Collagen: a billion-pound promise

Collagen has become one of the most prominent ingredients in the beauty and wellness industries. It is sold in powders, capsules, drinks and gummies, with promises ranging from smoother, firmer skin to healthier joints and improved mobility.

The marketing is compelling. Collagen is an essential structural protein in our bodies, and its production changes as we age. It seems logical, therefore, that consuming more collagen might replenish what we lose.

But there is a difference between understanding the biological role of a substance and demonstrating that taking it as a supplement produces meaningful health benefits.

That distinction is at the heart of the collagen debate.

How strong is the evidence? Are the benefits as impressive as the advertising suggests? And why does the source of funding matter when we evaluate the research?

At Ermana, we believe consumers deserve answers based on evidence rather than persuasive marketing.

First, what is collagen?

Collagen is a structural protein found throughout the body, including the skin, bones, tendons, ligaments and cartilage.

It helps provide strength and structure to connective tissues. Our bodies produce collagen naturally using amino acids obtained from dietary protein, alongside other nutrients required for normal collagen formation.

As we age, collagen production and the organisation of collagen within our tissues change. Sun exposure can also accelerate the breakdown of collagen in the skin.

These are well-established biological processes.

The question is whether consuming collagen in the form of a supplement can meaningfully influence those processes.

Most oral collagen supplements contain hydrolysed collagen, also called collagen peptides. This means the collagen has been broken down into smaller peptides to make it suitable for consumption.

When we swallow it, it is digested and absorbed as a mixture of amino acids and smaller peptides. It does not simply travel to our face to fill wrinkles or directly rebuild the cartilage in our knees.

The body regulates how these components are used. Whether supplementation produces a meaningful benefit for a particular outcome must be established through properly designed clinical trials.

And this is where the evidence becomes less straightforward.

Does collagen work for skin? What the research actually says

In 2025, researchers published a systematic review and meta-analysis in The American Journal of Medicine examining the effects of collagen supplements on skin ageing.

The researchers analysed 23 randomised controlled trials involving 1,474 participants.

When all the trials were combined, the analysis suggested improvements in skin hydration, elasticity and wrinkles.

That sounds promising. But the researchers went further.

They examined the results according to the quality of the studies and their funding sources.

Their findings were striking.

Studies receiving pharmaceutical-company funding reported significant benefits, while studies without that funding did not demonstrate significant improvements in hydration, elasticity or wrinkles.

Similarly, when the researchers examined higher-quality studies, they found no significant benefits across the outcomes assessed.

Their conclusion was that the available clinical evidence did not support using collagen supplements to prevent or treat skin ageing.

You can read the full study here:

Effects of Collagen Supplements on Skin Aging — The American Journal of Medicine, 2025.

This is an important finding because it challenges the assumption that the positive results frequently quoted in collagen marketing necessarily reflect the most reliable evidence.

It does not prove that every collagen supplement is ineffective, nor does it mean that future research cannot identify benefits. But it does mean that claims about reversing skin ageing deserve much greater caution.

Why does research funding matter?

This is one of the most important questions in the collagen debate.

Many supplement manufacturers have a financial interest in demonstrating that their products work. They may fund clinical trials, provide the products being tested or support researchers investigating particular ingredients.

Industry funding does not automatically invalidate research. Commercially funded studies can be well designed, carefully conducted and scientifically valuable.

However, financial interests can influence the research process in several ways, sometimes without any deliberate misconduct.

For example:

• Study design: Researchers may select a dose, comparison group or study duration that favours finding a positive result.

• Choice of outcomes: A study might measure several outcomes but place greater emphasis on the ones that show improvement.

• Statistical analysis: Decisions about how results are analysed can influence whether a finding appears significant.

• Publication bias: Studies showing positive results may be more likely to be published or promoted than studies showing no benefit.

• Commercial interpretation: A small or uncertain improvement may be presented to consumers as a substantial, proven effect.

These are recognised concerns in clinical research generally, not accusations that every collagen manufacturer or researcher has acted improperly.

This is why independent replication matters.

When findings are reproduced by researchers without a financial interest in the product, confidence in those findings can increase. When apparent benefits disappear in higher-quality or independently funded research, we have good reason to question how robust the original claims are.

