New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Study Finds No Evidence of Ginkgo's Purported Cognitive Benefits

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


You can find it at almost any drugstore, supermarket or corner bodega, not mention on the Internet. But does ginkgo biloba actually sharpen the minds of healthy adults, as manufacturers suggest? Consumers seem to think so: sales of the dietary supplement in 1998 amounted to about $310 million in the U.S. alone. Researchers writing today in the Journal of the American Medical Association, however, report that such claims do not appear to hold up under scientific scrutiny.

Paul R. Solomon of Williams College and his colleagues conducted a six-week, double-blind study of 230 healthy adults ages 60 and older, giving half of the subjects ginkgo and the other half placebo. Participants completed standardized tests of learning, memory, attention and concentration before, during and after the study period. The researchers also questioned the subjects themselves and their close friends and family about any perceived shifts in cognitive status. What they found was that ginkgo recipients fared no better on the tests than placebo recipients did. "The ginkgo group also did not differ from the control group in terms of self-reported memory function or global rating by spouses, friends, and relatives," they say.

Solomon and his collaborators acknowledge that higher doses of the supplement or longer periods of exposure might produce the desired effects. But they conclude that their results "suggest that when taken following the manufacturer's instructions, ginkgo provides no measurable health benefit in memory or related cognitive function to adults with healthy cognitive function."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and was formerly senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe