Meshima: Dosage, Safety & Sourcing
128 people · 8 weeks
That is the entire human safety base for Phellinus linteus: two Korean randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Across both, investigators attributed no adverse reaction to the extract — but neither trial ran longer than eight weeks.
Ku & Kang, Medicine, 2022; Ku et al., Medicine, 2022
8 weeks
longest human trial ever run on meshima; there is no safety data beyond this point
CYP1A2, 2E1
the liver enzymes actually tested against meshima — in rat microsomes, not people
1 case report
of pemphigus worsening; the most serious adverse event documented anywhere in the literature
Ku & Kang, Medicine, 2022; Ku et al., Medicine, 2022
View as image ↗The safety profile of meshima (Phellinus linteus) is shaped more by what has not been studied than by what has. Rigorous human data amounts to two Korean randomized controlled trials published in 2022, together covering 128 participants for eight weeks, plus one observational study in pancreatic cancer patients. A standard preclinical toxicology battery found very low toxicity. One published case report documents a serious autoimmune reaction.
That is the honest starting point: a small, clean, and very short human record, with real warnings for specific populations and one widely repeated drug-interaction claim that the published evidence does not support.
This article covers what the trials actually recorded as adverse events, what the cytochrome P450 evidence does and does not show, the autoimmune caution, the cancer patient data, and who the current evidence suggests should avoid meshima. For the research behind why people take it, see meshima and the immune system: immunomodulatory research and the full overview at what is meshima mushroom.
Key Takeaways
- Two 2022 CONSORT-randomized, double-blind trials (Ku & Kang, n=30; Ku et al., n=98) ran Phellinus linteus extract for 8 weeks. Investigators attributed no adverse reaction in either trial to the extract, and in the main trial the extract and placebo arms were near-identical: 11 people reported 16 events on the extract, 12 people reported 13 events on placebo
- One serious adverse event occurred across the two trials — a hospitalization for a lumbar spine sprain in the main trial — and was judged unrelated to the intervention. Claims of "zero serious adverse events" overstate the record slightly; "none attributed to meshima" is the accurate version
- The widely repeated claim that meshima inhibits CYP3A4 and CYP2C8 is not supported by any published study. Neither enzyme has ever been tested against Phellinus linteus. The only primary evidence is a 2003 rat-liver-microsome study showing inhibition of CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP2B1 and CYP2E1
- Because the enzymes that matter most for common prescriptions have never been tested, the honest reason to review meshima with a prescriber is absence of data, not a documented interaction
- One published case report (Jin et al., 2011) documents pemphigus worsening after Phellinus linteus ingestion; the mechanism — immune activation amplifying a pre-existing autoimmune attack — is biologically coherent and applies to other Th1-mediated conditions
- In Lee et al. (2019), pancreatic cancer patients taking meshima completed adjuvant chemotherapy more often and had less severe toxicity, but meshima was not an independent predictor of survival once other factors were controlled for
- No human safety data exists beyond 8 weeks, and no dose-finding phase 1 trial has been published. Populations that should avoid meshima without medical supervision: people with autoimmune conditions, those on immunosuppressants, and pregnant or breastfeeding individuals
What the Two Human Trials Actually Recorded
The two highest-quality safety sources for meshima are a pair of Korean RCTs published in 2022, both CONSORT-reported, double-blind, and placebo-controlled.
The pilot trial by Ku and Kang randomized 30 participants into three arms: 1000 mg of PL extract per day, 2000 mg per day, or placebo, with ten people in each arm for eight weeks.[1] The larger trial by Ku and colleagues randomized 98 participants to either 1000 mg of PL extract per day or placebo, also for eight weeks.[2]
Both trials tracked adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory values throughout. The results are worth reading precisely rather than in summary, because the detail is more reassuring than a headline number would be — and also more limited.
Adverse Event Ledger
Every Adverse Event Recorded in the Only Two Meshima RCTs
128 people, 8 weeks each. This is the entire human safety base for Phellinus linteus.