In the 2025 collagen review, the relationship between funding source, study quality and reported outcomes was particularly relevant.

The important question is not simply whether a study found a benefit. It is whether that benefit remains convincing when we examine how the research was conducted and who paid for it.

What about collagen for joint pain?

Collagen is also widely marketed to people experiencing joint pain, stiffness and age-related changes in mobility.

The proposed rationale is that collagen is an important component of cartilage and other connective tissues, so consuming collagen peptides might help support joint health.

Some clinical trials and systematic reviews have reported improvements in pain or physical function among people with knee osteoarthritis who take collagen supplements.

For example, a 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 randomised controlled trials involving 870 participants reported improvements in pain and function with collagen-based supplementation.

Read the 2024 review of collagen supplementation for knee osteoarthritis.

However, the findings need to be interpreted carefully.

The included studies were relatively small, and there was substantial variation in their results. The products, doses, treatment durations and methods used to assess symptoms also differed.

A statistically significant result does not automatically mean that a treatment produces a meaningful improvement for an individual. Nor does it establish that every collagen formulation will produce the same effect.

The wider literature on dietary supplements for osteoarthritis has also identified concerns about study quality, conflicts of interest and incomplete or selective reporting.

The UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) provides evidence-based guidance on osteoarthritis management, including exercise, weight management where appropriate and medicines for symptom relief. Its guidance does not specifically recommend collagen supplements as an established treatment.

Read the NICE guidance on osteoarthritis.

The sensible conclusion is that collagen supplements may have promising findings in some joint studies, but the evidence is not sufficiently consistent to treat them as a proven solution for joint pain or cartilage repair.

Anyone experiencing persistent joint pain should seek appropriate medical advice rather than relying on supplements in place of assessment and established treatment.

Why positive studies are not the whole story

If you search online for collagen research, you will find systematic reviews reporting benefits for skin and joints.

Some have pooled the results of multiple trials and found statistically significant improvements.

It would be misleading to ignore those findings.

But systematic reviews are only as reliable as the studies they include, and different reviews can reach different conclusions depending on their inclusion criteria, the quality of the evidence and the methods used to analyse it.

For example, a 2023 meta-analysis of 26 randomised controlled trials reported improvements in skin hydration and elasticity with hydrolysed collagen supplementation. The authors also identified limitations and called for further, larger trials.

Read the 2023 review of oral collagen for skin ageing.

The 2025 review in The American Journal of Medicine reached a more sceptical conclusion after examining results by funding source and study quality.

This does not mean one paper automatically settles the debate. It means the evidence needs to be assessed as a whole, with particular attention to the quality and independence of the research.

A product can have several positive studies without having sufficiently robust evidence to justify all the claims made about it.

That is a distinction consumers rarely see in an advertisement.

Why are collagen supplements marketed with such confidence?

The commercial appeal is easy to understand.

Collagen has a genuine biological function. The body contains it in abundance, and its role in skin and connective tissue is well established.

These facts provide a convincing starting point for marketing.

But the next step is where we need to be cautious: assuming that because collagen is essential to the body, taking more of it will necessarily improve the appearance of our skin or relieve joint pain.

That conclusion does not automatically follow.

The supplement industry can turn a complex scientific question into a simple consumer promise: collagen declines with age, so take collagen to replace it.

The reality is more complicated. Digestion, absorption, metabolism, individual differences and the design of the clinical studies all matter.

There is also a difference between measuring a change in skin hydration and proving that a product meaningfully reverses skin ageing.

Similarly, a short-term improvement in a pain questionnaire does not demonstrate that a supplement rebuilds cartilage or prevents osteoarthritis from progressing.

These distinctions matter because the stronger the marketing claim, the stronger the supporting evidence should be.

Are medical professionals refusing to endorse collagen?

It would be inaccurate to say that no medical professional supports collagen supplementation. Some clinicians discuss it with patients, and some researchers consider the findings promising.

However, collagen supplements have not achieved the same status as established treatments supported by consistent evidence and formal clinical recommendations.

Major evidence-based guidance for osteoarthritis does not establish collagen supplements as a standard treatment. And the 2025 systematic review on skin ageing concluded that the available evidence did not support their use for preventing or treating skin ageing.

