Home › Our Method

How we grade evidence

And why this site publishes no dosing protocols.

The problem with peptide information

Search any peptide and you will find the same paragraph rewritten a hundred times: a confident summary of benefits, a mechanism stated as settled fact, and a dosing table. The tone does not change between a molecule with three Phase 3 trials and a molecule with one uncontrolled rodent study from 1994. That flattening is the single biggest failure of peptide information online, and it is what this library exists to correct.

Five tiers

Every profile carries a tier badge before you read anything else. The tier describes the strength of human evidence — nothing more. It is not a safety rating, not a recommendation, and not a ranking of how interesting the biology is. Some of the most scientifically fascinating molecules here sit at Tier 4 or 5 precisely because nobody has done the work.

Tier 1 — FDA Approved

Approved by the FDA for at least one indication. Human efficacy and safety established for that use.

Tier 2 — Clinical Trials

In active human clinical trials (Phase 2/3). Not approved. Efficacy not established.

Tier 3 — Limited Human Data

Some human studies exist, but small, dated, or approved only outside the US.

Tier 4 — Preclinical Only

Evidence is animal or in-vitro. Human efficacy and safety are unestablished.

Tier 5 — Minimal Data

Little or no peer-reviewed human evidence. Claims commonly outrun the science.

What a tier does not mean

  • Tier 1 is not an endorsement. Semaglutide is approved and carries a boxed warning. Approval means the evidence exists, and that the risks are known — not that they are absent.
  • Tier 4 is not a dismissal. MOTS-c is genuine, well-published mitochondrial biology. It is Tier 4 because the human interventional work has not been done, not because the science is poor.
  • Tier 5 is a warning about the record, not proof of inactivity. It means claims have outrun evidence to a degree that should change how you read them.

Some of these are not peptides

Nine entries in this library are not peptides, and we label every one of them at the top of its profile. NAD+ is a dinucleotide coenzyme. NMN is a nucleotide. MK-677 is a spiropiperidine small molecule. 5-Amino-1MQ is a quinolinium. HCG is a glycoprotein hormone, somatropin a 191-residue protein, follistatin a 344-residue glycoprotein. Cerebrolysin and thymalin are not single molecules at all — they are animal-derived mixtures of variable composition.

We include them because they are sold by peptide vendors, filed under peptides, and discussed as peptides, and pretending otherwise would make the library less useful rather than more accurate. But the label stays on. If a vendor cannot tell you whether the thing they are selling is a peptide, that is a fact about the vendor.

Editorial policy: what we do publish, and what we do not

We report the doses used in clinical trials and on FDA labels, as a matter of record — cited, and framed as what a study or label actually administered. Where a compound has never been tested in humans, the profile says exactly that, because “no dose has ever been established” is itself the most useful dosing fact we can give you.

We do not convert any of that into a personal protocol. We will not calculate a dose for your body weight, tell you what to inject, or write reconstitution and administration steps. That is the line, and it is a real one: reporting what a trial did is publishing; generating a personalised injection instruction is closer to practising medicine, and it manufactures false precision for compounds where no therapeutic window in humans exists. Three reasons underpin it, in order of importance.

For unapproved substances, there is no personal dose to honestly calculate. A weight-based number implies a therapeutic window — an amount shown to produce a defined benefit at acceptable risk in humans. For most compounds here that study has never been run, so a “0.3 mg for your weight” figure would be interpolated from nothing and handed to one person as instruction. We will tell you what a trial used; we will not pretend a personalised protocol exists where it does not.

For approved drugs, dosing is clinical work. It is individualised, titrated, and monitored by a physician who can see the patient. A web page cannot do that and should not pretend to.

And the regulatory reality is unambiguous. In March and April 2026 the FDA issued a coordinated set of warning letters to online peptide sellers. Every one of those sites carried “research use only” and “not for human consumption” disclaimers. The FDA's position was that the disclaimers were irrelevant, because the surrounding page copy described human effects and use. The website content was the evidence that the products were unapproved new drugs. Any site that pairs a peptide with a protocol has, in the agency's reading, marketed a drug — whatever the footer says.

The short version

A disclaimer does not neutralise the page it sits on. We would rather publish less and have all of it be true.

Sources and revision

Profiles are built from primary literature, FDA public records including the 503A bulk substances lists and advisory committee materials, clinical trial registries, and WADA's prohibited list. Regulatory status in this field moves quickly — BPC-157 has changed category twice since 2023 — so every profile carries a date and an instruction to verify independently. When we do not know something, the profile says so.

Important notice Forge Bioenergy publishes scientific reference information only. Nothing on this site is medical advice, a therapeutic claim, or a recommendation to use any substance in humans. Many peptides described here are not approved by the FDA for any use, and several are approved only for narrow indications under prescription. We do not publish dosing, administration, or usage protocols. Consult a licensed physician before making any medical decision.