About
Methodology
How to read this site, and what its labels mean.
Approved by the FDA for at least one indication, with published phase 3 data and a regulated supply chain.
Randomised controlled human data exists and is published, but the compound is not approved for the use discussed here.
Evidence is cell-culture and animal work. No completed randomised controlled trial in humans for this use.
Human use is documented mainly through self-report. Treat every effect claim as unverified.
The tier describes the use, not the molecule
This is the distinction that makes the tiers useful rather than decorative. A compound is rated on the evidence for what people take it for, not on whether any research exists.
BPC-157 has well over a hundred published papers. It is rated preclinical, because none of them is a completed randomised controlled trial in humans. GHK-Cu has decades of topical trials and is still rated preclinical, because the injectable route people are buying has no trials behind it. Tesamorelin is approved - for HIV-associated lipodystrophy, which is not why most readers arrive at its page, and the page says so.
Where dosing figures come from
Every dose on this site is labelled by origin, and the two categories are not interchangeable:
- Trial doses - what was actually administered in a published study, cited. Retatrutide’s 1-12 mg range is this.
- Reported practice - what users and vendors converge on, with no dose-finding study behind it. Ipamorelin’s 200-300 mcg is this. It is recorded because you will encounter it, and knowing that it is convention rather than evidence is more useful than not knowing the number.
Neither is a recommendation. Where a figure has no study behind it, the page says so in the same sentence as the number rather than in a footnote.
What this site will not do
- Recommend vendors. Any list would be stale within months, and a reference that also directs traffic to sellers has an interest in what it concludes.
- Fabricate community sentiment. Reddit removed unauthenticated API access, so community sections are populated by a script run against real threads with real permalinks. Where that cache is empty, the section says it is empty. Inventing plausible-sounding quotes would be indistinguishable from the vendor copy this site exists to be an alternative to.
- Round a preclinical compound up. Encouraging language about a compound with no human trials is the most common failure mode in this space, and it is usually done by describing mouse results in the passive voice until they sound like human ones.
- Pretend the legal position is settled when it is not. Regulatory status is stated per compound with a date, because it changes.
Corrections
Every compound page carries a last-reviewed date. Trials read out, approvals land, and bulk-substance lists change - a page that has not been touched in a year should be treated as a year old. If something here is wrong, it is worth more to this site to fix it than to have been right.