@liam.eykyn

1 post audited · 1 claims analysed

Instagram profile

Science evidence grade

0%Very low evidence grade

Based on 1 claim across 1 audit

SupportedOverstatedMisleadingNo Evidence

0

Supported

0%

0

Overstated

0%

0

Misleading

0%

1

No Evidence

100%

Share this evidence grade

Claim-level evidence grades — not a character judgment. Methodology · Right of reply · Leaderboards

What @liam.eykyn 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

0%

0 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

100%

1 claim

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

Loading…
BackedIncorrectGrey

Verdict detail

Grey splits into overstated (wrong certainty) vs no published support

Loading…

Claims over time

Stacked by bucket as audits land — plus the running evidence grade

Loading…

Gold line = running science evidence grade (Supported + ½ Overstated ÷ total claims).

Audit history(1 post)

Post thumbnail
No Evidence
Posted Apr 9, 2026·4 months ago·View source

My peptide stack #peptides #motivation #fitness #reel #explore

The claim that peptides are being used as a 'stack' for health optimization, recovery, anti-aging, longevity, healing, or performance lacks both explicit scientific citation and supporting evidence. No registered human clinical trials were found for this specific indication. The abstracts provided are scientifically unrelated to peptide bioregulation—appearing to be either misattributed or retrieved in error. Without evidence directly addressing the peptide-stack claim, no scientific verdict on efficacy can be rendered.

Audit another post from @liam.eykyn

Paste their social post link to add a new audit

New audit