Guide
Reading ingredient names on a supplement label
An ingredient name is a specification, and most of them are incomplete. A good one tells a reader which species, which part of the plant, how concentrated the extract is and — for a mineral — whether the figure beside it is the element or the compound carrying it. A poor one gives a word. This guide takes the six names on one label apart, and this label is the best in the series.
Four things a name can specify, and a fifth that only a mineral row raises. Species, plant part, standardisation, and the form or isomer of a compound — then, separately, whether a declared figure is the element or the compound. Of the six names on this label, two carry a genus, a species and a plant part, one of those adds a standardisation at 95% curcuminoids, and three of the four compounds name their form. That is the best ingredient naming this desk has read on any product in this series, and it is credited as such. One row falls short: the alpha lipoic acid is named without a form.
- Names on the label
- Six
- Botanicals
- Two
- With a binomial
- Two of two
- With a plant part
- Two of two
- With a standardisation
- One — 95% curcuminoids
- Compounds naming their form
- Three of four
- Amounts printed
- One, and it is an element
- Verdict on naming
- Best in the series
The anatomy of an ingredient name
A name on a Supplement Facts panel can carry up to four specifications, and a mineral row can carry a fifth distinction that no botanical row ever raises. Nothing requires any of them. Each one that is present makes the row checkable; each one that is absent makes it looser.
Species
The genus and species, printed as a binomial. A common name can cover several species across several continents and species differ in their constituents, so a binomial is the difference between a row you can look up and a row you can only guess at. Butcher’s broom is a word; Ruscus aculeatus is a plant.
Plant part
Root, rhizome, leaf, bark, fruit, seed, aerial parts. Different parts of one plant are studied separately and are not interchangeable. A label that says Rhizome Extract has told you which literature applies; a label that says Turmeric Extract has not.
Standardisation
A statement that the extract was manufactured to a fixed proportion of a measured constituent — here 95% Curcuminoids. Without it, two extracts sharing a name need share nothing else: not the solvent, not the ratio, not the chemistry. It is the single most informative thing a label can print about a botanical.
Form, isomer or compound
For something that is not a plant, the equivalent specification is which form of the substance is present. L-Carnitine names an isomer. Coenzyme Q 10 (as Ubiquinone) names a form. Magnesium Glycinate names a compound, and a named compound has a molar mass, which turns a name into arithmetic.
The fifth distinction is the one this label turns on, and it belongs to mineral rows only: is the printed figure the element, or the compound carrying it? A supplement panel declares the element. The compound weighs more, because the rest of the molecule weighs something. A row that names both the element and the compound has handed a reader both halves of a sum, and the next section but one is about what that sum does here.
All six names, against what each specifies
The six constituents of the blend, transcribed exactly as printed, each set against what the name does and does not pin down. Nothing has been tidied, including a binomial that is printed without its space.
| As printed on the label | Species or formula | What the name specifies | Element or compound |
|---|---|---|---|
| Magnesium Glycinate | A compound, not a plant. Mg(C2H4NO2)2 | No binomial needed. A chemical name specifies itself: a magnesium ion chelated to two glycine residues. The name is what makes the arithmetic possible, because a named compound has a molar mass and therefore a fixed percentage of magnesium by weight. | Compound — and the panel separately declares the element above the blend. |
| Alpha Lipoic Acid | A compound. No binomial, and none required | Form not specified. The name is complete as a chemical name, but alpha lipoic acid exists in more than one form and the label distinguishes none of them. This is the one place where the naming on this label is thinner than it could be. | Compound. Nothing is declared above the blend, so nothing fixes its weight. |
| Butcher’s Broom (Ruscus aculeatus) Root Extract | Ruscus aculeatus — genus and species | Genus, species and plant part. Three of the four things a botanical name can specify. This row is searchable, which is a higher bar than it sounds: most labels in this series print a common name and stop. No standardisation is given, so two extracts answering to this name need not be comparable. | Botanical extract. Position three of six, so at most 3.7 mg of the remainder — a ceiling, not an amount. |
