We use essential cookies (authentication, your saved goals/stack) by default. With your permission we’ll also enable privacy-respecting analytics (Vercel Web Analytics, anonymous load-time metrics) and error-replay diagnostics (Sentry — DOM snapshots only when an error fires) so we can fix bugs faster. Learn more about cookies
Gte7.5
Green Tea Extract Research
Likely helps
306 peer-reviewed studies
What the evidence says
Likely helps
Green Tea Extract appears to help in 8 of 10 studies with measurable effects — the evidence leans clearly favourable.
Most evidence is from high-quality meta-analyses and randomised trials published 1997–2026 with a typical study size of 349 participants.
Based on 306 studies · 70 meta-analyses · 180 RCTs · 77,763 total participants
Confidence
High confidence
What the studies found
8helped2unclear· 296 more without graded effect data
By outcome
Therapeutic & clinical
Likely helps118 studies
Weight managementModest fat oxidation and thermogenesis · 4-12 weeks
Mostly mechanism / observational50 studies
Heart & blood pressureCatechins improve lipid profiles and endothelial function · 8-12 weeks
Mostly mechanism / observational28 studies
Cognitive function
Mostly mechanism / observational22 studies
Cholesterol & lipidsCatechins improve lipid profiles and endothelial function · 8-12 weeks
InflammationIncreased fat oxidation and metabolic rate · 4-8 weeks
Mostly mechanism / observational8 studies
Safety profile
Mostly mechanism / observational7 studies
Liver health
Mostly mechanism / observational6 studies
Depression & mood
Too few graded studies2 studies
Immune support
Too few graded studies2 studies
Longevity & agingAntioxidant protection and cardiovascular support · Ongoing
Too few graded studies2 studies
By the numbers
Pulled from 48 studies with measurable effects
Likely real effects
89%
across studies
People studied
78k
typical study: 349 people
Strongest designs
250
70 pooled, 180 randomised
Showed benefit
80%
8/10 studies
How long studies ran
1–3 months
5
3+ months
3
Populations Studied
General population4
Adults4
Diverse populations1
Adults with obesity markers1
Active research area
96 studies in the last 5 years · Latest meta-analysis: 2026
199720112026
1Office systolic blood pressureMeta-AnalysisCited 6×n=5,205 · very large study2025
Flavan-3-ol-rich foods considerably reduce elevated BP and improve endothelial function independent of blood pressure supporting their use for cardiovascular prevention.
Lagou V et al. · European journal of preventive cardiology (2025)
Noticeable benefit
← WorseNo effectBetter →
Flavan-3-ol interventions included epicatechin, epigallocatechin-gallate, cocoa products, tea, grape extract, and apples delivering 586 mg (95% CI 510, 662) total flavan-3-ols.
Interventions decreased office (-2.8 [95% CI -3.9, -1.7]/-2.0 [-2.6, -1.3] mmHg) and 24 h-ambulatory BP (-3.7 [-5.8, -1.6]/-2.6 [-4.5, -0.8] mmHg) after chronic repetitive consumption.
Flow-mediated dilation increased after acute (+2.0% [1.6, 2.3]) and repetitive (+1.7% [1.3, 2.2]) consumption independent of BP.
5Influenza preventionMeta-AnalysisCited 9×n=5,048 · very large study2021
To confirm the findings before implementation, longitudinal clinical trials with specific doses of green tea consumption are warranted.
Rawangkan A et al. · Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) (2021)
Large benefit
← WorseNo effectBetter →
Likely real
Similarly, in three cohort studies with 2,223 participants treated with GTCs, there were also statistically significant effects (RR 0.52, 95%CIs 0.35-0.77, P = 0.001) with very low evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 3%, P = 0.358).
Additionally, the overall effect in the subgroup analysis of gargling and orally ingested items (taking capsules and drinking) showed a pooled RR of 0.62 (95% CIs 0.49-0.77, P = 0.003) without heterogeneity (I2= 0%, P = 0.554).
There were no obvious publication biases (Egger's test (P = 0.138) and Begg's test (P = 0.103)).
6Cancer incidenceMeta-AnalysisCited 109×n=1,795 · large study2020
Overall, findings from experimental and nonexperimental epidemiological studies yielded inconsistent results, thus providing limited evidence for the beneficial effect of green tea consumption on the overall risk of cancer or on specific cancer sites.
Filippini T et al. · The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2020)
No clear effect
← WorseNo effectBetter →
For incident prostate cancer, the summary risk ratio (RR) in the green tea-supplemented participants was 0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.36), based on three studies and involving 201 participants (low-certainty evidence).
The summary RR for gynaecological cancer was 1.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 5.48; 2 studies, 1157 participants; low-certainty evidence).
No evidence of effect of non-melanoma skin cancer emerged (summary RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.92; 1 study, 1075 participants; low-certainty evidence).
Both in vitro and in vivo studies have demonstrated that the possible anticancer mechanisms are the inhibition on proliferation, anti-angiogenesis, induction of apoptosis, suppression on metastasis, inhibition on cancer stem cells, and modulation on gut microbiota.
Xu XY et al. · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition (2020)
Epidemiological studies have shown that the consumption of tea is inversely associated with the risk of several cancers.
The anticancer actions of tea are mainly attributed to tea polyphenols, such as epigallocatechin-3-gallate and theaflavins.
Clinical trials have elucidated that intervention of tea phytochemicals is effective in the prevention of several cancers.
8Preeclampsia managementMeta-AnalysisCited 3×n=349 · medium study2025
ECGC and resveratrol supplements have been investigated for potential effects in managing clinical signs and symptoms of preeclampsia; however, evidence on the clinical and adverse effects of polyphenols is limited and uncertain.
Nguyen PY et al. · BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology (2025)
ECGC and resveratrol supplements have been investigated for potential effects in managing clinical signs and symptoms of preeclampsia; however, evidence on the clinical and adverse effects of polyphenols is limited and uncertain.