CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-08-02). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 3 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 1984 · Search date 2026-08-02 · Methodology v0.6

Fig paste, 300 g daily,
does it really help with Improved colonic transit and bowel symptoms in functional constipation?

30-Second Summary
C
Evidence Grade C · 48 · Safety caution
Fig paste modestly sped transit, but a unique fig effect was not separated from added fiber
Three hundred grams daily is a large serving and may cause bloating, gas, loose stools, or diarrhea. People limiting sugar should also check the paste's sugar load.
What the
research shows
The verdict is C with 48 points. In an 80-person randomized trial completed by 74, fig paste shortened eight-week colonic transit more than a sugar-and-starch placebo and improved some symptoms. A standardized difference calculated from the primary-outcome change scores was about 0.47, just below the conventional medium effect of 0.5.
What the
ads claim
Fiber descriptions become claims that figs treat constipation. This study used 300 g of paste daily, not a few fresh figs, and the placebo did not match fiber.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Figs contain dietary fiber, and fiber can affect stool bulk, water, and transit.
  • The placebo contained water, sugar, and modified starch and did not match the paste's fiber. Fig-specific components and added fiber therefore remain confounded.
  • Verdict 532 is C with 55 points for green kiwifruit powder in the same indication, but it is a different food and form.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 1984 · C 48
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Baek and colleagues compared 300 g daily of fig paste with a water, sugar, and modified-starch placebo for eight weeks. NCT02138851 registered colonic transit as primary, matching the positive paper. The trial began in June 2013 and was registered in May 2014, making the retrospective-registration interval longer. Korea Food Research Institute investigators participated, while no direct grower or food-company funding was identified in public information.

02

Why this is classified as C (48)

The registered surrogate primary outcome was positive, but this was one small eight-week trial and the standardized effect of about 0.47 missed the conventional medium threshold. The result is C with 48 points.

Counterpoint. Double blinding, placebo control, and very low attrition are strengths for a whole-food study.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Recalculated the standardized change-score difference and cross-checked the registered primary outcome, timing, placebo composition, and funding disclosure

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointSSurrogate marker - laboratory or imaging measures
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeE~Statistically positive but below the threshold

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
Figs contain fiber and fiber affects colonic transitCThis is an established composition and physiology fact; the grade applies to the fig-paste claim.
Three hundred grams of fig paste improves functional constipationCPrimary transit was positive, but magnitude was modest and added fiber was not isolated.

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 1Randomized double-blind sugar-and-starch placebo-controlled parallel trial, eight weeks40Korea Food Research Institute investigators participated; no direct grower or food-company funding identifiedPrimary colonic transit timeChange −24.5±22.4 versus −15.0±17.7 hours, P=0.030; simple standardized difference about 0.47Positive registered primary outcome, but small and short with unmatched fiber
§

Receipt — 3 References

All 3 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-02).

Baek HI, Ha KC, Kim HM, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of Ficus carica paste for the management of functional constipation. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2016;25:487-496. PMID: 27440682. DOI: 10.6133/apjcn.092015.06.
checked
ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02138851.
checked
Rao SSC, Brenner DM. Efficacy and safety of over-the-counter therapies for chronic constipation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021;116:1156-1181.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-08-02 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Fig paste, 300 g daily x functional constipation Evidence Grade C card
[Chamgap] Fig paste, 300 g daily x functional constipation — Evidence Grade C·48. 3 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/gut/fig-paste-300g-functional-constipation/ · 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.