| L-Carnitine | A compound. No binomial, and none required | Isomer specified. The L- prefix is doing real work: it names the form rather than leaving it open. This is the one ingredient on the label with a published study range to set a ceiling against. | Compound. Position four of six, so at most 2.5 mg — a ceiling, not an amount. |
| Turmeric (Curcumalonga) Rhizome Extract 95% Curcuminoids | Curcuma longa, printed on the label without the space | Genus, species, plant part and a standardisation. All four. This is the best-specified ingredient name this desk has read on any label in the series. The binomial is printed as one word, which is a typesetting slip rather than a factual one, and it is transcribed here as printed. | Standardised botanical extract. Position five of six, so at most 1.9 mg — a ceiling, not an amount. |
| Coenzyme Q 10 (as Ubiquinone) | A compound. No binomial, and none required | Form specified in brackets. As Ubiquinone names which form of coenzyme Q10 is present rather than leaving the reader to guess, which is the same courtesy the magnesium row performs. The bracket is the informative part. | Compound. Position six of six, so at most 1.5 mg — the smallest figure on the label, and a ceiling, not an amount. |
| Detail | What we were actually given |
|---|---|
| Genus and species | Printed for two of the six: Ruscus aculeatus and Curcumalonga. The other four are compounds rather than plants, so no binomial applies to them. Among the botanicals on this label, the hit rate is two out of two. |
| Plant part | Printed for both botanicals: Root Extract for the butcher’s broom, Rhizome Extract for the turmeric. Root and rhizome are not interchangeable and a label that specifies which is being extracted has told a reader something real. |
| Standardisation | Printed for one: 95% Curcuminoids. Not printed for the butcher’s broom, which is the gap worth naming. One of two is the best rate in this series. |
| Form or isomer of a compound | Printed for three of the four compounds: Magnesium Glycinate, L-Carnitine and Coenzyme Q 10 (as Ubiquinone). Not printed for the alpha lipoic acid. |
| Element against compound | Distinguished once, and consequentially: Magnesium 80 mg (as Magnesium Glycinate from proprietary blend). The element is declared with a Daily Value percentage; the compound is named as its source and located inside the blend. |
| An amount | Printed for one of the six, and only as an element: 80 mg of magnesium. The other five carry no figure at all, which is what a proprietary blend permits. |
The same six, as this site files them — each with the species or formula it was indexed under, and the ceiling or weight that applies to it. Every figure below the first is a ceiling, not an amount.
Forced by the 80 mg magnesium declaration. 98.7% of the blend.
Alpha Lipoic Acidno binomial; a compoundat most 7.5 mgNo fact sheet at NCCIH or NIH ODS. A ceiling, not an amount.
Butcher’s Broom root extractRuscus aculeatusat most 3.7 mgGenus, species and plant part printed. No federal fact sheet.
L-Carnitineno binomial; a compoundat most 2.5 mgNIH ODS records trials at 250 to 4,000 mg a day.
Turmeric rhizome extract, 95% curcuminoidsCurcuma longaat most 1.9 mgThe best-specified name on the label. NCCIH is blunt about the evidence.
Coenzyme Q10 (ubiquinone)no binomial; a compoundat most 1.5 mgA documented warfarin and insulin interaction, unmentioned on the label.
Read the counts rather than the prose and the shape is clear. Two botanicals, both with a binomial and both with a plant part. One standardisation out of a possible two. Three of four compounds naming their form. One amount printed, and it is an element declared above the blend rather than a weight of anything inside it.
Why this is the best naming in the series
This desk has read several labels in this series and the naming on this one is the best of them. That deserves saying flatly, before anything else, because the rest of this site is about what the same label leaves out.
What the naming on this label gets right
- Two binomials. Ruscus aculeatus and Curcumalonga — both botanicals on the label are named to species. Other products in this series print common names and stop.
- Two plant parts. Root Extract and Rhizome Extract. Both botanicals specify which part was extracted, which decides which published record applies.
- One standardisation, at 95% curcuminoids. The single most informative thing any label in this series has printed about an ingredient.
- Three compounds naming their form. Magnesium Glycinate, L-Carnitine and Coenzyme Q 10 (as Ubiquinone) each specify what they are rather than gesturing at it.
