The finder
Pick what you want to change. See who actually measured it.
Every other tool like this gives you a compound and a match score. Those scores are not measured. Ours does not exist. What you get instead is what was actually measured and where: trials in people first with the participant count, then the animal and cell work kept separate, then what people using it report, and the trials that found nothing, counted rather than dropped.
82 of the 444 compounds here have never been through a trial in people. That is worth knowing and it is not a verdict: a molecule nobody can patent has no sponsor to pay for a trial, so a thin human record is usually a fact about money rather than about the compound. Where that is the case, this says so and shows you what does exist.
What are you trying to change?
Pick as many as you like. The number on each one is how many people it has been measured in across the whole archive, so you can see where the evidence is before you choose.
Or start from the compounds
Somebody handed you a stack. What is actually known about it?
Add what you are looking at and you get every outcome those compounds have been measured for in people, and then the longer list of the ones they have not.
Immune function
Does it help the immune system?
Vague as a goal and specific as a measurement. The trials here counted infections or counted cells; those are very different claims.
1,109 people · 5 human studies · 5 compounds
- 1,106 people1 study1 found nothing
found nothing1,106 adults with sepsis, 22 centres, double blinded and placebo controlled. 28 day all cause mortality was 23.4% on thymosin alpha-1 and 24.1% on placebo, hazard ratio 0.99, p = 0.93. Included here as the contrast: this is what a defined thymic peptide looks like when tested under modern conditions, and the result...
BMJ, 2025 · 1,106 people
- 3 people1 study
Three children with congenital leptin deficiency treated with daily subcutaneous recombinant human leptin for up to 4 years: sustained reductions in appetite, fat mass, hyperinsulinaemia and hyperlipidaemia, rapid rise in thyroid hormones, appropriately timed puberty, and reversal of reduced CD4 T cell numbers and...
Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2002 · 3 people
- no headcount stated1 study
Novosibirsk clinical trial in chronic salpingitis and oophoritis timing thymalin to each patient's own lymphocyte succinate dehydrogenase response. Clinical, laboratory and immunological improvement was more frequent when the drug was given while that response was present. An example of the broader Russian clinical...
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2015 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated1 study
Thymopentin-treated asymptomatic patients maintained higher CD4+ cell percentages over 24 weeks.
AIDS, 1992 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated1 study
The multicentre follow-up reporting enhanced immune function and reduced infections in older adults with TORC1 inhibition. Together with the 2014 trial this is the positive half of the programme, and the phase 3 that followed is on the RTB101 page.
Science Translational Medicine, 2018 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
Increased CD5 expression and T-helper precursor differentiation in cultured human and rat thymic cells.
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2013 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
Calorimetry showed bronchogen raised the melting temperature of calf-thymus and mouse-liver DNA by 3.1 degrees C, with no base-pair specificity. This is a physical-chemistry result, not evidence of a lung effect, and like the rest of the bronchogen literature it comes from the single Khavinson research lineage. The...
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2011 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
Cells and mice. Activity against BCL-xL-dependent T cell lymphoma models, extending the preclinical case for selective degradation over inhibition.
Journal of Hematology and Oncology, 2020 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
The ageing result, and the only one. ISRIB reversed integrated stress response activation in the aged mouse brain, reversed spatial memory deficits and improved working memory in old mice, and in hippocampus restored intrinsic neuronal electrophysiological properties and spine density while reducing interferon and T...
eLife, 2020 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
Mouse. A separate group built a self-assembling nanovaccine carrying a Gpnmb seno-antigen peptide. After subcutaneous immunisation it activated CD8-positive T cells and selectively eliminated senescent adipocytes and cardiomyocytes in high-fat-diet progeroid mice, improving adipose metabolic measures and cardiac...
Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics, 2025 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
How this is counted
Human studies only. Animal and test-tube work never enters this ranking, because the question you asked was about a person.
A compound is listed for an outcome only when a citation on its own page states that outcome and reports a result for it. Naming it is not enough: a paper that measures testosterone and reports a result about something else does not count as testosterone evidence, which is a mistake this tool made on its first run and no longer makes.
People counts are read out of the study lines themselves and are deliberate undercounts. Where a line states no number, the study still counts as a study and adds nothing to the headcount. Counts are never added across compounds, because the same person can appear in more than one trial.
Ranking is by people measured. That is a fact about the evidence, not a judgement about the compound, and it is the only ordering this site will defend. A compound at the top of a list is the most studied, which is not the same as the best.
Nothing here is advice, and nothing here is a recommendation to take anything.