Nerve Recovery Max Ingredients: Ten Names, Ten Printed Amounts
There is no proprietary blend here, so nothing has to be inferred — which means every line can be checked against a published figure, and two of them survive that.
Written by the Nerve Recovery Max editorial team·Last updated October 11, 2026·How this page was checked
Nerve Recovery Max declares ten dietary ingredients per two-capsule serving, each with its own printed amount: Vitamin D3 20 mcg, Vitamin B6 1.7 mcg, Folate 383 mcg DFE (230 mcg folic acid), Vitamin B12 2 mcg, Alpha Lipoic Acid 400 mg, Benfotiamine 150 mg, Acetyl L-Carnitine 50 mg, and Ashwagandha, Broccoli and Turmeric powders at 25 mg each. There is no proprietary blend. Set against published doses: benfotiamine at 150 mg is exactly the monotherapy dose of the trial we opened; alpha-lipoic acid at 400 mg is two-thirds of the 600 mg once daily that SYDNEY 2 concluded gives the optimum risk-to-benefit ratio; vitamin D3 is a full Daily Value, folate 96% and B12 83%. Acetyl L-carnitine at 50 mg is one-thirtieth of the lowest dose in its Cochrane review, which states that an effect may be present above 1,500 mg a day but not at lower doses. The vitamin B6 line prints micrograms against a Daily Value of 1.7 milligrams and cannot be right as printed. The three 25 mg powders have no dose comparison this desk would publish.
How a panel with nothing hidden gets read
Four steps, before any ingredient. This is the whole method of the page.
- 0110 of 10ingredients with an amount
What the panel gives you
Ten names, ten printed figures. No proprietary blend, no shared total, no asterisk standing in for a number. On most labels in this category this is where reading stops. Here it is where it starts.
- 022 capsulesper serving, not one
Read the serving size first
Every figure on this panel is per two capsules. It is the commonest misreading of a label built this way. One capsule is 200 mg of alpha-lipoic acid, not 400 — and 75 mg of benfotiamine, which stops matching its trial.
- 03600 mgwhat the trial used
Put each figure beside its research
For every ingredient with a published dose, we opened the paper or the fact sheet, took the figure, and set it against the printed amount. Not a ratio we invented — the number in the study, beside the number on the bottle.
- 0430×short, on one of the ten
Then you can see which lines work
Two fill their track. One reaches two-thirds. Three are vitamins at or near a full Daily Value. Three have no comparison. And one is a thirtieth of the threshold its own review names.
Every figure below is printed on the bottle. Nothing on this page is a ceiling, an estimate or an inference.
The ten, one at a time
Tap any tile. The bar is that ingredient's printed amount as a fraction of the dose the research used — so benfotiamine fills it and acetyl L-carnitine barely starts it.
What our sources recordSYDNEY 2, 181 patients, 5 weeks
The largest thing in this capsule and the one with the best evidence behind it. The SYDNEY 2 trial gave 181 diabetic patients oral doses of 600, 1,200 or 1,800 mg once daily for five weeks and concluded that “an oral dose of 600 mg once daily appears to provide the optimum risk-to-benefit ratio.” 400 mg is two-thirds of that — the same order of magnitude, which is more than most labels in this category manage, and still not the dose that was tested.
What our sources record6-week trial, 36 patients, three arms
Exactly the monotherapy dose the trial used. The study we opened ran three arms over six weeks and describes its monotherapy arm as “3 x 1 tablets/day, = 150 mg benfotiamine/day.” Its conclusion is that benfotiamine “is most effective in large doses” — its high arm was 320 mg/day — but that “even in smaller daily dosages, either in combination or in monotherapy, it is effective.” 36 patients is a small trial. The number on this label is still the number in it.
