How to Read a Sea Buckthorn Lab Report: NABL, ULR & Units

 

A useful sea buckthorn lab report should let you identify the laboratory, the exact sample tested, the test methods, the dates, the results and their units. It should also make clear which results, if any, were issued under the laboratory’s NABL-accredited scope.

A laboratory logo, a cropped certificate image or the phrase “lab tested” does not provide enough information to verify a claim on its own. That does not prove that a product is poor quality. It simply means that the underlying evidence has not been made available for checking.

This guide explains how to read a sea buckthorn lab report without overstating what one report can prove. Cherker’s published report details are used as worked examples, including tests issued under NABL-accredited scope and tests that were not presented as NABL-accredited results.

Sea buckthorn lab report checklist

Before relying on a test result, look for these details:

1. Laboratory identity: the laboratory’s name and address.
2. Report identity: a unique report number and clear page identification.
3. Customer identity: who submitted the sample.
4. Sample description: whether the item was pulp, juice, powder, leaf, seed oil, pulp oil or another material.
5. Dates: receipt date, sampling date where relevant, analysis period and issue date.
6. Test method: a published method or an identified validated in-house method.
7. Results and units: for example, mg/100 mL, mg/kg, g/100 g or µmol TE/100 mL.
8. Authorisation: the person approving or authorising the report.
9. Accreditation status: whether the reported work was issued under NABL-accredited scope.
10. Sample limitation: wording explaining that the results relate to the item or sample tested.

What ISO/IEC 17025 says a report normally includes

ISO/IEC 17025:2017 is the international standard used for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. Clause 7.8 covers reporting of results. It says reports should contain the information needed to interpret the results and, unless there are valid reasons for omission, normally include the following core elements.

Clause 7.8.2.2 also distinguishes information generated by the laboratory from information supplied by the customer. A statement such as “sample collected by client” means the laboratory tested the material it received, but did not independently certify where the material was grown, how it was harvested or whether the submitted sample represented an entire production batch.

What a NABL ULR can tell you

NABL is India’s national accreditation body for testing and calibration laboratories. A Unique Laboratory Report number, or ULR, is used on reports issued under accredited scope according to NABL’s applicable procedures.

Cherker’s September 2025 vitamin report displays:

ULR-TC682025000074169F

Under the NABL format used for this 2025 report, the 18-character code after “ULR-” can be read as follows:

A ULR is alphanumeric, not simply an “18-digit number”. Also, NABL announced changes to its accreditation-certificate-number and related ULR format in June and July 2026. Future reports may therefore not follow the exact TC-6820 pattern shown above. When checking a new report, use NABL’s current guidance rather than assuming that an older format will remain unchanged.

The ULR supplements the laboratory’s own report number; it does not replace it. You should normally be able to see both.

NABL-accredited laboratory vs NABL-accredited result

Testing by a NABL-accredited laboratory does not automatically mean that every test the laboratory performs is covered by its accredited scope. Accreditation is tied to defined fields, products or matrices, parameters and methods listed in the laboratory’s current scope.

A laboratory may therefore be accredited for vitamin C testing in a food matrix but not for a particular antioxidant assay on the same type of product. A result outside accredited scope is not automatically fake or unusable. It simply must not be presented as an NABL-accredited result.

Current NABL policy requires accredited and non-accredited parameters to be reported separately and prohibits the use of a marker inside an accredited report to imply that only selected lines are outside scope. It also restricts third parties, including customers of the laboratory, from reproducing the NABL symbol as though they themselves were accredited.

For shoppers, the practical rule is:

• A NABL symbol and ULR on the laboratory’s report support an accreditation claim only for the work represented by that report and its applicable scope.
• No ULR on a document does not prove that the result is false. It means that the document should not be marketed as an NABL-endorsed accredited report unless other valid report-level evidence establishes that status.
• The laboratory’s current accreditation scope should be checked directly through NABL rather than inferred from a logo alone.

Cherker reports: worked examples

Cherker’s public testing pages reproduce the principal report identifiers, dates, methods and results. The examples below concern different reports and, in some cases, different submitted samples or testing programmes. Sharing a product name or a nearby reporting date does not by itself prove that every result came from one physically identical sample.

