Maxforce FAQ: 83 Common Questions Answered

A dietary supplement in chewable gummy form, sold in a black and red 30-count jar. The label reads “MALE ENHANCEMENT GUMMIES” and “May Support: Vitality*, Drive*, Performance*”. It is not a medicine and it is not FDA-approved.

Thirty. At one a day that is thirty days, and the panel prints “Servings Per Container: 30” to match.

One line on the panel: Proprietary Blend, 82 mg, holding nine ingredients — muira puama extract, maca extract, catuaba extract, green tea extract, caffeine (5mg), ashwagandha, L-arginine, tribulus terrestris and horny goat weed extract.

Only one is itemised: caffeine, at 5 mg. The other eight share the remaining 77 mg in proportions the panel does not print. That is legal — FDA requires a blend to print its total weight and the members in descending order of weight, not the individual amounts.

More than you would expect, actually. Because the members must be listed in descending order of weight, and because caffeine is listed fifth with 5 mg printed beside it, everything listed after it can be no more than 5 mg. That caps ashwagandha, L-arginine, tribulus terrestris and horny goat weed at 5 mg each.

Muira puama extract is row one, so it is the heaviest. It sits between about 14 mg and 62 mg. The ceiling is 82 total, minus 5 for the caffeine, minus at least 5 each for the three rows between them. The floor is the same rule read from the other end: every row is capped by this one or by the 5 mg caffeine line, so nine rows cannot add up to 82 mg unless this one is at least about 14 mg.

No. For scale, NIH ODS discusses L-arginine at 2 to 20 grams a day; this whole blend is 82 milligrams. The trials NCCIH describes for ashwagandha use preparations dosed in the hundreds of milligrams.

It is an extract-ratio claim: 82 mg of extract presented as equivalent to about 567 mg of the raw dried plant, roughly 6.9 to 1 across the whole blend. No per-ingredient ratio is printed, so it cannot be applied to any single row, and even 567 mg split nine ways is about 63 mg each.

Yes, and it is declared as one. FDA’s labeling guide allows it: a blend must print “the total weight of all ‘other dietary ingredients’ contained in the blend” and list the members “in descending order of predominance by weight”. Individual weights are not required.

The Supplement Facts panel names nine. The pack text supplied to this desk names six. The “Inside Maxforce” marketing card shows five. Unusually, the label is the most complete of the three — the marketing omits ingredients rather than adding them.

Four: green tea extract, caffeine, tribulus terrestris and horny goat weed extract. A buyer who reads only that card does not learn the product contains caffeine.

A chewable gummy. Thirty in a jar. The supplied pack is explicit that it is not a capsule and not liquid drops.

Two of the nine. NCCIH has consumer pages on green tea and on ashwagandha, and NIH ODS has fact sheets for both. Caffeine is covered by FDA’s consumer update, and L-arginine appears inside an ODS health-professional fact sheet on exercise. Muira puama, maca, catuaba, tribulus terrestris and horny goat weed have no page at all.

Because federal agencies write consumer pages for the botanicals most asked about. MedlinePlus’s own herb database, which used to cover several of them, was withdrawn on 29 July 2025. NCCIH notes that “The amount of scientific evidence on dietary supplements varies widely—there is a lot of information on some and very little on others.”

The bark of an Amazonian shrub, sold in herbal tradition for potency. It is row one of nine on this panel, so it is the heaviest ingredient — somewhere between 5 mg and 62 mg. It has no federal consumer page.

A root vegetable grown in the Peruvian Andes and eaten there as a food. Row two of nine. Where it is studied it is studied at gram amounts, because it is a food. No federal consumer page exists.

A Brazilian bark. The common name covers more than one plant — commonly Trichilia catigua and Erythroxylum vaccinifolium — and this label prints the common name without a species. No federal consumer page exists.

On effectiveness: “definite conclusions cannot yet be reached on whether green tea is helpful for most of the purposes for which it is used.” On safety: “Although uncommon, liver injury has been reported in some people who used green tea products, primarily green tea extracts in tablet or capsule form.” Nothing on that page concerns sexual function.

That “some ashwagandha preparations may be effective for insomnia and stress”, that there is “some limited evidence” it “may increase testosterone levels and sperm quality” over 2 to 4 months, and that “although it is rare, there have been a number of cases that link liver injury to ashwagandha supplements.”

It is an amino acid, and it carries the nitric-oxide story this category tells. NIH ODS: “some arginine is converted to nitric oxide, a potent vasodilator that can increase blood flow.” ODS discusses it at 2 to 20 grams a day and concludes those doses have “little to no effect on performance”. This row is capped at 5 mg.

A spiny ground plant sold for athletic and sexual performance. It has no federal consumer page, but NCCIH cites two trials of it — one positive in 2017, one null in 2014 — inside its digest on this category. It is row eight of nine here.

The common name for plants of the Epimedium genus. It is row nine of nine, so the lightest ingredient in the blend, and it has no federal consumer page. It appears on the Supplement Facts panel and on neither the pack text nor the marketing card.

