Among 30 people with atopic eczema who had never consumed royal jelly, 10 already had antibodies capable of recognizing it, and all three subjected to a skin test reacted. Published in 2020, this result summarizes the real safety issue: although well tolerated by the vast majority of adults in trials, royal jelly can trigger severe allergic reactions in certain people, sometimes from the first dose.
This guide classifies each risk, based on studies identified via PubMed, as established, rare, theoretical, or misconception, then provides practical rules and signs that require stopping or seeking medical advice.
What is established : in randomized trials, from 690 mg to 4.8 g per day (this high dose with enzyme-treated jelly), for 4 weeks to one year, produced no notable adverse effects compared to placebo, in adults most often non-allergic. The real risk is allergic: acute asthma, urticaria, anaphylaxis, with at least one documented death, especially in people with asthma or atopic conditions and those already allergic to a bee product, sometimes from the first dose; cross-reactions with bee venom and dust mites have been shown in laboratory studies.
What is rare or theoretical : a sharp increase in INR under warfarin (one case), hemorrhagic colitis (one case), contact eczemas. The estrogenic activity, weak in laboratory and rat models by injection, was not found in any tissue of a reporter mouse, and no human data links royal jelly to hormone-dependent cancers. Due to lack of studies, pregnancy, breastfeeding, and childhood require medical advice.
- Royal Jelly: What Are We Talking About?
- What the trials show: overall good tolerance
- Allergy, the established risk
- Asthma and atopic predisposition: who is most at risk?
- Cross-allergies: propolis, pollen, honey, venom, and dust mites
- Skin and digestive tract: contact eczemas and isolated cases
- Interactions: anticoagulants, diabetes, blood pressure
- Hormones and hormone-dependent cancers
- Pregnancy, breastfeeding, and children
- Freshness, storage, and contaminants
- The risk table: established, rare, theoretical, or misconception
- Using it properly: practical rules and warning signs
- Frequently Asked Questions
Royal jelly: what are we talking about?
Royal jelly is a creamy substance secreted by the hypopharyngeal and mandibular glands of worker bees. All larvae receive it during their first three days; only the future queen continues to be fed it throughout her life. Fresh, it contains 60 to 70% water and has an acidic pH of 3.6 to 4.2, according to a 2019 review.
The proteins represent approximately half of its dry matter, and more than 80% of them belong to a family of nine proteins, the MRJP (major royal jelly proteins). Yet it is these proteins, MRJP1, MRJP2 and MRJP3 foremost, that studies identify as its main allergens. Its lipids are dominated by short-chain fatty acids unique to it, including10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid (10-HDA), presented in our complete guide to royal jelly.
In trials pooled by a 2023 meta-analysis, doses range from 500 mg to 6 g per day, in various forms: freeze-dried powder, soft capsules, liquid; other trials use tablets of enzyme-treated royal jelly. These forms are not interchangeable. Our Organic Royal Jelly is fresh royal jelly, from organic farming, to be stored between 2 and 6 °C.
Established : found repeatedly, with a demonstrated mechanism or an effect measured against placebo. Rare : isolated clinical cases, with causality not always proven. Theoretical : deduced from laboratory or a weak average effect, without published cases in humans. Common misconception : contradicted by available data.
What the trials show: overall good tolerability
Randomized placebo-controlled trials are the best source for assessing tolerability; the longest double-blind trial in healthy adults lasted six months.
61 healthy volunteers aged 42 to 83 years took 3,000 mg of royal jelly daily in 100 mL of liquid, or placebo, for 6 months. Three participants in the royal jelly group and five in the placebo group stopped during the trial, due to a feeling of fullness, diarrhea or a taste they didn't like. These symptoms were mild, disappeared upon stopping, and their frequency did not differ between the two groups.