The original draft of this article described the accelerated shelf-life report as issued in 2025. Cherker’s current testing page lists the issue date as 27 January 2026, so that date is used here.

A public summary page is useful for discovery, but a buyer auditing a specific result should request or inspect the complete signed report, including all pages, notes, sample details and authorisation.

See Cherker’s 2025 testing page and 2026 testing page for the currently published report details.

How to assess the method column

A report should identify the method used for each parameter. Common forms include:

• A published standard: for example, IS 5838 for vitamin C or AOAC 996.06 for selected fatty-acid analysis.
• A validated in-house method: normally identified by a specific standard operating procedure or method code.
• A vague instrument description: for example, “by UV/Visible Spectrophotometer” without an identified analytical procedure.

An in-house method is not automatically inferior. It may be properly validated and included within accredited scope. Conversely, naming an instrument alone is less informative because an instrument can be used with many different sample preparations, reagents, calibration procedures and calculation methods.

Cherker’s 2025 antioxidant report identifies the testing approach as “By UV/Visible Spectrophotometer” and does not display a ULR. That supports publishing the figures as non-accredited, method-limited laboratory results rather than presenting them as accredited nutrition or health evidence.

“Results relate only to the sample tested” is an important boundary

A report describes the item the laboratory received and tested. Unless the laboratory performed or controlled a statistically valid sampling plan, the report does not automatically establish that:

• every bottle in a batch has the identical composition;
• every harvest year has the same result;
• every product form sold by the brand has been tested;
• the laboratory independently verified the geographic origin claimed by the customer;
• a result will remain unchanged throughout the product’s entire shelf life.

UKAS guidance similarly cautions that testing one sample, even when accompanied by an expert opinion, is not a substitute for assessing factory production or the broader controls behind a product.

Sea buckthorn composition can vary with factors such as cultivar or origin, maturity, harvest timing, processing, storage and the part of the fruit analysed. A responsible brand should therefore identify the sample form and harvest or production period rather than presenting one historical report as a permanent property of all future products.

Why the tested product form must match the product sold

A laboratory result only applies to the material identified in the report. A result for sea buckthorn pulp is not automatically a result for juice, powder, leaf tea, seed oil or pulp oil.

• Powder and liquid use different measurement bases. A value per 100 g of powder cannot be compared directly with a value per 100 mL of liquid without additional information such as moisture content and, where mass and volume are being converted, density.
• Oil and whole-fruit products are different materials. A fatty-acid percentage measured in an extracted oil is not automatically a value for the berry pulp or finished drink.
• The sample name matters. Descriptions such as “Sea Buckthorn Pulp” and “Sea Buckthorn Pulp (without sieve)” identify different submitted materials and should not be silently treated as interchangeable.

This article is about evaluating laboratory evidence rather than re-explaining every sea buckthorn food format. For the regulatory differences between pulp, juice, concentrate, nectar and ready-to-serve drinks, read Sea Buckthorn Juice vs Pulp vs Concentrate.

Cherker’s revised 2026 fatty-acid report identifies its sample as “Sea Buckthorn Pulp (without sieve)” and reports total fat, omega-9, omega-6 and omega-3. It does not contain an omega-7 measurement. The report therefore should not be used to make a quantified omega-7 claim for Cherker pulp.

Units can completely change the meaning

A result is incomplete without its unit and measurement basis. Cherker’s mineral report illustrates why: potassium is shown in mg/100 mL, while zinc and manganese are shown in mg/L. Those values cannot be compared by looking only at the printed numbers.

These conversions apply only when the measurement basis remains comparable. Converting between a mass basis and a volume basis may require the product’s density, and comparing powder with liquid may require moisture information.

What does “less than” mean?

A result written as <0.10 g/100 g means the laboratory did not quantify the substance at or above the stated reporting or quantification threshold. It does not necessarily mean absolute zero. The report’s notes should identify whether the threshold is a limit of detection, limit of quantification or another reporting limit.

