The bench
A research bench, not a chat board
Post freely—say what you want, title it how you like, and add tags where they help (a peptide, a topic, or a type like question or claim) so others can find it. The one rule that keeps this a bench and not a chat board: make a claim and you back it—cite a source and say how strong the evidence is. Reading is open to everyone—posting takes a free account.
Tag your post
Posts are free-form. Add tags where they apply—a peptide, a topic, or one of these types:
- QuestionAsk something you want the literature — or the community — to help answer.
- ClaimAssert something specific, and label how strong you think the evidence is.
- Field noteShare personal or reported experience — clearly flagged as anecdote, n=1.
- Study readoutWalk through a specific published study or a STACKD research roundup.
Claims cite evidence
Tag a post Claim and it asks for a source and a strength tier before it posts:
- Stance · AnecdotePersonal or reported experience (n=1). Lowest tier — a signal, not proof.
- Stance · MechanismA plausible biological rationale, but not outcome data in people.
- Stance · Human studyBacked by human trial data you can point to.
- Stance · STACKD summaryBacked by an in-house STACKD study roundup you've linked on the shelf.
No upvotes. Instead, threads keep a contribution ledger—a tally of citations, steelmans, and counter-evidence—so you can see what kind of thinking a thread attracted, not just how popular it was.
Research desks
Evidence desk
Evidence & study readouts
Work through published trials and STACKD roundups — what a study actually measured versus how it gets sold.
2 threads · active 11d ago
Profiles desk
Compound profiles
Threads anchored to a specific peptide. Bring the profile onto the research shelf and pressure-test what we know.
2 threads · active 8d ago
Diligence desk
Diligence & red flags
Spot shaky claims, marketing sleight-of-hand, and identity/purity confusion. Learn to read past the hype — no sourcing.
2 threads · active 7d ago
Practice desk
Training & recovery
Programming, sleep, and rehab from an evidence-first angle. Practical, not protocols-for-sale.
2 threads · active 5d ago
Onboarding desk
Start here: reading research
New to diligence? Learn how to read a study, what evidence levels mean, and how to post a good claim.
2 threads · active 17d ago
Recent threads
- ClaimStance · Human studySupported by evidenceTesamorelin's visceral-fat effect is real — in its studied population; extrapolating to general fitness is a leapTraining & recovery · STACKD Team · 1 reply · active 5d ago1counter-evidence
- QuestionBuilding a shared red-flag checklist: how do you spot marketing outrunning evidence?Diligence & red flags · STACKD Team · 1 reply · active 7d ago
- Study readoutGH-axis secretagogues (CJC-1295 + ipamorelin): GH pulses vs actual outcomesCompound profiles · STACKD Team · 1 reply · active 8d ago1steelman
- ClaimStance · Human studyContestedTirzepatide's phase-3 weight loss looks larger than semaglutide's — but they weren't head-to-headEvidence & study readouts · STACKD Team · 1 reply · active 11d ago1counter-evidence
- QuestionTendon and soft-tissue recovery: what's the honest state of BPC-157 / TB-500 evidence?Training & recovery · STACKD Team · 0 replies · active 12d ago
- ClaimStance · Mechanism"TB-500" sold as research material isn't automatically the same molecule as endogenous Thymosin β4Diligence & red flags · STACKD Team · 1 reply · active 13d ago1citation