THE BLP STANDARD • OUR METHODOLOGY

BLP Evidence Framework

Every compound in the Research Hub is scored the same way, using published criteria. We rate the strength and maturity of the evidence—not whether a compound is “good.” Here is exactly how it works, so you can check our reasoning.

FIVE DIMENSIONS

What we score

Each compound receives five independent scores. Keeping them separate is deliberate—a compound can have a strong mechanism but little human data, or heavy real-world use but few formal trials. A single star rating would hide those distinctions.

1 • Human Evidence

How much documented human research exists. Popularity is not evidence.

5 — FDA-approved. Approved by the FDA in a clinical formulation.

4 — Phase 3 complete. Completed Phase 3 human trials but not yet approved.

3 — Human trials. At least one human RCT or Phase 2 study.

2 — Documented human studies. Human research exists, even if smaller, older, or from outside Western regulators (for example, established clinical use abroad).

1 — No human clinical foundation. Evidence is animal, cell-based, or anecdotal only.

2 • Mechanistic Support

How well the underlying biology is understood.

5 — Specific, characterized target with a well-mapped pathway.

3 — Plausible mechanism that is partially understood.

1 — Speculative or largely unknown mechanism.

3 • Observable Outcomes

How measurable and objective the studied effects are.

5 — Large, objective, consistent measures (for example, body weight or HbA1c).

3 — Measurable but modest, variable, or shown mainly in models.

1 — Theoretical, not yet demonstrated in outcomes.

4 • Established Use

Real-world research track record, scored separately from formal trials. This lets us show a long history of use honestly—without letting it stand in for clinical evidence.

5 — Long, widespread, consistent use over many years.

3 — Growing use, generally positive but variable.

1 — Minimal or too new to establish a pattern.

Established Use is scored from checkable signals—how long a compound has been in common research use and how consistent that use is—never from individual testimonials or health claims.

THE BADGE

How Research Maturity is decided

Maturity is not scored by hand. It is derived from the five dimensions above using fixed rules, so it can never contradict the underlying scores.

Established

FDA-approved, or Phase 3 complete with a strong real-world track record, or a long documented history of human use. Something can only be Established if real evidence supports it.

Emerging

Has real human research but has not yet reached the Established bar.

Experimental

Human research is minimal—no matter how popular the compound is.

THE PRINCIPLES THAT KEEP IT HONEST

Why this is defensible

Popularity is never evidence

A widely used compound with no clinical foundation still reads as Experimental. We show its real-world track record openly on the Established Use axis, but that use never raises its evidence score or its maturity. What people find helpful and what has been documented in research are two different questions, and we answer them separately.

Evidence from anywhere counts—anecdote does not

Documented human studies count as evidence even when they come from outside Western regulators. A compound with decades of clinical study abroad is treated differently from one that is merely popular. The line is whether documented human research exists, not where it was run.

Blends are only as proven as the blend

Combination products are rarely tested as a specific blend. A blend inherits credit from its best-evidenced ingredient, but its Human Evidence is capped—so a blend can never read as trial-proven on the strength of the combination alone.

We rate evidence, not products

A low score does not mean a compound is ineffective. It reflects where the current research stands. We would rather show you an honest, limited evidence picture than imply a certainty the science does not support.

Why we sometimes say “not yet”

Interesting mechanisms, animal data, or social-media attention can justify further research, but they do not automatically establish human effectiveness or safety. BLP prioritizes transparent evidence maturity and realistic expectations over catalog size.

Every compound is scored identically, so the results stay comparable across the whole catalog, and each page shows a “Last literature review” date—scores are not fixed, and change as new human research emerges.

An educational standard, not medical advice

The Evidence Framework describes the state of the research. It does not diagnose, treat, or recommend any compound for any person, and it does not guarantee efficacy, safety, or a particular outcome. All materials are for laboratory and research use only.