- The element is distinguished from the compound. Magnesium 80 mg (as Magnesium Glycinate from proprietary blend) declares the element, names the compound and locates it. Three facts in one bracket.
Where it falls short
- No form for the alpha lipoic acid, which exists as more than one.
- No standardisation for the butcher’s broom extract, so two extracts answering to that name need not be comparable.
- No extract ratio anywhere — nothing says how much raw material produced a milligram of either extract.
- No amount for five of the six, which is what a proprietary blend permits and what the ceilings on this site exist to bound.
- No country of origin for any ingredient, and no manufacturer named anywhere on the label.
Those two columns are the whole of it. Good naming and withheld amounts are not in tension: a label can tell you exactly which species it used and still decline to say how much of it there is. On this product both are true at once, and the second is what the arithmetic on this site exists to address.
Compound against element: what one bracket adds
This is new to this product and it is the most useful thing on the page. The magnesium row reads:
“Magnesium 80 mg — 19% — (as Magnesium Glycinate from proprietary blend)”
Transcribed from the Neuralisse Supplement Facts panel
Compare that with the bare row the label was entitled to print: Magnesium 80 mg, 19%. A reader of the bare row learns one thing — eighty milligrams of elemental magnesium, at 19% of a 420 mg Daily Value. That is useful and it is all of it. Nothing in the bare row says what form the magnesium is in, and nothing says where in the formula it sits.
The bracket adds two facts, and both do work:
“as Magnesium Glycinate”
Names the compound. A named compound has a formula and a molar mass: Mg(C2H4NO2)2, 172.42 g/mol, of which magnesium is 24.305. That is 14.1% magnesium by weight, which means 80 mg of the element needs about 567.5 mg of the compound. Without the name, that calculation cannot be made at all.
“from proprietary blend”
Locates it. The 567.5 mg is not additional to the 575 mg blend — it is inside it. So the blend has to find that weight, and what remains for the other five ingredients together is 575 − 567.5 = about 7.5 mg. Without this phrase a reader could not tell whether the chelate was inside the blend or beside it.
Four words and a compound name, and a 575 mg blend of six becomes one ingredient at about 567.5 mg — 98.7% of it — and five ingredients sharing about 7.5 mg. That is the entire finding, and it exists because the label was more specific than it needed to be. The chemistry is walked through step by step in the category guide.
Why a correct percentage matters to a reader
The panel prints 19% beside the 80 mg, and 80 ÷ 420 = 19.05%. That is not just tidy: it is the proof that the 80 mg is elemental magnesium rather than a weight of the chelate. If it were a weight of the compound, the element would be about 11 mg and the percentage would not be 19. A label whose arithmetic checks out is a label whose rows can be reasoned from.
What a standardisation buys a reader
Turmeric (Curcumalonga) Rhizome Extract 95% Curcuminoids is the best-specified ingredient name this desk has read in this series, and the last three words are why.
An extract is whatever came out of a solvent. Two products can both print turmeric extract and contain preparations with nothing in common but a plant: different solvents, different ratios of raw material to extract, different constituent profiles. A standardisation closes that gap by stating a measured proportion — here, that 95% of the extract by weight is curcuminoids. It makes the row comparable with another row and with a published record.
Two things follow, and both belong on the page. The first is a credit, and it is unqualified: nothing required this label to print a standardisation and it did. The second is that a standardisation says nothing about quantity. The turmeric is fifth of six inside a 7.5 mg remainder, so its ceiling is about 1.9 mg — a ceiling, not an amount. A highly standardised extract present in trace is still present in trace.
“We don’t know enough to definitively conclude if turmeric or curcumin is beneficial for any health purposes … Oral turmeric can cause adverse effects such as nausea and vomiting, acid reflux, stomach upset, diarrhea, or constipation.”
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health — Turmeric: Usefulness and Safety
That is NCCIH’s own conclusion, and it is printed here rather than paraphrased. The same page records that oral turmeric can cause digestive adverse effects and that highly bioavailable curcumin products have been linked to liver damage in some people. A 95% curcuminoid extract is a concentrated preparation, which is what that note concerns — though at a ceiling near 1.9 mg this is not the dose that literature is about.
