Rankings / Hormones & Endocrine

Fadogia agrestis

Hormones & Endocrine · Nigerian shrub

Tier F

High-risk evidence profile

otcweak-evidence
High-risk evidence profile
2 / 10
Tier F
Ev 0 Bn 5 Sf 3

Bottom line

Read Off Label grades Fadogia agrestis as F (2.0/10) based on none evidence, unclear benefit magnitude, and a unknown-high-risk safety profile.

Its high-risk evidence profile reflects a Safety score of 3/10; reported benefits and harms can differ by indication, dose, route, duration, and population.

Virtually no human data.

Studied, labeled, or reported-use context: Typical marketing dose 600 mg/day — OTC; not individualized guidance.

Frontier potential — editorial judgment, not evidence

This is a separate axis from the grade above. It asks a different question: if this worked in humans, how much would it matter? It is our judgment, it is not part of the composite score, and it cannot raise a grade. A high number here is a statement about the idea, not about whether it works or whether anyone should take it.

1/10
Little to support a ceiling Preclinical

What the ceiling rests on

Rodent studies report increased testosterone, and it acquired a following through podcast recommendation rather than through any clinical result.

Why it may not get there

No published human efficacy trial of any kind. Rodent studies additionally reported testicular toxicity at higher doses, so the animal literature that generated the interest also contains a safety signal. There is no characterised active compound, no standardised extract, and no human dose rationale.

What would change this Any published human trial.

What the evidence says

Virtually no human data. Single Yakubu 2005 rat study — which also documented testicular and hepatic toxicity at higher doses — is the foundation of the entire supplement category. Popularity driven by Huberman Lab podcast discussion. Often stacked with tongkat ali despite absence of evidence for either combination or individual efficacy in humans.

Mechanism

Crude extract from Fadogia agrestis stem; proposed LH stimulation and testosterone increase based on a single 2005 rat study (Yakubu); no published human trials

Studied, labeled, or reported dose & route

Typical marketing dose 600 mg/day

This records doses and routes described in studies, approved labeling, clinical practice, or documented use. It is not individualized guidance and does not establish safety; context changes with indication, formulation, health history, monitoring, and other medicines.

Citations

A link means the source informed this entry; it does not mean every claim on the page comes from that source. If a citation looks wrong or you want a claim re-checked, send a correction.

Common questions

What does the evidence show about Fadogia agrestis's effects?
Read Off Label rates the evidence for Fadogia agrestis as None and the benefit magnitude as unclear, producing an overall grade of F (2.0/10). Virtually no human data.
What safety findings are reported for Fadogia agrestis?
Fadogia agrestis has a unknown-high risk profile in the database. Unknown-High (rat study showed hepatic/testicular toxicity at higher doses; no human safety data) Legal status: OTC (supplement).
What does the low Safety score for Fadogia agrestis represent?
The Safety score is 3/10. It records the substantial harms described for one or more use contexts; the Benefit score, indication, dose, route, duration, population, and legal status remain separate parts of the evidence profile.
What doses or routes are reported for Fadogia agrestis?
Typical marketing dose 600 mg/day This is context from studies, approved labeling, clinical practice, or documented use; it is not individualized guidance and does not establish safety.
How does Fadogia agrestis work?
Crude extract from Fadogia agrestis stem; proposed LH stimulation and testosterone increase based on a single 2005 rat study (Yakubu); no published human trials

This is an independent synthesis of published research by a non-clinician. Scores are opinions supported by citations, not prescriptions. See the full disclaimer and methodology for how this score was produced and what it does and doesn't mean.