Yes, 5 mg, declared and itemised on the panel — which is to the label’s credit. FDA cites 400 mg a day as an amount not generally associated with negative effects in healthy adults. The green tea extract above it carries caffeine of its own, and no second figure is printed.

Not stated per ingredient. NIH ODS: “U.S. law does not require dietary supplements to be standardized. In fact, there is no legal or regulatory definition of the term in the United States.”

Nobody outside the company can answer that, because safety depends on amounts and eight of the nine amounts are not printed. What can be said is what the federal pages say about the two ingredients that have federal pages, and that the whole blend is 82 mg.

No side-effect list is printed on the jar. NCCIH names side effects for green tea extract supplements: “nausea, constipation, abdominal discomfort, and increased blood pressure.” For five of the nine ingredients there is no federal side-effect information at all.

Yes, a real one: “If you are pregnant or nursing, take medications or have a medical condition, consult your doctor before using. Discontinue use and consult your doctor is any adverse reactions occur.” Note the typo in the last sentence — the word should be if.

On NCCIH’s ashwagandha guidance: anyone pregnant or breastfeeding, anyone about to have surgery, anyone with an autoimmune or thyroid disorder, and — because ashwagandha may raise testosterone — anyone with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

Ask a pharmacist. NCCIH: supplements “may interact with your medications or pose risks if you have certain medical problems or are going to have surgery.” NCCIH also names a specific interaction: green tea at high doses reduces the effectiveness of nadolol, a beta-blocker.

Two of the nine carry federal liver notes. Ashwagandha: “Although it is rare, there have been a number of cases that link liver injury to ashwagandha supplements.” Green tea extract: “Although uncommon, liver injury has been reported in some people who used green tea products, primarily green tea extracts in tablet or capsule form.” Both amounts here are small.

5 mg is a rounding error beside FDA’s 400 mg a day figure. FDA’s caveat still applies: “there is wide variation in both how sensitive people are to the effects of caffeine and how fast they eliminate it from the body.”

No. The supplied pack says healthy adults 18 and over only.

No. FDA puts it sharply in its own list of warning signs: “Don’t be fooled by descriptions like ’all-natural cure.’” and “The FDA has found numerous products promoted as ’all-natural’ cures or treatments that contain hidden and dangerously high doses of prescription drug ingredients.”

A search of FDA’s Sexual Enhancement and Energy Product Notifications on September 25, 2026 did not return Maxforce. That is a statement about what a database contained on a date and nothing more. FDA itself notes: “FDA is unable to test and identify all products marketed as dietary supplements that have potentially harmful hidden ingredients.” No test result for this product exists in the public record.

Because this is the product category FDA publishes those notifications about, and a buyer deserves the context. FDA describes such products as “typically promoted for sexual enhancement, weight loss, pain relief and body building and… often represented as being all natural”. The context belongs to the category, not to this product.

FDA: “Sildenafil is the active ingredient in the FDA-approved prescription drug Viagra… This undeclared ingredient may interact with nitrates found in some prescription drugs, such as nitroglycerin, and may lower blood pressure to dangerous levels.” And: “People with diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or heart disease often take nitrates.”

Because the supplied pack labels its own review block as layout copy. Its precautions block ends: “Reviews, star scores, and order counts in this pack are layout copy only.”

Eight named buyers share three sentences between them. Two different buyers are both called Omar W. — one 49 in Dallas, one 66 in Pittsburgh. And a pull-quote attributed to “Vince, 60” reads “Desk answered”, while the review attributed to Vince D., 60, says nothing about the desk.

Not quite. 66/21/8/3/2 weights to 4.46, which rounds to 4.5. The figure printed above it is 4.6.

Two. A photograph-styled portrait of a man holding the jar, whose filename names an AI upscaler and describes it as a hyper photographic portrait. And a five-star graphic with nothing attached to it.

No. It means the review block and that portrait tell you nothing about the product. The gummy is judged on this site by its panel, its marketing and the federal record — the material that can be checked.

Between them: a process standard, a factory filing, two absence claims, a sourcing claim, a naturalness claim, a vegetarian claim that actually holds, an unnamed clinician, two country-of-origin marks (one misspelled) and a seller’s guarantee. None is an approval of the formula.

The blue country-of-origin roundel. It reads “MANUFACTURE IN USA” along the top and “MANUFACTURE IN” along the bottom. A second, separate flag mark reads “MANUFACTURED IN THE USA” correctly.

On this product, yes. Apple pectin rather than gelatin, printed on the other-ingredients line. Most gummies in this category are gelatin.

Nothing checkable. No clinician is named anywhere in the supplied material, and the file the mark arrived in is named doctor-developed while the mark itself reads doctor formulated.

Maxforcemen, a U.S. stocking partner for Maxforce. The editorial rules are on the About page.

This desk is paid when an order completes on the brand’s sales page. That is the whole of the commercial relationship, and it is why the rules are written down.

3.9 out of 10, across nine rows. Label completeness scores 7.5 and amounts against research scores 1.5, which is this product in two numbers: the label tells you a great deal, and what it tells you is that there is very little in the jar.