What our sources recordCochrane review of three randomised trials
This is the line that does not survive. The Cochrane review we opened describes the trials as using “2000 mg/day” in one and “1500 mg/day or 3000 mg/day” in the other two, and states that “any effect may be present at doses greater than 1500 mg/day but not at lower doses.” 50 mg is one-thirtieth of the smallest of those. The reviewers are also “very uncertain” that it works at all.
What our sources recordNIH Office of Dietary Supplements
83% of a full day's Daily Value, and on this product that matters more than the percentage suggests. ODS records that in B12 deficiency “neurological changes, such as numbness and tingling in the hands and feet, can also occur” — the exact symptom this product is sold for. It also records that metformin “might reduce the absorption of vitamin B12 and significantly reduce serum vitamin B12 concentrations.”
What our sources recordNIH Office of Dietary Supplements
A full Daily Value, exactly. ODS: “The DV for vitamin D is 20 mcg (800 IU) for adults and children age 4 years and older.” That is also the RDA for adults over 70, and above the 15 mcg RDA for everyone between 19 and 70. There is nothing to criticise in this line.
What our sources recordNIH Office of Dietary Supplements
96% of the Daily Value as printed, and the percentage checks out. The two figures inside the line do not reconcile with each other, which is dealt with separately below — ODS gives the conversion as “mcg DFE = mcg naturally occurring folate + (1.7 x mcg folic acid)” and 230 × 1.7 is 391, not 383.
What our sources recordNIH Office of Dietary Supplements
The unit cannot be right. ODS: “The DV for vitamin B6 is 1.7 mg for adults and children age 4 years and older.” The panel prints 1.7 mcg and claims 100% of the Daily Value for it. 1.7 micrograms is a thousandth of 1.7 milligrams, which is 0.1% of the DV, not 100%. Either the number is right and the percentage is wrong by a factor of a thousand, or — far more likely — the unit is a typo for mg and the percentage is correct.
What our sources recordNCCIH: evidence insufficient
Twenty-five milligrams of root powder, not a standardised extract. NCCIH records that ashwagandha “may be safe” for up to three months and that the evidence for the uses it is sold for is insufficient. We found no trial of ashwagandha for nerve symptoms at any dose that we would cite, so we publish no comparison for this line.
What our sources recordno source this desk uses covers it
Twenty-five milligrams of broccoli leaf powder. We looked for a monograph, a government fact sheet or a trial covering broccoli powder at any dose for nerve symptoms and found none we would cite, so we publish no dose comparison and no effect for it. It is roughly the dry weight of a third of a gram of vegetable.
What our sources recordNCCIH: not enough evidence
Twenty-five milligrams of root powder, which is not a curcumin extract and does not carry a piperine or phospholipid absorption aid. NCCIH's position is that there is not enough evidence to support turmeric for any health condition. We publish no dose comparison for this line.
Positions are the printed order on the panel. Every amount shown is the brand’s own printed figure — nothing here is derived. The bar is that figure as a fraction of the dose a published trial or a Daily Value used, capped at 100%; three ingredients have no bar because we found no published figure we would cite for them.
The panel, exactly as printed
A straight transcription, because for once that is all it needs to be.
| As printed on the panel | Per 2 capsules | % Daily Value |
|---|---|---|
| Vitamin D3 (as Cholecalciferol) | 20 mcg | 100% |
| Vitamin B6 (as Pyridoxine hydrochloride) | 1.7 mcg | 100% |
| Folate | 383 mcg DFE (230 mcg folic acid) | 96% |
| Vitamin B12 (as Methylcobalamin) | 2 mcg | 83% |
| Alpha Lipoic Acid | 400 mg | ** |
| Benfotiamine | 150 mg | ** |
| Acetyl L-Carnitine | 50 mg | ** |
| Ashwagandha Powder (Root) | 25 mg | ** |
| Broccoli Powder (Brassica Oleracea)(leaf) | 25 mg | ** |
| Turmeric Powder (Root) | 25 mg | ** |
Every one of the ten dietary ingredients carries its own printed amount. There is no proprietary blend on this panel, no total covering several names, and no descending-order arithmetic to do. That is rare enough to be the best thing about this product: you can check this entire label against published figures without leaving it.
