@finnveerman_fitness
1 post audited · 6 claims analysed
Science evidence grade
Based on 6 claims across 1 audit
4
Supported
67%
2
Overstated
33%
0
Misleading
0%
0
No Evidence
0%
Share this evidence grade
Claim-level evidence grades — not a character judgment. Methodology · Right of reply · Leaderboards
What @finnveerman_fitness claims actually are
We separate claims into three buckets: backed by evidence, factually incorrect, and grey — like animal-only findings sold as human fact (e.g. BPC-157 “fixes Achilles” from rat studies).
Evidence-based
67%
4 claims
Claims that align with published human or clinical evidence at the stated strength.
Ex: “Semaglutide can reduce body weight in adults with obesity” — supported by large RCTs.
Factually incorrect
0%
0 claims
Claims that conflict with the evidence, invent certainty, or omit critical safety/context in a misleading way.
Ex: “Peptides have no side effects” — contradicts known adverse-event profiles.
Grey / overstated
33%
2 claims
Plausible direction but wrong certainty — animal-only data sold as human fact, dose/effect overstated, or no adequate published support yet.
Ex: “BPC-157 fixes Achilles tears” — often rests on rodent tendon models, not proven human Achilles repair trials.
Evidence mix
Share of audited claims in each bucket
Verdict detail
Grey splits into overstated (wrong certainty) vs no published support
Claims over time
Stacked by bucket as audits land — plus the running evidence grade
Gold line = running science evidence grade (Supported + ½ Overstated ÷ total claims).
Audit history(1 post)
“Dit is wat je moet weten over peptides..👆”
Claims 1–4 are strongly supported by scientific evidence: peptides are indeed short amino acid chains produced endogenously; GLP-1 agonists, insulin, and glucagon each have extensive human clinical data documenting safety and efficacy. Claims 5–6 are overstated: BPC-157 and TB-500 have promising preclinical animal evidence for tissue healing, but zero registered human clinical trials and no human safety data exist to justify ranking them 'among the safest peptides.' The creator's own qualifier—'despite not being extensively tested on humans'—directly undermines the claim of safety ranking.
Audit another post from @finnveerman_fitness
Paste their social post link to add a new audit