We publish our mistakes

Grade of tested-negative kept, and its basis stated honestly. The summary called the compound 'properly tested', but the phase IIb weight-loss failure has never been published with data: it is known only from the developer's 2007 stock-exchange announcement. The trials themselves demonstrably ran — the developer's own 2013 safety paper describes them — and that paper now fills the human research section. The placeholder slot for the phase IIb result was removed rather than kept, because no source reporting its data exists to cite. That paper also lists five serious adverse events in the 12-week trial, four of them cancers and all in treated groups, which its abstract summarises as no serious adverse event related to the peptide; that is now a safety signal, with the investigators' reasons for judging them unrelated reported alongside. Three factual corrections: the structure is residues 177-191 plus an N-terminal tyrosine, sixteen residues, not 176-191 with a tyrosine added; 'every human efficacy trial used oral administration' was true only of the obesity programme, since a later analgesia trial as LAT8881 used a single intravenous infusion; and the GRAS myth now has its origin recorded — a self-affirmed expert-panel determination the developer reported, not an FDA notice.

The generic humanResearch entry 'cardiogen-h1' and its placeholder reference 'ref-cardiogen-1' were removed, not filled, which leaves humanResearch empty. Searches of PubMed, Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov found no human study of the Ala-Glu-Asp-Arg tetrapeptide. The ClinicalTrials.gov hits for 'cardiogen' were the unrelated CardioGen-82 rubidium generator. One preclinicalResearch entry was added: Khavinson et al. 2012 (PMID 22977870), an in-vitro study in cultured mouse embryonic fibroblasts. Its reference replaces the placeholder in the dossier references. The sequence Ala-Glu-Asp-Arg was checked against the originating group's own peptide table (PMID 35887081, Table 2, 'Cardiogen (AEDR)') and its US Patent 7,662,789 (SEQ ID NO:1), and it is unchanged. The 'insufficient' grade stands on the same ground as before: we found no independent replication. Before publication, 'synthetic' was removed from the entry because the source abstract does not use the word. An unsupported claim that Chalisova et al. 2009 belonged to the same circle as the originating group was replaced with what its PubMed record actually shows.

Corrected the sequence from Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly to Ala-Glu-Asp. The old sequence belongs to Epitalon and came in through the shared Khavinson generator. The originating group's own publications name Cartalax as the AED tripeptide (PMIDs 37782637, 37176122), so whatItIs now describes a 3-amino-acid peptide, and the aliases are Ala-Glu-Asp and AED. Removed the generic human placeholder (cartalax-h1) and its placeholder reference. We found no human study that gave the AED tripeptide itself, so humanResearch is now empty. The human-facing reports we did find concern tissue extracts: a cartilage polypeptide complex described as in phase II trials, with no results reported, and Sigumir. Added one in-vitro study from the originating group (PMID 37782646) on chondrogenic markers in aged human mesenchymal stem cells. The grade stays "insufficient" because we still found no independent replication.

Replaced the placeholder human entry (pinealon-h1) with Meshchaninov et al. 2015 (PMID 26390612). This is a Russian-language report, read from its English abstract, on the synthetic tripeptides Pinealon and Vesugen given together to 30-32 adults with organic brain syndrome. The abstract's participant count is internally inconsistent, so no number is carried. The study is typed open-label on the basis that no control group is described; the abstract does not itself state the design, and the entry says so. The group affiliation is unresolved. Added the first preclinical entry, Arutjunyan et al. 2012 (PMID 22567179), an originating-group rat study of prenatal hyperhomocysteinaemia that states the Glu-Asp-Arg sequence. The listed sequence was confirmed against three primary abstracts and is unchanged. The evidence summary now names the outside and adjacent work: the Ekaterinburg group, the Rostov-on-Don South Federal University group (which is linked to the originating institute through co-authorship) and a 2026 preprint. It also notes one occupational-comparison report that prints p-values. The grade stays insufficient, because none of this work replicates a specific originating-group finding. The CD34+ and prooxidant findings are to be carried into safetySignals as a reported, unquantified caution, observed with Pinealon and Vesugen co-administered and not attributed to either peptide.

We replaced the generic template human entry (testagen-h1, placeholder reference) and left humanResearch empty: no human study of synthetic Lys-Glu-Asp-Gly could be found, and the only registry match (NCT02733133) is an unrelated testosterone product sold under the Testagen name. We added one preclinical entry, Fedoreyeva, Kireev, Khavinson and Vanyushin 2011 (PMID 22117547). In that paper, fluorescein-labelled testagen reached HeLa cell nuclei, and the unlabelled peptide showed sequence-dependent quenching with DNA oligonucleotides in cell-free assays. It is recorded as work from the originating programme, not as replication. The sequence KEDG was checked against this paper and against the Chita State Medical Academy series and is unchanged. Those abstracts describe the peptide as derived from pituitary cytomedins, not testicular tissue, so the dossier's 'testicular' label currently has no support. The testicular extract (patent RU2302874, PMID 28243903) and the gamma-Glu-Lys dipeptide (RU2324703) are different materials and are not cited under Testagen. The grade stays insufficient. Before approval, the entry was corrected to attribute the Moscow agricultural-biotechnology affiliation only to the first author, to drop a claim that the paper is the primary source for the sequence, and to scope its no-outcome statements to what the abstract reports.

