Skip to content
RNAWiki

Flax

  • Plant preparation
  • Varies by country
  • Identity checked
  • Sources last checked 2026-09-04

This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.

What Flax does in the body

RNAWiki has not recorded what this substance changes in the body.

What happened in people

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

A fixed RNAWiki sentence

Where this came from

Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.

No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.

No source is stored against this line.

The limit that matters most

Not recorded.

Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
Not usually supervised: sold as a supplement or food ingredient where recorded. That is a legal category, not a safety judgement.

What the registries record it as

  • The organism is Linum usitatissimum, a species. It is also called flax.

    NCBI Taxonomy · 4006 · read 2026-08-29

  • The supplement label database classes it as botanical, under the name Flaxseed.

    NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · 67 · read 2026-08-29

Where each sentence above came from

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.

Biomarker

A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.

Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.

What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.

A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.

Placebo

A placebo is a dummy treatment given so the real one can be compared with it.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A placebo is like a blank control in an experiment.

Where that stops being true. A blank does nothing. People given a placebo often do get better.

What people get wrong. A placebo effect is read as imaginary. The improvement is measured and real.

An inactive intervention matched in appearance to the test intervention, used to control for non-specific effects.

Comparator

A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

It is like the other runner in a race.

Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.

What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.

The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.

What happened in peopleRead 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.

Exclusive breastfeeding on the day preceding the interview.

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT02975063
How many people
15169
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

ASF frequency of consumption

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT05858151
How many people
5216
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

Grams of Vegetables Consumed

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT06602752
How many people
4616
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

Grams of Vegetables Consumed

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT05992376
How many people
4213
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

Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (EoT) in Mean Number of Incontinence Episodes Per 24 Hours

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT01972841
How many people
3527
Study design
Phase 3
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

Minimum dietary diversity

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT04835662
How many people
2168
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 is missing or unclearRead 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 takeRead 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 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 (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
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 takeRead 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 botanical or organism preparation; no 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

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

No register entry is recorded.

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 takeNothing 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 unclearRead 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

  • 2003 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as botanical with nutrients, fat/fatty acid, other combinations and botanical.

    NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · 17280 · read 2026-08-29

  • 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.

    NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · 17280 · read 2026-08-29

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 takeRead 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.

  1. Pick one goal. One goal only. Two at once cannot be told apart afterwards.

  2. Pick one thing to watch. No registered study lists a measure RNAWiki could read for this.

  3. Measure before you start. Take the same measurement several times first. One reading is not a starting point.

  4. Know the swing. Write down how much it moves on its own across a normal week.

  5. Change one thing. Change nothing else at the same time, including training and sleep.

  6. Give it the study length. No finished study window is recorded, so no length is suggested here.

  7. Track whether you took it. Missed days are the most common reason a home test shows nothing.

  8. 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 unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What nobody knows yet

Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.

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 peopleNothing 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 botanical or organism preparation; no register records an approval.

  • Passed

    Canonical metadata present

    slug and display name present

What is missing or unclearRead 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

10 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.

  • What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • How close this is to real life — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Felt, measured, or meaningful — 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 (3)

Which 2 trials of Flax posted no result?

Posted no result
2 of 2 completed trials
Registrations
NCT02621307 and NCT02014181
Completion dates
oldest 2011-07; newest 2013-01
Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT02621307
    2011-07
  • NCT02014181
    2013-01

At the median, Flax's trials enrolled 12 people — anything larger?

Median enrolment
12
Largest enrolment
15
Registered trials counted
3

Who carried Flax to phase 1, and who else?

St. Boniface Hospital, 1 study: the lead sponsor the registry names most often for Flax; 3 lead sponsors in all; highest registry phase 1, 2 of 3 studies at it. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

3 matched studies in all; not recorded here: a human dose and a stop reason ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

Show the evidence
  • St. Boniface Hospital NCT06491095
    1 study; other
  • Unity Health Toronto NCT02621307
    1 study; other
  • University of Pennsylvania NCT02014181
    1 study; other
  • phase1
    2
  • na
    1

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Where it is registered
Identifiers, relations and other names
Sources (2)

Sources

ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work

How these records are assembled · Which registers were checked

Index-quality checks
  • identity passed: no open identity hold
  • 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: 2 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.