The History of Adaptogens

The industry is crazed about adaptogens – but who coined the term? Surprisingly, it does not come from ancient Ayurvedic wisdom or traditional Chinese medicine. Instead, it originated in the Soviet Union in the late 1940s, when Russian scientists were seeking ways to help soldiers survive extreme conditions.

Specifically, Nikolai Lazarev, a Russian toxicologist, wanted to define substances that could increase the body’s state of non-specific resistance to stress without causing significant physiological disruption. The goal was to deliver agents that could improve stamina and work capacity among soldiers, factory workers, and even Olympic athletes in the USSR.

Later, Israel Brekhman refined the concept and formalized three criteria for adaptogens, which were published in the 1960s in the Annual Review of Pharmacology:

• Non-specific resistance – the substance should increase the body’s resistance to a broad spectrum of stressors: physical, chemical, and biological.

• Normalizing influence – the substance should exert a balancing effect on physiological processes.

• Safety – the substance should not disrupt normal biological functions or cause significant side effects.

Siberian ginseng was one of the most heavily researched and distributed substances at the time. However, much of the research was published in Russian-language journals. When Western scientists later reviewed this literature, they found many studies were poorly controlled and ideologically biased. Still, the idea laid the groundwork for the association between adaptogens and high performance under stress.

The concept of adaptogens entered the Western supplement market in the late 1980s, coinciding with the popularity of herbal medicine. The rise of ingredients such as ginseng and ashwagandha helped establish what we now call the “adaptogen category,” despite the mixed scientific foundations behind these ingredients.

Adaptogens: Proposed Pathways & Overview

Adaptogens are natural substances, primarily botanicals, thought to increase the body’s non-specific resistance to stress. Unlike caffeine, which gives a quick energy spike, adaptogens function more like a “stress thermostat,” supporting energy, focus, and recovery when the body is under pressure.

Researchers have proposed several biological pathways through which adaptogens may act. Understanding these mechanisms is essential for evaluating whether they can truly be considered ergogenic agents in sports and active nutrition, or whether they remain primarily a marketing concept. Key mechanisms include:

• Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis

  The HPA axis regulates the body’s stress response through cortisol secretion. In athletes, chronic dysregulation caused by elevated cortisol can accelerate protein catabolism, impair recovery, and ultimately affect performance. Adaptogens may modulate HPA axis activity, helping to restore cortisol balance under stress. For example, a systematic review found that 250–500 mg of ashwagandha extract daily significantly reduced morning cortisol levels in stressed adults. More recent randomized controlled trials also showed statistically significant decreases in serum cortisol compared to placebo. Rhodiola rosea has also been labeled an adaptogen. A 2016 study in the Journal of Sport and Health Science found that Rhodiola shortened reaction and response times, though it had no impact on exercise capacity or hormonal profiles.

• Heat shock proteins (HSPs)

  HSPs are molecular chaperones that stabilize proteins and protect cells from damage during stress. A strong HSP response can be critical for athletes under conditions of intense training, oxidative stress, or thermal load. Some research suggests certain adaptogens may enhance HSP expression, improving cellular stress tolerance. Siberian ginseng, for example, has been positioned in adaptogen literature as a modulator of HSPs, though most evidence comes from animal and in vitro studies rather than human trials. A recent comprehensive review concluded that while Siberian ginseng demonstrates bioactivity, its precise mechanisms remain unclear.

• AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) pathway

  AMPK is a key regulator of cellular energy balance, activating when ATP demand exceeds supply during intense exercise. It enhances energy availability by stimulating glucose uptake, fatty acid oxidation, and mitochondrial biogenesis—all essential for performance and recovery. However, most evidence linking adaptogens to AMPK activation comes from animal or cell studies, with limited human data available.

Adaptogens in Sports Performance

Can adaptogens help with sports performance? The answer is: maybe. The category still lacks consistent definitions, and sports-focused research remains limited.

In high-performance sports, where cumulative training loads and stress compromise recovery, certain adaptogens’ ability to modulate stress pathways—particularly HPA axis and cortisol regulation—could be valuable. In my view, adaptogens should be seen as adjunctive tools rather than primary ergogenic aids. Their most consistent benefits appear to involve supporting recovery and stress management—factors that are harder to quantify but still crucial for long-term performance.

While adaptogens cannot replace evidence-based strategies such as training, sleep, and balanced nutrition, they might provide additional support for optimizing performance and recovery in certain environments. Beyond sports and active nutrition, adaptogens are also gaining traction in the mental wellness category, marketed for stress, anxiety, sleep, and peri-, pre-, and post-menopause support.

Summary

So, do adaptogens really exist? The definition is debatable, and many researchers argue that the traditional criteria do not meet modern pharmacological standards. As individual ingredients, some botanicals do show ergogenic potential, but more rigorous research—especially in sports contexts—is needed.

Not every botanical is inherently safe: poorly standardized extracts, excessive doses, or combining multiple “adaptogens” without evidence could lead to negative outcomes such as fatigue, digestive discomfort, or interference with recovery pathways. Ultimately, science—not marketing—should define which ingredients truly earn a place in supporting athletes’ performance and recovery.