Turning a name into a usable search
Seven steps. The aim is not to find an opinion about an ingredient; it is to find out whether a published record exists and what dose it used, so that a figure on a label can be set against a figure from somewhere else.
- 01Copy the name exactly as it is printed, brackets and allNot the marketing version and not a tidied version. Turmeric (Curcumalonga) Rhizome Extract 95% Curcuminoids is six separate pieces of information and you want all six in front of you before you start dropping any.
- 02Search the binomial first, not the common nameA common name can cover several species and several continents. A binomial covers one species. Search Ruscus aculeatus rather than butcher’s broom, and if the label gives no binomial, note that the search you are about to run is looser than it looks.
- 03Go to a federal fact sheet before a search engineNCCIH’s Herbs at a Glance index for botanicals, and the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements fact sheets for nutrients and compounds. Both are public and neither is selected by somebody with something to sell. If an ingredient returns nothing at either, that is your answer for now.
- 04Add the plant part to the queryRoot, rhizome, leaf, bark, fruit, seed, aerial parts. Different parts of the same plant are studied separately and are not interchangeable, so a result about one part is not a result about another. The label tells you which to ask about on both botanicals here.
- 05Search the compound by its chemical name and its formFor a compound, the name is the search. Magnesium bisglycinate gives you a molar mass. Coenzyme Q10 ubiquinone distinguishes the form. L-carnitine distinguishes the isomer. A bare alpha lipoic acid does not distinguish anything, and that is a real difference between rows.
- 06Write down the dose the source used, then compare it with the ceilingA published figure is only useful beside the figure on your label. NIH ODS records L-carnitine trials at 250 to 4,000 mg; the ceiling here is about 2.5 mg. That comparison takes thirty seconds and it is usually the whole answer.
- 07Stop where the published record stopsIf no federal fact sheet exists, do not substitute a journal abstract chosen by a search ranking, and do not substitute a seller’s summary. Write not published and move on. Two of the six ingredients on this label end here, and saying so is more useful than filling the gap.
Run on these six names, that sequence returns four fact sheets and two blanks. Magnesium and L-carnitine have fact sheets at the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements; turmeric and coenzyme Q10 have pages at NCCIH. Alpha lipoic acid and butcher’s broom return nothing at either, and that is where the search stops rather than where a journal search begins.
The magnesium figure against the two numbers the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements publishes: a Daily Value of 420 mg, and a Tolerable Upper Intake Level of 350 mg for magnesium taken as a supplement. At 80 mg a capsule this product is at about 23% of that upper limit, which is a point in its favour.
Never guess a species
The rule this desk works under is absolute: if a label does not print a binomial, none is supplied here. Not an inference from the common name, not the species a seller’s page mentions, not the one most products in the category use.
The reason is that a guessed binomial is indistinguishable from a printed one once it is on a page. A reader cannot tell which came from the bottle, and every subsequent sentence — the fact sheet consulted, the dose quoted, the comparison drawn — inherits the guess. One invented species silently contaminates a whole entry.
- 01If the binomial is not printed, none is suppliedNot inferred from the common name, not taken from a seller’s page, not borrowed from the species most products in the category use. A guessed binomial is indistinguishable from a printed one once it is on a page.
- 02If the plant part is not printed, none is suppliedRoot, rhizome, leaf and bark are studied separately. Choosing one on a reader’s behalf decides which literature applies, which is not a decision this desk is entitled to make for them.
- 03If no standardisation is printed, the row is reported as unstandardisedNot as weakly standardised and not as probably standardised. The butcher’s broom extract on this label carries none, and that is what the page says.
- 04If no federal fact sheet exists, no dose and no effect is publishedTwo of the six ingredients here return nothing at NCCIH or the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements. The output is not published, in both directions, and no journal is substituted for it.
- 05Transcribe a slip rather than repairing itCurcumalonga is printed on the label without its space and is printed that way here, with the species noted separately. A transcription that silently corrects its source cannot be checked against it.
On this label the rule costs nothing, because both botanicals are named to species. It is worth stating anyway, because the same restraint explains two other absences on this site. There is no form given for the alpha lipoic acid, because the label gives none. There is no extract ratio for either botanical, because the label prints none. Where the label is silent, this site is silent, and the silence is labelled rather than filled.
