The short answer
Small trials examine sexual function, menopausal symptoms, and mood; reliable benefit is uncertain.
- Evidence and scope
- Mixed evidence
This status does not grade the ingredient for every goal, outcome, or person.
- Important limitation
- Trials are inconsistent or small, so a reliable clinically important benefit is not established.
- Before deciding
- Key concern: Pregnancy, hormone-sensitive conditions, thyroid disease, fertility treatment, and product adulteration require review.
01 / PRACTICAL GUIDE
Dose, absorption, and combinations
These are indication-specific reference or studied ranges—not a personalized prescription. Start with the objective, then check the form, label, medicines, and health conditions.
Reference or studied range—not a personalized prescription. The product label or a clinician may specify a different dose.
Dose source ↗More is not automatically better. A clinician or product label may specify a different amount.
Not usefully classified as a fat- or water-soluble vitamin; absorption depends on the salt, extract, delivery system, and meal.
Take with food; gelatinized products may be easier to digest.
Pregnancy, hormone-sensitive conditions, thyroid disease, fertility treatment, and product adulteration require review.
Dose and use links lead to primary or official source material. Search links are discovery tools, not proof that every returned paper applies.
02 / EVIDENCE
What the research says
We keep supportive, mixed, negative, safety, and contextual findings together. The headline never replaces the underlying papers.
These are audited counts for this JIVANA collection, not search-result totals. Participants are counted once when multiple papers use the same cohort; review papers are not added again to participant totals.
Open the research timelineResearch timeline+
Entries are ordered by publication year. A study period appears only when the source reports it.
Maca for sexual function
Three small trials reported positive findings in different populations, while one found no effect. With only four trials, limited total sample size, and limited methodological quality, the review could not draw firm conclusions about sexual function.
Study design and methods
- Design
- Systematic review of 4 randomized placebo-controlled trials
- Population
- Healthy men, healthy menopausal women, healthy cyclists, and men with erectile dysfunction; the abstract did not report a pooled participant total
- Intervention
- Various maca preparations versus placebo
- Outcome
- Sexual desire, sexual dysfunction, and erectile-function scores
Unscreened discovery appendix—not evidence1 candidate publicationsSearch run: Aug 21, 2026
Complete for the displayed PubMed query at the search timestamp—not for all databases or every possible synonym. Candidates can be irrelevant, duplicate the same study, or report negative findings. They are never summed as evidence or participants until screened.
03 / SOURCES
Start with the source material
The live search is for discovery only. Search-result counts change and are not included in the audited totals above.
Recent PubMed discovery recordsDirect links to the first 12 records returned by the reproducible search. These are discovery candidates—not reviewed summaries or a count of supportive findings.
04 / EXPERT CONTEXT
Expert context—not evidence
Expert positions are dated context—not scientific evidence. They never raise the evidence status or become consensus by repetition.
No direct, source-verified endorsement is currently recorded. Research authorship or discussion alone is not treated as endorsement.