The footnote** Daily Value (DV) not established.
The ** appears beside the six non-vitamin ingredients and it is correct for all six: the FDA has set no Daily Value for alpha-lipoic acid, benfotiamine, acetyl L-carnitine, ashwagandha, broccoli powder or turmeric, so there is no percentage to print.
Other ingredientsHypromellose (vegetable capsule), Oat Fiber Powder, Brown Rice Flour, Magnesium Stearate, Silicon Dioxide.
Hypromellose means the capsule shell is cellulose rather than gelatin, which is the line a vegetarian buyer needs. Oat fiber powder means this is not a gluten-free product, and none is claimed.
The four percentages, recomputedVitamin D3: 20 mcg against a 20 mcg Daily Value is 100%, exactly as printed. Folate: 383 mcg DFE against 400 is 95.75%, correctly rounded to 96%. Vitamin B12: 2 mcg against 2.4 is 83.3%, correctly rounded to 83%. Three of the four are right.
Vitamin B6 is not. The Daily Value is 1.7 milligrams. The panel prints 1.7 micrograms and claims 100% of it beside them. Those are a thousand-fold apart. The likeliest reading is a typo for mg — which would make the percentage correct — but we cannot print a correction as though it were the label.
Two capsules, against the dose the research used
Six of the ten could be drawn. The other four could not, and the reasons are the review.
A printed amount that reaches the figure its own research usedA printed amount that does notWhat the research, or the Daily Value, usedone linear scale per row — compare the fraction filled, not the length
Ten ingredients are printed on this panel, every one with its own amount. Six could be drawn here. The other four could not, and the reasons are the review.
Three are powders with no comparison we would publish. Ashwagandha root, broccoli leaf and turmeric root, 25 mg apiece. NCCIH records that some ashwagandha preparations may help insomnia and stress — nothing about nerves — and that we do not know enough to conclude turmeric is beneficial for any health purpose. On broccoli leaf powder we found no source we would cite at all.
And one cannot be drawn because the line cannot be right. Vitamin B6 is printed as 1.7 micrograms against a Daily Value the NIH gives as 1.7 milligrams, with 100%% claimed beside it. There is no honest bar to draw for a figure that is either right or a thousand-fold out.
Every bar here is a printed amount. Not one is a ceiling, an estimate or an inference — which is the whole difference between this panel and most of the shelf.
The two lines that stand up
It would be easy to write a page like this as a demolition. It would also be wrong, because two of the ten ingredients on this panel are dosed properly and that is unusual enough to lead with.
Benfotiamine, 150 mg. The six-week trial we opened randomised 36 patients aged 40 to 70 into three arms of twelve. It describes its monotherapy arm as “3 x 1 tablets/day, = 150 mg benfotiamine/day.” This label prints 150 mg. Not a rounding, not a fraction — the figure that was tested. Two qualifications, both the trial's own: its conclusion is that benfotiamine “is most effective in large doses” and its high arm was 320 mg a day, more than twice what is here; and twelve patients an arm over six weeks is a small, short study.
Alpha-lipoic acid, 400 mg. SYDNEY 2 gave 181 diabetic patients in Russia and Israel once-daily oral doses of 600, 1,200 or 1,800 mg, or placebo, “for 5 weeks after a 1-week placebo run-in period.” All three doses moved the Total Symptom Score by a similar amount — “4.9 points (51%) in ALA600, 4.5 (48%) in ALA1200, and 4.7 (52%) in ALA1800” — which is why the conclusion is a dose recommendation rather than a more-is-better one: “An oral dose of 600 mg once daily appears to provide the optimum risk-to-benefit ratio.”
400 mg is two-thirds of 600. It is the same order of magnitude, which most of this category does not manage, and it is still not the figure that was tested. The trial does not tell us what two-thirds of a dose does, and neither will we.