The one transcription decision on this page
The turmeric binomial is printed on the label as Curcumalonga, with no space between genus and species. The species is Curcuma longa. This site transcribes the label exactly as printed and notes the slip separately, rather than silently correcting it, because a transcription that repairs its source cannot be checked against it — and being checkable is the only thing a transcription is for.
What these six names still do not say
Good naming and a readable formula are different achievements. This label has the first and not the second, and it is worth being precise about which gaps are naming gaps and which are quantity gaps.
| Gap | Kind | What it would have told a reader |
|---|---|---|
| No form for the alpha lipoic acid | Naming | Which of its forms is present, and therefore which published record would apply if one existed. |
| No standardisation for the butcher’s broom | Naming | Whether this extract is comparable with any other extract of the same root. |
| No extract ratio for either botanical | Naming | How much raw root or rhizome produced a milligram of extract. |
| No amount for five of six ingredients | Quantity | What is actually in the capsule. A proprietary blend permits this; the ceilings on this site exist because of it. |
| No country of origin for any ingredient | Sourcing | Where the material came from. The label names a distributor in Aurora, Colorado, and no manufacturer at all. |
| No Certificate of Analysis | Verification | What a specific lot actually contained. Operation Supplement Safety says laboratory testing is the only way to know. |
The quantity gap is the one that decides this product, and it is answered by arithmetic rather than by better naming. Five of the six names on this label are excellent names for ingredients present at ceilings of 7.5, 3.7, 2.5, 1.9 and 1.5 mg — ceilings, not amounts. A precise name for a trace is still a precise name, and it is still a trace. What a 7.5 mg remainder means in practice is set out separately.
Common questions about ingredient names
These are the questions people type about names like the six on this label. Type to filter them.
what does ruscus aculeatus mean on a label
It is the binomial — the genus and species — for butcher’s broom. Printing it beside the common name tells a reader exactly which plant is meant, which a common name alone does not. On this label the full row reads Butcher’s Broom (Ruscus aculeatus) Root Extract, so the genus, the species and the plant part are all specified. There is no fact sheet for it at NCCIH or the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, so this site publishes nothing about its effects.
what is curcuma longa
The binomial for turmeric. This label prints it as Curcumalonga, without the space between genus and species, which is a typesetting slip rather than a factual one; it is transcribed here exactly as printed. The row goes further than most and gives the plant part — rhizome — and a standardisation of 95% curcuminoids.
what does 95% curcuminoids mean
That the extract has been manufactured to a measured concentration: 95% of the extract by weight is curcuminoids. Without a standardisation, two extracts sharing a name need not share anything else, so this is the single most informative thing any label in this series has printed about an ingredient. It does not increase the amount: the turmeric is fifth of six inside a 7.5 mg remainder, so the ceiling is about 1.9 mg — a ceiling, not an amount.
what does root extract mean on a supplement label
That the extract was made from the root rather than from the leaf, the fruit or the whole plant. It matters because different parts of the same plant have different constituents and are studied separately. This label specifies the part for both of its botanicals — Root Extract for butcher’s broom and Rhizome Extract for turmeric — which most labels in this series do not.
magnesium glycinate how much elemental magnesium
Magnesium bisglycinate is Mg(C2H4NO2)2, with a molar mass of 172.42 g/mol of which magnesium accounts for 24.305 — so about 14.1% magnesium by weight. Eighty milligrams of elemental magnesium therefore requires about 567.5 mg of the chelate. On this label that is 98.7% of a 575 mg blend. The full derivation is here.
what does as magnesium glycinate from proprietary blend mean
It means the 80 mg declared is a weight of the element magnesium, that the compound carrying it is magnesium glycinate, and that the compound is inside the 575 mg blend rather than additional to it. A bare Magnesium 80 mg would tell a reader the first of those three things and neither of the other two. Those two extra facts are what allow the blend to be solved rather than merely bounded.
why do supplement labels use latin names
Because a common name is ambiguous and a binomial is not. The same common name can cover several species in different parts of the world, and species differ in their constituents. A binomial names one species, which makes the ingredient searchable against a published record. Nothing requires a label to print one; two of the six rows on this label do, and both of them also give the plant part.
