Corrections and correspondence
Challenge a claim about GHK-Cu
An incorrect compound name can change the whole argument. So can an outcome credited to the wrong ingredient.
A specific correction is welcome
I’d welcome a challenge that puts its finger on the mistaken sentence. The page address, the disputed claim and the paper behind the correction are enough to start. A confused peptide form, an omitted comparator or a number attached to the wrong group can alter the conclusion even when the rest of the account sounds plausible.
The reference list contains the papers discussed here. Questions about a study’s population, formulation or endpoint fit the purpose of this site. A personal reaction, an amount to use or a decision about treatment does not; I cannot provide medical advice or interpret an individual health situation.
Put the claim and the paper in the same note
The form below is for correspondence about the published research and this site’s account of it. A paper title or its DOI helps identify the source. A sales inquiry has no destination here: the site offers no products or services.
I value a correction that makes a claim more exact, even when it leaves the conclusion less tidy.