This is educational information, not medical advice, and The Peptide University does not sell peptides, supplies, or supplements. Many compounds discussed here are sold as “research chemicals” and are not approved for human use outside of clinical trials. Laws vary by country, and nothing here is a recommendation to obtain or use anything. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation.
The short version
- A primary source is the actual study. A headline about the study is not.
- Animal and cell studies are a starting point, not proof it works in people.
- Sample size, controls, and who funded it tell you how much weight to give a result.
- “Statistically significant” is not the same as “large” or “meaningful.”
Primary vs. secondary sources
A primary source is the original research — the clinical trial, the lab study, the paper with methods and results. A secondary source summarizes it: a news article, a YouTube video, a forum post, a vendor's blog. Secondary sources are fine for finding studies, but you evaluate the claim by going to the primary source. The game is always: who actually measured this, and what did they measure?
Where to find studies
- PubMed (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) — the standard index of biomedical literature.
- ClinicalTrials.gov — registered human trials, including ones still running.
- Google Scholar — broad, good for finding full-text PDFs.
Start with the abstract — the structured summary at the top. It tells you the population, what was done, and the headline result in about 250 words.
Trial phases & what they mean
| Phase | Question it asks | Roughly how many people |
|---|---|---|
| Preclinical | Does it do anything in cells / animals? | No humans yet |
| Phase 1 | Is it safe? What dose is tolerated? | Tens |
| Phase 2 | Does it work, and at what dose? | Hundreds |
| Phase 3 | Does it work vs. standard care, at scale? | Thousands |
A compound with only preclinical or Phase 1 data is a long way from proven. That's not a reason to dismiss it — it's a reason to calibrate how confidently anyone (including you) should talk about it.
Weighing a study
Five quick questions do most of the work:
- Humans or animals? Mouse results don't automatically transfer to people.
- How many subjects? Ten people can't tell you much; thousands can.
- Was there a control group? Compared against placebo or against nothing?
- Who funded it? Industry funding doesn't invalidate a study, but it's context.
- Effect size? A “significant” 1% change may not matter in real life.
“Statistically significant” just means the result probably isn't random noise. It says nothing about whether the effect is large or useful. Always look at the actual numbers, not just the p-value.
Common traps
- Quoting a headline without reading the paper.
- Treating an animal or in-vitro result as human proof.
- Confusing a vendor blog for a source.
- Cherry-picking one study while ignoring the rest of the literature.
Common questions
QI'm not a scientist — can I really read these?
Yes. Read the abstract, then the conclusion, then skim methods for sample size and controls. You'll understand more than you expect, and it gets easier fast.
QWhat if studies disagree?
They often do. Look at which are larger, better controlled, and more recent, and lean toward the weight of evidence rather than any single paper.
QAre preprints trustworthy?
Preprints haven't been peer-reviewed yet. They can be valuable but should be read with extra caution — treat them as provisional.
Questions & comments
No account, no login — leave a name or stay anonymous. Ask a question, add something the article missed, or answer someone else. Be kind and cite sources where you can.