Despite The Glossy Claims, AG1’s ‘Clinical Evidence’ Raises Eyebrows

The company Athletic Greens, promoting its AG1 product (a powdered blend of more than 70 ingredients, primarily freeze-dried vegetables) as a source of vitamins, probiotics, and superfoods, actively uses the term «clinically proven» in its advertising. It is claimed that AG1 boosts energy, improves digestion, strengthens immunity, and enhances concentration. However, as analysis of the studies presented on the AG1 website shows, the situation is not so clear-cut.

On the page dedicated to research, AG1 emphasizes that all claims are supported by «numerous studies of the ingredients and the final formula». Scientific terms such as «biomarkers», «bioavailability», and «microbiome» are used, and mentions are made of «randomized, placebo-controlled trials». Randomized placebo-controlled trials are the «gold standard» of clinical trials, where participants are randomly assigned to groups receiving either the active substance or a placebo (dummy), allowing the real effect of the drug to be assessed.

However, as noted by Dr. Julia Adamian, an internist from NYU Langone Health, the term «clinically tested» can have different meanings depending on the context and is often used for marketing purposes. It is important to pay attention to who conducted and funded the study, what specific results were evaluated, and where the results were published.

Analysis of published AG1 studies showed that all were funded by the company itself, and some authors were AG1 employees. This does not mean that the studies are invalid but indicates a potential conflict of interest. Moreover, the results of some studies showed little to no impact of AG1 on the body. For example, a study on the impact on the gut microbiome showed an increase in the number of two probiotic strains that were already included in AG1.

It is important that the published studies relate to the original AG1 formula. Data about the new version, AG1 Next Gen, also positioned as «clinically proven», is presented in the form of brief conference reviews and footnotes on the site. Full publication of results in peer-reviewed journals may take years. Although AG1 conducts research on its product, the use of the term «clinically proven» can be misleading to consumers. It is important to consider that studies funded by the manufacturer may be biased.

Recent developments in consumer advocacy emphasize the need for transparency in claims made by supplement companies. Governments and organizations are pushing for stricter regulations on advertising practices, especially regarding the representation of clinical evidence. The growing consumer awareness and skepticism are driving companies to either substantiate their claims with robust third-party research or face potential backlash, which could impact their reputation and sales.