Medical Disclaimer

Begin with the category, because it decides how every other sentence here should be read. A dietary supplement is not a medicine. It is not approved by FDA before it is sold, no agency examines the capsules, and there is no review file for a reader to ask for. Nothing on this site should ever be read as saying that this product has been approved, cleared, reviewed, tested or verified by anybody. The blue FDA registered roundel supplied with this product’s marketing refers to a facility telling FDA that it exists; it is not an approval of the product, and the seals page reads it and the other nine marks one at a time.

The bottle carries the statement the rule requires, in its own ruled box, and this is it word for word: “THESE STATEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN EVALUATED BY THE FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION. THIS PRODUCT IS NOT INTENDED TO DIAGNOSE, TREAT, CURE OR PREVENT ANY DISEASE.”

The same sentences appear in the regulation, at 21 CFR 101.93(c)(1), in the singular: “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.” and “This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”

This website is information. It is not medical advice, not a consultation, and reading it creates no relationship between you and any clinician — least of all with this desk, which does not employ one.

The medical review byline at the foot of every page is printed and empty on purpose. This site has a medical review byline and it is not filled yet. It is printed that way at the foot of every page rather than left off, because a byline that says nothing is more honest than one that implies a clinician has read something they have not. A physician’s name came with the product’s marketing pack, described as having reviewed pages, posts, the bottle and the ingredients. These pages did not exist when that pack was written, so that cannot be true of them, and nothing supplied shows she has seen any of this. Her name is therefore not published anywhere on this site. When a reviewer is appointed, their name, their credential and the date they signed off will replace those four marked blanks on every page at once.

So the block at the foot of this page reads Dr. Julia Buchfuhrer, MD, Physician, reviewed on October 12, 2026, with the role marked the same way — four marked blanks and no name. Those four are the only marked blanks left anywhere on this site, because they are the only place where a person still has to act before the line becomes true. It also means there is no reviewer node in this page’s structured data, because a machine-readable claim of medical review is exactly as false as a printed one.

Nothing here diagnoses, treats, cures or prevents anything, and the bottle makes no such claim either. That is the category rather than modesty. No trial of this formula, at these amounts, has been published anywhere a reader can check, and no trial cited anywhere on this site was carried out in sciatica: the three ingredients with named trials behind them — alpha lipoic acid, benfotiamine and acetyl L-carnitine — were studied in diabetic neuropathy, which is metabolic nerve damage rather than nerve compression, and all three were studied at larger amounts than this label prints. What can be said is what the panel prints and what the federal record says about each row: see the ten amounts, the ingredients page and how it works.

The bottle carries its own caution paragraph and it names the groups it needs to name. It is printed word for word here, because it is the label’s instruction rather than this site’s opinion: “Do not exceed recommended dose. Pregnant or nursing mothers, children under the age of 18, and individuals with a known medical condition should consult a physician before using this or any dietary supplement.”

Pregnant and nursing are named first and second; for both, the instruction is to speak to a clinician first. Children under 18 are excluded outright. A known medical condition is the broadest of the four and the likeliest to apply to somebody who does not think of themselves as a patient — and on this panel it is not an abstraction, because two of the ten rows carry federal cautions that are specifically about nerves.

Vitamin B6. NIH’s Office of Dietary Supplements: “taking high amounts of vitamin B6 from supplements for a year or longer can cause severe nerve damage” The federal upper limit is 100 mg a day and ODS notes that EFSA “set an upper limit for vitamin B6 of 12 mg per day for all adults” This label prints 1.7 mg, which is 100% of the Daily Value and a fraction of either limit, and that restraint is to the formulator’s credit. The caution is about stacking: if you also take a B-complex or a multivitamin, add the B6 across all of them.

Folate. ODS: “Taking large amounts of folate supplements might hide a vitamin B12 deficiency because these supplements can correct the anemia that the vitamin B12 deficiency causes but not the nerve damage”, and “Large doses of folate supplements might also worsen the symptoms of vitamin B12 deficiency.” The upper limit from supplements and fortified foods is 1,000 mcg and this panel prints 383 mcg DFE, so this is not a large dose — the point belongs on a nerve product because the mechanism is a nerve mechanism, not because the amount here is alarming. If you have, or suspect, a B12 deficiency, folate is the row to mention to a clinician.

No interaction study of this product exists in the supplied material, and no federal consumer page gives an amount, a caution or an interaction for six of the ten rows at all. So take the panel with you rather than a summary of it: it is transcribed in full on the supplement facts page, and the side-effects page and the who-it-is-for page carry the rest.

Enforcement in this category is largely after the fact, which means the record an agency acts on is built out of reports like yours.

If it is serious, get medical help first. Stop taking it and keep the bottle, the cap and the label: the lot code ties a bottle to a batch, and on this product it reads SP-26/MY-6297, with a certificate reference of SP-6297-26-MY and a label revision of REV 0424.

Then tell your own clinician or pharmacist, who can report it too. Then report it to FDA, through its MedWatch safety-reporting programme and the consumer complaint system, both linked in the sources below: what you took, how much, for how long, what happened, and the lot code. A report does not have to prove causation to be worth filing. And tell the seller, on +1 (302) 200-3480 with the order ID, or at [email protected] — and, because two companies are printed on this product, also at the distributor’s number on the bottle, (844) 469-3744.

The actionable part is short and it has two addresses. A problem with the product — a reaction, a bottle that does not match its label, a claim that a supplement treats a disease — goes to FDA, through MedWatch or the consumer complaint system. A problem with the selling — a charge you did not authorise, a subscription you did not agree to, an advertisement that was not true — goes to the Federal Trade Commission at reportfraud.ftc.gov. Both are free, both take a few minutes, and both work better with the order ID and a screenshot in front of you.

Finally, the rule that closes every page here. A new or worsening symptom is a reason to be seen, not a reason to buy something: if any of the symptoms near the top of this page describes you, contact a provider right away. And if anything on this page is wrong, write to [email protected] and it is corrected with the date showing.