@liverking
1 post audited · 1 claims analysed
Science evidence grade
Based on 1 claim across 1 audit
0
Supported
0%
1
Overstated
100%
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 @liverking 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
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)
“1,256 likes, 617 comments - liverking on February 6, 2026”
The human liver does possess genuine regenerative capacity — this is well-established in clinical literature on hepatic resection and transplantation. However, the claim that regeneration continues 'forever' overstates the evidence significantly. Hepatic regeneration is age-dependent, impaired by cirrhosis and chronic injury, and limited by declining stem cell function over the lifespan. The cited organoid study (Mun et al. 2019) actually demonstrates in-vitro expansion of engineered hepatocyte cultures, not indefinite whole-liver regeneration in humans — a fundamental difference. The scientific consensus is that hepatic regenerative capacity is robust but finite and declines with age and disease burden.
Audit another post from @liverking
Paste their social post link to add a new audit