We replaced the generic template human entry (vesugen-h1) and its placeholder reference with a sourced entry, and added the dossier's first preclinical entry. The human entry is Kitachov et al. 2013 (PMID 28976154), a 41-patient before-and-after report of Vezugen monotherapy after lower-limb arterial surgery. We mark it as from inside the originating programme because of the co-author and team overlap with the Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology. It is uncontrolled and was read from the abstract only. The preclinical entry is Khavinson et al. 2021 (PMID 34071923), synthetic KED in 5xFAD-M mice. We checked it against the full text. The spine effect differed by sex, restoring spine density in males only. The neuroplasticity effect was a non-significant trend. A 2025 correction (PMID 39861198) replaced duplicated male and female spine figures, and the authors say the conclusions are unaffected. We confirmed the sequence Lys-Glu-Asp (KED; alias T-38) from primary literature. The evidence grade stays 'insufficient'. We refined the evidence summary to note the limited independent work that exists: one null in-vitro test of the commercial product (PMID 28124601) and uncontrolled Ekaterinburg human reports that combine vesugen with Pinealon. None of it replicates an originating-group finding.

Grade of established confirmed rather than changed, and now actually cited. The efficacy claim had been sitting on a placeholder reference, and a citation pass proposed the sponsor's safety review for the slot — a source reporting no efficacy outcome at all, which would have left the grade resting on a paper that does not measure what it grades. Resolved to RECONNECT (Kingsberg 2019), the two phase 3 trials the approval was granted on, with the effect sizes stated so the reader can see how small they are in absolute terms. The safety review was added as its own entry, where it substantiates the safety signals instead of standing in for the trial.

Reframed for consistency with the five Khavinson siblings added later. The grade is unchanged — it was and is about absent independent replication — but the wording previously leaned on Western reporting conventions as the yardstick, which conflated a discoverability limit with a quality verdict. Russian marketing status added; certificate details withheld as unverifiable.

Evidence grade changed from "preliminary" to "insufficient", and the human-research section filled with five cited studies in place of a single placeholder slot. Recorded rather than quietly amended, because the grade moved on a disputed reading of the literature and the reasoning needs to be auditable. The prior summary's framing that no therapeutic outcome trial exists was wrong: a 48-week double-blind placebo-controlled trial of intranasal GHRP-2 in 126 GH-deficient children (PMID 25374440) found no growth benefit over placebo and no between-group difference in IGF-I, and is now cited. That trial was considered as grounds for "tested-negative" and rejected, because it tested a different route, a different population and a growth endpoint rather than the muscle-recovery claim this dossier states, and because its authors attribute the null to insufficient GH exposure; no human study of GHRP-2 has measured muscle, body composition, strength or recovery at all, so grading it tested-negative would assert that the claim on this page was tested and failed when it has not been tested. A supporting argument that GHRP-2 raises GH without ever moving IGF-I was also rejected as false: that dissociation holds for the intermittent schedules tested but not for continuous exposure, where IGF-I rises substantially (PMIDs 10372723, 9467533, 12030918). Diagnostic validation (PMIDs 17609397, 23079545) is substantial and is now stated explicitly in approvedUses and evidenceSummary so the grade is not read as saying the compound is inert, and the unsourced claim that it is "used diagnostically in Japan" is replaced with what the cited paper supports plus a verify-locally caveat. The human food-intake evidence removed from the GHRP-6 dossier in the compound-conflation correction is placed here, where it was generated, and carried as a new safety signal graded "promising".

Corrected a compound conflation. The appetite evidence this dossier relied on was generated with GHRP-2, not GHRP-6 — searches of the human GHRP-6 literature returned diagnostic provocation testing, pharmacokinetics and ACTH/cortisol work, and no trial measuring appetite, hunger or food intake. Several records that appear in an appetite search are for [D-Lys3]-GHRP-6, which is the receptor antagonist rather than this compound. The human research slot is now cited to GHRH plus GHRP-6 provocation testing, which is what the literature actually contains, and the appetite safety signal is regraded from preliminary to preclinical. Recorded rather than quietly amended, because attributing one compound's clinical data to another is the failure this platform exists to call out.

Merged two study entries into one. This dossier described a 2007 systematic review AND a separate 2008 meta-analysis of 27 trials in 440 participants. Citation resolution could not find that second paper — the figures appear to belong to the 2007 review, which is real and now cited. An invented second source is exactly the failure this platform exists to call out, so it is recorded rather than quietly deleted. Remaining figures are described qualitatively until read from the full text.

