Maca Supplements UK — What the Evidence Says

What is Maca?

Maca (Lepidium meyenii) is a root vegetable native to the high-altitude plateaus of the Peruvian Andes, typically grown at elevations above 4,000 metres. It belongs to the Brassicaceae family, which also includes cabbage, broccoli, and radish. The plant has been cultivated in Peru for thousands of years, where it has traditionally been used as both a food source and a plant with cultural significance in Andean communities.

The root is harvested, dried, and consumed in various forms. In supplement contexts, maca is most commonly sold as dried root powder or gelatinised extract. Gelatinisation involves cooking the raw root under pressure to remove starches, which is thought to improve digestibility and the absorption of active compounds. Maca is sometimes categorised by root colour, with yellow, red, and black variants having slightly different chemical profiles. Most commercial supplements use yellow maca or a blend of colours.

Key Active Compounds

Maca contains several groups of bioactive compounds that researchers have focused on when studying the plant. The most frequently cited are macamides and macaridine, which are unique to Lepidium meyenii and are not found in other plants. Macamides are fatty acid amide derivatives, and they are considered primary markers of maca-specific activity in research contexts. Cogniscore looks for these compounds on certificates of analysis (COAs) because their presence and concentration can indicate extract quality and authenticity.

Glucosinolates and isothiocyanates are sulphur-containing compounds also found in other Brassica vegetables. Research has examined these compounds in the context of cellular health. Alkaloids, including macaridine, are nitrogen-containing compounds present in the root. Sterols, such as beta-sitosterol and campesterol, round out the key compound profile. When a brand specifies macamide content or glucosinolate concentration on its label or COA, that disclosure gives Cogniscore more to assess. Products that list only raw root powder without compound standardisation provide limited data for scoring purposes.

Benefit Areas Studied in Research

Energy. Several studies have used maca supplementation to examine physical performance and perceived energy levels. Research in this area has generally used doses between 1,500mg and 3,000mg of dried or gelatinised root powder per day. Most trials studying energy and physical output have been conducted over periods of four to twelve weeks in healthy adult populations. Sample sizes in these trials have tended to be small, which limits how broadly the findings can be applied.

Libido. Maca has been studied in clinical research for its relationship with sexual desire in both men and women. A number of human trials have used doses in the 1,500mg to 3,000mg range over periods of eight to twelve weeks. Gonzales et al. (2002) and Stone et al. (2009) are among the frequently cited studies in this area, examining self-reported sexual desire as the primary outcome measure. Cogniscore notes this research without drawing conclusions about whether any specific product is likely to produce these outcomes.

Hormonal balance. Some clinical research has looked at maca in relation to hormonal markers, particularly in post-menopausal women. These studies have generally examined serum hormone levels alongside subjective symptom reporting. The research has used a range of dose forms, including both standard and gelatinised extracts. This area of study is still considered preliminary, with most trials being small-scale pilot investigations.

Mood. A smaller body of research has examined maca in relation to mood and psychological wellbeing, often as a secondary outcome within trials designed to study other endpoints. Most of this research has used self-reported mood scales alongside other measures. Human RCT data in this area is limited, and most findings come from studies where mood was not the primary focus of investigation.

Menopausal symptoms. Clinical trials have examined maca as a botanical option in studies of menopausal symptom management, looking at outcomes such as hot flushes and sleep quality. Dording et al. (2008) explored a related area, examining maca in the context of SSRI-induced dysfunction in a double-blind, randomised pilot trial. Much of the menopause-focused research uses gelatinised extract at doses between 2,000mg and 3,500mg per day, and most trials have been short in duration.

The Science and Research

The clinical evidence base for maca is built primarily around small human trials, with a smaller number of animal model studies informing mechanistic hypotheses. Below is an overview of key research that informs how Cogniscore contextualises dose and disclosure for this ingredient.

Gonzales GF et al. (2002). This double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT examined the effect of maca on sexual desire in healthy adult men. Participants received either 1,500mg or 3,000mg of dried maca root per day over twelve weeks. Self-reported sexual desire was the primary outcome, measured using a standardised questionnaire. The trial involved a relatively small sample and was conducted in a single research setting in Peru. Findings were measured rather than definitive, and the authors noted the need for larger confirmatory trials. This study is frequently cited as foundational to maca's libido-related research profile, though it does not establish a clinical standard of care.

Stone M et al. (2009). This pilot study examined maca supplementation in male cyclists, looking at both sexual desire and physical performance outcomes. Participants used 2,000mg of gelatinised maca extract per day over fourteen days. The study was small, lacked a long follow-up period, and used a crossover design with a short washout period between conditions. Both physical performance and self-reported sexual desire were assessed as outcomes. The gelatinised form used here is consistent with the format now considered standard in most clinical research, as it offers improved bioavailability compared to raw dried root.

Dording CM et al. (2008). This double-blind, randomised, pilot dose-finding study examined maca root for SSRI-induced sexual dysfunction. Participants received either 1,500mg or 3,000mg of maca root per day over twelve weeks. Outcomes were measured using validated sexual function scales. This was a pilot study, meaning sample size was deliberately small and the primary aim was to gather preliminary data to inform future trial design. The authors noted that the 3,000mg dose produced findings of greater interest, though the study was not powered to draw firm conclusions. Industry funding and sample limitations are typical caveats in this literature.

General research notes. Most maca trials share common limitations: small sample sizes, short study durations (typically eight to sixteen weeks), and a reliance on self-reported outcome measures. Animal model research has provided additional context, particularly around hormonal markers, but these findings do not translate directly to human outcomes. Gelatinised extract is used in most contemporary clinical trials due to its more consistent bioavailability. Products using raw dried root at doses below 1,500mg per day fall outside the range that clinical research has used.

How Cogniscore Evaluates Maca

Cogniscore scores maca-containing products on dose transparency, source type, and third-party testing disclosure. On dose, the clinical research range is 1,500mg to 3,500mg of dried root or gelatinised extract per day. Products that disclose a per-serving dose within this range score higher than those that list maca as part of a proprietary blend without individual quantities. Products using gelatinised extract and stating so clearly on the label score better than those using unspecified root powder, because gelatinised forms are the format used in most clinical trials.

Third-party testing, evidenced by a publicly available COA, is a key scoring factor. For maca specifically, a COA that confirms macamide content, glucosinolate levels, or standardisation to a defined compound percentage gives Cogniscore more to evaluate. Products that list maca without any standardisation data and without a COA receive a lower disclosure score. The score reflects what the brand publicly discloses, not whether the product is likely to produce any health outcome. See the full Cogniscore methodology for more detail on how each scoring dimension is weighted.

Top Rated Products Containing Maca

Ranked by Cogniscore — highest disclosure scores first. Scores reflect what brands publicly disclose, not product quality or efficacy.

No scored products containing Maca are currently listed. Check back as the database grows.

Frequently Asked Questions