I would get rid of the "10x more effective" claim. Effective at what? That sounds like a vague hand wavy health claim. If you mean it is more readily absorbed, say that.

You are operating in the wellness space. I blog in this space and have for years. You will get compared to really crappy, shady companies. You need to do all in your power to sound nothing like them.

I realize you are a recent convert, so you are enthusiastic, but you need to come way, way down on the gushy tone. It is a serious problem.

Start a blog. Fill that blog with reliable studies, historical information on conditions like scurvy and how vitamins C and D were discovered, etc

Acknowledge up front that a well rounded diet is best. Blog about how to get that well rounded diet. Then let people know that if they can't manage to fit a well rounded diet into their hectic lives, supplements may be able to help make up for your inability to eat right. Always say may help. Don't make promises that it will do anything at all.

There are multiple conditions where diet alone is insufficient. People with cystic fibrosis are routinely subscribed ADEK vitamins because of malabsorption of fat soluble vitamins. Pregnant women need lots of extra stuff. Athletes need extra stuff.

I would talk a lot about that stuff and completely drop any biohacking language. I would go very conservative with this.

The alternative remedy circles I used to hang in would not care one bit about your spin here. They would want to know the chemical names of the specific vitamin forms you sell. They would also want links to studies and other respectable sources backing up your claims.

Some vitamin forms are inherently more bioavailable. Bioavailability is a big deal. Stop talking about biohacking. Start talking about why their multivitamin isn't doing what they hoped it would.

I have no idea if you are producing a multivitamin. I and most people I know who are serious about alternative health approaches do not consume multivitamins. People who are serious do their own research and they buy individual supplements. If they need vitamin D, they buy vitamin D, not a multivitamin containing D.

The only exception is where you need certain things together. Off the top of my head (therefore possibly filled with inaccuracies), you need to take magnesium and calcium together and you also need vitamins K and D for proper absorption, plus you need twice as much of one of those minerals as the other. Plus it needs to be bioavailable.

If you came up with a formulation with that set of nutrients and backed up your logic as to why you combined it that way, there is a market for that. I used to spend $300/mo on supplements. I am not the only one.

I would blog in the vein of "Did you know that the most commonly available form of calcium supplement is calcium carbonate, the same thing coral is made of? Yup, you are basically eating coral. No wonder it doesn't do much for you. Humans don't absorb it very well. Calcium citrate is substantially more bioavailable. That's a big fancy word that means your body can readily put it to work. It also means that more of it gets put to use."

Etc.

Target markets include athletes, people getting older and trying to maintain an active life, people with specific conditions, etc. You can cite the latest research on staving off osteoporosis and the risk of injury if you are an athlete with a deficiency, etc.

Healthcare and nutrition is nothing new. You are doing yourself no favors by talking like it is.

I would talk about how healthcare has been evolving in this direction for a long time and this is the next incremental step in vitamin efficacy. Take it way down. If you need to start every reply with "I understand your skepticism... " you are doing something wrong.