Kava and Liver Toxicity: What We Actually Know

If you’ve ever typed “is kava bad for your liver?” into a search bar, you know exactly how chaotic the results can be. On one side, you’ll find headlines sounding the alarm; on the other, centuries of safe, deeply rooted traditional use across the South Pacific. It’s a bit like watching two different movies on the same screen: one a thriller, the other a calm island documentary. Between those two narratives sits a complicated mix of research findings, regulations, case reports, and misconceptions that have proven surprisingly persistent.

So, what does the evidence actually say?

When you unpack the data, the picture becomes far more nuanced and less dramatic than the early 2000s headlines suggested. This is where things get messy. Several countries imposed restrictions after reports of hepatotoxicity, but later reviews found that many cases couldn’t clearly attribute liver injury to kava itself. Others highlighted very specific circumstances associated with the reported liver cases: non-traditional solvent extracts, poor-quality or adulterated products, individual susceptibility due to pre-existing risk factors [1,2].

The goal here is to clarify what we actually know today: what sparked the controversy, how different types of kava products differ in risk, what mechanisms might explain liver injury, and what modern evidence says about real-world safety.

What Is Kava and How Does It Work in the Body?

Piper methysticum — better known as kava or kava kava— is a sterile cultivar native to the South Pacific. It doesn’t reproduce from seed; instead, it spreads through cuttings, which helped shape a rich diversity of cultivated varieties (“cultivars”) across Oceania [3,4]. Only the peeled roots and rhizomes are traditionally used.

As researchers began to look more closely at what makes these roots so biologically active, attention quickly centered on kava’s signature compounds: the kavalactones. This is where things get interesting, because kavalactones don’t just “relax you;" they tune specific neural circuits in ways modern pharmacology finds genuinely compelling. The major kavalactones are kavain, dihydrokavain, methysticin, dihydromethysticin, yangonin, and desmethoxyyangonin, and they act on multiple targets in the central nervous system. They modulate GABA (short for gamma-aminobutyric acid, the neurotransmitter that helps dial down excessive neuronal firing so your system can shift out of high-alert mode) and influence voltage-gated sodium and calcium channels, mechanisms that collectively contribute to kava’s anxiolytic, muscle-relaxant, and mood-supporting effects [5,6]. Importantly, these actions tend to produce calm without the heavy sedation or cognitive dulling associated with some pharmaceutical anxiolytics.

Kava’s biological reach doesn’t stop there. Research highlights anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antioxidant properties, and some studies even explore anticancer potential [7].

Traditional Uses: Social, Ritual, and Therapeutic

In Pacific cultures, kava is far more than a relaxing beverage. It plays a central role in ceremonies and diplomacy, spiritual practices, and social bonding. The traditional drink is prepared by macerating peeled roots in cold water [8], a gentle extraction method that yields a mild, slow-acting beverage with a well-characterized safety record [3,4].

Within these cultural settings, kava is valued for its ability to promote relaxation, sociability, mental clarity, and a mild sense of euphoria without impairing cognition. These same properties explain why kava has attracted medical interest as a natural option for supporting mood balance and managing anxiety, stress, sleep difficulties, and premenstrual discomfort. Traditional use doesn’t replace clinical data, but it provides a long-standing real-world context for understanding both its benefits and its safety profile.

Modern Preparations: Where Things Began to Diverge

The version of kava that entered Western markets in the 1990s and 2000s looked nothing like the traditional beverage. Instead of a single, culturally consistent preparation, kava began to appear in multiple forms:

• Traditional aqueous beverages (root-only, kneaded or ground in water)

• Standardized extracts (often acetone- or ethanol-based, sometimes made from aerial plant parts)

• Tinctures (alcohol-based)

• Capsules (powdered root or extracts)

At that point, the difference was no longer just about how kava was consumed, but what was being extracted and from which parts of the plant. Traditional use relies on water-based extraction and peeled roots only, while many commercial products shifted toward solvent-based methods, mixed plant material, and non-standardized sourcing.