Pilot trial · n=30 · 8 weeks
Ku & Kang, 20223 arms — PL 1000 mg (n=10), PL 2000 mg (n=10), placebo (n=10)
Participants reporting any AE
4 of 30 (13.3%)
Serious adverse events
0
Events recorded (4 total)
- Common cold ×3
- Constipation ×1
None judged related to the trial food
Main trial · n=98 · 8 weeks
Ku et al., 20222 arms — PL 1000 mg vs placebo
Participants reporting any AE
23 of 98 (23.5%)
Serious adverse events
1 — hospitalization for lumbar spine sprain, judged unrelated
Events recorded (29 total)
- Upper respiratory tract infection
- Indigestion, stomach pain, diarrhoea, constipation
- Sprains, lumbago, wrist pain, insomnia
- WBC shifts, elevated ALT (placebo arm)
None judged to originate from PL extract
Main trial: adverse events by arm
PL extract arm
Placebo arm
The two measures point in opposite directions and both differences are tiny: one more person reported something on placebo, three more individual events were logged on the extract. Neither gap is meaningful in a 98-person trial, and that lack of separation — not an absence of complaints — is why investigators attributed no adverse reaction to Phellinus linteus.
Both trials ran 8 weeks in generally healthy Korean adults. Neither was designed or powered to detect uncommon harms, and neither enrolled people with autoimmune disease, people on immunosuppressants, or pregnant participants. A clean 8-week record in 128 people is a real finding, but it is a narrow one.
In the pilot trial, four participants (13.3%) reported an adverse event: three common colds and one case of constipation. All were mild, and none were judged related to the trial food. No serious adverse events occurred.
In the larger trial, 23 of 98 participants (23.5%) reported a total of 29 adverse events. Eleven participants in the extract arm reported 16 events; twelve participants in the placebo arm reported 13. The recorded complaints spanned upper respiratory tract infections, indigestion, stomach pain, diarrhoea, constipation, sprains, lumbago, insomnia, shifts in white blood cell counts, and one case of elevated liver enzymes — which occurred in the placebo arm. One serious adverse event was recorded: a participant was hospitalized for a lumbar spine sprain, which the investigators judged unrelated to the intervention and which resolved. No PL-related changes in liver or renal function were observed.
Two corrections to how this data is often summarized are worth making. First, it is not accurate to say no serious adverse events occurred; one did, and it was judged unrelated. Second, nausea and diarrhoea are frequently described as meshima's "most common side effects," but nausea was not recorded in either trial, and the gastrointestinal complaints that were recorded appeared in both arms and were not attributed to the extract. There is no published dose-response data on gastrointestinal tolerability for meshima, and no trial evidence that taking it with food changes anything.
Ku et al. (2022) · Medicine
- Population
- 98 generally healthy Korean adults
- Intervention
- 1000 mg Phellinus linteus extract daily for 8 weeks
- Comparator
- 1000 mg dextrin placebo daily
- Finding
- Natural killer cell activity rose significantly versus placebo. On safety, 29 adverse events occurred across 23 participants, distributed slightly more toward the placebo arm (12 subjects) than the extract arm (11 subjects). No PL-related liver or renal findings. One serious adverse event — hospitalization for a lumbar sprain — was judged unrelated to the intervention.
narrow-scope A clean 8-week safety record in healthy adults. The trial was not designed or powered to detect uncommon harms, and enrolled nobody with autoimmune disease, nobody on immunosuppressants, and no pregnant participants.
Ku et al., Medicine, 2022 (PMID 36042633)
What these trials do not tell us: safety beyond eight weeks, safety at doses above 2000 mg, safety in people with pre-existing conditions, safety alongside multiple medications, or safety in elderly populations. Both enrolled generally healthy adults. The evidence is genuine but narrow.
The CYP3A4 Claim, and What the Evidence Actually Says
Meshima is routinely described online — and in some supplement literature — as an inhibitor of CYP3A4 and CYP2C8, the liver enzymes that process a large share of prescription medications. That claim traces to no published study. Neither enzyme has ever been tested against Phellinus linteus.
Fact Check
Does meshima inhibit CYP3A4?
The claim
“Meshima inhibits CYP3A4 and CYP2C8, so it can raise blood levels of statins, antihistamines, macrolide antibiotics and many cancer drugs.”
Repeated across supplement and integrative-health writing, usually without a citation, and often generalised from unrelated medicinal mushrooms.
