The evidence ladder
Which topics have real trials behind them? Ranked by how deep the randomized-trial record goes, set beside how much attention each gets. Depth of record, not size of effect.
Five lines we check on every topic
Every guide here reads these lines on the source's own page and dates what it found. The full method is on how we check.
- 01
How many real trials?
PubMed papers typed as randomized controlled trials, with the query linked.
3,954resistance training trial papers - 02
Do the reviews agree?
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses for the same queries.
1,852resistance training reviews - 03
How much hype?
English Wikipedia pageviews as a curiosity proxy, never as search volume.
308KBPC-157 yearly wiki views - 04
Where is the gap?
Attention set against trial depth, side by side.
3,954 vs 0resistance training vs BPC-157 - 05
Is it still true?
Counts are read on the date shown and re-read monthly.
30 Novnext review
Every topic guide
Each one prints the date its figures were read and the date they will be read again.
The evidence ladder: trial depth by topic
Training, creatine, sleep, sunscreen, skin and hair care and BPC-157, counted from public registries.
Steroid era vs peptide era: the harm data
Published cohorts link non-medical steroid use with higher mortality and heart disease; most peptides have almost no harm data. Missing data is not safety.