Official product information
No Proprietary Blend: Ten Rows, Ten Printed Amounts
Ten rows, ten printed amounts, and nothing pooled — so this page sets every printed amount against the amount a published trial actually used, names the condition that trial was run in, and draws the shortfall.
Quick answer
There is no proprietary blend on this label: all ten ingredients carry their own printed amount, about 677 mg of declared actives a serving. Three rows can be set against a studied amount. Alpha lipoic acid prints 400 mg against the 600 mg SYDNEY 2 called optimal, which is two thirds. Benfotiamine prints 150 mg against a 300 mg lower trial arm, which is one half. Acetyl L-carnitine prints 50 mg against a lowest studied dose of 1,500 mg, which is one thirtieth. Every one of those trials was in diabetic neuropathy. The other seven rows have no studied amount at all.
0 proprietary blends on this panel
Nothing is pooled on this label, so there is nothing to derive
Ten rows, ten printed figures. The question is not what is in it. The question is how much, against what was studied.
Start where this page would start on almost any other product in this category, and then notice that it cannot. There is no proprietary blend on this label. No pooled total, no indented list under one figure, nothing to unpick. All 10 rows carry their own printed amount, and together they come to about 677 mg of declared actives in a 2-capsule serving.
That sounds like a low bar and it is not. A proprietary blend prints one total for a group of ingredients and no figure for any member of it, which means a reader can bound the amounts at best and never state them. This panel asks nobody to infer anything. Every amount on this site is a printed amount, quoted from the photographed panel, which is why you will not find the words derived, at most or capped at anywhere on these pages. It also means every comparison that follows is an honest one: a printed 400 mg can be set beside a studied 600 mg and the arithmetic is simply division.
So the job of this page inverts. There is no derivation to show and no hidden quantity to bound. The question that is left is the harder and more useful one: how much is printed, against how much was actually studied? That is a division, the figures for both sides are published, and the rest of this page does it row by row.
3 of 10 rows with a studied amount to compare
Every row: the printed amount against the studied amount
The table a proprietary blend would have made impossible, and the seven rows it leaves honestly empty.
Here is the whole comparison in one table. The printed column is quoted from the photographed panel. The studied column carries the amount a published trial actually used, and the condition it was used in, because the condition is half the finding. The last column is the division.
Three rows of ten have a studied amount to be compared with. Seven do not, and those seven say so rather than being filled in with something adjacent. Four of them are vitamins, where the federal fact sheet gives a recommended daily intake — a reference amount for a diet, not a dose measured against nerve pain. The other three are dried plant powders at 25 mg apiece, for which no federal consumer page gives an amount for nerve pain at all.
| Row | Printed on the panel | Studied amount, and the condition studied | Printed amount as a fraction of it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin D3 (as Cholecalciferol) | 20 mcg | no studied amount for nerve pain; the fact sheet gives a recommended intake instead | Nothing studied to fall short of |
| Vitamin B6 (as Pyridoxine hydrochloride) | 1.7 mg | no studied amount for nerve pain; the fact sheet gives a recommended intake instead | Nothing studied to fall short of |
| Folate | 383 mcg DFE (230 mcg folic acid) | no studied amount for nerve pain; the fact sheet gives a recommended intake instead | Nothing studied to fall short of |
| Vitamin B12 (as Methylcobalamin) | 2 mcg | no studied amount for nerve pain; the fact sheet gives a recommended intake instead | Nothing studied to fall short of |
| Alpha Lipoic Acid | 400 mg | 600 mg once daily — diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy | two thirds (400 mg of 600 mg once daily) |
| Benfotiamine | 150 mg | 300 mg a day — symmetrical distal diabetic polyneuropathy | one half (150 mg of 300 mg a day) |
| Acetyl L-Carnitine | 50 mg | 1,500 mg a day — diabetic peripheral neuropathy | one thirtieth (50 mg of 1,500 mg a day) |
| Ashwagandha Powder (Root) | 25 mg | no federal consumer page gives an amount for nerve pain | Nothing studied to fall short of |
| Broccoli Powder (Brassica Oleracea)(leaf) | 25 mg | no federal consumer page gives an amount for nerve pain | Nothing studied to fall short of |
| Turmeric Powder (Root) | 25 mg | no federal consumer page gives an amount for nerve pain | Nothing studied to fall short of |
Nothing in the first column is derived: all ten amounts are printed on the label. The fractions in the last column are division, and every studied amount beside them was measured in diabetic neuropathy rather than in sciatica.
2/3 · 1/2 · 1/30 printed, against studied
The three gaps, drawn to scale
The shortfall is the orange. It is arithmetic, not an opinion.
Three rows, drawn. Each bar is the amount the trial used at full width; the navy is what this label prints and the burnt orange is the shortfall. Nothing else on this page is drawn in that colour, because nothing else on this page is a measured gap.
the amount this label prints. the shortfall against the amount the trial used. Each bar is the studied amount at full width, so the orange is what is missing from the dose, not a judgement about the ingredient.
