Are there published clinical trials evaluating products named Gelatide or similar supplements in humans?

1. The narrow answer: Gelatide as a branded product has no published human trials

The company website for Gelatide explicitly flags the absence of published clinical trials validating the complete ingredient combination and sublingual delivery claims, noting undisclosed component dosages and a lack of peer‑reviewed human studies to substantiate synergistic effects ^[1]. That statement in a manufacturer’s channel is the clearest direct evidence available in the provided reporting that Gelatide itself has not been the subject of a published clinical trial in humans ^[1].

2. The broader reality: “Gelatin” and gelatin‑based systems have been studied in humans, but usually in different contexts

Separately, gelatin as a biomaterial has been the subject of clinical evaluation in drug‑delivery contexts: reviews of gelatin‑based drug delivery systems report that clinical trials have been performed using gelatin microspheres (both empty and drug‑loaded), and that clinical evaluation remains at an early stage despite promising in vitro and in vivo work ^[2]. Reviews and mini‑reviews also document clinical use of gelatin carriers for aerosol delivery and other formulations, indicating real clinical experience with gelatin as a carrier rather than with consumer metabolic supplements claiming thermogenic effects ^[3].

3. Concrete clinical evidence for gelatin combinations: xyloglucan–gelatin trials in gastroenteritis

Clinical trials exist for specific gelatin‑containing combinations: xyloglucan–gelatin products have been tested in randomized clinical trials for acute gastroenteritis in adults and children, with trial publications cited in systematic articles and indexed repositories ^{[4] [5]}. Those studies demonstrate that gelatin can be used in clinically tested medical formulations, but they are therapeutic gastroenterology trials and not evaluations of metabolic enhancement or sublingual thermogenic supplements like Gelatide ^{[4] [5]}.

4. Why positive gelatin trials don’t validate a branded supplement’s claims

The scientific principle here is simple: clinical evidence for a material or carrier (gelatin microspheres in drug delivery, xyloglucan–gelatin for enteritis) does not constitute clinical evidence for an independently formulated nutraceutical that combines gelatin with botanical extracts and delivers them sublingually; the Gelatide site itself notes the absence of dose disclosure and trial data for the combination, which prevents extrapolation from carrier‑level studies to the product’s safety or efficacy claims ^{[1] [2]}.

5. Trial registries and the limits of available entries

Public clinical registries and trial indexes (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov) host thousands of records and are useful for checking whether a product has been registered in a clinical study, but the reporting provided here includes registry links without evidence tying Gelatide to any completed, peer‑reviewed human trial record in those databases ^{[6] [7]}. Therefore, absence of a published trial in the literature plus no identified registered, completed human study in the supplied snippets supports the conclusion that Gelatide has not been clinically evaluated in humans in the peer‑reviewed record accessible through the supplied sources ^{[1] [6]}.

6. Alternative interpretations and hidden agendas to consider

Manufacturers sometimes conflate compositional or carrier‑level science with product‑level proof; Gelatide’s marketing references gelatin and botanicals that individually have pharmacological literature (e.g., catechins such as EGCG) while acknowledging a lack of combination trials, which can mislead consumers into assuming clinical validation where none exists ^{[1] [3]}. Independent reviewers and regulatory reviewers would treat carrier or ingredient trials as distinct from randomized controlled trials of the marketed formulation, and the company’s own admission of “no published clinical trials” suggests transparency on that point even as marketing highlights mechanistic rationales ^{[1] [2]}.

Conclusion

The evidence assembled in the provided reporting leads to a twofold conclusion: there are published clinical trials involving gelatin as a carrier or in specific gelatin combinations (e.g., xyloglucan–gelatin for gastroenteritis) and early clinical work on gelatin‑based drug delivery exists ^{[2] [3] [4] [5]}, but there are no published, peer‑reviewed human clinical trials evaluating the branded supplement Gelatide or its undisclosed full ingredient combination, a point the manufacturer itself concedes ^[1].