Edible Bird Nest Supplementation Enhances Male Reproductive Function: Current Insights and Future Horizons
Jaffar FHF., Azhar NA., Maluin SM., Osman K., Ibrahim SF.
Narrative Review, published in Foods (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Foods (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 41227729
- PMCID
- PMC12609096
- DOI
- 10.3390/foods14213759
Abstract (original English)
Edible bird nest (EBN) has a longstanding tradition in Chinese herbal medicine as a natural supplement for enhancing health and well-being. Current scientific research indicates that EBN possesses properties conducive to improving male reproductive function. These properties include promoting cell proliferation, containing essential reproductive hormones, and exhibiting antioxidant activity. Despite these promising characteristics, the potential of EBN's specific effects on male reproductive health, particularly in addressing infertility, remains sparsely discussed. Hereby, this review aims to present the available scientific evidence, discuss potential benefits, and underscore the importance of future research in advancing our understanding of EBN's role in male reproductive health. This work is imperative to expand our knowledge of the biological underpinnings of EBN so that it can be developed as a food supplement and alternative treatment for male infertility.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.