This is an important distinction.

The absence of a recommendation does not necessarily mean that a product has been conclusively proved ineffective. It can mean that the evidence is too uncertain, inconsistent or limited to justify recommending it routinely.

That is how evidence-based medicine should work: recommendations should reflect the strength of the evidence, not the popularity of a product or the confidence of its advertising.

What should we do instead for healthy skin?

We do not need to purchase a specialist supplement simply because collagen is essential to healthy skin.

There are practical ways to support normal skin function without assuming that one ingredient holds the answer.

Eat enough protein

The body needs amino acids to make collagen and other proteins. A varied diet containing sufficient protein provides these building blocks.

For those eating a plant-based diet, useful sources include lentils, chickpeas, beans, tofu, tempeh, soya products, nuts and seeds.

Plant foods do not contain collagen, but they can provide amino acids that the body uses to produce its own proteins.

Include vitamin C-rich foods

Vitamin C is essential for normal collagen formation. Fruit and vegetables such as berries, kiwi, citrus fruits, peppers and broccoli can help supply it.

This does not mean that consuming large amounts of vitamin C will eliminate wrinkles. It means providing the nutrients required for normal physiological function.

Protect your skin from ultraviolet radiation

Sun exposure contributes to the breakdown of collagen in the skin. Broad-spectrum sunscreen, protective clothing and seeking shade are practical ways to reduce UV damage.

Look after your skin barrier

Healthy skin is about more than collagen. The skin barrier helps regulate water loss and protects against environmental irritants.

Gentle cleansing and suitable moisturising products can help maintain skin comfort and reduce moisture loss.

At Ermana, our plant-oil-based skincare is formulated to support the skin's moisture balance and comfort. We do not claim that applying oils or balms rebuilds collagen in the deeper layers of the skin.

We believe in being clear about what skincare can reasonably do.

Remember that ageing is not a disease

Fine lines, changes in texture and gradual changes in skin firmness are normal parts of life.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to care for your skin, but we should be wary of an industry that encourages us to see every sign of ageing as a problem requiring another purchase.

Healthy skin does not need to be wrinkle-free.

The bigger question: are we buying evidence or hope?

Collagen supplements sit at the intersection of nutrition, beauty and the wellness industry.

Their marketing often draws on legitimate biology, but the strength of the evidence supporting specific benefits varies.

Funding adds another layer to the conversation. When research supported by commercial interests reports benefits that are not reproduced in higher-quality or independently funded studies, consumers should be entitled to ask difficult questions.

This is not about dismissing all supplements or assuming that commercial research is inherently unreliable. It is about applying the same standards to wellness products that we expect elsewhere in healthcare.

We should ask whether the results are reproducible, whether the improvements are meaningful, whether the research has been independently replicated and whether the claims accurately reflect the evidence.

We should also ask whether the cost is justified when the benefits remain uncertain.

For some people, collagen supplementation may be a personal choice. But it should be a choice informed by the limitations of the evidence, not one driven by fear of ageing or promises of guaranteed results.

The Ermana conclusion: skin health over hype

Collagen is an important protein, but that does not mean collagen supplements are a proven route to younger skin or healthier joints.

Research into skin ageing has produced conflicting results, and a major 2025 review found that apparent benefits did not hold up in higher-quality studies or studies without pharmaceutical-company funding.

For joint health, some studies report improvements in pain and function, but the evidence remains variable and collagen is not established as a standard treatment in NICE's osteoarthritis guidance.

These are important distinctions that deserve more attention than they receive in supplement advertising.

At Ermana, we believe in thoughtful skincare, evidence-informed choices and looking after the skin we have rather than endlessly trying to correct the natural process of ageing.

We do not need to reject every new ingredient. But we should be willing to question the claims, examine the evidence and consider the commercial interests behind them.

Before spending money on a supplement promising younger skin or pain-free joints, ask a simple question: has the claimed benefit been demonstrated convincingly in good-quality, independent research?

If the answer is uncertain, the marketing should not make it sound otherwise.

Because wellbeing should be about making informed decisions, not being persuaded that we are always missing something.

 

Photo by Louis Reed on Unsplash