Hericenones in lion's mane: lab results and why we don't race for numbers

Hericenones in lion's mane (in Polish: hericenony w soplówce; Hericium erinaceus) are a group of compounds that a laboratory quantifies in an extract by liquid chromatography. Below we show the results for a sample of batch 260204 tested by Omnient Labs: six hericenones add up to 1.533%, and hericenones together with hericenes to 1.717%. We also explain why one number is not enough for us to judge an extract.

I want to know what is in the extract we sell. That is why we need tests, quantification methods and documents tied to a specific batch. At the same time, our experience in therapeutic practice shows that a very good result for one chosen parameter of an extract does not always go hand in hand with equally good feedback from patients and with how the preparation actually works for them.

Of course this is our personal experience, but we are practitioners first of all, and we keep looking for a balance between art and science. We have not run a controlled product comparison on this basis and we do not present these observations as proof of effect. They are a reason for us to look more carefully at the whole preparation, and at the process of making it, instead of ending the assessment at a single number. Life, like nature, is more complex than that…

What exactly was tested in the lion's mane sample?

The data below comes from an Omnient Labs report in which the active compounds were quantified by UPLC, a liquid chromatography technique that separates the components of a sample, following procedure LAB TM-305. The results apply to the sample as delivered to the laboratory. We do not automatically transfer them to other batches, capsules or powdered extracts.

How many hericenones did the report show, and how do you add them up?

The sum of these six items is 1.533%. This is our own calculation based on the rounded results in the table below, not a separate total issued by the laboratory. The laboratory did, however, report a combined line for hericenones and hericenes together. Results for each compound follow.

The laboratory also reported other quantified components:

In the summary line "Total Hericienones and Hericenes" the report gives 1.717%. The name covers hericenones and hericenes together. This value should not be presented as the content of hericenones alone. Ergosterol is reported separately.

Adding the rounded results for hericenones and hericenes gives 1.718%, which is 0.001 percentage points more than the total in the report. Without the unrounded data we do not settle the cause of this difference; we quote the laboratory result unchanged.

See the full Omnient Labs report with the chromatogram (PDF).

What does "Fail" mean in a laboratory report?

For the sum of hericenones and hericenes the laboratory entered a specification of at least 2.5%. The measured 1.717% is below that threshold, so the result carries the status "Fail". The sample did not meet this requirement. We do not skip this information and we do not change its interpretation because we take a broader view of extracts.

This status concerns one specific compound-content requirement. The document itself is not a study of effect in humans. In a footnote the laboratory also notes that determinations marked with the number 2 are not covered by its accreditation. This applies to the results shown in this table, despite the accreditation marks visible on the document.

Why does one parameter not give the full picture of an extract?

When we judge an extract solely by the concentration of one compound, we assume that this one number is enough to compare its value. I consider that approach mechanistic: it reduces a complex preparation to a single gauge. Hericenone content describes the composition of the sample, not the whole preparation.

Compound content is important information about composition. To assess a product more broadly, we also want to know the type of raw material, the form of the preparation, the serving size, the extraction method, purity, and whether the document really applies to the batch in question. Even a precise chemical analysis does not by itself answer the question of what a person will feel after using a Lion's Mane preparation.

It is also worth distinguishing a compositional analysis from a study involving people. For example, the 2009 study by Mori and co-authors involved 30 participants and the intervention lasted 16 weeks. It tested a specific preparation containing lion's mane powder and compared it with placebo. It was not a ranking of extracts by percentage of hericenones, nor a test of our sample. Study description on PubMed (PMID: 18844328).

We do not derive a conversion factor from such a study: twice as many hericenones means twice the effect. Nor do we draw the opposite conclusion, that a lower result is better.

How do we combine science, experience and the matrix of nature?

At Aloha Fungi we follow the science and we listen to people. We have seen a gap between attractive numbers, an extract with excellent results for valuable active compounds, and feedback from therapeutic practice. Such an observation raises questions. It does not, however, tell us whether the difference came from composition, method of use, expectations or something else.

When I speak of the "matrix of nature", I mean the complexity of the raw material that a single parameter does not describe. I feel humility towards that complexity. I do not treat it as proof that natural always means better, nor as a reason to ignore an unmet specification.

The functional mushroom extract market keeps outdoing itself and shouting… Our intention is to make products as close to nature as possible.

We want to look for a balance between what we can measure and what we do not yet understand. That is why we show results together with their limitations, instead of picking only the most attractive number out of a document.

Why do we need a product passport?

A passport links a batch number to specific results and documents. For every piece of information we want to show its source: an independent laboratory or a manufacturer's certificate. This lets you check what was actually tested, instead of settling for the slogan "tested product".

See the published Aloha Fungi batch passports.

We do not race for numbers. We want to be able to explain every number we show, and at the same time we stay humble before the complexity of nature. That is exactly the ignorance of a person cut off from nature. 🙂 If someone believes it is ONLY about one compound, they are of course free to think what they like.

Big corporations have already made many attempts to isolate a single compound from a raw material (a mushroom or a herb), assuming that this one would work miracles and the rest did not matter. And? Nothing…

That is not how nature works. Nature does not work in isolation.

Everything that is modified becomes questionable, because the original energetic structure of something created in nature, the way God intended, simply falls apart.

Thinking that one compound works miracles here is one thing.

The second: how the proportions of that compound interact with the rest of the mushroom (of nature), and how an excess of one component affects the interaction and coherence with the others.

The point? The less human interference and the more room to keep that natural balance, the better.

Of course, that is only my opinion. I have tested many products and I too used to think that more of a given active compound meant better. And? I felt those products the least, while on paper the parameters were brilliant.

That is why at Aloha we are slowly moving away from the race of „who has more”. It really does not matter… What matters is a profile as close to nature as possible… And what does that mean for mushrooms?

We keep working it out with my friend Yi, a technologist who, above all, loves mushrooms.

And Aloha Fungi is meant to have mushrooms you can feel, mushrooms with a soul.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between hericenones and hericenes? They are two different groups of compounds quantified in lion's mane. In the Omnient Labs report six hericenones add up to 1.533%, while the summary line "Total Hericienones and Hericenes" at 1.717% covers both groups together. The second figure should not be quoted as the content of hericenones alone.

What does the status "Fail" mean in a laboratory report? That the measured value did not reach the threshold written into the specification. Here the threshold for the sum of hericenones and hericenes was at least 2.5%, and the result was 1.717%. The status concerns that one requirement and says nothing about the efficacy or safety of the sample.

Does a higher hericenone content mean a better extract? We do not derive such a conversion factor. The 2009 study by Mori et al. compared a specific preparation with placebo in 30 people (PMID: 18844328), not extracts by hericenone percentage. Compound content is information about composition, not a measure of effect.

Do these results apply to products in the Aloha Fungi shop? The results apply only to the sample "Lion's Mane Mushroom DHA Solution", batch 260204, as delivered to the laboratory. It is a development sample, not a product on sale. We do not transfer the results to other batches, capsules or powdered extracts. The documents for individual batches are collected in the product passport.

More on preparation forms in the comparison of lion's mane extracts, and the doses used in clinical studies are listed in the post on lion's mane dosage in studies.

---

This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. A food supplement does not replace a varied diet or a healthy lifestyle. If in doubt, consult your doctor or pharmacist.