These changes matter. Extraction solvents can alter the chemical profile, potentially concentrating compounds that traditional preparations kept at very low levels. Pacific Island communities have long distinguished kava cultivars by chemotype [9], with some considered unsuitable for regular consumption, subtleties that Western manufacturing historically overlooked [10]. In addition, some commercial extracts included leaves and stems, which contain alkaloids absent from the root and linked to toxicity [1,11].

Taken together, these shifts in preparation methods and plant material help explain why the modern safety story became so complicated.

The Early 2000s Hepatotoxicity Wave

Between 1999 and 2002, several countries reported cases of liver injury potentially linked to kava. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) documented reports from Germany, Switzerland, and the U.S. [2]. Some cases involved severe outcomes, including liver failure requiring transplantation, prompting regulatory agencies in Europe, Canada, and Australia to restrict or ban kava products. But once researchers dug into the data, a more nuanced picture emerged, not exactly a smoking gun. Problems with the original case reports included:

• Incomplete patient histories [12,13]

• Missing product information [12]

• Co-consumption of alcohol or hepatotoxic drugs (comedication) [10,12,13]

• Pre-existing liver disease (such as autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cirrhosis, or viral infection) [12,13]

• Use of non-traditional extracts (such as those prepared with ethanol or acetone, in contrast to the traditional water-based extract) [10-14]

• Uncertain dosages and durations of use [12,13]

• Questionable product quality [10,12,15]

Taken together, the evidence looked less like a clear verdict and more like a collection of warning flags. When later reviews revisited these cases, clear causal links were often missing [1,10,13,15]. For example, in a critical analysis of 26 suspected hepatotoxicity cases in Germany and Switzerland, only 3 were considered "probable" and 6 "possible," and in 79% of the cases, the dose and/or duration exceeded regulatory recommendations [13].

Furthermore, some products used stem peelings or aerial parts of the plant, which are known to contain alkaloids like pipermethystine, associated with greater hepatic risk [1,9,11,14,15]. Others may have been contaminated by mycotoxins or were improperly stored, which was considered a more likely cause than synthetic solvents [1,9,16].

By 2014, accumulating evidence led German courts to lift the national ban, citing insufficient proof of inherent toxicity in properly prepared kava [17].

Possible Biological Pathways Behind the Reported Liver Cases

Researchers have explored several hypotheses to explain how kava might contribute to liver injury in rare circumstances. None fully explains all cases, but together they outline plausible pathways.

Animal Clues: Context Matters More Than the Headlines

Early toxicology studies in animals did raise some eyebrows. At very high doses, certain kavalactones could nudge liver enzymes or stress liver cells [1,2]. But many of these studies used doses far above human exposure, relied on ethanol or acetone extracts, and sometimes included aerial parts or non-noble cultivars. So yes, there were biological “signals," but they were more like stress-testing the system than reflecting real-world human use.

Metabolism Insights: How the Liver Handles Kavalactones

Certain kavalactones, especially methysticin derivatives, undergo bioactivation by liver enzymes. Reactive metabolites may cause extra oxidative cellular stress in susceptible individuals with genetic polymorphisms, concurrent medications, or existing liver disease [18].

Non-Traditional Compounds: Flavokavain B and Friends

One of the biggest “aha” moments came from studying flavokavains, compounds that appear in higher amounts in non-noble cultivars, leaves, and stems, and solvent-based extracts. Flavokavain B in particular has shown hepatotoxic effects in cell studies (in vitro) [11,17].

Drug Interactions and Liver Enzyme Inhibition

Kava can inhibit CYP3A4, one of the major enzymes the liver uses to process medications.

This doesn’t inherently mean toxicity, but it does mean that if someone is taking acetaminophen, isoniazid, oral contraceptives, alcohol, or other medications with hepatic load, the metabolic “traffic jam” might make the liver more vulnerable [19].

Idiosyncratic Reactions: The Rare Wild-Card Events

Some reported cases resemble classic idiosyncratic liver injury: extremely rare, unpredictable, and not clearly tied to the amount consumed [8]. This pattern appears with many herbal and even prescription products, meaning that a tiny fraction of people may respond atypically due to genetic or immunologic factors.