Morita H, Ikeda T, Kajita K, et al. Nutr J 2012;11:77. DOI: 10.1186/1475-2891-11-77
The finding is repeated in the other trials in the table, with no notable adverse effects or impairment of liver or kidney function. A meta-analysis of 10 trials found no significant effect on liver enzymes.
| Trial | Population, dose and duration | Reported tolerance |
|---|---|---|
| Morita, 2012 | 61 healthy adults, 3,000 mg per day, 6 months | 3 discontinuations versus 5 on placebo, mild digestive disorders |
| Meng, 2017 | 194 seniors, 1.2 g or 4.8 g per day of jelly treated with proteases, 1 year | No adverse effects related to treatment; allergic and asthmatic individuals excluded |
| Fujisue, 2022 | 100 healthy adults, 690 mg per day, 4 weeks | No serious adverse effects, no discontinuations |
| Chiu, 2017 | 40 adults with moderately elevated cholesterol, 3,150 mg per day, 3 months | No liver or kidney damage |
Limitation: these volunteers were selected. The one-year trial excluded people with allergic constitution and asthmatics, asthma and anaphylaxis being according to its authors the most common adverse effects of royal jelly; the 4-week trial excluded those allergic to honey. These trials provide information on tolerance in non-allergic adults, not on allergic risk.
Allergy, the established risk
Allergy is the only risk of royal jelly documented repeatedly, with a demonstrated mechanism. In an Australian series of seven people who had an asthma attack, sometimes with anaphylaxis, after ingesting royal jelly, tests found IgE antibodies directed against its proteins, including 18 components capable of binding to them: true immediate allergies, not intolerance.
Published anaphylaxis cases are similar. In Japan, a 33-year-old man presented with hives, respiratory distress with wheezing and loss of consciousness after royal jelly taken with other products, only the royal jelly test being positive; a 26-year-old woman, asthmatic and atopic, had anaphylaxis after a raw royal jelly and honey drink. In China, a 56-year-old woman experienced two anaphylaxis episodes in one month, less than an hour after ingestion, with laryngeal edema, drop in blood pressure and collapse.
In this 56-year-old patient, the responsible allergen was identified by mass spectrometry: a 62 kDa protein, MRJP3. The skin test and basophil activation test were positive for royal jelly and honeycomb, the skin test negative for honey, and her antibodies did not recognize any bee venom protein. She had no further reactions after eliminating royal jelly and other hive products.
Li JD, Cui L, Xu YY, Guan K. J Asthma Allergy 2021;14:1555-1557. DOI: 10.2147/JAA.S346045
A fatal outcome was also reported: a 2025 review on allergies to hive products cites the death of an 11-year-old atopic girl after taking royal jelly in the 1990s, the only documented child death according to its authors, and anaphylaxis occurring 15 minutes after ingestion in an atopic 15-year-old girl.
No study quantifies the frequency of these reactions in consumers: we only have clinical cases and sensitization rates. The 2025 review considers them relatively rare but potentially fatal.
Asthma and atopic predisposition: who is most at risk?
Allergic predisposition frequently appears in published cases: asthma, atopic eczema, allergic rhinitis, food allergies. According to the 2025 review, these are the people most exposed to anaphylaxis after a hive product, even if severe reactions have also been described without known predisposition. Its authors even recommend that people with atopic eczema, asthma or allergic rhinitis avoid royal jelly-based products, due to the risk of severe cross-reactions; the 2020 Japanese team also concludes that they must be warned. In Australia, 52% of 75 people allergic to respiratory or food allergens had IgE antibodies reacting with royal jelly proteins; in Hong Kong, 16.8% of sera from 666 asthmatic adults contained them, according to a study cited by a Japanese team in 2020.
In 30 patients with atopic eczema who had never consumed royal jelly, 10 had IgE antibodies capable of recognizing it, at highly variable levels. All three patients subjected to a skin test reacted. The more extensive and severe the eczema and the higher the total IgE level, the more abundant these antibodies were.
Hata T, Furusawa-Horie T, Arai Y, et al. PLoS One 2020;15(6):e0233707. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233707
Being sensitized does not mean being allergic: the clinical significance of these antibodies remains unknown in most tested individuals, emphasized the Australian researchers. These figures can nevertheless explain reactions upon first ingestion, due to sensitization to similar allergens.