Grade of safety-concern confirmed rather than changed, and the clearance claim behind it properly sourced. That grade never rested on the clearance figure — it rests on there being no human trial of this analogue at all, on reagent-grade supply whose own vendors prohibit human use, and on a mechanism that plausibly worsens acute hypoglycaemia risk. But proposedMechanism asserted roughly an order of magnitude higher metabolic clearance, and the only paper cited here could not support it: Gillespie 1996 compares renal failure against normal animals peptide by peptide, never LR3IGF-I against native IGF-1. The comparison that does exist is Bastian 1993, which gives both peptides to the same rats and reports metabolic clearance about eleven times higher for the analogue. Added as its own entry. The claim was right and the citation was wrong, which is the harder version of this problem to catch.

Dossier created. All registration certificate numbers and all trial figures excluded as unverifiable. Graded on absence of independent replication, not on country of origin.

Dossier created. All registration certificate numbers and all trial figures excluded as unverifiable. Graded on absence of independent replication, not on country of origin.

Dossier created. Russian registration particulars excluded as unverifiable.

Dossier created. Phase 2 percentages excluded: the accessible reporting contained a contradiction between adverse-event rates and the stated trial-arm design.

Dossier created. Two specific harm statistics were excluded as uncited despite being offered as the justification for the grade; the grade rests instead on documented regulatory warnings.

Dossier created. Graded on the blend format rather than on its components, each of which is covered separately.

Dossier created. Compounding-committee vote details excluded as unverifiable.

Dossier created.

Dossier created. Vendor-sourced CAS number excluded as unverifiable.

Dossier created. All registration certificate numbers and all trial figures excluded as unverifiable. Graded on absence of independent replication, not on country of origin.

Dossier created. A fabricated anxiety trial with full fake figures was found circulating in our research sources and excluded.

Dossier created. A fabricated stroke trial with full fake figures was found circulating in our research sources and excluded. All registration certificate details were excluded pending state-register verification.

Dossier created. No human study exists; none is implied.

Dossier created. All registration certificate numbers and all trial figures excluded as unverifiable. Graded on absence of independent replication, not on country of origin.

Dossier created. A narrative that it was 'out-competed commercially rather than refuted' was rejected — that is a causal story built from absence of data.

Dossier created. All registration certificate numbers and all trial figures excluded as unverifiable. Graded on absence of independent replication, not on country of origin.

Dossier created. Orphan designation numbers and national marketing authorisations excluded — those registers are public and must be cited directly rather than from summaries.

Dossier created. Fact-check flagged fabricated human phase 1 data circulating with fully specified figures — none reached this page. Also corrected: emergency presentations reported in a January 2026 FDA action were attributed to a compounded NAD+ product, not to this compound, and must not be listed here as its adverse events.

Dossier created. Fact-check rejected the widely circulated 'FDA GRAS, GRN 000546' claim as fabricated — that notice number belongs to an unrelated substance. Also surfaced that no human efficacy trial used the injected route, which the claim set had missed entirely.

Dossier created and graded Tested, no benefit for its grey-market use. Fact-check corrections applied: hGH is NOT a scheduled controlled substance, and 21 U.S.C. 333(e) reaches distribution and possession with intent to distribute, not simple possession. Both errors are common in secondary sources and neither was published.

Dossier created. Fact-check correction applied before publication: the extended-half-life premise repeated across vendor listings is backwards, and there is no boxed warning on the Increlex label — hypoglycaemia sits in Warnings and Precautions. Neither error was published.

Regraded from Preliminary to Tested, no benefit. The earlier grade implied an evidence gap; the trials were in fact adequately powered and answered the question negatively. This compound is why the grade was added.

Dossier created. Fact-check correction applied: FDA's exclusion of NMN from the dietary supplement definition was REVERSED in late 2025. Publishing the old position as current would have been a false statement of US law. The India and EU positions were added — both are the inverse of the US one, and are the ones that bind our readership.

Dossier created. Fact-check corrections applied: the 'approved in 30+ countries for hepatitis B and/or C' framing was rejected as materially misleading, and the US position rewritten — it is a failed phase 3 programme, not a regulatory gap.

Dossier created. Regulatory note written to prevent the approval being read as covering off-label use in men.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created.

Dossier created and graded Safety concern. This grade reflects documented human harms, not weak efficacy evidence.

Dossier created. Graded Preliminary rather than Promising: the human trials are good quality and largely negative on function.

Dossier created. Note added distinguishing the commercial fragment from the full protein studied in most of the cited literature.

Dossier created. Regulatory table flags that EU standing has changed over time and must be re-verified.

Regulatory note clarified to distinguish compounding-committee consideration from approval, after reader confusion.

Added grey-market supply safety signal at serious severity.

Scheduled review. Regulatory table re-checked; no change to standings.

Scheduled review. No change to evidence grade.

Scheduled review. No change.

Scheduled review; trial table refreshed.

Downgraded from preliminary to insufficient after independent-replication search returned nothing.

Clarified that cosmetic listing is not drug approval.

Added lean-mass safety signal and reclassified it from watch to caution.

Downgraded from preliminary to preclinical after re-reading the cited human literature.