CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-08-03). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 1 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 2066 · Search date 2026-08-03 · Methodology v0.6

Dried dill-leaf powder,
does it really help with Relief of colonic-motility-related symptoms in adults with type 2 diabetes?

30-Second Summary
C
Evidence Grade C · 45 · Safety acceptable
A motility-symptom signal was not a prespecified placebo-superiority result
No serious adverse-event signal was reported in the eight-week trial. People with food allergy to dill should avoid it.
What the
research shows
The grade is C with 45 points. An eight-week trial assigned 48 people, excluded six, and analyzed 21 per group. Only one of five gastrointestinal items improved within the dill group, but no between-group ordinal test or analysis of individual change was reported, so treatment-effect magnitude could not be judged.
What the
ads claim
Three grams of dried leaf is about 3 teaspoons, 1 tablespoon, or 24 pinches. It is culinary, but high for daily seasoning, and a within-group change must not be marketed as superiority over placebo.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • The intervention was milled whole dried dill leaf, not an extract.
  • Three grams is about 3 teaspoons, 1 tablespoon, or 24 pinches.
  • Verdict 501 is B with 70 points and concerns bisacodyl treatment of chronic constipation; this verdict concerns dried dill leaf and an exploratory motility symptom.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2066 · C 45
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Haidari 2020 assigned 48 adults with type 2 diabetes and gastrointestinal symptoms to dried dill-leaf powder, 3 g/day, or starch placebo for eight weeks. Six participants were excluded and only 21 per group were analyzed. The original registry record could not be checked, while the paper included gastrointestinal symptoms in its study purpose and eligibility criteria. LDL, reported as the registered primary outcome, was positive: change −9.76±19.08 versus +3.09±14.07 mg/dL, between-group P=0.017 and adjusted P=0.040. Funding was Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences grant NRC-9617.

02

Why this is classified as C (45)

The endpoint distribution is a signal, but an appropriate between-group effect size cannot be calculated and this was a single 42-person, eight-week completer analysis, giving C with 45 points.

Counterpoint. Dill extracts, seeds, and lipid or glucose outcomes were not pooled into this symptom verdict.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Ordinal endpoint distributions and within-group findings were assessed alongside the absence of a suitable between-group ordinal analysis and the small, short completer design

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointPPatient-reported treatment goal - the symptom is the goal
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeEXThe clinical size of the effect could not be judged

The scoring table and the verdict agree (C).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Relief of colonic-motility-related symptomsCEndpoint distributions favored dill, but this was not a prespecified between-group confirmatory analysis.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Double-blind placebo-controlled single-center trial21Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences grant NRC-9617Five gastrointestinal symptom items scored 0, 1, or 2Within-group P values for colonic motility were 0.010 with dill and 0.317 with placebo. Endpoint distributions were 10, 10, and 1 at scores 0, 1, and 2 with dill versus 7, 4, and 10 with placebo; no appropriate between-group ordinal test was reported.Exploratory symptom signal
§

Receipt — 1 References

All 1 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-03).

Haidari F, Zakerkish M, Borazjani F, Ahmadi Angali K, Amoochi Foroushani G. The effects of Anethum graveolens (dill) powder supplementation on clinical and metabolic status in patients with type 2 diabetes. Trials. 2020;21:483. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-04401-3.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-08-03 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Dried dill-leaf powder x colonic-motility-related symptoms Evidence Grade C card
[Chamgap] Dried dill-leaf powder x colonic-motility-related symptoms — Evidence Grade C·45. 1 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/gut/dried-dill-leaf-powder-colonic-motility-symptoms/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.