What research shows
UnsupportedNo published study has tested Phellinus linteus against CYP3A4 or CYP2C8 — not in humans, not in animals, not in vitro. A PubMed search returns nothing for either enzyme paired with this mushroom.
The only primary CYP evidence is Shon & Nam (2003), which found that P. linteus polysaccharides inhibited CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP2B1 and CYP2E1 in isolated rat liver microsomes. Those are different enzymes, in a different species, in a preparation whose concentrations cannot be mapped onto human blood levels after an oral dose. The caution about reviewing supplements with a prescriber remains sound — but it rests on missing data, not on a documented CYP3A4 interaction.
Shon & Nam, Biotechnology Letters, 2003 (PMID 12882294); PubMed search, no CYP3A4/CYP2C8 records
The single primary source is a 2003 study by Shon and Nam, who incubated polysaccharides from cultured P. linteus broth and mycelia with rat liver microsomes at 0.5, 1, and 3 mg/ml.[4] They found inhibition of CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP2B1, and CYP2E1. Polysaccharides from broth grown with 5% mulberry extract were most potent against CYP1A1, CYP1A2, and CYP2B1; those grown with 10% mulberry extract were most potent against CYP2E1.
Evidence Reality Check
Which Liver Enzymes Have Actually Been Tested Against Meshima
The four isozymes with any Phellinus linteus data are not the four that handle most prescription medicines. One rat-microsome study is the entire evidence base.
CYP1A2
Tested (rat, in vitro)Inhibited in rat liver microsomes · Direct human counterpart exists
Typical substrates: Caffeine, theophylline, clozapine, olanzapine, tizanidine, melatonin
CYP2E1
Tested (rat, in vitro)Inhibited in rat liver microsomes · Direct human counterpart exists
Typical substrates: Ethanol, acetaminophen (toxic-metabolite route), chlorzoxazone
CYP1A1
Tested (rat, in vitro)Inhibited in rat liver microsomes · Largely extrahepatic; few common drug substrates
Typical substrates: Limited prescription-drug role
CYP2B1
Tested (rat, in vitro)Inhibited in rat liver microsomes · Rat isozyme — humans have CYP2B6, which was not tested
Typical substrates: Rat-specific; does not transfer directly
CYP3A4
No dataNever tested against P. linteus · Metabolises roughly half of all prescription drugs
Typical substrates: Statins, many antihistamines, macrolides, calcium channel blockers, many oncology drugs
CYP2C8
No dataNever tested against P. linteus · Handles several narrow-window drugs
Typical substrates: Repaglinide, paclitaxel, amiodarone
CYP2C9
No dataNever tested against P. linteus · Handles several narrow-window drugs
Typical substrates: Warfarin, phenytoin, many NSAIDs
CYP2D6
No dataNever tested against P. linteus · Highly polymorphic; wide psychiatric and analgesic role
Typical substrates: Many antidepressants, beta blockers, codeine, tamoxifen
“No data” is not the same as “no interaction.” The honest position is that meshima’s effect on the enzymes that matter most for everyday prescriptions has never been measured, in rats or in people — and that the one study that does exist used isolated rat liver microsomes at concentrations that cannot be mapped to what an oral supplement produces in human blood.
Several caveats compound here. Isolated liver microsomes are not a living animal, and a living rat is not a person. CYP2B1 is a rat enzyme without a direct human equivalent — the human counterpart, CYP2B6, was not tested. CYP1A1 is largely extrahepatic and handles few common drugs. That leaves CYP1A2 and CYP2E1 as the two findings with clear human analogues, covering caffeine, theophylline, some antipsychotics, tizanidine, melatonin, ethanol, and acetaminophen's toxic-metabolite pathway.
Interestingly, the direction of the CYP2E1 finding is echoed in the hepatoprotection literature, where P. linteus polysaccharides reduce CYP2E1 expression and protect rodents against acetaminophen-induced liver injury — an effect that would be protective rather than harmful, if it translated. It has not been tested in people.
Sliva's 2010 review of P. linteus as an alternative cancer therapy remains the most-cited overview of the mushroom's pharmacology, and it documents the immune and antitumor activity in detail.[7] It does not address drug interactions, and it should not be cited as though it does. Sixteen years later, no formal human drug-interaction study for meshima has been published.
