No plain explanation of what this changes is stored.
No recorded use is stored in reader language.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 26 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 11 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Cholesterol
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved3 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Cholesterol
changes in levels of circulating triglycerides; ldl cholesterol; total cholesterol
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
3 registered test measure.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Baseline to end-line change in the prevalence of stunting among children 0-59 months of age
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06025786
How many people
13200
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Number of passages through each part of the stair cases
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01574040
How many people
11000
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Prevalence of low birthweight
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05836961
How many people
5500
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Effectiveness assessed by recovery from MAM, defined as achieving mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) ≥ 12.5 cm within the 12-week treatment period
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT03146897
How many people
2691
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Recovery From Moderate Acute Malnutrition (MAM)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01790048
How many people
2259
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Proportion of patients achieving an LDL <1.4mmol/L
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05325034
How many people
2000
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.6 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Mouse, Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
evolution of inflammatory markers in postprandial state
changes in levels of circulating triglycerides
ldl cholesterol
changes in ambulatory blood pressure
total cholesterol
faecal short chain fatty acid concentrations
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (5)
evolution of metabolic parameters in postprandial state
pharmacokinetic of niacin and its metabolites
endothelial function
hs crp
gut microbiota composition
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
No description of who was studied is recorded.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Varies by country
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No form or route is recorded.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Not usually supervised: sold as a supplement or food ingredient where recorded. That is a legal category, not a safety judgement.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
The identity record classes it as a supplement ingredient; no medicines register records an approval.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing is recorded about product quality.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
The exact form studied is not recorded.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
662 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as amino acid/protein, other combinations and animal part or source.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
Watching one thing carefully can tell you whether it moved. It cannot tell you what moved it.
This is sold without a prescription, so a person can sensibly watch one thing and see whether it moves.
Pick one goal. One goal only. Two at once cannot be told apart afterwards.
Pick one thing to watch. Registered studies measured things like: evolution of inflammatory markers in postprandial state; changes in levels of circulating triglycerides; ldl cholesterol.
Measure before you start. Take the same measurement several times first. One reading is not a starting point.
Know the swing. Write down how much it moves on its own across a normal week.
Change one thing. Change nothing else at the same time, including training and sleep.
Give it the study length. No finished study window is recorded, so no length is suggested here.
Track whether you took it. Missed days are the most common reason a home test shows nothing.
Read the trend. Look at the line across weeks. A single reading tells you almost nothing.
What not to measure
Anything that swings more day to day than the change you are looking for.
A wearable estimate of sleep stages, which is an estimate and not a measurement.
Weight on one morning, which mostly records water.
A feeling you did not write down before starting.
When to stop
Stop if something new and unpleasant starts, and ask a pharmacist or doctor.
Stop if you cannot keep everything else steady, because the result will not mean anything.
Stop at the end of the window you set, and read the trend then.
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki does not work out an amount for anyone.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people∅Nothing found in the sources checked
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No traced study record is stored for this substance.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✗ Not passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries no source: the record holds neither an explanation nor a recorded use.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
The identity record classes it as a supplement ingredient; no medicines register records an approval.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What to learn next
Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (8)
Q1
What did Butter's largest trial (94 people) and its longest (3.5 years) measure?
94 people in Butter's largest registered study, 3.5 years in its longest registered window, measuring Incremental Area Under the Serum Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) of Glucose. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
13 na; NCT02061267; 2015-06-30; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2025, NCT06640036.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Butter was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
na
13
Last recorded human testNCT06640036
2025-12-17
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From mouse to human: where has Butter shown lifespan?
Interpretation Incremental Area Under the Serum Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) of Glucose — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
mouse
mechanism-only
rat
lifespan
humanNCT04419948
biomarker; Incremental Area Under the Serum Concentration Versus Time Curve (AUC) of Glucose; 13
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
Could one person measure Butter's effect on evolution of metabolic parameters in postprandial state?
Evolution of metabolic parameters in postprandial state: measured in Butter's trials.
Interpretation evolution of metabolic parameters in postprandial state is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
evolution of metabolic parameters in postprandial state; 2026-09-01
evolution of inflammatory markers in postprandial state; 2026-09-01
pharmacokinetic of niacin and its metabolites; 2026-09-01
changes in levels of circulating triglycerides; 2026-09-01
ldl cholesterol; 2026-09-01
endothelial function; 2026-09-01
5 more recorded rows
biomarkers
changes in ambulatory blood pressure; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
total cholesterol; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
hs crp; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
faecal short chain fatty acid concentrations; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
gut microbiota composition; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
6
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
13; NCT05264233; NA; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; COMPLETED
Q4
Which of changes in ambulatory blood pressure, changes in levels of circulating triglycerides and endothelial function did Butter's trials measure?
changes in ambulatory blood pressure, changes in levels of circulating triglycerides and endothelial function lead 11 outcome terms across Butter's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
Interpretation changes in levels of circulating triglycerides, ldl cholesterol, endothelial function, changes in ambulatory blood pressure, total cholesterol and hs crp follow.
Show the evidence
evolution of metabolic parameters in postprandial state
1
evolution of inflammatory markers in postprandial state
1
pharmacokinetic of niacin and its metabolites
1
changes in levels of circulating triglycerides
1
ldl cholesterol
1
endothelial function
1
5 more recorded rows
changes in ambulatory blood pressure
1
total cholesterol
1
hs crp
1
faecal short chain fatty acid concentrations
1
gut microbiota composition
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
What will the one ongoing trial of Butter report, and when?
Interpretation Change in faecal short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) concentrations
Show the evidence
TrialNCT07550023
"Effects Of Dietary Fats on Gut Microbiota Composition and Metabolic Activity in Healthy Adults"; n 64; "Change in faecal short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) concentrations"; 2028-03-31
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which 7 trials of Butter posted no result?
Posted no result
7 of 7 completed trials
Registrations
NCT01006174, NCT02061267, NCT02836106, NCT03105947, NCT02922062 and NCT03438084, and 1 more
Completion dates
oldest 2010-05; newest 2021-09-30
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT01006174
2010-05
NCT02061267
2015-06-30
NCT02836106
2017-04
NCT03105947
2017-08-10
NCT02922062
2018-03
NCT03438084
2019-10-31
1 further recorded trialNCT05264233
2021-09-30
Q7
At the median, Butter's trials enrolled 40 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
40
Largest enrolment
94
Registered trials counted
13
Q8
Was Butter studied with fasting and exercise?
fasting and exercise are named in Butter's label sentences: "In this acute randomised crossover trial, 20 healthy adults (10 normal weight, 10 overweight/obese) consumed two slices of white (100 g, fibre 3.6 g) or wholemeal bread (88 g, fibre 5.6 g) alongside 150 ml of orange juice and 10 g butter on separate visits in random order after fasting for 8-12…" openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-08-13
2 recorded statements; fasting, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
In this acute randomised crossover trial, 20 healthy adults (10 normal weight, 10 overweight/obese) consumed two slices of white (100 g, fibre 3.6 g) or wholemeal bread (88 g, fibre 5.6 g) alongside 150 ml of orange juice and 10 g butter on separate visits in random order after fasting for 8-12 hours.
exercise
Participants were randomized to a fat (FFC; 20 g nut butter) or CHO supplement (CFC; 47 g CHO gel) for a feeding-challenge protocol (1 hr exercise with supplement for 7 days), followed by a gut-challenge retrial (T2).
recorded 2026-08-13 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 3 required field(s) not terminal: Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 7 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.