what is alpha lipoic acid
A compound, named second in the blend on this label. There is no fact sheet for it at NCCIH’s Herbs at a Glance index and none at the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, which are the two bodies this desk reads, so no dose and no effect are published here in either direction. The label also does not say which form is used, and alpha lipoic acid exists as more than one. By position it is capped at about 7.5 mg — a ceiling, not an amount.
what is butcher's broom used for
Nothing can be reported here. Butcher’s broom has no fact sheet at NCCIH or at the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, so this site publishes no use, no dose and no effect for it. That is a statement about available federal information rather than a verdict on the ingredient. The label’s naming of it is good — genus, species and plant part — which makes it searchable; the search simply returns nothing at either body.
is coenzyme q10 the same as ubiquinone
Ubiquinone is a form of coenzyme Q10, and this label specifies it: Coenzyme Q 10 (as Ubiquinone). Naming the form is a courtesy a label is not obliged to perform. NCCIH records that no serious side effects of CoQ10 have been reported, with one specific exception — it “may interact with the anticoagulant (blood thinner) warfarin and the diabetes drug insulin”. Here it is sixth of six, so at most about 1.5 mg.
how do i look up a supplement ingredient
Copy the name exactly as printed, brackets and all. Search the binomial rather than the common name, and add the plant part. Go to NCCIH’s Herbs at a Glance index for botanicals and the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements fact sheets for nutrients and compounds before any search engine. Then set whatever dose the source used against the figure on your label. The seven-step version is on this page.
neuralisse ingredients
Six, inside a single 575 mg proprietary blend: magnesium glycinate, alpha lipoic acid, butcher’s broom (Ruscus aculeatus) root extract, L-carnitine, turmeric (Curcumalonga) rhizome extract standardised to 95% curcuminoids, and coenzyme Q 10 (as ubiquinone). Above the blend the panel declares 80 mg of elemental magnesium at 19% of the Daily Value, sourced from the glycinate inside it. Each one has its own entry.
References
Nine sources, all opened and read. Every quotation on this page is copied from the page linked here.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2026). Dietary Supplement Labeling Guide: Chapter IV. Nutrition Labeling.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2026). Structure/Function Claims.
- NIH Office of Dietary Supplements (2026). Magnesium: Fact Sheet for Health Professionals.
- NIH Office of Dietary Supplements (2026). Magnesium: Fact Sheet for Health Professionals — nerve function.
- NIH Office of Dietary Supplements (2023). Carnitine: Fact Sheet for Health Professionals.
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (2025). Turmeric: Usefulness and Safety.
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (2019). Coenzyme Q10.
- Operation Supplement Safety, U.S. Department of Defense (2026). Proprietary blends: What does this mean?.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2026). Questions and Answers on Dietary Supplements.
Read the blend row before you decide
Thirty capsules, one a day. The panel declares 80 mg of magnesium at 19% of the Daily Value, and a 575 mg blend of six ingredients. The magnesium declaration fixes the weight of the first ingredient at about 567.5 mg, which leaves roughly 7.5 mg for the other five together. No price appears anywhere but the checkout.
- Guarantee as printed at checkout
- 80 mg magnesium, 19% of the Daily Value
- Returns to 4 Times Square, Floor 22, New York, NY 10036, USA
No price appears in any document supplied to this desk, as of October 11, 2026, so none is printed here. The checkout screen is the only place a price exists. Questions first? Every published contact route is here.
Keep reading
Authorship and review
Who wrote and checked this page
What this page was checked against
- The label artwork, read at 2× and transcribed character for character. Where the label and the marketing disagree, the label is printed.
- The seller pack, quoted rather than paraphrased, and identified as marketing wherever it is used.
- The published sources listed in the references on this page. Every one was opened and read; none is cited from memory.
- The arithmetic, shown in full. Every per-ingredient figure other than the magnesium is a ceiling derived from one printed number, never a measured amount.
- Nothing else. Any fact that was not supplied is recorded as not published rather than filled in.
Last updated October 11, 2026. A highlighted slot is a value no human has supplied yet. Who reviews these pages?