Does chicken soup help with colds and flu?

Maybe a little, and the evidence for it is thin. A 2025 systematic review found only four small studies of soup for colds and flu, 342 people in all, most of them testing chicken-based soups. Symptoms were milder in three of them, and in one the illness was 1 to 2.5 days shorter. The review did not pool the results, and no trial has tested plain chicken soup on its own.

Unsettled. The answer stays open because the studies are few, small and unlike each other. The soups contained herbs and vegetables, the comparisons varied, and one of the four studies was a single group measured before and after with no comparison at all. Two studies also found lower inflammation markers (IL-6, TNF-alpha and CRP).

What the trials found

The largest randomized trial in that review was not about colds. In 160 adults in hospital with COVID-19 in Tehran, a five-day Persian diet regimen that included chicken and barley soup made a significant difference in myalgia, weakness, headache and cough. CRP, a marker of inflammation, was lower in the control group. Because the soup came as one part of a whole regimen, its own effect cannot be separated.

What warm soup does to the nose has been measured, briefly. In a 1978 study of 15 healthy volunteers, sipping hot chicken soup sped nasal mucus from 6.9 to 9.2 mm per minute, slightly more than hot water did. The effect was gone by 30 minutes, and the volunteers did not have colds.

Warmth may be most of the story. In 30 people with a cold or flu, a hot fruit drink relieved runny nose, cough, sneezing, sore throat, chilliness and tiredness. The same drink at room temperature relieved only the first three. Measured nasal airflow did not change, and the authors discuss a placebo effect. That study used a fruit drink, and its abstract does not say people were randomized.

The steam alone has been reviewed. A Cochrane review of 6 trials in 387 people found it uncertain whether breathing warm, moist air from a device relieves cold symptoms, on evidence rated low quality. In a lab dish, chicken soup slowed the migration of white blood cells linked to inflammation, with large differences between commercial soups. We found no study showing this in people with colds.

Unsettled. The advice to drink plenty of fluids, which soup is often meant to deliver, has not been tested in trials. A Cochrane review searched to 2010 and found no randomized trials of extra fluids in colds or other respiratory infections. That is an absence of trials, which is different from evidence that fluids do nothing.

Who should be careful

Not for everyone. Two cautions. The same Cochrane review notes that some observational studies suggest extra fluids may cause harm in lower respiratory infections such as pneumonia. That signal comes from studies that were not trials. Salt is the other one. In US national survey data, soups of all kinds supplied 4.4% of dietary sodium, one of the top four sources. UK data list dried chicken noodle soup at 3,740 mg sodium per 3.5 oz (100 g), or 220 mg per 3.5 oz (100 g) once made up with water, about 540 mg in a 8.6 oz (245 g) bowl. If you limit salt for blood pressure, heart or kidney reasons, the label on the packet is worth reading.

What expert bodies say

We found no position from a health agency on chicken soup for colds. The relevant syntheses are the two Cochrane reviews above, on fluids and on steam, and neither found enough trials to back either one.

How we searched

What would change this answer

• A randomized trial of chicken soup in people with colds against a fair comparison, such as hot water or a flavored broth, with symptom scores and length of illness as outcomes. Our search found none.
• A trial of the common advice to drink more fluids during a cold, for which Cochrane found no trials.

What is in a bowl of chicken soup, and how versions compare on salt, is on our chicken soup page.

Sources

1. ev-csc-01 · Meta-analysis or systematic review · systematic review with narrative synthesis (no meta-analysis) · n = 342
   Findings showed modest reductions in symptom severity and illness duration (by 1-2.5 days).
   
   Who: children, adults and older adults with acute respiratory tract infections in 4 trials
   Effect: illness duration shorter by 1 to 2.5 days (1 study); lower symptom severity in 3 studies; IL-6, TNF-alpha, CRP lower in 2 studies; no pooled estimate
   Certainty: Full text calls all four studies RCTs but describes one as a single-group pre-post design; soups with herbs and vegetables; comparators varied; no meta-analysis.
   Nutrients, 2025 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
2. ev-csc-02 · Meta-analysis or systematic review · Cochrane systematic review of RCTs (empty review) · n = 0 trials
   No RCTs assessing the effect of increasing fluid intake in acute respiratory infections were found.
   
   Who: people with acute respiratory infections; searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL to December 2010
   Effect: no RCTs found; no evidence for or against advice to increase fluids
   Certainty: Search to 2010; absence of trials, not evidence of no effect.
   Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2011 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
3. ev-csc-03 · Meta-analysis or systematic review · Cochrane systematic review of RCTs (empty review) · n = —
   Some non-experimental (observational) studies report that increasing fluid intake in acute respiratory infections of the lower respiratory tract may cause harm.
   
