The research landscape on individual natural compounds — compiled for healthcare professionals, traceable back to the original source, with clear indication of the basis for each statement.
Last updated:
For every natural substance we examine, we compile the international research landscape—studies, reviews, academic theses—and classify each work based on what it actually investigated: in humans, in human tissue, in animal trials, or in cell cultures.
This distinction is the core of our work. It determines the value of a statement—and it is missing in most compilations currently in circulation.
1. The Substances
Currently 150 substances and thematic fields, in alphabetical order. For each we compile the international research landscape and classify every study by what it was carried out on: in humans, in animals or in the laboratory.
How to read the figures: Studies in total covers every paper we have checked for this substance or therapy, including reviews and basic research. In humans are observational and intervention studies in people, of which controlled the most informative form with a comparison group. In animals counts animal experiments, in the lab studies on cells. The figures update automatically as new studies are classified.
The substances are listed alphabetically.
2. The therapies
Alongside substances we examine therapies with the same method: all international studies, classified by what was studied, every statement traceable to the source. Overview and classification on the therapies page.
In practice, a question rarely begins with the substance but rather with the clinical presentation. These pages reverse the approach: they show which substances have been studied for a given topic, how robust the respective evidence is—and where mechanisms are described for a substance but no human studies exist.
The topic pages are generated directly from the database. When a substance is added, it automatically appears under all relevant topics—with its respective evidence ranking.
4. Our approach
A keyword search in a database only finds what coincidentally contains the searched terms. We take a different approach and follow the trails left by research itself:
Identify starting points — recognised reviews and key studies on the topic.
Follow the citation network — backwards into the reference lists, forwards to every paper that builds on them. Each find becomes a new starting point. This reveals the actual research field instead of a keyword list.
Beyond specialist databases — theses, repositories, books, and patents. Dissertations are often among the most thorough works of all and are missing from almost every overview.
Classify rather than exclude — every paper is kept and shows clearly what it was studied on.
Keep it current — the research continues every week.
5. Access via the mechanism of action
The third level: not the substance, not the symptom, but the mechanism—across all substances. This reveals what humic acid complexes share with beta-glucans, omega-3, or zeolite, and where a mechanism of action is well-documented for one substance but never investigated for a related one.
Using the same data, we calculate where a mechanism of action is well-described in laboratory and animal studies but scarcely investigated in humans—across all substances. The gap list is updated with each review. A gap is not evidence of efficacy; it is evidence that no one has looked.
Every statement on this page carries its evidence tier — proven, plausible or hypothesis — and leads to the original work. The decision in the individual case rests with the practitioner; we provide the connections.
International Health Research · https://ih-research.com/en/knowledge/ · Last updated: 2026-10-15