Inhalation also matters: in China, an executive at a royal jelly packaging factory, allergic to bee venom, had an asthma attack each time she entered the workshop, with a 44% drop in her forced expiratory volume in one second during an on-site test. This is massive occupational exposure, unrelated to taking a supplement.
Along with anaphylaxis, acute asthma attack is among the most commonly reported reactions, and it can be severe. Asthma, especially poorly controlled, or history of severe food reaction: no royal jelly without your doctor's or allergist's approval, who can propose a skin test.
Cross-allergies: propolis, pollen, honey, venom and dust mites
The best-established case is that of bee venom : it contains two proteins from the same family, MRJP8 and MRJP9, listed in the international allergen nomenclature under the name Api m 11. In a Chinese executive allergic to both, royal jelly extract blocked 82% of the binding of her antibodies to venom. The link is not systematic: in the Australian series, 38% of sera from 63 people allergic to venom reacted to royal jelly, with no direct relationship between the two reactivities.
The 2020 Japanese study broadened the picture: the antibody reaction to royal jelly was blocked by extracts ofdust mites dust, crabs, cockroach and bee venom, but not by grass pollen, cedar or wormwood pollen tested, nor by shrimp, peanut or buckwheat. Reactions linked to pollen have nevertheless been described, as royal jelly may contain trace amounts: the 2025 review reports a severe reaction in an 11-year-old girl linked to grass and plantain pollens, and oral syndrome in a 7-year-old girl probably linked to almond tree pollen. Honey also contains MRJP1, the main protein in royal jelly.
<<<12>>> Propolis propolis is especially known for contact allergies: among 4,947 patients tested for contact eczema in North America in 2017 and 2018, 3.4% reacted to propolis, the only allergen among the twenty most common ones showing an increase. As early as 1983, among ten controls tested with royal jelly, two reacted, including one sensitive to propolis.
The allergic risk is therefore common to royal jelly and propolis: our Organic Propolis, like our Organic Royal Jelly, is not recommended in case of allergy to hive products. It is reserved for adults and children over 3 years of age, with medical advice if undergoing treatment, during pregnancy or breastfeeding. Our articles on propolis side effects and on how to take propolis detail its precautions.
After a reaction to royal jelly, the authors of the Chinese case recommend eliminating other hive products as well. An allergy to venom or dust mites does not automatically rule out royal jelly, but justifies consulting an allergist before trying it.
Skin and digestive tract: contact eczemas and isolated cases
When applied to the skin, royal jelly can also cause eczema: in 1983, a woman saw her dermatitis worsen after applying it to her feet, with a positive patch test, and the 2025 review cites a 30-year-old woman who was applying it to facial dermatitis. These cases remain isolated.
On the digestive side, the disorders described in trials are mild: sensation of fullness and diarrhea in the six-month trial, with no difference from placebo. A more serious case was published in 1997 in Japan: a 53-year-old woman developed hemorrhagic colitis, with abdominal pain and bloody diarrhea, after 25 days of royal jelly. The lymphocyte stimulation test was only slightly positive (index of 147%), symptoms resolved within days, and colon lesions disappeared within two weeks. It was the first case described; the authors speak of an association, without demonstrating a causal link.
Interactions: anticoagulants, diabetes, blood pressure
The only drug interaction published that we identified in humans concerns warfarin, an anticoagulant, and is based on one specific case.
An 87-year-old man on warfarin, whose INR, the blood coagulation indicator, was stable between 1.9 and 2.4, arrived at the emergency room with blood in his urine and an INR of 6.88, rising to 7.29 during his hospitalization. He had started royal jelly a week earlier, with no other change in treatment or diet. The authors see this as the most probable explanation for a possible interaction, without being able to prove it.
