Maca History: From Andean Root to Five Clinical Trials

Maca is a cultivated root from the Andean region, and its modern record is five randomized trials with different sizes, doses and outcomes. This page covers what each trial measured, where the early history runs thin, and why the gelatinized form matters for reading the results.

The history of maca starts with a cultivated root from the Andean region, and its modern record is five randomized trials that do not all point the same way. No source we could check names the Andean communities that grew maca, and none describes how it reached supplement shelves in detail. This page therefore names no communities, cites no early chronicles, and gives dates only where a source states one. ## A cultivated Andean root with a thin early record According to PubMed, a [2009 trial report](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0272.2008.00892.x) describes *Lepidium meyenii* as a cultivated root from the brassica family, used in the Andean region for its supposed aphrodisiac properties. A [2009 review](https://doi.org/10.1159/000264618) says it is cultivated exclusively at 4,000 to 4,500 meters in the Peruvian Central Andes. A [2024 review](https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16040530) gives a wider range, 3,500 to 5,000 meters. A [2017 review](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.08.003) states that Andean people have cultivated and used maca for over 1,300 to 2,000 years in Peru, as food and medicine. Its abstract does not name the communities, so that range is the only figure for how long maca has been used in these sources. ## What the five trials measured According to PubMed, the five trials differ in size, design and outcome. The table below sets out each trial as its abstract reports it, along with its size and design. | Study | Year | People | Design | What the authors reported | |---|---|---|---|---| | [Gonzales et al.](https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0272.2002.00519.x) | 2002 | Men aged 21 to 56; number not stated in the abstract | Randomized, placebo-controlled, 12 weeks, gelatinized maca at 1,500 mg or 3,000 mg | Improved sexual desire from week 8; serum testosterone and estradiol did not differ from placebo | | [Dording et al.](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-5949.2008.00052.x) | 2008 | 20 outpatients with SSRI-induced sexual dysfunction; 16 in the intent-to-treat analysis | Randomized pilot, double-blind, 1.5 g or 3.0 g a day | The 3.0 g dose improved two sexual function scores; the 1.5 g dose did not; well tolerated | | [Zenico et al.](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0272.2008.00892.x) | 2009 | 50 men with mild erectile dysfunction | Randomized, double-blind, 12 weeks, 2,400 mg maca extract or placebo | IIEF-5 score rose more than placebo: 1.6 points against 0.5 | | [Shin et al.](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) | 2023 | 80 eugonadal participants with late-onset hypogonadism symptoms | Randomized, placebo-controlled, 12 weeks, gelatinized maca, 1,000 mg two pills at a time, three times a day | Greater improvement than placebo on the AMS, IIEF and IPSS questionnaires | | [Wu et al.](https://doi.org/10.4103/ejpi.EJPI-D-25-00037) | 2025 | 10 well-trained college male basketball players | Randomized, placebo-controlled crossover, 2,000 mg a day, 2 weeks | No significant difference from placebo in jump height, shooting accuracy, sprint performance, fatigue index or lactate clearance | Four of the five trials measured questionnaire scores, and the fifth measured athletic performance. The [2002 trial](https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0272.2002.00519.x) also measured serum testosterone and estradiol. Those hormone levels did not differ between groups, and the authors reported that the change in sexual desire was not explained by them or by the depression and anxiety scores. The [2009 trial](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0272.2008.00892.x) found that both groups improved on the IIEF-5 questionnaire, and the maca group improved more. The authors wrote of "a small but significant effect" on subjective perception of general and sexual well-being. The [2023 trial](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) reported greater improvement than placebo on the AMS, IIEF and IPSS questionnaires, and a significant decrease in the ADAM positive rate in the maca group. Three of its authors list company affiliations, two with Yuhan Care Co., Ltd. and one with Green Medicine Co., Ltd. The [2025 basketball study](https://doi.org/10.4103/ejpi.EJPI-D-25-00037) was motivated by animal work suggesting that maca may reduce exercise-induced fatigue by improving blood lactate clearance. Its authors concluded that two weeks did not provide ergogenic benefits for performance or fatigue. ## What the design details change The [2002 report](https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0272.2002.00519.x) used a product it calls "Maca Gelatinizada," and the [2023 trial](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) used gelatinized maca, so their results describe that form. Processing matters more broadly. A [2024 review](https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16040530) says color, growing location, cultivation and post-harvest processing can all change maca's nutrition and chemical profile, and it reports up to seventeen colors. Three of the five trials ran for 12 weeks, and the [athletic study](https://doi.org/10.4103/ejpi.EJPI-D-25-00037) ran for two. A [2017 review](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.08.003) names methodology and sample