Peptide Record

Methodology

Evidence grading

Grades are computed per peptide-outcome pair, never per peptide, from five inputs by a fixed rule. No editorial judgment, no hand-tuning, and no exceptions for any vendor.

The five inputs

Thresholds imported from the grader itself
Best available study type
human-rct5
human-observational4
animal2
preclinical1
none0
Largest human sample size · independent replication · directional consistency
Largest human n ≥ 2003
Largest human n ≥ 502
Largest human n ≥ 11
No human study0
3 independent research groups3
2 independent research groups2
1 independent research group1
90% concordant direction of effect3
70% concordant direction of effect2
50% concordant direction of effect1
Bias risk
One point per flag — industry funding stated, preregistration stated absent, blinding stated absent — floored at −3. A flag is counted only where a record states it. Silence deducts nothing and certifies nothing: deducting for every unreported funding source would subtract the same constant from every peptide in the corpus, which measures how little has been extracted rather than how much bias there is.
0 to −3

From total to letter

The five components sum, floored at zero. The letter is then resolved in order:

  • Best study type scoring 1 or less (preclinical or nothing) → E, whatever the total.
  • Best study type scoring 2 (animal) → D, whatever the total.
  • Total ≥ 11 and replication ≥ 2 A. Both conjuncts are required: a high total carried by one research group is not replicated evidence, however large the trial.
  • Total ≥ 8B.
  • Otherwise → C.

The first two rules are gates, not scores. Animal evidence cannot reach C by accumulating replication and consistency points, because no quantity of rat studies is a human study.

Replication and consistency are measured over the same studies. Both read the records at the best available study tier — the tier that produced the study-type score — and nothing below it. A pair whose best evidence is one human trial cannot take replication points from three animal groups, and cannot take consistency points from five animal readings either. The two rows in the decomposition beside every grade therefore describe one population, which is what makes the ledger addable by eye.

The consistency ratio needs at least three stated directions before it returns anything; below that it scores 0 rather than awarding full marks for one paper agreeing with itself. The denominator is printed under the row on every peptide page, because a ratio over three readings and the same ratio over ninety are the same number and are not the same evidence.

Worked examples — the grade column is computed by the grader
SituationComponentsTotalGrade
Two RCTs from separate groups, n = 400, agreeing, preregistered5 · 3 · 3 · 3 · 014
One industry RCT, n = 300, unblinded, not preregistered5 · 3 · 1 · 3 · -39
One small human study, n = 24, no replication5 · 1 · 1 · 1 · -17
Rat studies only, however many2 · 0 · 3 · 3 · 08
In vitro work only1 · 0 · 3 · 3 · 07

What the corpus actually grades

84 graded pairs · 18 with evidence and no grade
Strong6
Moderate25
Limited13
Preliminary40
Insufficient0
Not gradedPairs holding evidence where no record carries a determined study design. Declined rather than graded E: E says we looked and the evidence is insufficient, and that is a claim about a literature we have not finished reading.18
The ungraded pairs, and how much evidence each one holds
PeptideOutcomeRecordsWith a determined design
BremelanotidePigmentation20
GHK-CuInflammation20
SemaglutideSleep quality20
TirzepatideMood & anxiety20
SemaglutideMuscle growth & preservation10
TirzepatideMuscle growth & preservation10
TesamorelinNeuroprotection10
TirzepatideNeuroprotection10
TirzepatideSkin appearance & aging10
Thymosin beta-4Sleep quality10
Thymosin beta-4Tendon & ligament repair10
CJC-1295Wound healing10
IpamorelinWound healing10
BPC-157Bone & joint health10
TesamorelinWound healing10
BPC-157Exercise performance & endurance10
SemaglutideFatigue & energy10
TesamorelinImmune function10

Grade E showing zero does not mean nothing is insufficient. It means the grader has not yet reached a pair it can say that about. Every pair in the table above holds collected evidence and no record in it carries a design the type mapper could determine — mostly reviews, editorials, commentary and papers PubMed never indexed with a publication type. Those pairs used to render nowhere at all, which turned a 0% into a claim about the corpus rather than about our coverage of it.

A grade of E is not a lesser thing to look at, and it is drawn at the same size in the same ink as A everywhere on this site. “There is not much evidence here” is the most common honest answer about peptides and it is usually the one a reader most needs.

A grade is not a safety assessment. It says how much evidence exists for one outcome. It says nothing about side effects, contamination, drug interactions, or whether anyone should take anything.