CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-07-19). 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. 673 · Search date 2026-07-19 · Methodology v0.6

Catuaba bark,
does it really help with Increased male libido, erectile function, and testosterone?

30-Second Summary
?
Evidence Grade ? · Safety unknown
No human efficacy trial was found for single-ingredient catuaba in male sexual function
What the
research shows
Single-ingredient catuaba bark is ungraded (?) for increasing male libido, erectile function, or testosterone. Published human research mainly concerns tolerability or other outcomes of Catuama, a mixture containing guarana, muira puama, and ginger in addition to catuaba, and therefore does not establish sexual-function efficacy for the single ingredient. The common name catuaba is also applied to multiple plants including Trichilia, Anemopaegma, and Erythroxylum, while a survey of commercial samples found frequent mismatch and adulteration. No efficacy trial of a botanically identified and standardized single catuaba ingredient for male sexual function was found, so no score was assigned.
What the
ads claim
Marketing presents a traditional aphrodisiac name and results from mixtures or animal experiments as clinical evidence that single-ingredient catuaba improves erections or testosterone. Without a botanical species, plant part, standardized material, and human sexual-function endpoint, the evidence does not concern the same ingredient.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Catuaba is a common name applied to several Brazilian plants rather than one definitive botanical species, so labels should state the scientific name and plant part.
  • Catuama is not single-ingredient catuaba but a mixture with guarana, muira puama, ginger, and other components, so its study findings cannot be assigned to catuaba bark.
  • Clinical safety and interaction data for the single ingredient are inadequate, and species, dose, and contamination can vary; people with cardiovascular disease or prescription medicines should seek clinical advice before use.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 673 · ?
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Kletter 2004 examined 14 commercial bark samples sold as catuaba using morphological, chemical, and functional methods. Only a minority contained the crude drug claimed on the label, more than half were adulterated, and most contained Trichilia catigua bark. Oliveira 2005 administered a Catuama liquid containing guarana, Trichilia catigua, muira puama, and ginger to 48 healthy men and women for 28 days and observed toxicology and tolerability; no severe adverse reaction occurred, but sexual efficacy was not tested. A 2023 review of Brazilian plants used for male sexual dysfunction also highlighted the multiple species called catuaba, adulteration, and controversial effects. These sources document the absence of direct evidence rather than a positive or negative efficacy trial.

02

Why this is classified as ?

No human efficacy literature was found evaluating male libido, erections, or testosterone with a botanically identified and standardized single catuaba bark. Catuama mixture research cannot be attributed to one ingredient and commercial species identity is unstable, producing ? with a null score. Unknown interactions and product variability are safety issues rather than efficacy evidence.

Counterpoint. Erectile dysfunction or low libido can reflect vascular disease, diabetes, depression, sleep problems, hormonal disorders, or medicines, so assessment should not be delayed for an unproven supplement.

Rejudgment record. New verdict — Applied ? because no human efficacy literature evaluates male libido, erectile function, or testosterone using botanically identified and standardized single-ingredient catuaba bark; published human data concern a multi-ingredient Catuama product that cannot be attributed to catuaba, and species identity under the common name is unstable

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
Increased libido, erectile function, and testosterone?There is no human efficacy trial of an identified and standardized single ingredient.
Attribution of Catuama mixture results to catuaba alone?The mixture includes guarana, muira puama, and ginger, preventing single-ingredient attribution.
Botanical identity and standardization?Multiple species are sold under the same common name and label mismatch was demonstrated in commercial samples.

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
Kletter C et al. 2004Morphological, chemical, and functional authentication study of commercial botanicals14Academic analysis with limited funding detailIdentity and purity of labeled and actual crude drugsOnly a minority contained the labeled crude drug and more than half were adulterated with other crude drugs.Key evidence on identity and product variability
Oliveira CH et al. 2005Twenty-eight-day clinical toxicology and tolerability study in healthy volunteers48Combination-product evaluation with limited funding detailAdverse events, hematology, biochemistry, and electrocardiographyNo severe adverse reaction occurred with the Catuama mixture, but libido, erections, and testosterone efficacy were not assessed.Not single-ingredient human efficacy
Teixeira TM et al. 2024Narrative review of ethnomedicinal and preclinical evidenceAcademic researchTraditional use, animal models, mechanisms, and identityIt highlighted that several species are called catuaba, producing adulteration and controversial effects.Confirms the human-efficacy gap and identity problem
§

Receipt — 3 References

All 3 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-07-19).

Kletter C, Glasl S, Presser A, et al. Morphological, chemical and functional analysis of catuaba preparations. Planta Med. 2004;70(11):993-1000. PMID: 15490329. DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-832627.
checked
Oliveira CH, Moraes MEA, Moraes MO, Bezerra FAF, Abib E, De Nucci G. Clinical toxicology study of an herbal medicinal extract of Paullinia cupana, Trichilia catigua, Ptychopetalum olacoides and Zingiber officinale (Catuama) in healthy volunteers. Phytother Res. 2005;19(1):54-57. PMID: 15798997. DOI: 10.1002/ptr.1484.
checked
Teixeira TM, Boeff DD, de Oliveira Carvalho L, Ritter MR, Konrath EL. The traditional use of native Brazilian plants for male sexual dysfunction: evidence from ethnomedicinal applications, animal models, and possible mechanisms of action. J Ethnopharmacol. 2024;318(Pt A):116876. PMID: 37437795. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2023.116876.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-07-19 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Catuaba bark x increased male libido, erectile function, and testosterone Evidence Grade ? card
[Chamgap] Catuaba bark x increased male libido, erectile function, and testosterone — Evidence Grade ?. 3 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/mens/catuaba-bark-male-libido-erection-testosterone/ · 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.