Two thirds, one half, one thirtieth. Those three fractions are the most important figures on this site, and the only reason they can be stated at all is that this label prints its amounts. On a pooled label the acetyl L-carnitine row could have sat inside a total and nobody outside the company would ever have known it was 50 mg.
And the second half of each sentence, every time: the amounts on the right-hand side of those divisions were measured in diabetic neuropathy, which is nerve damage from high blood sugar. Sciatica is nerve compression. That gap is the subject of the how it works page and it is not closed here.
400 of 600 two thirds, in diabetic polyneuropathy
Four hundred milligrams, against the six hundred SYDNEY 2 called optimal
The largest row on the panel, and the narrowest of the three gaps.
Alpha lipoic acid is the largest row on this panel at 400 mg, and it is the row with the best-known trial behind it, so it is worth doing properly. The SYDNEY 2 trial gave oral doses of 600 mg, 1,200 mg and 1,800 mg once daily for five weeks to 181 patients with diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy in Russia and Israel. The authors’ conclusion, word for word: “An oral dose of 600 mg once daily appears to provide the optimum risk-to-benefit ratio.” So the printed 400 mg is two-thirds of the dose that trial called optimal, and that trial was in diabetic polyneuropathy rather than in sciatica. Two-thirds is not a rounding error and it is not an absurdity either; it is a real fraction of a real studied dose, in a different condition.
Put the arithmetic beside the sentence so neither can drift. The trial used 600 mg as its optimum. The label prints 400 mg. 400 ÷ 600 = 0.667, which is two thirds, so the shortfall is 200 mg a day against the dose those authors named — in diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy, which is the condition the 181 patients in that trial had.
Two thirds is the narrowest of the three gaps on this panel and it is worth saying plainly that it is not an absurd amount. It is a real fraction of a real studied dose, in a condition that is not the one on the front of the bottle.
1/30 the widest gap on this panel
One half, and one thirtieth
The second and third of the three rows the front of the bottle is referring to, with the arithmetic done in full.
Benfotiamine: 150 mg printed, 300 mg the lower studied arm
The trial supplied for this row was placebo-controlled, ran six weeks, randomised 165 patients with symmetrical distal diabetic polyneuropathy, and used 300 mg a day and 600 mg a day. The authors’ conclusion, word for word: “Benfotiamine may extend the treatment option for patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.” Note the two careful words in it: may, and diabetic. The printed 150 mg is one half of the lower of those two arms, in diabetic polyneuropathy rather than in sciatica, so the shortfall against even the smaller arm is 150 mg a day.
Acetyl L-carnitine: 50 mg printed, 1,500 mg the lowest studied dose
This is the widest gap on the panel by a long way. A Cochrane review examined four trials and about 906 participants with diabetic peripheral neuropathy, at 1,500 mg, 2,000 mg and 3,000 mg a day. Its plain-language conclusion, word for word: “We are uncertain whether ALC reduces pain in DPN, as the evidence is sparse and of very low certainty.” So the printed amount is one thirtieth of the lowest dose in those trials — 1,500 ÷ 50 = 30 — and at thirty times this amount, in the condition that was actually studied, the review’s own verdict is uncertainty. Both halves of that belong in the same sentence: the dose here is a thirtieth of the studied one, and the studied one did not produce a confident result either.
Three rows on this panel carry named trials, and all three are smaller than the amounts those trials used. Put them in one place. Alpha lipoic acid: 400 mg printed against the 600 mg SYDNEY 2 called optimal — two-thirds — in diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy. Benfotiamine: 150 mg printed against the 300 mg lower arm of a placebo-controlled trial — half — in symmetrical distal diabetic polyneuropathy. Acetyl L-carnitine: 50 mg printed against 1,500 mg, the lowest of the three daily doses in the trials a Cochrane review examined — one thirtieth — in diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Two-thirds, one half, one thirtieth — and every one of the three was measured in diabetic neuropathy, which is not the condition on the front of the bottle.
7 of 10 rows with nothing to compare against
The seven rows with no studied amount
Four recommended intakes, which are not studied doses, and three rows with no federal figure at all.
Seven rows have no studied amount to be set against, and being honest about those seven is as much of the job as drawing the three that do. They divide into two groups and the two groups are not the same.
The four vitamins have a federal recommended intake. Vitamin D3 at 20 mcg is 100% of the Daily Value and the RDA for adults 71 and over; vitamin B6 at 1.7 mg is the top of the adult RDA range; folate at 383 mcg DFE is 96% of an RDA of 400 mcg DFE; vitamin B12 at 2 mcg is 83% of an RDA of 2.4 mcg. A recommended intake is a reference amount for a diet. It is not a dose that was measured against nerve pain, and this site does not present it as one. The percentages, the limits and the one real caution among them — B6 — are on the panel page.
The three powders have nothing at all. Ashwagandha root, broccoli leaf and turmeric root, 25 mg each, printed as powders rather than standardised extracts, with no ratio and no curcumin figure anywhere on the label. No federal consumer page supplied to this desk gives an amount for any of them for nerve pain, so there is no number to put on the right-hand side of a division and no effect is assigned to them here.