Lee NJ, Fermo JD. Pharmacotherapy 2006;26(4):583-586. DOI : 10.1592/phco.26.4.583
This unique case, of unknown mechanism, falls under rare risk, but bleeding can be serious: if taking anticoagulants, discuss this with your doctor before starting and have your INR monitored. The same caution applies to other supplements, as our article on ginkgo side effects.
reminds us. For diabetes, the effect is weak. A meta-analysis of 5 trials found no significant reduction in fasting blood glucose (−0.95 mg/dL) or HbA1c; another, of 10 trials, found an effect only after 8 weeks and in people with the disease (−4.28 mg/dL). In a pilot trial in 50 women with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c in the royal jelly group (1,000 mg per day) decreased from 8.67% to 7.05% in 8 weeks. Adding this effect to a treatment remains theoretical, with no published cases of hypoglycemia identified, but justifies monitoring blood glucose. Our file on high blood sugar reviews other studied options.
The same logic applies to blood pressure : according to a 2025 review covering 13 royal jelly trials (150 to 1,500 mg per day), it lowers diastolic pressure by an average of 2.48 mmHg, a modest effect. Combined with antihypertensives, adding these effects remains theoretical and without published cases; unusual dizziness justifies a check-up. Our guide on herbs for blood pressure details other options.
| Medication | What is published | Level |
|---|---|---|
| Warfarin and anticoagulants | One case: INR of 6.88 then 7.29 and urinary bleeding, one week after starting | Rare, possible interaction according to authors |
| Antidiabetics | No or weak effect on fasting blood glucose in two meta-analyses | Theoretical |
| Antihypertensives | −2.48 mmHg diastolic pressure on average, according to a review of 13 trials | Theoretical |
| Other treatments | No identified published interactions | Not documented |
Hormones and hormone-dependent cancers
Estrogenic activity of royal jelly has been described in the laboratory. It binds to estrogen receptors α and β, much more weakly than phytoestrogens, and at 0.5 to 1 mg/mL, it stimulated the proliferation of breast cancer cells in culture, an effect blocked by tamoxifen. Four of its compounds, including 10-HDA, contribute to this: injected under the skin of young female rats, they slightly thickened the uterine lining, without increasing its weight. In ovariectomized female rats, royal jelly injected under the skin (1 g/kg) restored expression of an estrogen-sensitive gene in the uterus, but not in the brain. These two studies, like the 2020 Japanese study on eczema, involve researchers from a bee product manufacturer.
What this does not mean: another team did not find binding of its fatty acids to the estrogen binding site and, in the presence of estradiol, these fatty acids even inhibited receptor activity in two cellular models. The most direct experiment points in the same direction.
In a very sensitive cellular test, royal jelly showed no agonist activity on estrogen receptors α or β. In a mouse whose marker gene activates in organs where these receptors are activated, estradiol activated 17 tissue types, including the uterus and mammary gland; royal jelly, none. According to the authors, its estrogenic-type effects probably do not work through activation of these receptors, unlike endocrine disruptors.
Ishida K, Matsumaru D, Shimizu S, et al. Biol Pharm Bull 2022;45(10):1510-1517. DOI : 10.1248/bpb.b22-00383
In humans, measured hormonal effects are modest: in the six-month trial, testosterone slightly increased, with no change in estradiol, and in the 3-month trial, DHEA-S, an adrenal hormone, increased from 1,788 to 1,992 ng/mL.
For hormone-dependent cancers (breast, endometrium, ovary, prostate), we identified no studies in humans on PubMed: neither a risk signal nor proof of safety. The risk remains theoretical; in cases of current or past hormone-dependent cancer, or hormone therapy, the decision rests with the oncologist. For menopause, our guide menopause: symptoms and solutions presents the best-studied options.
Pregnancy, breastfeeding, and children
We identified no trials or follow-up studies on PubMed in pregnant or breastfeeding women, and the 4-week Japanese trial explicitly excluded pregnant women. The 2025 review reports that it has been suggested to avoid royal jelly during pregnancy, due to its potential hormonal activity or lack of data, especially at high doses. The risk is neither demonstrated nor excluded: pregnancy and breastfeeding require the advice of a healthcare professional, as specified in the fact sheet for our organic Royal Jelly.