For Cherker’s published summaries, values such as vitamin B12 <0.001 mg/100 mL, omega-3 <0.10 g/100 g and selenium <0.5 mg/L are presented as below the applicable method’s quantification level. They should not be converted into positive nutrient claims.

How to interpret a vitamin C result without overstating it

Cherker’s 2025 pulp report lists vitamin C at 106.74 mg/100 mL using method IS 5838. That is a result for the identified submitted sample, not an unconditional guarantee for every future bottle or harvest.

ICMR-NIN’s 2020 recommendations list adult vitamin C RDAs of 80 mg/day for men and 65 mg/day for women, with different requirements applying to other life stages. A percentage comparison must therefore identify the reference value used.

FSSAI’s Advertising and Claims Regulations set separate thresholds for using regulated claims such as source of and high in. For vitamins and minerals, the schedule sets:

• Source: at least 15% of the applicable RDA per 100 g for solids or 7.5% per 100 mL for liquids.
• High: at least 30% of the applicable RDA per 100 g for solids or 15% per 100 mL for liquids.

A laboratory result alone does not automatically settle whether a finished product may carry a particular nutrition claim. The applicable product category, measurement basis, current formulation, stability, labelling requirements and other regulatory conditions must also be considered.

Comparative nutrition claims require a real comparison

FSSAI requires a nutrient comparative claim to compare different versions of the same food or similar foods. The regulations also require the identity of the foods and the amount of the difference to appear close to the claim.

The required minimum difference is generally:

• 30% for energy or macronutrients other than sodium;
• 10% of the RDA for micronutrients;
• 25% for sodium.

A loose statement such as “many times more vitamin C than another fruit” should therefore not be made without an appropriate comparator, equivalent units, a valid data basis and the required nearby disclosure.

ORAC, FRAP and DPPH measure laboratory chemistry—not a human health outcome

ORAC, FRAP and DPPH are in vitro antioxidant assays. A laboratory exposes a prepared sample to a defined chemical system and measures the response. The result depends on the assay method, sample preparation, reagent, calibration standard, units and test conditions.

EFSA’s guidance on antioxidant-related health claims explains that free-radical-scavenging capacity measured in model systems does not, by itself, establish a beneficial physiological effect in humans. A 2022 review in the journal Antioxidants likewise concluded that values from common in vitro antioxidant assays cannot be directly correlated with activity in the human body or with health outcomes.

There is no recognised dietary reference intake for an ORAC, FRAP or DPPH score. These values should not be presented like daily nutrient requirements.

Cherker’s non-NABL antioxidant report lists:

• DPPH: 204 µmol TE/100 mL;
• ORAC: 1,066 µmol TE/100 mL;
• FRAP: 1,600 µmol Fe²⁺/100 mL.

These are three assay-specific results from one submitted sample. They cannot be combined into one universal “antioxidant score”, and they should not be used to claim that the product prevents, treats or improves a disease or health condition.

Cross-product comparisons are also unreliable unless the products were tested using the same validated method, sample preparation, conditions and units. Even a technically controlled comparison would rank assay behaviour, not proven health benefit.

What an FSSAI licence number does—and does not—show

An FSSAI licence number identifies a licensed or registered food business operator and can be checked through FSSAI’s FoSCoS system. It is not a laboratory result, an accreditation certificate or a quality grade.

FSSAI’s Advertising and Claims Regulations specifically prohibit using the mandatory FSSAI logo and licence number to make a promotional claim. The same regulations require claims to be truthful, unambiguous, meaningful and not misleading, and require nutritional or health attributes to be supported by validated methods.

They also prohibit claims that a food prevents, alleviates, treats or cures a disease, disorder or particular physiological condition unless specifically permitted under the law. A food laboratory report establishes analytical results for a sample; it does not turn the food into a medicine.