Safety
ModerateReview meshima with your prescriber if you take regular medication
Concern
Meshima's effect on the liver enzymes that clear most prescription drugs has never been measured in humans. The absence of evidence is the problem: an interaction cannot be ruled out because nobody has looked.
What the research says
This is a reason for a conversation, not a reason for alarm. Bring the actual evidence — one rat-microsome study covering CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP2B1 and CYP2E1 — rather than the unsupported CYP3A4 claim, so the discussion starts from the real record.
Particularly relevant for: Anyone on regular prescription medication, especially drugs with a narrow therapeutic window such as warfarin, phenytoin, lithium, digoxin, tacrolimus, or oral chemotherapy agents
What to do
List meshima alongside your other supplements at your next medication review, and mention it before any new prescription is started.
Shon & Nam, Biotechnology Letters, 2003; no published human drug-interaction study
Autoimmune Conditions: When Immune Activation Becomes the Risk
Meshima's mechanism is immune activation. It stimulates macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells, and shifts T cell responses toward Th1 dominance. In people with healthy immune systems, that is the reason to take it.
One published case report documents this concern directly. Jin and colleagues described a patient with pemphigus — an autoimmune blistering disease of the skin and mucous membranes driven by autoantibodies against skin proteins — whose symptoms worsened after ingesting Phellinus linteus.[5] It is the most serious adverse event associated with meshima anywhere in the literature.
A single case report cannot establish causation or quantify risk. No rechallenge was performed, and confounding exposures cannot be excluded. What it does establish is that the theoretical concern about immunostimulants in autoimmune disease is not purely hypothetical for this specific mushroom. The mechanism is coherent, and there is now one human report consistent with it.
Autoimmune conditions in which Th1 overactivity is a recognised component include rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, type 1 diabetes, Crohn's disease, psoriasis, and pemphigus itself.
Safety
CriticalImmunostimulants and autoimmune disease
Concern
Meshima activates the same Th1 immune pathways that drive tissue damage in many autoimmune conditions. One published case report documents pemphigus worsening after ingestion, and no trial has ever enrolled an autoimmune patient to study this systematically.
What the research says
Do not start meshima on your own if you have an autoimmune diagnosis. This is a decision that requires an individual medical evaluation weighing your specific condition, disease activity, and current treatment.
Particularly relevant for: Rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, type 1 diabetes, Crohn's disease, psoriasis, pemphigus, and related conditions — plus anyone taking immunosuppressants such as tacrolimus, cyclosporine, or mycophenolate, or anyone with a transplant
What to do
If you have an autoimmune condition and are already taking meshima, tell your treating specialist rather than stopping abruptly on your own.
Jin et al., JEADV, 2011 (PMID 20561124)
Cancer Patients: What the Observational Data Shows
The largest safety dataset for meshima in a medically vulnerable population comes from Lee and colleagues (2019), a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent curative resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at a Korean hospital.[3] After exclusions the study population was 217, of whom 161 received adjuvant chemotherapy. Some of those patients also took Phellinus linteus medication during the adjuvant period, and the comparison was propensity score matched.
Among the matched patients, severe chemotherapy toxicity (grade 3 or higher) occurred in 14.7% of the meshima group versus 33.8% of the no-meshima group. Completion of chemotherapy without dose reduction or early stop reached 83.8% versus 63.2%. Disease-free and overall survival were both significantly higher in the meshima group.
Lee et al. (2019) · Integrative Cancer Therapies
- Population
- 217 patients after curative resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; 161 received adjuvant chemotherapy
- Intervention
- Phellinus linteus medication during the adjuvant chemotherapy period
- Comparator
- Propensity score matched patients not taking Phellinus linteus
- Finding
- Grade 3 or higher chemotherapy toxicity: 14.7% with meshima versus 33.8% without (P=.001). Chemotherapy completion without dose reduction: 83.8% versus 63.2% (P=.005). Meshima was the only significant predictor of treatment completion (adjusted OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.04–4.41, P=.039).
mixed Encouraging on tolerability, but meshima was NOT an independent predictor of survival in the multivariate Cox model (recurrence HR 1.02, P=.889; cancer-related death HR 0.77, P=.168). The authors' own interpretation is that any survival benefit ran indirectly through better chemotherapy adherence.