Contamination, Adulteration, and Product Quality

This is the least glamorous but often the clearest explanation. Poor-quality products may contain mold toxins (such as aflatoxins or ochratoxin A), incorrect plant parts (stem peelings or aerial tissues), misidentified cultivars, or solvent residues. Given that these contaminants are themselves hepatotoxic, several cases likely had nothing to do with kava chemistry per se.

Mechanistically, then, kava’s risk profile depends heavily on chemotype, cultivar, extraction method, and individual susceptibility.

What High-Quality Evidence Actually Shows

When you step away from case reports and instead focus on controlled clinical trials, the picture changes significantly. 

Anxiolytic Efficacy and Trial Safety

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) use standardized products and controlled subject groups, which makes their safety and efficacy findings far more reliable.

Multiple trials show that standardized kava extracts can significantly reduce symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder compared to placebo [1,10,20]. One study using a standardized extract at 210 mg per day over 24 weeks reported a 68.4% reduction in anxiety scores [1,9].

Importantly, in high-quality trials, severe liver injury is extremely rare. For example, a six-week RCT using a standardized aqueous extract found no significant differences in liver function tests between the kava and placebo groups [10]. A 2018 clinical pharmacology review also concluded that while hepatotoxicity is possible, it appears to be rare and may depend on non-traditional preparations or individual susceptibility [1].

Several studies also note that kava does not typically cause cognitive impairment or withdrawal issues, a meaningful contrast with some synthetic anxiolytics [6,10].

You can read more about kava and anxiety in our dedicated blog article here.

The Quality Control Factor and the Rejected Paradox

The early safety controversy led to the so-called "Pacific kava paradox," which suggested that liver toxicity occurred only with Western solvent-based extracts and not with traditional water-based preparations [16]. This idea has now been rejected: analyses show that hepatotoxicity cases have also been linked to traditional aqueous extracts in New Caledonia, Australia, the United States, and Germany [16,21]. Current evidence points to poor raw material quality as the most plausible driver of rare toxicity [1,12,16], regardless of the extraction solvent used.

What Modern Regulatory Agencies Conclude

Across agencies, the message is consistent: kava can be used safely when products meet high-quality standards, and consumers understand potential risks. Here’s how major regulators frame it:

• World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes a potential risk but emphasizes that quality standards significantly reduce it [22].

• European Medicines Agency (EMA) acknowledges that evidence is insufficient to justify a full ban and calls for strict quality controls [23].

• U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) maintains safety notifications but does not prohibit kava [24].

• U.S. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) notes that kava may help with anxiety but advises caution because liver injury, though uncommon, has been reported [25].

Conclusion: A More Accurate, Less Dramatic Picture

Early reports created a lasting impression that kava poses a meaningful risk to the liver. But when the full body of evidence is examined, that risk appears to be extremely low for properly prepared, high-quality kava products used by healthy adults. 

The takeaway is practical. Choose products made from peeled noble-root material and backed by third-party testing (like Troscriptions!). These show a far safer profile than the poorly characterized preparations implicated in early reports. If unusual symptoms appear, stop use and seek medical evaluation, as you would with any bioactive compound.

A clear, evidence-driven perspective not only helps consumers make informed choices; it also raises the standard for how botanicals are discussed in modern health science.

Read more about kava and its principal kavalactone, kavain, below:

• Understanding Kava (Piper methysticum): Half-Life, Benefits, and More
• Can Kava Help with Anxiety?
• What is Kavain? Exploring the Anxiolytic Kava Extract

References

1. White CM. The pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and adverse events associated with kava. J Clin Pharmacol. 2018;58:1396-1405. doi:10.1002/jcph.1263

2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Hepatic toxicity possibly associated with kava-containing products—United States, Germany, and Switzerland, 1999–2002. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002;51:1065-1067.

