Choosing a memory supplement: an eight-point checklist

Eight things to check on any label in this aisle, in the order that matters.

The first one decides more purchases than the other seven together: whether there is a Supplement Facts panel with an amount beside each name. At the end this checklist is applied to the product this desk sells, which scores four out of eight.

A checklist that never scores the seller's own product is an advertisement with a numbered list in it.

The checklist

The eight points, in order of how much they decide

Is there a Supplement Facts panel, with an amount beside each name?

Everything else is downstream of this. Without a panel you cannot compare any ingredient with any published dose, cannot work out cost per milligram, and cannot tell a serious formula from a label with six fashionable words on it. A panel is also a legal expectation in the United States for a packaged supplement, which makes its absence stranger than a low dose.

Is the list free of proprietary blends?

A blend prints one combined weight and hides the split, so 850 mg of a Cognitive Matrix could be 800 mg of the cheapest ingredient. This is a different failure from a missing panel and a more deliberate one, because somebody chose that construction.

Is at least one ingredient near the dose its own research used?

Pick the ingredient the marketing leads with and look up one trial. If the label carries a tenth of what the trial used, the rest of the panel will be the same story. This is the fastest way to tell a formula from a flavouring.

Is the serving size stated, and how many servings are in the bottle?

A three-capsule serving changes every amount on the panel and every price comparison you make. A bottle of 90 capsules at three a day is a month, not three months, and plenty of pack ladders are priced as though buyers will not notice.

Does the caution name specific interactions?

A caution that names blood pressure medicine, anticoagulants or a specific drug class was written by somebody who thought about the formula. Consult your healthcare professional was written by a lawyer and tells you nothing about the contents.

Is the refund window longer than the formula's own timeline?

A formula whose slowest ingredient needs four weeks, sold with a thirty-day window, is asking you to decide before the product has finished arriving. Match the two before buying.

Is there a named manufacturer or facility?

A name, a state, or a registration number beside the registered-facility badge. Registration is a filing rather than an inspection, so a badge with no number attached is the weakest form of this claim.

Do the claims stay inside what the bottle prints?

Compare the bottle with the sales page. Where the sales page says more than the label, the extra material is marketing that nobody has had to substantiate. The FTC guidance sets out what substantiation a health claim is supposed to have.

A worked example

Scoring MemoHoney against the same eight points

Point	Score	Why
1. A Supplement Facts panel with amounts	No	The artwork names six actives and carries no panel at all
2. No proprietary blend	Yes	All six are named in order, with nothing behind a trademarked wrapper
3. At least one ingredient near its trial dose	Unknown	Unknowable without a panel. Five of the six were trialled at gram doses
4. A stated serving size and servings per container	Partly	One capsule a day and 30 capsules are both printed; no servings line exists
5. A caution naming specific interactions	Yes	Blood pressure medicine, blood thinners and vasodilators, all three correct for this formula
6. A refund window longer than the formula's timeline	Yes	Sixty days against a four-week floor, and thirty days of use asked for
7. A named manufacturer or facility	No	The label prints neither, and the registered-facility badge carries no number
8. Claims that stay inside what the bottle prints	Partly	The bottle is within its claims. The seller's information page adds three lines that are not supported

Three yes, two no, two partly and one unknowable. Four out of eight on the strictest reading, which is the number this desk publishes.

The shape of that score is more useful than the total. Every point it loses is about disclosure rather than about the formula, and three of the four would be fixed by printing one panel.

Points two, five and six are genuine strengths and are not close calls. Six named actives with no blend wrapper is better than most of this aisle manages. A caution naming the three medicine classes that actually matter for a nitric oxide formula is better labelling than most. And a sixty-day window against a four-week floor is the right way round, which is rarer than it should be.

Point one is the one that costs it. Without a panel, point three becomes unanswerable rather than merely disappointing, and a reader is left comparing a name against a trial dose with nothing in the middle.

The standard

What a label scoring eight out of eight would look like

Worth describing, because a checklist is more useful when the top of the scale is concrete.

A Supplement Facts panel listing all six actives with a milligram amount beside each, and a percentage of daily value where one exists.
A serving-size line reading one capsule and a servings-per-container line reading thirty.
At least one active at or near the amount its own trials used, which in this ingredient family would mean a gram-scale dose and a bigger capsule or more of them.
An other-ingredients line naming the capsule shell material.
A manufacturer name and state, with a registration number beside the facility badge.
A caution naming the interacting medicine classes, which this label already has.
A sixty-day window, which this product already has.
A sales page that says nothing the bottle does not, which would mean dropping three lines from the seller's current information page.

Five of those eight are already true or nearly true here. The distance between four out of eight and eight out of eight is smaller than the score suggests, and almost all of it is printing.

Honest critique

Three questions this checklist deliberately leaves out

Every checklist is a set of choices about what not to ask, and the omissions are worth defending.

It does not ask about star ratings. A seller's own average describes who chose to write a review, and people who reorder write more of them than people who quit. That is true of every product ever sold and it carries no information about a formula.

It does not ask about clinical studies on the finished product, because almost nothing in this aisle has one and a checklist that fails everything is not a checklist. The 2023 review of memory supplements is the place to go for that question across the category.

And it does not ask about price. A cheap formula with no panel and an expensive formula with no panel are the same purchase, and price only becomes meaningful once point one is answered.

About this review

Sources behind this checklist

U.S. Federal Trade Commission. Health Products Compliance Guidance. December 2022. https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Questions and Answers on Dietary Supplements. https://www.fda.gov/food/information-consumers-using-dietary-supplements/questions-and-answers-dietary-supplements
Hersant H, He S, Maliha P, et al. Over the Counter Supplements for Memory: A Review of Available Evidence. CNS Drugs. 2023;37(9):797-817. PMID 37603263. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37603263/
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Alzheimer's Disease: At a Glance. U.S. National Institutes of Health. https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-disease-at-a-glance
Trexler ET, Smith-Ryan AE, Stout JR, et al. International society of sports nutrition position stand: Beta-Alanine. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2015;12:30. PMID 26175657. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26175657/
Schwedhelm E, Maas R, Freese R, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of oral L-citrulline and L-arginine: impact on nitric oxide metabolism. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;65(1):51-9. PMID 17662090. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17662090/
Campbell B, Roberts M, Kerksick C, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and effects on exercise performance of L-arginine alpha-ketoglutarate in trained adult men. Nutrition. 2006;22(9):872-81. PMID 16928472. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16928472/

Written and reviewed by the MemoHoney Team at Memohonees

We write these pages from the MemoHoney label artwork and the seller’s own order paperwork. This label names six actives and prints no Supplement Facts panel, so beside each one we print the amount the published trials used and state plainly that there is no figure on the bottle to set against it. Corrections go onto the page itself and move the review date forward. Write to contact@Memohonees.com. Last reviewed September 2026.

The MemoHoney six-bottle pack, front labels showing

Order MemoHoney with a four out of eight in front of you

Three genuine strengths, one disclosure gap that costs it most of the score, and sixty days to decide whether that trade works for you.

Two bottles $158 · six bottles $294 · 60-day money-back guarantee

Order MemoHoney On The Official Website

One capsule a day · 30 per bottle · lot MEM-26/ME-3415

Keep reading

More about MemoHoney

Memory supplement guideThe five approaches the whole category is built from. Testing and qualityEvery badge on the pack read individually. MemoHoney ingredientsPoint three, answered as far as it can be.