Alpha-lipoic acid is also the one ingredient on this panel that a government source names in connection with nerve symptoms. NCCIH's wording is careful and worth quoting in full rather than in part: “For a few dietary supplements, there is weak evidence of a possible benefit… alpha-lipoic acid might be helpful for diabetic neuropathy (nerve problems).”
Most supplements in this category print an ingredient a buyer recognises at a fraction of its studied dose, and rely on the name doing the work. Two lines here do not do that. Somebody costed them properly.
The one line that does not
Acetyl L-carnitine is printed at 50 mg.
It is the ingredient on this panel with the most research behind it for diabetic peripheral neuropathy specifically, which is what makes the figure so strange. The Cochrane review pooled the randomised trials and describes their doses: “in one trial the dose of ALC was 2000 mg/day, and in the other two trials, it was 1500 mg/day or 3000 mg/day.”
The review is cautious about whether it works even at those doses: “We are very uncertain whether ALC causes a reduction in pain after 6 to 12 months' treatment in people with DPN… as the evidence is sparse and of low certainty.”
And then it does something reviews rarely do — it names a threshold: “any effect may be present at doses greater than 1500 mg/day but not at lower doses.”
50 mg is one-thirtieth of 1,500 mg. This is not a marginal shortfall or a judgement call about what counts as enough. The review names the figure below which it does not expect an effect, and the label prints a thirtieth of that figure.
We cannot tell you why a brand would include it at that amount. What we can tell you is what it does: an ingredient at a fraction of its studied dose still appears on the panel, still appears in any marketing list, and still lets a buyer who recognises the name assume the dose is there. This is the line we would take off this panel, and it is the single largest reason the product's score is not higher.
The four vitamins, and the one that cannot be right
Vitamin D3, 20 mcg. The NIH's figure: “The DV for vitamin D is 20 mcg (800 IU) for adults and children age 4 years and older.” So this is exactly 100% of a Daily Value, which is also the RDA for adults over 70 and above the 15 mcg RDA for everyone from 19 to 70. There is nothing to criticise in the line. We also found no source connecting vitamin D at this dose to nerve symptoms specifically, so we claim none.
Vitamin B12, 2 mcg. 83% of a 2.4 mcg Daily Value, and the smallest active on the panel by weight — and still the one that could matter most to a specific reader. The NIH records that in B12 deficiency “neurological changes, such as numbness and tingling in the hands and feet, can also occur”, and that these “can occur without anemia.” It also records that metformin “might reduce the absorption of vitamin B12 and significantly reduce serum vitamin B12 concentrations.” If you take metformin and have tingling feet, that is a blood test, not a bottle.
Folate, 383 mcg DFE (230 mcg folic acid). 95.75% of a 400 mcg DFE Daily Value, correctly rounded to the 96% printed. But the two figures inside the line do not reconcile with each other. The NIH gives the conversion as “mcg DFE = mcg naturally occurring folate + (1.7 x mcg folic acid)”, and 230 × 1.7 is 391, not 383. One of the two numbers is out by about 2%. It changes nothing clinically; we print it because we recompute everything we are given.
Vitamin B6, printed as 1.7 mcg at 100% DV. This one cannot be right. The NIH: “The DV for vitamin B6 is 1.7 mg for adults and children age 4 years and older.” A microgram is a thousandth of a milligram, so 1.7 mcg is 0.1% of the Daily Value, not 100%.
The likeliest explanation is the dullest one: a typo for mg, which would make the percentage correct and the amount an ordinary full Daily Value. We would rather say that plainly than present a printing slip as a scandal. But we cannot print a correction as though it were the label, so what this site prints is the discrepancy — and the fact that it is the only one of four percentages that fails a recheck.