In children, safety data is also lacking, and pediatric publications are mostly allergy cases (a small open study in 20 children with lupus is insufficient to establish its safety): the death of an 11-year-old atopic girl, anaphylaxis in a 15-year-old adolescent, a severe reaction in another 11-year-old girl, oral syndrome in a 7-year-old girl. The 2025 review notes that the effect of its hormonally active compounds on children is not established and advises caution, or even abstention in young children outside medical supervision. No royal jelly without pediatrician approval.
The one-year trial in 194 nursing home residents without allergies or asthma (jelly treated with enzymes) found no adverse effects related to treatment. In elderly people, vigilance focuses mainly on medications, with anticoagulants at the forefront.
Freshness, storage, and contaminants
Royal jelly is a fresh and fragile product, but its signature molecule is stable: 7 days at 40 °C did not change its 10-HDA content, whereas a 57 kDa protein was already degrading, proportional to temperature and duration: 10-HDA therefore does not tell the whole story about freshness.
Proteins are the first affected. At 40 °C, MRJP1 had lost 37.3% in 7 days and 73.1% in 49 days; a test based on this protein is moreover proposed to verify the freshness and authenticity of a jelly. A proteomic analysis counted 85 protein spots in fresh jelly, versus 81 after one year at −20 °C, 73 at 4 °C, and 70 at room temperature, where MRJP5 and glucose oxidase had disappeared.
Aging markers follow the same trend: in 10 months, furosine rose from 72.0 to 500.8 mg per 100 g of protein at room temperature, versus 100.5 mg at 4 °C, and hydroxymethylfurfural, undetectable at 4 °C and −18 °C for 9 months, increases exponentially at 25 °C. None of these studies measured the effect of storage on allergic risk, which depends on the proteins themselves. Our Organic Royal Jelly, fresh, is stored between 2 and 6 °C.
As for contaminants, the data is rather reassuring, but limited. A 2023 review coupled with a food risk assessment concludes that pesticide residues present in bee bread, propolis, and wax do not appear to pass into royal jelly, likely thanks to filtering by nurse bees. Another review notes exceptions: thiamethoxam at trace levels (0.15 to 0.25 µg/kg) in 3 of 11 jellies purchased online, and up to 1,520 µg/kg of paradichlorobenzene, an insecticide used against wax moth, in jelly from hive frames, or according to the authors approximately 0.014% of the acceptable daily intake for a 70 kg adult consuming less than 0.5 g per day. The same review reports coumaphos, an acaricide, between 10 and 92 µg/kg in jelly from hives treated by aerosol; its authors judge the consumer risk as low, but data is limited.
The risk table: established, rare, theoretical, or misconception
| Risk | Level | What the data says |
|---|---|---|
| Immediate allergic reaction : urticaria, acute asthma, anaphylaxis | Established, rare but serious | Cases on multiple continents, IgE mechanism demonstrated, at least one death |
| Sensitization of atopic individuals | Established | 10 eczematous out of 30 never exposed; 16.8% of asthmatic sera |
| Cross-allergy : venom, dust mites, crabs, hive | Established | Demonstrated in laboratory, variable clinical relevance |
| Occupational asthma from inhalation | Rare | Factory employees exposed, not consumers |
| Contact dermatitis | Rare | Isolated cases after skin application |
| Mild digestive troubles | Infrequent, benign | No more frequent than placebo in the 6-month trial |
| Hemorrhagic colitis | Rare, causality not established | One case published in 1997, resolved in two weeks |
| Interaction with warfarin | Rare | One case: INR of 6.88 with bleeding |
| Drop in blood sugar or blood pressure during treatment | Theoretical | Weak average effects, no published cases identified |
| Hormone-dependent cancers | Theoretical | Cell culture only, no human data |
| Pregnancy, breastfeeding, young children | Not evaluated | No trials identified, medical advice necessary |
| "It damages the liver" | Misconception | No effect on liver enzymes (10 trials) |
| "It causes weight gain" | Misconception | No significant effect on weight (10 trials, 512 participants) |
| "It acts like hormone therapy" | Misconception | Weak activity in vitro and in rats by injection; no receptor activation in reporter mice; estradiol unchanged over 6 months in humans |
| "Natural, therefore risk-free" | Misconception | Allergy can be serious and occur from the first dose |
Using it properly: practical rules and warning signs
These rules fall under practical guidance: no trial has tested a reduced first dose, which the 2025 review recommends with a skin test in at-risk individuals. They apply to adults without allergy to bee products, excluding pregnancy and breastfeeding.