Weak evidence vs verifiable evidence

How to check a sea buckthorn lab claim

1. Ask for or open the complete report rather than a cropped screenshot.
2. Check that the sample form matches the product: pulp, juice, powder, leaf or oil.
3. Find the report number and all relevant dates.
4. Read who collected or submitted the sample.
5. Check the test method for every parameter.
6. Read every result together with its unit.
7. Check whether the report displays a ULR and NABL symbol, then compare the work with the laboratory’s current scope.
8. Check the laboratory against FSSAI’s current lists of notified food-testing laboratories where relevant.
9. Do not compare values until units and measurement bases are aligned.
10. Treat “less than” values according to the stated detection or quantification limit.
11. Treat ORAC, FRAP and DPPH as assay results rather than nutrition or health scores.
12. Ask whether the report represents the batch or harvest you are purchasing.

To understand the difference between pulp, juice, concentrate and formulated fruit drinks, read Sea Buckthorn Juice vs Pulp vs Concentrate.

Frequently asked questions

What is a ULR on a lab report?

ULR stands for Unique Laboratory Report number. It is used on reports issued under NABL-accredited scope according to NABL’s applicable procedure. Cherker’s 2025 reports use an 18-character alphanumeric format after the “ULR-” prefix. NABL announced a new accreditation-certificate-number and related ULR format in 2026, so new reports should be checked against current NABL guidance rather than decoded only through the older TC-6820 pattern.

Does a NABL-accredited laboratory mean every test it performs is accredited?

No. Accreditation applies to defined scopes involving particular matrices, parameters and methods. A laboratory may issue both accredited and non-accredited work, but the status must be represented clearly and non-accredited work must not be presented as NABL-accredited.

Does no ULR mean the result is fake?

No. The absence of a ULR does not prove that the analytical result is false. It means the document should not be represented as an NABL-endorsed accredited report unless valid report-level evidence establishes that status. The method, laboratory competence and report limitations still need to be evaluated.

Why does the sample form matter?

Pulp, juice, powder, seed oil and pulp oil have different compositions and measurement bases. A result for one form is not automatically evidence for another. The sample description should match the product being promoted.

What does a value such as <0.001 mean?

It means the laboratory did not quantify the substance at or above the stated threshold. Depending on the report, that threshold may be a detection limit, quantification limit or reporting limit. It does not necessarily mean absolute zero.

Is a high ORAC value proof of a better or healthier product?

No. ORAC is an in vitro assay, not a human health outcome or a recognised dietary requirement. Comparisons are method-dependent, and a higher laboratory assay result does not by itself prove a greater health benefit.

Can I verify a laboratory myself?

Yes. NABL provides a public directory where a laboratory’s accreditation status and scope can be checked. FSSAI also publishes current lists of notified food-testing laboratories. Use the laboratory name and current certificate identifier shown on the report.

Where can I see Cherker’s testing information?

Current summaries are published on the 2025 Quality & Testing page and 2026 Quality & Testing page. For a formal audit of a result, review the complete signed laboratory report rather than relying only on a webpage summary.

Sources

• NIST crosswalk for ISO/IEC 17025:2017, Section 7.8 — Reporting of Results
• NABL 133: Policy for Use of NABL Symbol and Claim of Accreditation, Issue 09, Amendment 03
• NABL clarification on ULR number following the 2026 certificate-number format change
• NABL news and announcements, including 2026 certificate-number and ULR format updates
• FSSAI Advertising and Claims Regulations compendium, Version IV dated 14 December 2022
• FSSAI food laboratories and notified laboratory information
• ICMR-NIN: A Brief Note on Nutrient Requirements for Indians and the RDA/EAR 2020 recommendations
• UKAS LAB 13: Guidance on ISO/IEC 17025 opinions and interpretations
• EFSA guidance for health claims related to antioxidants, oxidative damage and cardiovascular health
• Critical review of in vitro antioxidant assays, Antioxidants (2022)
• Cherker Quality & Testing hub
• Cherker 2025 Quality & Testing page
• Cherker 2026 Quality & Testing page

This article provides general information about reading laboratory reports and food claims. It is not legal, medical or laboratory-accreditation advice. Cherker products are foods, not medicines, and are not intended to diagnose, prevent, treat, cure or manage any disease or condition. Laboratory results apply to the samples identified in the corresponding reports.