood as feed decontamination (e.g. PEDV-contaminated feed) and in-vitro activity rather than demonstrated in-animal antiviral protection.
Growth and FCR benefits are real but dose-dependent and partly from sponsor-linked data.
Regulatory note: MCFA are used as feed materials/technological aids; antibacterial/antiviral is not a standalone EU additive function and disease claims are sensitive.
Where studies disagree: The 'antiviral' claim is mostly about decontaminating virus-contaminated feed (e.g. PEDV) and in-vitro membrane activity; demonstrated in-animal antiviral protection is limited. Antibacterial efficacy also depends heavily on coating/delivery.
Gaps: Exact blend proportions undisclosed (researched at the MCFA-class level). In-vivo antiviral efficacy not demonstrated in the captured studies. No product-specific patent captured.
Manufacturer’s stated mechanism (their words): A blend of medium-chain fatty acids (C6-C10) that, in their undissociated form, cross and disrupt bacterial (and enveloped-viral) membranes, acting further down the gastrointestinal tract than short-chain acids to reduce pathogen load, support the gut barrier and modulate immunity.
Compare & export
Put this beside alternatives on the same active substance (e.g. HMBi / other rumen-protected methionine), and take the data with you.
Sponsored
970×90 — direct-sold creative, or a responsive Google AdSense unit when unsold