Methodology
How BioStack grades evidence.
Every compound dossier in the library carries an evidence tier. The tier describes the strength of the published research behind what the dossier reports — nothing more. This page is the rubric, in full, so the grading is inspectable rather than taken on trust.
The five tiers
Unknown
No graded human or preclinical literature has been reviewed for this claim, or the available material does not meet the sourcing bar below. Unknown is the default state — a compound starts here and earns its way out.
Limited
Sparse evidence: isolated case reports, small uncontrolled studies, or findings that have not been replicated. Enough to describe, not enough to weigh.
Moderate
Multiple consistent studies or at least one well-designed controlled trial, with limitations in size, duration, or population that keep the picture incomplete.
Strong
Replicated controlled human trials or systematic reviews pointing the same direction. Strong describes the state of the literature — it is not an endorsement of use.
Mechanistic
Evidence describes how a compound acts (receptor, pathway, in-vitro or animal data) without adequate human outcome data. A plausible mechanism is not an outcome.
Where sources come from
Dossier claims cite published literature — peer-reviewed studies, reviews, and regulatory documentation — and every dossier lists its references so a claim can be followed back to its source. Social posts, influencer content, and anecdote are not sources, whatever their reach. When the literature is thin, the dossier says so instead of borrowing confidence it has not earned.
What a grade is not
- A grade never means a compound is safe, effective, or appropriate for any person.
- A grade never ranks compounds against each other or suggests one over another.
- A grade never accounts for an individual’s health status, medications, or context — only a qualified clinician can.
- A higher tier is not a recommendation. It means more is known, including, sometimes, more about limitations and risks.
BioStack is not a doctor. The library exists so decisions people are already making are grounded in what the research actually says — the decision, and the conversation with a qualified clinician, stays with you.