size among the key limitations of the studies it covers. According to PubMed, a [2026 review of proposed adaptogens](https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27198565) lists fatty acid amide hydrolase inhibition by maca macamides among the most consistently supported mechanisms. The same review says that many of the mechanisms it covers remain predominantly preclinical. For the wider picture on energy metabolism, see our [mitochondrial health guide](/health/mitochondrial-health-complete-guide). If you want a different plant's history for comparison, the [turmeric history](/blog/history/history-of-turmeric-and-curcumin-from-ayurveda-to-isolation) traces the story from Eastern texts to the capsule. ## Frequently asked questions ### Which Andean communities grew maca, and for how long? We could not verify which Andean communities grew maca, so this page names none. The [2017 review](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.08.003) gives the only range for how long maca has been used in these sources, over 1,300 to 2,000 years, and its abstract does not name the communities behind that figure. A dated source for specific communities would be needed before this page could say more. ### What did the early Spanish chroniclers write about maca? We did not verify any Spanish chronicle that describes maca, so this page does not name one or quote one. None of the abstracts behind this page names a chronicler or a passage. PubMed indexes the [2009 review](https://doi.org/10.1159/000264618) under 16th-century history, but its abstract does not say what that history covers, so the index term is as far as this page goes. ### What do the maca trials measure, and how large are they? According to PubMed, the five trials measured sexual desire, erectile function, sexual function, symptom scores and sports performance. The 2002 abstract does not state its sample size. Sizes in the other four abstracts run from 10 to 80 people, and the [80-person trial](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) used symptom questionnaires while the [10-player trial](https://doi.org/10.4103/ejpi.EJPI-D-25-00037) measured jumps, shots and sprints. Each result describes the people in that study, not maca in general. ### Why do the maca trial results differ? According to PubMed, four of the five trials reported gains on at least one questionnaire or scale measure. The [2025 athletic trial](https://doi.org/10.4103/ejpi.EJPI-D-25-00037) found no significant difference from placebo over two weeks. The designs, doses, lengths and outcomes differ, so the trials answer different questions, and no single result settles the matter. The [2023 trial](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) lists company affiliations for three of its authors. ### Why does the gelatinized form matter for the research? The [2002 report](https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0272.2002.00519.x) used "Maca Gelatinizada," and the [2023 trial](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) used gelatinized maca, so their findings describe that form. The abstracts do not compare gelatinized and raw root. We did not verify how gelatinization changes the root, so this page makes no comparison. A reader comparing a product label with these trials should first check whether the label names the form at all. ### What do regulators say about maca, and is it safe? We did not verify any regulator's position on maca. A [2017 review](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.08.003) says that during the market's rapid expansion, protocols to regulate production and marketing were lacking. Two trial reports mention safety. The [2008 report](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-5949.2008.00052.x) says maca was well tolerated in its small pilot group, and the [2023 study](https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.220112) evaluated efficacy and safety together. Neither is a regulatory review. If you take a prescription medicine or have a medical condition, check with a clinician before you start maca. For how to judge a supplement's quality before you buy, see our [supplement safety guide](/health/vitamin-d-complete-guide/supplement-safety-quality-testing-guide). ### How did maca reach supplement shelves? We did not verify the full route. A [2017 review](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.08.003) says maca entered the global market over the last twenty years, with demand growing sharply alongside promotion on the internet, and that it is now grown outside the Andes, including in Yunnan province in China. A [2009 review](https://doi.org/10.1159/000264618) says it is exported as powder, capsules, pills, flour, liquor and extracts. Neither abstract traces a specific chain of sale. ## Bottom line The early history of maca is the thin part of this story. The trial record is more detailed, and it is worth reading one study at a time, with its size, dose, length and outcome in view. In the [2025 study](https://doi.org/10.4103/ejpi.EJPI-D-25-00037) of ten basketball players, two weeks of 2,000 mg a day produced no significant difference from placebo in jump height, shooting accuracy, sprint performance, fatigue index or lactate clearance. **Next reads** - [Mitochondrial health guide](/health/mitochondrial-health-complete-guide): the wider picture on energy metabolism. - [Turmeric and Curcumin: From Eastern Texts to the Capsule](/blog/history/history-of-turmeric-and-curcumin-from-ayurveda-to-isolation): another plant's history, from Eastern texts to the capsule. ### Related reading - [Rhodiola history](/blog/history/history-of-rhodiola-from-siberia-to-adaptogen)