Related Compounds
Compounds connected by the same goals, effects, or research topics.
Herb Profile
Green Tea
Camellia sinensis
Green Tea (Camellia sinensis) carries a Grade A rating — strong evidence.
Last reviewed: •3 sources citedReport a correctionProfile-wide ·A Strong
Use extra caution — Liver risk at high dose extracts Details
- Evidence
- Strong Evidence
- Typical onset
- Varies by prep
- Safety rating
- Moderate caution
- Best for
- Antioxidant, Metabolic, Cardiovascular, Stress resilience
- Avoid / review if
- Stimulants, Hepatotoxic Drugs
At a glance
From this profile's structured data- Evidence
- Grade A
- Safety
- Liver risk at high-dose extracts
- Profile context
- antioxidant, metabolic, cardiovascular
Next stepsWhere to go next — guides & comparisons
Continue reading
- If you want help with anxiety or stress → Anxiety & stress guides
- If you want to browse more herbs → All herbs
Safety
Safety & Cautions
Liver risk at high dose extracts
Elevated caution
Caution level: Elevated. One caution category applies — read it before use.
- Liver-SensitiveLiver-related caution language appears in the profile.
Detailed safety fields
Pregnancy, breastfeeding, and contraindications
- Stimulants
- Hepatotoxic Drugs
Safety classifications
- Liver-Sensitive: Liver-related caution language appears in the profile.
Full safety note
- Liver risk at high dose extracts
Safety labels
- Liver-Sensitive
Evidence
Evidence Summary
Evidence lens
Most useful for practical interpretation when safety context also fits.
StrongStrong Evidence
Human clinical evidence: Present in source signals
Mechanistic / preclinical: Mechanism mapped — Oxidative Stress Modulation · Metabolic Regulation · Vascular Function Support
Research maturity: Established research — Long Term Human Evidence May Be Limited.
Safety boundary: Safety note available — Liver risk at high dose extracts
This profile cites 3 human studies.
Study design details
Evidence Grade
Grade A: Strong Evidence
Evaluation of methodological rigor, population reach, and evidence alignment.
- Design Match
- Meta-analysis
- Risk of Bias
- Low
- Consistency
- Consistent
Strongest recorded design is a meta-analysis, drawn from 8 recorded studies, 6 in people. No disagreement is recorded across them.
How evidence grades work
Each grade reflects the strength and consistency of published human evidence — not marketing claims. Grades are based on study count, design quality, effect size, consistency, and recency.
- Strong
- Multiple RCTs, consistent direction, adequate effect size
- Moderate
- Some RCTs or consistent observational data in humans
- Preliminary / Mixed
- Animal or in-vitro only, or conflicting human data
- Traditional / Theoretical
- Traditional use only; no controlled human trials
Clinical Study Summaries (8)6 human evidence sources · 0 human trials · Participant totals not consistently reported · Consistency not yet classifiable
Filter by study class
Showing 8 of 8 studies.
What the evidence actually shows
This table contains 8 structured sources, including 6 human evidence sources; 0 are human trials. A reliable participant total cannot be calculated because sample size is not consistently structured in the cited sources. Source-to-conclusion relationships are not classified in this structured set, so consistency is not yet classifiable.
Profile-wide evidence grade: see the profile grade above · Confidence: not separately assigned
What would change our conclusion?
Larger, well-controlled human trials using comparable populations, doses, preparations, and clinically meaningful outcomes could materially strengthen or weaken this conclusion. Replication in a different population or a high-quality synthesis resolving current disagreement could also materially change confidence.
