Dispatches·Vol. 6·Updated monthly

Dispatches

Essays and columns on how preclinical peptide evidence is made, cited, inflated, and occasionally confirmed. Each piece is a literature summary or a methods argument — never usage guidance.

An open handwritten journal on a desk beside a compass and papers, the pages filled with cursive notes
FIG. 05 — A researcher's notebook. The primary record of an experiment is still paper more often than outsiders expect.

Lead·Evidence Review

One lineage of evidence: the BPC-157 tendon literature, read closely

In rat after rat, a gastric pentadecapeptide has been reported to speed tendon healing. Nearly every report descends from a single Zagreb research group. This month we trace the lineage, weigh what small unblinded cohorts can bear, and ask what a real confirmation would require.

Read the feature →

Column·Underpowered

Underpowered: what n=8 supports, and what it does not

Eight rodents per group can find an effect the size of a barn door. It cannot find the modest effects that translation depends on — and a significant result from a tiny sample is more likely to be exaggerated than true. Our biostatistician walks through the arithmetic.

History

How one unreplicated paper becomes “established” online

A 2004 rodent finding, cited in a review, quoted in a summary of that review, and flattened into a forum certainty within five years. A former research librarian traces the citation chain and finds one experiment holding up a building.

Evidence Review

Host-defense peptides and antimicrobial-resistance research

LL-37 and its cousins kill bacteria in broth culture and modulate immunity in mice. The resistance argument for host-defense peptides is real but narrower than its reputation, and mouse sepsis models have burned the field before.

Explainer

Mitochondrial-derived peptides as a young research field

Humanin in 2001, MOTS-c in 2015: the mitochondrial genome keeps yielding signaling peptides, and the mouse metabolic literature keeps growing faster than its replication base. A field guide to being early.

Methods·Editorial

Why FIELD STANDARD does not publish dosing, sourcing, or human-use instructions

Readers ask, reasonably, why a publication about peptide research refuses to discuss use. Because the literature we cover cannot bear the weight of that discussion — and because pretending otherwise is how evidence reviews become storefronts.