Useful. I have added it to my own notes with the date on it.
30 likes 8mo
Topic summary
Sequence verification for an obscure compound: how it is done — what changed since
This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 109, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.
m.strand_rph, post #29: Post #28 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition. Melanocortin agonists: mechanism involves the melanocortin-4 receptor pathway that regulates appetite. The documented adverse profile includes blood pressure elevation and erections of sustained duration, the second of which is specific enough that it is the first… Go to post
AOD-9604 is a fragment of human growth hormone and has been discussed as a potential weight-loss agent based on theoretical mechanism. The fragment hypothesis — that the fragment retains a specific property of the intact hormone — is not settled for this compound.
If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess.
f.novak, post #19: How to research a compound with no human data: mechanistic plausibility is one input. Preclinical data is another. The honest position is that you are reasoning from theory, not from evidence, and the track record of such reasoning is unimpressive when tested against actual outcomes. Go to post
Having read the whole Sequence verification thread before replying: the question in the first post has not actually been answered yet, and three of us have answered a nearby one instead.
i.coelho, post #65: Helpful, and short, which on this subject is harder than long. Go to post
Post #66 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
Sequence verification is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.
This follows post #73 rather than contradicting it.
When "no data" is the complete and final answer: if there is no published human data on a compound, that is the state of knowledge. Hope is not a substitute and reasoning from theory is not a substitute. That is not a reason for shame; it is the honest epistemic position.
28 likes 8mo
No disagreement from me. Posting only so the question does not look ignored.
29 likes 8mo
When "no data" is the complete and final answer: if there is no published human data on a compound, that is the state of knowledge. Hope is not a substitute and reasoning from theory is not a substitute. That is not a reason for shame; it is the honest epistemic position.
This is the version I would want a new member to read first.
30 likes 8mo
Read the full topic (109 posts)
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Naming conventions for research peptides and the confusion they cause — one year on
Naming conventions for research peptides and the confusion they cause — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about Naming conventions for research peptides…
|
+1 | 5 | 181 | 2y |
|
How to research a compound with no human data without deceiving yourself
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How to research a compound with no human data without deceiving yourself Question about what the published evidence for this compound actually…
|
+107 | 119 | 11k | 12mo |
|
Coming back to: Reading a supplier's product description as a marketing document
Reading a supplier's product description as a marketing document Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Documentation question rather than a pharmacological one,…
|
+35 | 39 | 688 | 5mo |
|
Why catalogue breadth is not evidence of anything
Why catalogue breadth is not evidence of anything I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. What changes if the standard account of catalogue breadth is wrong?…
|
2 | 38k | 2d | |
|
Sequence verification for an obscure compound: how it is done
Sequence verification for an obscure compound: how it is done Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Asking about sequence verification directly, because I have…
|
+104 | 114 | 10k | 12mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags custom synthesis, needs a source, mislabelling
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation
On the subject in the title: Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation Working notes rather than a conclusion. Reading an unrefereed manuscript properly, and asking whether I am doing it…
|
+1 | 5 | 2k | 9mo |
|
A widely repeated interaction claim that turns out to be unsupported
On the subject in the title: A widely repeated interaction claim that turns out to be unsupported Working notes rather than a conclusion. I was wrong about widely repeated interaction claim in a thread last…
|
+47 | 51 | 37k | 3mo |
|
GHRH analogues versus ghrelin mimetics: different mechanisms, conflated discussion
On the subject in the title: GHRH analogues versus ghrelin mimetics: different mechanisms, conflated discussion Working notes rather than a conclusion. Asking about GHRH analogues versus ghrelin mimetics…
|
+47 | 53 | 6.9k | 2h |
|
Preprint servers and what screening they do
Preprint servers and what screening they do — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A preprint question rather than a question about the finding in it. The manuscript is on a…
|
+95 | 106 | 5.6k | 4mo |
|
Reading a rodent study on a secretagogue without over-extrapolating — the long version
Reading a rodent study on a secretagogue without over-extrapolating — the long version — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A narrow question about Reading a rodent study,…
|
+59 | 66 | 30k | 4h |