Lee et al., Integrative Cancer Therapies, 2019 (PMID 30501431)
The nuance matters. In the multivariate Cox model, meshima itself was not significantly associated with recurrence or cancer-related death. What it did predict was completion of adjuvant treatment. The authors' proposed causal chain is meshima → lower chemotherapy toxicity → better adherence → better survival, rather than a direct antitumor effect in these patients.
On the specific question of safety: the study reported lower chemotherapy toxicity in the meshima group, and did not report adverse pharmacological interactions between meshima and the chemotherapy regimens used (gemcitabine-based and 5-FU-based). It was not designed as an interaction study, so it cannot rule one out for other agents.
This is retrospective observational data with propensity matching. Patients who chose to take meshima may have differed from those who did not in health behaviours or baseline characteristics that matching only partially controls. The results are encouraging but are not proof of safety or efficacy. For the full treatment context, see meshima for immune enhancement during cancer treatment.
Pregnancy and Long-Term Use: Where the Evidence Runs Out
No clinical safety data exists for meshima in pregnancy or breastfeeding. No reproductive toxicology study has been published that would establish safety parameters. Standard practice for unstudied botanical extracts is avoidance during pregnancy and breastfeeding, and meshima offers no reason to depart from it.
On general toxicity, the most systematic assessment comes from Li and colleagues (2020), who ran a four-assay battery — Ames test, in vitro chromosome aberration, acute oral toxicity, and bone marrow micronucleus — on hispidin-enriched sanghuang mycelia.[6] No assay showed a statistically significant difference from negative controls, indicating a very low order of toxicity. Two caveats: the material tested was mycelium rather than the fruiting body extract used in the human trials, and the assays cover acute and genotoxic endpoints only, not chronic exposure. That paper also formalises a taxonomic correction worth knowing — the true sanghuang strains are properly Sanghuangporus sanghuang, not Phellinus linteus, which complicates transferring safety data between products sold under either name.
Beyond eight weeks, human safety data is absent entirely. No published study has followed participants on meshima for six months or longer. Whether extended supplementation shifts immune function in ways that become problematic over time is unknown.
- Cell and microsome studiescompleted
CYP inhibition in rat liver microsomes (Shon & Nam 2003); extensive immune-mechanism work
- Animal toxicologycompleted
Ames, chromosome aberration, acute oral toxicity and micronucleus assays all negative (Li et al. 2020)
- Human case reportscompleted
One report of pemphigus exacerbation after ingestion (Jin et al. 2011)
- Small randomized trialscurrent
Two 8-week RCTs totalling 128 healthy adults; no adverse reaction attributed to the extract
- Large or long-duration RCTmissing
No trial beyond 8 weeks, no dose-finding phase 1, no trial in medicated or elderly populations
- Meta-analysis of safety outcomesmissing
Too few trials exist to pool
Meshima's safety evidence is complete at the preclinical and small-trial levels and entirely absent above them. The clean eight-week record is real; it simply does not speak to long-term use, higher doses, or vulnerable populations.
Shon & Nam 2003; Li et al. 2020; Jin et al. 2011; Ku & Kang 2022; Ku et al. 2022
Research Gaps
What would it take to call meshima safe for long-term use?
The eight-week record is clean. What is missing before that can extend to months or years?
A trial running 6–12 months
The longest published human exposure is 8 weeks. Nothing is known past that point.
A dose-finding phase 1 study
No formal dose-escalation trial has been published; the 1000–2000 mg range comes from product formulation, not tolerability testing.
A human drug-interaction study
CYP3A4, CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP2D6 have never been tested against P. linteus in any system.
Trials enrolling medicated and elderly participants
Both RCTs enrolled generally healthy adults, which excludes most people who actually take medicinal mushrooms.
Systematic autoimmune safety data
The concern rests on one case report and a coherent mechanism. No cohort or registry data exists.
Preclinical toxicology
Genotoxicity and acute oral toxicity are covered (Li et al. 2020), but on mycelium rather than the fruiting body extract used in trials, and with no chronic or reproductive endpoints.
