Podcast episode 100 (in German)
100 episodes – what has stuck and how decisions are made here
October 8, 2026
After 100 episodes, for once not about a substance but about the process: which mistakes happened in this series, which patterns repeated, and what decisions here are based on before a number goes on air.
What it is about
The episode begins with the show’s own mistakes. In the Dihexa episode, an advertising figure was passed on that appears in no study that can be found; the episode was withdrawn and redone. In the AOD-9604 episode, the number of participants came from a review instead of from the never-published original paper. Then the patterns that have repeated over 100 episodes, and the question of why, of all things, three failed company studies receive praise here. After that, the episode lays open how an episode comes about: from the overconfident claim, through the search for the primary source, to the question of whether a study answered its own main question. At the end is what actually remains after 100 episodes.
Key points
- The show’s most serious own mistake was an advertising figure: 10 million times more potent than an endogenous growth factor — it appears in sales copy, not in a study, and the episode was redone.
- 3 recurring patterns shape the series: the marker moves and the function does not, the small study says yes and the large one says no, and filling a gap is something other than topping up.
- In 3 episodes there was explicit praise, each time for a company that published a negative result — including a substance that lowered lipoprotein(a) by 80 percent without reducing events.
- The 5 misjudgments in estimating the scores fall into only 2 kinds: 3 times the wrong axis was read, 2 times the wrong object was rated.
- The score consists of 4 axes — human evidence, safety data, track record of use, mechanism — plus hype and a direction; the first measures how thoroughly the question was studied, not how good the answer is.
- What holds up after 100 episodes are 4 unspectacular things: sleep, endurance, omega-3 and creatine. A peptide appears among them 0 times.
- A cure of 500 kilocalories a day has been considered disproven for 31 years and is still being sold.
Where the data stop
This episode delivers no body of studies but an account of the process — and the process has visible limits. The scores are fixed before the episode and rate a topic, not every individual question about it: a high human evidence score can mean that a lot was measured, and still drop to 0 as soon as you narrow down the question that concerns you yourself.
Everything that cannot be traced back to the original paper is thrown out. That has a side effect: listeners never get to see the omitted claim, and the exclusion cannot be checked from outside. And that across 100 episodes the answer was more often “not supported” than “supported” is a finding about the state of research and not a verdict on the individual substance — open and disproven are two different results, and this episode explicitly does not separate them again for every substance discussed.
Listen (in German)
Listen on Spotify Listen on Apple Podcasts Listen on Amazon Music
Published on October 8, 2026.
All episodes in the app (German)
Information only, not medical advice and not a usage or dosage recommendation. Prescription-only and unapproved substances belong in the hands of a physician. Last updated: 2026-09-19.