3. Lindstrom L. Kava: From Ethnology to Pharmacology. 1st ed. CRC Press; 2004. doi:10.1201/9781420023374

4. Lebot V, Merlin M, Lindstrom L. Kava: The Pacific Drug. Yale University Press; 1992.

5. Chua HC, Christensen ETH, Hoestgaard-Jensen K, et al. Kavain, the major constituent of the anxiolytic kava extract, potentiates GABA_A receptors: functional characteristics and molecular mechanism. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0157700. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0157700

6. Dinh LD, Simmen U, Berger Bueter K, et al. Interaction of various Piper methysticum cultivars with CNS receptors in vitro. Planta Med. 2001;67:306-311. doi:10.1055/s-2001-14334

7. Tamta N, Ojha A, Belwal R, et al. Phytochemistry and pharmacological potential of Piper methysticum: influence of plant parts and implications for neurodegenerative disorders. Int J Environ Sci. 2025;11:415-425. doi:10.64252/psansa17

8. Ulbricht C, Basch E, Boon H, et al. Safety review of kava (Piper methysticum) by the Natural Standard Research Collaboration. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2005;4:779-794. doi:10.1517/14740338.4.4.779

9. Soares RB, Dinis-Oliveira RJ, Oliveira NG. An updated review on the psychoactive, toxic and anticancer properties of kava. J Clin Med. 2022;11(14):4039. doi:10.3390/jcm11144039

10. Sarris J, Stough C, Teschke R, et al. Kava for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: RCT analysis of adverse reactions, liver function, addiction, and sexual effects. Phytother Res. 2013;27:1723-1728. doi:10.1002/ptr.4916

11. Teschke R, Sarris J, Lebot V. Kava hepatotoxicity solution: a six-point plan for new kava standardization. Phytomedicine. 2011;18:96-103. doi:10.1016/j.phymed.2010.10.002

12. Teschke R. Kava hepatotoxicity: a clinical review. Ann Hepatol. 2010;9(3):251-265.

13. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Kava kava. In: LiverTox: Clinical and Research Information on Drug-Induced Liver Injury. Bethesda, MD: NIDDK; 2012-. Updated April 10, 2018.

14. Moulds RF, Malani J. Kava: herbal panacea or liver poison? Med J Aust. 2003;178(9):451-453. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05289.x

15. Teschke R, Sarris J, Glass X, Schulze J. Kava, the anxiolytic herb: back to basics to prevent liver injury? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;71(3):445-448. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2125.2010.03775.x

16. Teschke R, Sarris J, Schweitzer I. Kava hepatotoxicity in traditional and modern use: the presumed Pacific kava paradox hypothesis revisited. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;73(2):170-174. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2125.2011.04070.x

17. Kuchta K, Schmidt M, Nahrstedt A. German kava ban lifted by court: the alleged hepatotoxicity of kava (Piper methysticum) as a case of ill-defined herbal drug identity, lacking quality control, and misguided regulatory politics. Planta Med. 2015;81:1647-1653. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1558295

18. Wang P, Zhu J, Shehu AI, et al. Enzymes and pathways of kavain bioactivation and biotransformation. Chem Res Toxicol. 2019;32:1335-1342. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.9b00098

19. Nascimento MDL, Do Nascimento SB, Lima EDSP, et al. Evaluation of the effects of extracts containing Valeriana officinalis and Piper methysticum on the activities of cytochrome P450 3A and P-glycoprotein. Planta Med. 2024;90:792-800. doi:10.1055/a-2360-4808

20. Sarris J, LaPorte E, Schweitzer I. Kava in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2011;31:643-647. doi:10.1097/JCP.0b013e3182312981

21. Russmann S, Barguil Y, Cabalion P, et al. Hepatic injury due to traditional aqueous extracts of kava root in New Caledonia. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003;15(9):1033-1036. doi:10.1097/00042737-200309000-00015

22. World Health Organization. Assessment of the Risk of Hepatotoxicity with Kava Products. WHO Technical Report. World Health Organization; 2007.

23. European Medicines Agency. Assessment Report: Kava. European Medicines Agency; 2014.

24. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Consumer advisory on kava-containing dietary supplements. U.S. Food and Drug Administration; 2002. Updated 2019.

25. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Kava. National Institutes of Health. Updated 2025