Gap analysis across Ku & Kang 2022; Ku et al. 2022; Li et al. 2020; Shon & Nam 2003
This is not a limitation unique to meshima — most medicinal mushroom supplements sit in the same position. It does mean that claims of safety for indefinite long-term use are not grounded in evidence. People who take meshima for extended periods are going beyond what the clinical record supports.
For the doses used in trials, see meshima dosage guide: what the research uses. For product quality, see where to find meshima supplements: sourcing quality products and meshima extract vs. powder: which is more effective?.
Who Should Be Especially Cautious
Based on the current evidence, these populations have the clearest reasons for caution:
Autoimmune conditions. Rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Crohn's disease, psoriasis, pemphigus, and related conditions where Th1 activation may worsen the underlying disease. This is the best-supported caution on the list.
Immunosuppressant medications. Transplant recipients and others taking drugs designed to suppress immune function (tacrolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolate) should not add an immunostimulant without their transplant or specialist team's guidance.
Anyone on medication with a narrow therapeutic window. Not because a specific interaction has been demonstrated, but because none has been ruled out. Warfarin, phenytoin, lithium, digoxin, and oral chemotherapy agents are the categories where an unmeasured shift in drug levels would matter most.
Pregnant and breastfeeding individuals. No safety data exists; avoid.
People considering meshima for immune support who also have autoimmune disease. The most difficult case. Meshima's anti-tumor immune effects are studied precisely because of its Th1-activating properties, and those same properties create risk in autoimmune disease. This requires individual medical evaluation, not a general supplement recommendation.
This article summarises published research and is not medical advice. Meshima is a supplement, not a treatment for any disease, and decisions about taking it alongside medication or an existing diagnosis belong with a qualified clinician who knows your history.
The Bottom Line
Two 2022 Korean RCTs put 128 generally healthy adults on Phellinus linteus extract for eight weeks and attributed no adverse reaction to it — in the larger trial the extract and placebo arms were near-identical, with 11 people reporting 16 events on the extract and 12 people reporting 13 on placebo. One serious adverse event (a lumbar sprain hospitalization) occurred and was judged unrelated, so "no serious adverse events" overstates the record slightly. The widely repeated claim that meshima inhibits CYP3A4 and CYP2C8 has no published basis; the only primary evidence is a 2003 rat-microsome study covering CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP2B1 and CYP2E1, which means the real reason to review meshima with a prescriber is missing data rather than a documented interaction. One case report documents pemphigus worsening, making the autoimmune caution concrete rather than theoretical. Pancreatic cancer patients taking meshima alongside chemotherapy completed treatment more often with less severe toxicity, though meshima did not independently predict survival. Long-term safety beyond eight weeks, safety in medicated or elderly populations, and safety in pregnancy remain entirely unstudied.
Frequently Asked Questions
Sources & References
- 1RTHM-01555·Ku, Yong Ho et al. (2022). “Efficacy of Phellinus linteus extract on immunity enhancement: A CONSORT-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial..” Medicine.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩
- 2RTHM-01556·Ku, Yong Ho et al. (2022). “Effects of Phellinus linteus extract on immunity improvement: A CONSORT-randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial..” Medicine.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩
- 3RTHM-01082·Lee, Sung Hwan et al. (2019). “Potential Impact of Phellinus linteus on Adherence to Adjuvant Treatment After Curative Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Outcomes of a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis..” Integrative cancer therapies.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩
- 4RTHM-02366·Shon, Yun Hee et al. (2003). “Inhibition of cytochrome P450 isozymes in rat liver microsomes by polysaccharides derived from Phellinus linteus..” Biotechnology letters.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩
- 5RTHM-02367·Jin, Seon Pil et al. (2011). “Exacerbation of pemphigus following Phellinus linteus ingestion..” Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩
- 6RTHM-02368·Li, I-Chen et al. (2020). “Optimized production and safety evaluation of hispidin-enriched Sanghuangporus sanghuang mycelia..” Food science & nutrition.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩
- 7RTHM-00364·Sliva, Daniel (2010). “Medicinal mushroom Phellinus linteus as an alternative cancer therapy..” Experimental and therapeutic medicine.Study breakdown →PubMed →↩