Breathing difficulty, wheezing, sudden cough, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, extensive hives, discomfort or dizziness within minutes or hours after taking it: stop and call emergency services. If you have been prescribed an epinephrine auto-injector, use it: according to a 2025 review, epinephrine is the only first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. Also seek medical attention promptly if you experience unusual bleeding while on anticoagulants, bloody diarrhea, or eczema after application to the skin.
For general immunity, our article immunity: what really works reviews the evidence.
Fresh royal jelly from organic farming, certified GRF (French Royal Jelly), to be dissolved under the tongue in the morning on an empty stomach using its measuring spoon, or mixed with fruit juice, and stored between 2 and 6 °C. It is not recommended for people allergic to hive products; during pregnancy or breastfeeding, ask a healthcare professional.See Organic royal jelly
Ourcomplete guide to royal jelly details its composition, 10-HDA, its studied effects and the GRF label. Frequently asked questions
Is royal jelly dangerous?
For most adults, no: in trials, doses from 690 mg to 4.8 g per day (this high dose with enzyme-treated jelly) for 4 weeks to one year did not show any notable adverse effects compared to placebo. Its established risk is allergic, rare but sometimes serious, with at least one documented death, especially in people with asthma or atopic conditions.
What are the side effects of royal jelly?
The most common are digestive and mild (bloating, diarrhea), no more frequent than with placebo in a six-month trial. Serious effects are allergic: asthma attack, hives, facial swelling, anaphylaxis. Contact dermatitis and colitis have also been reported.
What are the contraindications for royal jelly?
An allergy to hive products or a previous reaction to royal jelly. Asthma, atopic eczema, allergic rhinitis, bee venom allergy or dust mite allergy, anticoagulant treatment, pregnancy, breastfeeding, hormone-dependent cancer and childhood require medical advice before taking it.
Can you take royal jelly if you have asthma?
Not without your doctor's approval, and a 2025 review even recommends that people with asthma avoid royal jelly-based products. Acute asthma attack is among the most frequently described reactions, and 16.8% of sera from 666 asthmatic adults contained antibodies against royal jelly in a study conducted in Hong Kong. An allergist can offer a skin test.
Pas sans l'accord de son médecin, et une revue de 2025 recommande même aux personnes asthmatiques d'éviter les produits à base de gelée royale. La crise d'asthme aiguë fait partie des réactions les plus souvent décrites, et 16,8 % des sérums de 666 adultes asthmatiques contenaient des anticorps contre la gelée royale dans une étude menée à Hong Kong. Un allergologue peut proposer un test cutané.
What royal jelly allergy symptoms should raise concern?
Itching, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, cough, wheezing, respiratory discomfort, malaise or dizziness within minutes or hours following intake. Stop immediately and call 15 or 112: anaphylaxis is a medical emergency.
Can royal jelly be taken if you are allergic to pollen, honey, or propolis?
An allergy to honey, propolis, or another hive product requires abstaining: honey contains MRJP1, the main protein in royal jelly, and after a reaction to a hive product, caution applies to all others. In case of pollen allergy, reactions linked to pollen traces have been reported: first seek advice from an allergist.
Is royal jelly compatible with anticoagulants?