| Study | Design | N | Dose | Duration | Population | Outcome | Result & magnitude | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Background | Meta-analysis Statistically combines results from multiple eligible studies; confidence still depends on the quality, consistency, and directness of those studies. | — | — | — | — | — | Some oxidative-stress and antioxidant markers improved, while CRP, IL-6, and TNF-alpha did not clearly improve. | PubMed → |
Background | Meta-analysis Statistically combines results from multiple eligible studies; confidence still depends on the quality, consistency, and directness of those studies. | — | — | — | — | — | Overall pooled effects were not significant for fasting glucose, HbA1c, blood pressure, or major lipid markers, although selected subgroups showed benefit. | PubMed → |
Background | Meta-analysis Statistically combines results from multiple eligible studies; confidence still depends on the quality, consistency, and directness of those studies. | — | — | — | — | — | Green tea extract increased fat oxidation during and after exercise in pooled analyses, with some dose-response signal. | PubMed → |
Background | Meta-analysis Statistically combines results from multiple eligible studies; confidence still depends on the quality, consistency, and directness of those studies. | — | — | — | — | — | Green tea supplementation produced modest pooled reductions in weight, BMI, waist circumference, and body-fat percentage; adiponectin was not clearly improved. | PubMed → |
Background | Meta-analysis Statistically combines results from multiple eligible studies; confidence still depends on the quality, consistency, and directness of those studies. | — | — | — | — | — | Pooled systolic and diastolic blood pressure reductions were about 1 mmHg, with larger subgroup effects in some higher-risk populations. | PubMed → |
Warfarin and food, herbal or dietary supplement interactions: A systematic review Tan CSS et al. · Br J Clin Pharmacol · 2021 Background | Systematic review Uses a predefined method to find and evaluate relevant studies, but may or may not pool their results statistically. | — | — | — | — | — | — | PubMed → |
Show 2 more studies
Green Tea (Camellia sinensis): A Review of Its Phytochemistry, Pharmacology, and Toxicology Zhao T et al. · Molecules · 2022 Background | Narrative review Summarizes selected literature without the full prespecified search and selection methods of a systematic review. | — | — | — | — | — | — | PubMed → |
Common Herbal Dietary Supplement-Drug Interactions Asher GN et al. · Am Fam Physician · 2017 Background | Narrative review Summarizes selected literature without the full prespecified search and selection methods of a systematic review. | — | — | — | — | — | — | PubMed → |
Dosing & Timing
- Dose guidance
- 300 800 mg EGCG/day
How Green Tea works
Simplified mechanism pathway based on preclinical and pharmacological evidence. Does not confirm clinical efficacy.
Mechanism Pathway — How Green Tea Works
CompoundTarget / ReceptorMechanismEffect / Outcome
Mechanisms & biological pathways
Preclinical pathways. Proposed mechanisms from in vitro and animal research; these do not confirm clinical outcomes in humans.
- Oxidative Stress Modulation
- Metabolic Regulation
- Vascular Function Support
- Endothelial Function Support
Active Compounds
Key constituents studied in Green Tea, with full pharmacology and safety profiles.
Compare related active botanicals
Explore botanicals with similar chemistry, effects, or safety considerations in the Botanical Activity Atlas.
Guides that use Green Tea
Condition guides
Compare & Sourcing
Compare side-by-side tradeoffs or verify active marker guidelines.
Review available sources for Green Tea
Independent database mapping — evaluated separately from safety and efficacy scores.
Affiliate disclosure: Shopping links may earn this site a commission at no cost to you. Links are chosen on quality and availability, never commission tiers; safety warnings and evidence ratings stay independent.
Continue comparing
Safety first · Harm reduction
This information is educational and not medical advice. Start low, avoid risky combinations, and consult a licensed clinician before making health decisions—especially if you use medications, have diagnosed conditions, or are pregnant/breastfeeding.
Learn how we evaluate confidence, safety, and intensity on the methodology page.
Editorial Review
Checked against primary sources, cited evidence, and contraindication language before publication. Evidence claims, safety language, and affiliate modules are reviewed independently. Not personal medical advice.
Help improve this profile
Was this useful for your research?
These controls record only the page and the structured choice you make when analytics consent is enabled. Please don’t include personal medical information in research requests.
Was this evidence summary clear?
Did you find what you were researching?
Free safety checklist
Get the Green Tea research notes
Evidence summaries, dosing context, and safety updates for this herb — straight to your inbox.
We use your email to send the checklist and occasional evidence-first supplement updates. Unsubscribe anytime. Privacy policy.
Botanical profile context
How to interpret Green Tea
Green Tea herb profile with evidence context, key research topics, source notes, safety context, and references presented in an evidence-first format. Use this herb profile as a starting point for evidence review, not as a recommendation to start a new supplement. Botanical products can vary by plant part, extract ratio, standardization, dose, and contaminant testing, so two labels with the same common name may not behave the same way.
When reviewing Green Tea, compare the traditional-use context against the human evidence, mechanism notes, and safety cautions. Pay special attention to pregnancy, breastfeeding, liver or kidney disease, blood-pressure effects, sedation, stimulation, anticoagulant use, antidepressants, and any prescription medication overlap.
For product decisions, prefer transparent labels, named extracts, clear serving sizes, and third-party quality testing. Avoid treating a long list of possible mechanisms as proof that an herb will solve a specific condition.