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.
Pain
Does it reduce pain?
Pain anywhere other than a joint, which has its own entry. Measured on a scale a person filled in, which is the only way pain gets measured.
5,470 people · 14 human studies · 11 compounds
- 1,384 people1 study
The therapeutic evidence that is usually left out of cosmetic coverage. Two multicentre phase 3 trials pooled, 1384 adults randomised 1 to 1 to onabotulinumtoxinA 155 to 195 units or placebo every 12 weeks. Mean change in headache days at week 24 was minus 8.4 versus minus 6.6 in favour of the toxin, P below 0.001,...
Headache, 2010 · 1,384 people
- 1,267 people1 study
1,267 premenopausal women across two identical 24-week trials: bremelanotide 1.75 mg as needed significantly increased FSFI desire scores (+0.35 integrated) and reduced desire-related distress versus placebo; nausea, flushing and headache in 10% or more.
Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019 · 1,267 people
- 1,161 people1 study1 found nothing
found nothing1,161 patients hospitalised with acute heart failure randomised 1:1 to a 48 hour infusion of serelaxin at 30 micrograms per kilogram per day or placebo within 16 hours of presentation. Serelaxin improved the visual analogue scale dyspnoea endpoint by 448 mm times hours (95 percent CI 120 to 775, p = 0.007) but had no...
The Lancet, 2013 · 1,161 people
- 968 people2 studies
The scale of evidence behind blocking this peptide, not administering it. 955 patients randomised to subcutaneous erenumab 70 mg (n=317), 140 mg (n=319) or placebo (n=319) monthly for six months. From a baseline of 8.3 monthly migraine days, days fell by 3.2 and 3.7 respectively against 1.8 on placebo (P<0.001 for...
The New England Journal of Medicine, 2017 · 955 people
What happens when you give CGRP to a human. Thirteen migraine patients previously enrolled in erenumab trials received CGRP in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised crossover design. CGRP induced migraine-like attacks in 10 of 13 patients (77%) compared with none after placebo, P = 0.002. Area under the curve...
The Journal of Headache and Pain, 2018 · 13 people
- 258 people2 studies1 found nothing
found nothing258 patients after bunionectomy randomised to a single oral dose of cebranopadol 200, 400 or 600 mcg, morphine controlled release 60 mg, or placebo. On the primary endpoint (summed pain intensity 2 to 10 hours), 400 and 600 mcg beat placebo and beat morphine, whose effect emerged later; 200 mcg did not differ from...
Pain Physician, 2018 · 258 people
Planned for 524, enrolled 126 because of low accrual; up to 7 weeks of cebranopadol (200 to 1,000 mcg) versus prolonged release morphine. On the primary endpoint, daily rescue morphine use, cebranopadol was non-inferior and superior (difference -7.48 mg, 95% CI -12.05 to -2.92). Non-inferiority on pain reduction...
European Journal of Pain, 2019 · no headcount in the line
- 175 people1 study
The decisive trial. 175 participants randomised 1:1 to carbetocin 3.2 mg three times daily (n=85) or placebo (n=90) over 12 weeks. Least squares mean change from baseline at week 12 on HQ-CT was -4.8 (SE 0.8) on carbetocin and -5.1 (SE 0.8) on placebo; treatment difference 0.3, 95% CI -1.8 to 2.4, P = 0.79. The...
Clinical Therapeutics, 2026 · 175 people
- 111 people2 studies
Double-blind, placebo-controlled, 32 centres in the United States, Australia and the Netherlands, 111 patients aged 24 to 85 randomised 2 to 1. Mean percentage improvement in the visual analogue scale of pain intensity was 53.1 percent (95 percent CI 44.0 to 62.2) with ziconotide versus 18.1 percent (95 percent CI 4.8...
JAMA, 2004 · 111 people
255 inpatients, 169 on ziconotide and 86 on placebo, treated over six days. Mean percent reduction in the visual analogue scale of pain intensity was 31.2 percent versus 6.0 percent. The protocol was amended during the trial, cutting the starting dose from 0.4 to 0.1 micrograms per hour and the maximum from 7.0 to 2.4...
Neuromodulation, 2006 · no headcount in the line
- 75 people1 study1 found nothing
found nothingDouble-blinded randomised controlled trial at a single centre, enrolling June 2018 to May 2019. 75 people with symptomatic Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3 knee osteoarthritis randomised to intra-articular A2M-rich concentrate, conventional platelet-rich plasma, or methylprednisolone, followed 12 weeks; 68 (90.7...
Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Diseases, 2024 · 75 people
- 54 people1 study
54 patients with non-specific chronic low back pain, six sessions of real or sham bee venom acupuncture over 3 weeks on top of loxoprofen. Bothersomeness, pain intensity and function improved more in the venom group at 3 weeks; minimal adverse events in both groups. Korean academic funding.
Toxins, 2017 · 54 people
- 17 people1 study
Retrospective chart review of 17 patients given 2 to 4 mg intra-articularly at one Florida clinic; of the 16 reached by phone months later, 11 of 12 who received BPC-157 alone reported meaningful pain relief. No control group, no validated outcome measure, no imaging.
Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2021 · 17 people
- no headcount stated1 study1 found nothing
found nothingIndependent, academic, and null. Both arms improved by roughly 1.6 to 1.9 points on the pain scale, which is larger than the between-group differences industry-funded trials attribute to collagen.
Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 2020 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
Mice given weekly oxaliplatin developed neuropathic pain and lost intraepidermal nerve fibres in the hind paw. Continuous SS-20 prevented the pain and returned nerve fibre density to normal levels. The authors note that SS-31 was the inventor's compound and declare that competing interest. Mice, prevention rather than...
ACS Chemical Neuroscience, 2018 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- no headcount stated0 studies
- 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.