For proportion, in both directions: the Tolerable Upper Intake Level for vitamin B6 is 100 mg a day, and the NIH records that “chronic administration of 1–6 g oral pyridoxine per day for 12–40 months can cause severe and progressive sensory neuropathy.” Neither figure is remotely close to this label on either reading of the line. Nobody is at risk here; a reader is simply not being told what they are getting.
Three powders at 25 mg each
Ashwagandha root, broccoli leaf and turmeric root, 25 mg apiece, as powders rather than standardised extracts. Together they are about a tenth of the capsule's active weight.
On ashwagandha, NCCIH records that some preparations “may be effective for insomnia and stress” — and says nothing at all about nerves. On safety: “Ashwagandha may be safe when taken in the short term (up to 3 months)”, with “not enough information to allow conclusions about its long-term safety”, and “although it is rare, there have been a number of cases that link liver injury to ashwagandha supplements.” We found no trial of ashwagandha for nerve symptoms at any dose that we would cite, so we publish no comparison for this line.
On turmeric: “We don't know enough to definitively conclude if turmeric or curcumin is beneficial for any health purposes.” This is plain root powder, not a bioavailable curcumin formulation — which is actually the safer choice, because NCCIH notes that the highly bioavailable versions “may harm your liver.” No dose comparison is published for it here.
On broccoli leaf powder, we looked for a monograph, a government fact sheet or a trial at any dose for anything to do with nerves, and found none we would cite. So this site publishes nothing for it: no effect, no comparison, no safety statement beyond the obvious. For scale, 25 mg is roughly the dry weight of a third of a gram of vegetable.
None of the three is doing harm at 25 mg. None of them is likely to be the reason anything on this label works either.
Because a dose comparison we cannot source is an invention, and an invention that flatters the product is worse than silence. Three blanks on this page are blanks on purpose.
What the brand's artwork shows instead
Published in full, as supplied, with what each one does and does not say.
What nobody published about this formula
- A price, in the product pack. Not one figure was supplied with this product; the pack says to print whatever the live checkout prints. The prices on this site were confirmed separately and should still be checked at the checkout.
- The guarantee terms behind the 180 days. The artwork says 180 days and we'll refund every penny. It does not say whether an opened bottle qualifies, whether a restocking fee applies, or whether a multi-pack can be partially returned.
- The pack structure and what each pack costs. The artwork shows one-, two-, three- and six-bottle renders. No price list accompanies any of them.
- A manufacturer. The bottle names a distributor — Nerve Recovery Max, Akron, OH 44301 — with a phone number and an email, but no street address and no maker.
- A certificate of analysis. A lot and a CoA reference were supplied; no document behind either was, and we publish no lab result we have not been sent.
- Who certified the GMP mark. No certifying body, no certificate number, no register entry.
- Who certified the non-GMO claim. No body named, no verification number.
- Any allergen testing. No added eggs, dairy, wheat, preservatives describes a recipe, not a test of the finished capsule.
- Whether the product is gluten free. It is not claimed, and the other-ingredients list contains oat fiber powder.
- The standardisation of the three powders. Ashwagandha, broccoli and turmeric are printed as powders with no extract ratio and no marker compound percentage.
- What part of the broccoli does what. The panel says leaf; we found no source covering broccoli leaf powder at any dose for anything, so we publish nothing.
- An onset time. Nothing on the bottle, nothing in the pack, and no trial on this combination to establish one.
- Any published human trial on this formula. None exists, none is claimed. The trials cited on this site are of single ingredients at other doses.
- A storage temperature range. Cool, dry place, with no numbers.
- An expiry or best-before convention. Not published; the pack says it is on the base of the bottle when the bottle shows it.
- Shipping speed, carrier and international availability. Not published. The three- and six-bottle packs carry free-shipping copy; nothing is published for the single bottle.
- Whether international shipping exists. Not published.
- Which capsule the 2-capsule serving splits into. The panel is per two capsules; nothing says the two capsules are identical, and nothing says they are not.