Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Free · no account · no tracking

Melatonin and sleep.Magnesium and migraine frequency.Berberine and LDL cholesterol.Zinc and common cold duration.Creatine and muscle strength (1-RM).Ashwagandha and perceived stress.Vitamin B12 and cognitive performance.Iron and fatigue.

A free record of what published studies measured. Most readings use a published abstract. 2 signed public-reading findings use the full paper, and some use other published documents. We write down what each source found, how sure anyone can be of it, and where it came from, so you can check it yourself.

Start with a topic

The figure is how many questions have been read under each.

Or start from an ingredient, ordered by how much we have read: Omega-3 fatty acids (EPA/DHA), Creatine, Magnesium, Piperine, Curcumin, Silymarin, Berberine, Melatonin, Ashwagandha, 5-HTP, Biotin (vitamin B7), Coenzyme Q10. All 58, A to Z.

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.

How much of our list is read

One square for each of the 645 questions on our to-read list: magnesium and sleep quality, and every other pair like it.

409 read here236 not read yet

A solid square means nobody here has read that question yet, not that nothing was found. The list is our own, in alphabetical order, which says nothing about any of them. The whole table has every reading in it.

How certain each finding is

One mark is one finding — one study’s answer to one question, and a question can hold several. The 546 here come from 313 sources; 9 are rated High.

  • High 9
  • Moderate 141
  • Low 292
  • Very low 104
  • Hollow, at any level: no likely range given 204

318 of the 418 questions rest on a single source, with nothing yet to check them against. 45 findings come from a source that later carried a notice.

Questions with the most sources read

Ordered by how much has been read here, and by nothing else.

Each bar is one source’s range, drawn against the line of no difference: left of the line is lower, right is higher. Widths are not comparable between rows.

  • Vitamin A and all-cause mortality

    Four sources here, and they say different things: one measured lower all-cause mortality, two found no clear difference and one reported mixed results.

    High certainty, level 4 of 4One source carries a notice

    One source’s range.

  • Omega-3 fatty acids (EPA/DHA) and triglycerides

    All four sources here measured lower triglycerides.

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4One source carries a notice

    -15 percent change

    One source’s number.

  • Berberine and LDL cholesterol

    All three sources here measured lower LDL cholesterol.

    High certainty, level 4 of 4

    One source’s range.

  • Berberine and total cholesterol

    All three sources here measured lower total cholesterol.

    High certainty, level 4 of 4

    One source’s range.

On 41 questions the studies point different ways. Every side is shown, none averaged away — two of them here.

  • Silymarin and aspartate aminotransferase (AST)

    Three sources here, and they say different things: two measured lower aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and one found no clear difference.

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4One source carries a notice

    One source’s range.

  • Berberine and HDL cholesterol

    Three sources here, and they say different things: two measured higher HDL cholesterol and one found no clear difference.

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4

    One source’s range, crossing no difference: these numbers fit no effect too.

What people misread here

A link to a source
is not proof the evidence is strong. A weak study with a link is still weak.
Certainty
is how unlikely a finding is to change, not how big it is.
Higher or lower
is which way the numbers went. It never says whether that is good news for you.
An empty question
means nobody here has read it yet, not that no research exists.

One system, several ways in

Follow a question all the way through

Start with the words you know. The system lines them up with one shared set of names, reads the checked evidence, builds connected pages, and stops visibly where something is missing. Every displayed fact keeps a link back to what supports it.

  1. Start anywhere familiar. Choose a health topic, an ingredient, or one thing that was measured. You do not need to know our internal names first.
  2. See how the words connect. The map joins goals, needs, outcomes and signals that share reviewed links, without turning that map into a recommendation.
  3. Open the supporting reading. Question pages keep every source, reported number, certainty reason and later correction together instead of choosing one answer for you.
  4. Notice what is not known here. A gap stays a named gap. Missing detail never becomes a zero, a guess or a confident-sounding sentence.