Hype against randomized trials for one topic, computed and dated 30 October 2026. It rates the topic, never a person, and gives no dosing and no sourcing.
The short version
308Kyearly wiki viewsEnglish Wikipedia, to 30 Sep 2026
0randomized-trial paperstyped on PubMed
Noneviews per trial papernothing to divide by
Pure copiumthe verdictby the published rule
BPC-157
Pure copium
No trialsto divide attention by
hype308K views a yearproof0 trial papers
Lots of attention and zero randomized-trial papers. The hype has no human trial record to point at yet.
English Wikipedia readers opened the BPC-157 article about 308K times in the year to 30 September 2026. PubMed holds 0 papers typed as randomized trials for it, so there is nothing to divide attention by, and the verdict is Pure copium.
That is a statement about the gap between attention and trial record. It does not say whether BPC-157 works or whether it is safe for anyone.
How does it compare with the others?
BPC-157 next to the other fourhype above, proof below, read 30 October 2026
Top chart: attention. Bottom chart: randomized-trial papers typed on PubMed. The highlighted bar is BPC-157. A big top bar over a small bottom bar is what the meter reads as hype ahead of the trials.