Four carry a federal recommended intake and three carry a trial dose. The other three rows have neither, and no figure is borrowed from an adjacent condition to stand in for one.
Nothing supplied to this desk describes a trial of the finished product. Every figure in the studied column of the table above belongs to a single ingredient, studied on its own, in diabetic neuropathy.
01 What would change this page
What would close the gap, and the method that found it
Two things would close it, and only one of them is arithmetic.
What would close the gap on this page is not complicated and the seller does not hold all of it. Two things would do it, and they are different in kind.
The first is a trial of this formula, at these amounts, in this dose form, in sciatica, published where a reader can check it. That is the only thing that would let anybody write a sentence about this product and the condition it is named after. Nothing supplied to this desk is that.
The second is smaller and entirely within reach: printed amounts that reach the studied ones on the three rows where a studied amount exists. 600 mg of alpha lipoic acid rather than 400 mg would match the dose SYDNEY 2 called optimal; 300 mg of benfotiamine rather than 150 mg would match the lower arm of that trial; 1,500 mg of acetyl L-carnitine rather than 50 mg would match the lowest dose in the Cochrane trials. That would still be a dose studied in diabetic neuropathy rather than in sciatica, so it would close the quantity gap and leave the condition gap exactly where it is.
The method, which is worth more than these three figures
Carry this off the page rather than the numbers. Find the printed amount. Find the amount a published trial used. Divide one by the other, and read the condition the trial was run in. If the label pools its ingredients so that the first step is impossible, that is itself the answer. This label makes all three steps possible, which is why it is possible to be this specific about it.
Questions
Sciatica Pro FAQ: the ten amounts questions
How much alpha lipoic acid is in Sciatica Pro?
400 mg, printed. For scale: the SYDNEY 2 trial gave 600 mg, 1,200 mg and 1,800 mg once daily for five weeks to 181 patients with diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy, and concluded “An oral dose of 600 mg once daily appears to provide the optimum risk-to-benefit ratio.” So 400 mg is two-thirds of that, in diabetic polyneuropathy rather than in sciatica.
How much benfotiamine is in Sciatica Pro?
150 mg, printed. A placebo-controlled trial used 300 mg a day and 600 mg a day for six weeks in 165 randomised patients with symmetrical distal diabetic polyneuropathy, concluding “Benfotiamine may extend the treatment option for patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.” 150 mg is half the lower of those two arms.
How much acetyl L-carnitine is in Sciatica Pro?
50 mg, printed. A Cochrane review covered four trials and about 906 participants with diabetic peripheral neuropathy at 1,500 mg, 2,000 mg and 3,000 mg a day, and concluded “We are uncertain whether ALC reduces pain in DPN, as the evidence is sparse and of very low certainty.” 50 mg is one thirtieth of the lowest of those doses.
Is 400 mg of alpha lipoic acid enough?
It is two-thirds of the 600 mg that the SYDNEY 2 trial called optimal, in patients with diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy. Two-thirds of a studied dose is a real fraction rather than a token, and the condition is still not the one on the front of the bottle.
Is 50 mg of acetyl L-carnitine enough?
It is one thirtieth of 1,500 mg, the lowest daily dose in the trials a Cochrane review examined in diabetic peripheral neuropathy. And even at thirty times this amount, in the condition that was actually studied, that review concluded “We are uncertain whether ALC reduces pain in DPN, as the evidence is sparse and of very low certainty.”
Is 150 mg of benfotiamine enough?
It is half the 300 mg lower arm of a placebo-controlled trial in symmetrical distal diabetic polyneuropathy. The authors’ own wording was cautious even at the studied doses: “Benfotiamine may extend the treatment option for patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.”
References
Sources for this page
- Ziegler D and others, Diabetes Care. Oral treatment with alpha-lipoic acid improves symptomatic diabetic polyneuropathy: the SYDNEY 2 trial. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Accessed October 11, 2026.
- Stracke H and others, Experimental and Clinical Endocrinology & Diabetes. Benfotiamine in diabetic polyneuropathy (BENDIP): results of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Accessed October 11, 2026.
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Acetyl-L-carnitine for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. www.cochrane.org. Accessed October 11, 2026.
- MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia, U.S. National Library of Medicine. Sciatica (Medical Encyclopedia). medlineplus.gov. Accessed October 11, 2026.
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Back Pain. www.ninds.nih.gov. Accessed October 11, 2026.
Next
Keep reading
Order Sciatica Pro from the official page
60 capsules a bottle, two a day, thirty days a bottle. Ten ingredients, ten printed amounts, no proprietary blend, and about 677 mg of declared actives a serving. Price and guarantee are read from the live checkout. Order support +1 (302) 200-3480.
Price and guarantee are read on the checkout page — screenshot it with the date before you pay · ships from inside the US · order support +1 (302) 200-3480