One case has been published: in an 87-year-old man on warfarin, INR rose to 6.88 one week after starting royal jelly, with blood in the urine. This single case warrants consultation with your doctor and INR monitoring.
Is royal jelly discouraged for diabetics?
Not formally, but its effect on blood sugar—weak and inconsistent according to two meta-analyses—could theoretically add to that of a treatment. No published case of hypoglycemia has been attributed to it: monitor your blood sugar and discuss with your doctor.
Does royal jelly increase the risk of breast cancer?
No human study demonstrates this. Its estrogen-like activity is weak in laboratory settings and in rats by injection, and it did not activate estrogen receptors in any tissue, including mammary gland, in a reporter mouse. In case of hormone-dependent cancer, the decision rests with the oncologist.
Can royal jelly be taken during pregnancy or while breastfeeding?
No study has evaluated its safety during pregnancy or breastfeeding: the risk is neither demonstrated nor excluded, and some authors advise avoiding it due to its potential hormonal activity. Consult your doctor or midwife.
Is royal jelly suitable for children?
Safety data in children is lacking, and pediatric publications are mainly cases of allergy, including the death of an 11-year-old atopic girl. No royal jelly without pediatric advice, especially in asthmatic or eczema-prone children.
How should royal jelly be stored?
In the refrigerator, between 2 and 6 degrees, tightly sealed. Heat degrades its proteins: at 40 degrees, MRJP1 loses 37.3% in 7 days.
Sources
The studies cited below were identified via PubMed.
- Hata T, Furusawa-Horie T, Arai Y, et al. Studies of royal jelly and associated cross-reactive allergens in patients with atopic dermatitis. PLoS One, 2020;15(6):e0233707. DOI
- Kunugi H, Mohammed Ali A. Royal jelly and its components promote healthy aging and longevity: from animal models to humans. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2019;20(19):4662. DOI
- Vajdi M, Musazadeh V, Khajeh M, et al. Effects of royal jelly supplementation on anthropometric indices: a systematic review evaluated by GRADE and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Frontiers in Nutrition, 2023;10:1196258. DOI
- Morita H, Ikeda T, Kajita K, et al. Effect of six months of royal jelly consumption in healthy volunteers. Nutrition Journal, 2012;11:77. DOI
- Meng G, Wang H, Pei Y, et al. Effects of protease-treated royal jelly on muscle strength in nursing home residents: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-response study. Scientific Reports, 2017;7(1):11416. DOI
- Fujisue K, Yamamoto E, Sueta D, et al. A randomized double-blind comparative study of royal jelly on vascular endothelial function in healthy volunteers. Journal of Atherosclerosis and Thrombosis, 2022;29(9):1285-1294. DOI
- Chiu HF, Chen BK, Lu YY, et al. Hypocholesterolemic efficacy of royal jelly in healthy adults with mild hypercholesterolemia. Pharmaceutical Biology, 2017;55(1):497-502. DOI
- Bahari H, Taheri S, Rashidmayvan M, et al. Effect of royal jelly on liver enzymes and glycemic indices: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 2023;77:102974. DOI
- Thien FC, Leung R, Baldo BA, et al. Asthma and anaphylaxis induced by royal jelly. Clinical and Experimental Allergy, 1996;26(2):216-222. DOI
- Takahama H, Shimazu T. Food anaphylaxis provoked by ingestion of royal jelly. The Journal of Dermatology, 2006;33(6):424-426. DOI
- Katayama M, Aoki M, Kawana S. A case of anaphylaxis provoked by ingestion of royal jelly. The Journal of Dermatology, 2008;35(4):222-224. DOI
- Li JD, Cui L, Xu YY, Guan K. A case of anaphylaxis provoked by royal jelly major protein 3 and its cross-reactivity with honeycomb. Journal of Asthma and Allergy, 2021;14:1555-1557. DOI
