Grow Defended Flawed Collagen Meta-Analysis with Proven Science

The Gelatin Research Optimization Working group (GROW), representing global gelatin and collagen interests, responds to Myung et al. (2025) meta-analysis questioning collagen supplements' skin benefits. While welcoming scientific scrutiny, GROW identifies serious methodological flaws that misrepresent established evidence and risk confusing consumers.

Critical Study Limitations Exposed

Contradictory Findings: The abstract confirms collagen significantly improves skin hydration, elasticity, and wrinkles across all trials. Yet conclusions claim "no clinical evidence," creating misleading inconsistency.

Opaque Quality Ratings: Subgroup analyses dismissing "industry-funded" or "low-quality" studies use undisclosed criteria without validated tools like CONSORT or GRADE, undermining credibility.

Funding Bias Fallacy: Rejecting rigorous, peer-reviewed trials solely for industry support ignores double-blind, placebo-controlled standards followed by leading research institutions worldwide.

Methodological Gaps:

• Mislabels commercially-affiliated studies as "independent"
• Fails to differentiate pure collagen peptides from multi-ingredient blends
• Includes heterogeneous trials (varying doses 3.1g/day average, mostly Asian, short durations)
• Draws broad conclusions from small, unbalanced subgroups

Robust Contrasting Evidence

• GROW cites comprehensive meta-analyses confirming collagen's efficacy:
• De Miranda et al. (2021): 19 RCTs show significant skin hydration, elasticity, and wrinkle improvements at 2.5-10g daily doses
• Pu et al. (2023): Nutrients journal validates anti-aging effects
• Dewi et al. (2023): Cureus confirms skin rejuvenation benefits

Global Regulatory Validation

Health authorities worldwide recognize collagen's skin benefits:

• Food Standards Australia (approved claims)
• Korea MFDS (hydration, UV protection)
• Health Canada, Japan Consumer Affairs, Brazil ANVISA

GROW urges balanced interpretation of collagen's extensive safety record across thousands of peer-reviewed studies. Consumers deserve evidence-based information about proven skin health solutions, not selective analyses that distort scientific consensus.