   Who: people with lower respiratory tract infections in observational studies
   Effect: possible harm (increased anti-diuretic hormone secretion); no trial data
   Certainty: The harm signal comes from non-experimental studies cited by the review, not from trials.
   Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2011 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
4. ev-csc-04 · Meta-analysis or systematic review · Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs · n = 387
   It was uncertain whether heated, humidified air provides symptomatic relief for the common cold, as the fixed-effect analysis showed evidence of an effect (odds ratio (OR) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.56; 2 studies, 149 participants), but the random-effects analysis showed no significant difference in the results (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.95).
   
   Who: people with natural or experimentally induced common cold inhaling heated water vapour
   Effect: symptom relief OR 0.30 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.56) fixed effect, OR 0.22 (0.03 to 1.95) random effects; 2 studies, 149 participants
   Certainty: GRADE low; tests steam devices, which bear on the vapour part of hot soup, not on soup itself.
   Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
5. ev-csc-05 · Randomized controlled trial(s) · randomized controlled trial · n = 160
   Using SPSS software version 22, statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in four symptoms: myalgia, weakness, headache, and cough (p<0.05). During the 5-day treatment period, the control group had significantly lower C-reactive protein (p<0.05).
   
   Who: adults hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 in Tehran, 5-day treatment
   Effect: significant differences in myalgia, weakness, headache and cough (p<0.05); CRP significantly lower in the control group
   Certainty: Multi-ingredient regimen, so the soup's own effect cannot be separated; the abstract's conclusion on CRP contradicts its results.
   Eur J Integr Med, 2022 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
6. ev-csc-06 · Observational data · within-subject experimental comparison, randomization not stated · n = 15
   Hot water by sip increased nasal mucus velocity from 6.2 to 8.4 mm per min, hot chicken soup by sip from 6.9 to 9.2 mm per min, and chicken soup by straw from 6.4 to 7.8 mm per min five minutes after administration.
   
   Who: 15 healthy subjects, measurements 5 and 30 minutes after drinking
   Effect: nasal mucus velocity 6.9 to 9.2 mm/min with hot chicken soup by sip; 6.2 to 8.4 with hot water; back to baseline at 30 min; no change in nasal airflow resistance
   Certainty: Healthy people, not people with colds; short-lived physiological effect; randomization not reported.
   Chest, 1978 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
7. ev-csc-07 · Observational data · controlled comparison of hot vs room-temperature drink, randomization not stated in abstract · n = 30
   The hot drink provided immediate and sustained relief from symptoms of runny nose, cough, sneezing, sore throat, chilliness and tiredness, whereas the same drink at room temperature only provided relief from symptoms of runny nose, cough and sneezing.
   
   Who: 30 subjects with common cold or flu
   Effect: hot drink: relief of runny nose, cough, sneezing, sore throat, chilliness, tiredness; room-temperature drink: runny nose, cough, sneezing only; objective nasal airflow unchanged
   Certainty: Hot fruit drink, not soup; subjective outcomes; authors discuss a placebo effect.
   Rhinology, 2008 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
8. ev-csc-08 · Laboratory or animal data · in vitro · n = —
   Chicken soup significantly inhibited neutrophil migration and did so in a concentration-dependent manner.
   
   Who: human neutrophils in a Boyden chemotaxis chamber assay
   Effect: concentration-dependent inhibition of neutrophil migration; commercial soups varied greatly
   Certainty: In vitro only; no clinical outcome.
   Chest, 2000 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
9. ev-csc-09 · Observational data · cross-sectional national survey analysis · n = 7081
   More than 50% of US population-level dietary sodium intake was contributed by: pizza (5.3%); breads, rolls and buns (4.7%); cold cuts and cured meats (4.6%); soups (4.4%)
   
   Who: US population, NHANES 2017-2018 24 h recalls
   Effect: soups 4.4% of population sodium intake, after pizza, breads and cold cuts
   Certainty: Soups of all kinds, not chicken soup alone; one-day recalls.
   Nutrients, 2023 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
10. ev-csc-10 · Position of an expert body · food composition dataset · n = —
    CoFID 17-850 Soup, chicken noodle, dried | Sodium (mg) | 3740 per 100 g || CoFID 17-714 Soup, chicken noodle, dried, as served | Sodium (mg) | 220 per 100 g
    
    Who: —
    Effect: sodium 3740 mg/100 g dried (code 17-850) vs 220 mg/100 g as served (code 17-714)
    Certainty: One UK product type; a 8.6 oz (245 g) bowl as served carries about 540 mg sodium.
    CoFID 2021, Public Health England, codes 17-850 and 17-714 (OGL v3.0) · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the dataset