- Matuszewska-Mach E, Borysewicz P, Králak J, et al. Ensuring safe use of hive products: review of allergic risks and their management. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2025;26(24):12074. DOI
- Li LS, Guan K. Occupational asthma provoked by inhalation of royal jelly and its cross-reactivity with bee venom. Chinese Medical Journal, 2016;129(23):2888-2889. DOI
- DeKoven JG, Silverberg JI, Warshaw EM, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2017-2018. Dermatitis, 2021;32(2):111-123. DOI
- Takahashi M, Matsuo I, Ohkido M. Contact dermatitis due to royal jelly. Contact Dermatitis, 1983;9(6):452-455. DOI
- Yonei Y, Shibagaki K, Tsukada N, et al. Clinical case: hemorrhagic colitis associated with royal jelly intake. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 1997;12(7):495-499. DOI
- Lee NJ, Fermo JD. Interaction between warfarin and royal jelly. Pharmacotherapy, 2006;26(4):583-586. DOI
- Mahboobi S, Jafarnejad S, Eftekhari MH. Royal jelly does not improve blood glucose markers: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 2019;44:235-241. DOI
- Pourmoradian S, Mahdavi R, Mobasseri M, et al. Effects of royal jelly supplementation on glycemic control and oxidative stress in women with type 2 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, 2014;20(5):347-352. DOI
- Norouzzadeh M, Barazandeh S, Hasan Rashedi M, et al. Exploring doses of honey and its derivatives on cardiometabolic parameters: synthesis of systematic reviews and updated meta-analysis assessed by GRADE. Nutrition & Diabetes, 2025;15(1):48. DOI
- Mishima S, Suzuki KM, Isohama Y, et al. Royal jelly has estrogenic effects in vitro and in vivo. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 2005;101(1-3):215-220. DOI
- Suzuki KM, Isohama Y, Maruyama H, et al. Estrogenic activities of fatty acids and a sterol isolated from royal jelly. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2008;5(3):295-302. DOI
- Moutsatsou P, Papoutsi Z, Kassi E, et al. Fatty acids from royal jelly modulate estrogen receptor functions. PLoS One, 2010;5(12):e15594. DOI
- Ishida K, Matsumaru D, Shimizu S, et al. Evaluation of the estrogenic potential of royal jelly via genomic signaling pathway in vitro and in vivo. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 2022;45(10):1510-1517. DOI
- Zahran AM, Elsayh KI, Saad K, et al. Effects of royal jelly supplementation on regulatory T lymphocytes in children with systemic lupus erythematosus. Food & Nutrition Research, 2016;60:32963. DOI
- Kamakura M, Fukuda T, Fukushima M, Yonekura M. Degradation of the 57 kDa protein of royal jelly during storage: a possible freshness marker. Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry, 2001;65(2):277-284. DOI
- Shen LR, Wang YR, Zhai L, et al. Determination of royal jelly freshness by ELISA with an antibody highly specific to apalbumin 1, the major royal jelly protein 1. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B, 2015;16(2):155-166. DOI
- Li JK, Feng M, Zhang L, et al. Proteomic analysis of modifications to major royal jelly proteins according to storage conditions. Journal of Proteome Research, 2008;7(8):3339-3353. DOI
- Marconi E, Caboni MF, Messia MC, Panfili G. Furosine, a suitable marker for evaluating royal jelly freshness. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2002;50(10):2825-2829. DOI
- Ciulu M, Floris I, Nurchi VM, et al. A possible freshness marker of royal jelly: 5-hydroxymethyl-2-furaldehyde formation according to temperature and storage duration. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2015;63(16):4190-4195. DOI
- Végh R, Csóka M, Mednyánszky Z, Sipos L. Pesticide residues in bee bread, propolis, beeswax and royal jelly: literature review and food risk assessment. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2023;176:113806. DOI
- Fuente-Ballesteros A, Brugnerotto P, Nguyen VD, et al. Royal jelly contamination by pesticides and sample preparation methods for their determination: a critical evaluation. Foods, 2023;12(19):3612. DOI
