ResearchHub

You can read the preprint, contribute to the posted reviews and comments, or submit your own peer review for $150 in $RSC. researchhub.com/paper/11185408…

A $150 peer review bounty on ResearchHub invites genomics, genetics, and aging biology experts to look over this new preprint on gene expression instability during aging. Researchers analyzed gene expression across ~1,000 people, 30 tissues, and multiple single-cell datasets, and found that biological “noise” increases with age, especially in the brain. Instead of genes behaving consistently across cells and individuals, gene regulation becomes more variable and unpredictable over time. The study suggests aging involves two parallel processes: 1. coordinated biological changes 2. increasing stochastic instability in gene regulation

Scientists are raising funds on @ResearchHub to test whether the Wim Hof Method is safe and potentially beneficial for cancer patients. So, we went and interviewed @Iceman_Hof himself. We asked him about breathwork, cold exposure, and what science still hasn't explained about his method. Support the proposal here: researchhub.com/proposal/4459

Our pipeline for science funding, publishing, and tracking is working. Here's the proof: AGEs are sugar-damaged proteins that accumulate with age and drive chronic disease, yet remain largely untargeted. @Stanford researcher @KejunYing raised $10k on @ResearchHub to address this. The project will design 10,000 AI-generated proteins and screen top candidates for binding to AGE-modified proteins. A first test of whether de novo protein design can target glycation damage. The project is now posted as a Stage 1 Registered Report in @RHubJournal, where progress will be tracked openly in real time. Our pipeline takes scientists from proposal → funding → peer review → registered report → results. All in public, all on ResearchHub. Follow along here: researchhub.com/paper/11152101…

Yesterday marked 30 days since we launched Endowments on @ResearchHub. Here's where things stand after one month: → Total Funding Credits Issued: 780,486 $RSC (~$122k at today's price) → Today's Annualized Yield: 70.08% (yield issued in Funding Credits) → Total Value Locked: 3.54M RSC ($2.11M at today's price) In just one month, Endowments has enabled ~$122k in new science funding. That's serious progress. Start your own Endowment today by depositing RSC in your account → researchhub.com/researchcoin

New Funding Opportunity on @ResearchHub: 🦠 We're offering $10K in seed funding for research on antiviral preparedness, with particular emphasis on studies related to hantavirus, emerging threats, and the development of new broad-spectrum antivirals. Science must move faster than traditional channels allow. One of our core goals at ResearchHub is to help science respond rapidly to developing events. So, we're deploying funds to the research areas that need it most. Applications are open now. Here's what we're looking for: 👇 researchhub.com/grant/32291/an…

The current hantavirus outbreak raises an important question: how prepared are we for the next viral pandemic? We're offering $10K in funding *right now* on @ResearchHub for studies exploring antiviral strategies, with particular relevance to hantavirus and the broader Bunyavirales family. Traditional funding channels can take months or years to respond to emerging threats. We think science funding can and should move faster.

On July 11th, @ResearchHub is partnering with @NucleateHQ and @Cure345 to host Catalyst NYC, a day of open dialogue between researchers, funders, and institution-builders reimagining how science works. The program will cover alternative funding models, open science infrastructure, translational research, and more. Space is limited. Request a spot here: luma.com/66yycaak

Science is the first step in the process to innovation. There are two more critical steps - creating a tangible product and ensuring there is widespread adoption. As an advisor to @ResearchHub, we are actively building new ways to build the Innovation Engine of biomedicine!

It’s refreshing to find a project that isn't just another "get rich quick" advertisement. @ResearchHub is a different breed—a stable, mission-driven platform focused entirely on accelerating the pace of science rather than chasing speculative hype.

@ScottExplores29 💜💪🧬

@victormelillii @bryan_johnson @HiddenBullStock We’d be happy to help recruit a few experts to share feedback/peer review @bryan_johnson

@bryan_johnson @HiddenBullStock This is a perfect example of why n=1 still needs peer-reviewed replications. @ResearchHub

People mistakenly believe peptides are only good. Peptides can be bad, too. They can cause adverse effects. Some dangerous. I did a peptide experiment and measured its effects in my body. The results are complicated. I tried a peptide called CJC-1295. It pushed my growth hormone up by ~8x. That’s good. That’s what it was supposed to do. But, it also came with adverse effects: > increased my morning fasted blood sugar up 20% > increased stress hormone by 12% > tanked my REM sleep by 23% > made my pancreas work 53% harder and was still losing to rising blood glucose > increased my insulin resistance by 50% These were the most obvious side effects, and I only ran a very narrow panel for this experiment. So I’m sure there’s more. I stopped after two doses, without even reaching the intended target dose. For those of you new to peptides, your body sends instructions to itself using tiny chemical messengers called peptides. There are thousands of them. For example, GLP-1s are drugs that take an existing class of short-lived peptides and modify them to extend their activity duration, which turns them into drugs, following rigorous clinical testing. CJC-1295 is one of those peptide-drugs. It tells your brain to release more growth hormone. Growth hormone is your body's signal to build muscle, repair tissue, and recover. However, and like most grey market peptides, CJC-1295 did not succeed its clinical trial, and hence never became an “official” drug. There is a version called CJC-1295 with DAC. DAC is an attachment glued onto the peptide that makes it last for days in your body instead of hours. One shot, longer effect, just like GLP-1s. Why people use it: more growth hormone could mean better recovery, leaner body, faster healing. The experiment I completed. Two injections a week of CJC-1295 with DAC: > 1.2 mg > 1.8 mg 48 hours after the first injection I was nearly comatose. It felt like severe jet lag, the type you’d feel after traveling nine time zones. My sleep was wrecked and I felt continuously awful. My REM sleep dropped by 23%. REM is when your brain processes memories and repairs itself. Less time for my brain to repair itself. During the experiment, I never felt rested and always fatigued. Why we chose CJC-1295 with DAC. Some will say we picked the wrong peptide. They will say I should have used a different version, CJC-1295 without DAC, mixed with another peptide called Ipamorelin. We went with CJC-1295 with DAC instead as it has the most controlled studies. CJC-1295 with DAC has 2 controlled trials in healthy adults. Ipamorelin alone has 1 controlled trial in healthy adults, plus 1 study that failed when they tried it on bowel surgery patients. The mix of the two has zero controlled trials. On Ipamorelin, it copies a chemical called ghrelin, the one that makes you hungry. On its own it gives you a quick burst of growth hormone that fades fast. It does not keep your longer acting growth signal (called IGF-1) up. Clinics mix Ipamorelin with CJC-1295 no-DAC because the two together are supposed to work better. But we don’t know if that’s accurate because we don’t have trial data. This is a problem with peptides. Almost none of them have been tested properly. We are flying blind. Most of what people use is based on what someone said online, what a clinic claims, or what a friend reports from their subjective feelings. Peptides have the potential to be great when well-studied.

Bringing $1 trillion in scientific research onchain

Since January 2025, ResearchHub has deployed over $1.5M in research funding to scientists worldwide. We just redesigned our funding page to make it even easier for funders and researchers to connect. Take a look ↓ researchhub.com/fund

This is why I love @ResearchHub Last month, they noticed a bottleneck in neuroscience: brain organoids can only be grown so big / realistic. They offered $25k to fund research in this area. Got 16 proposals from scientists worldwide. <1 month later, the funding is sent 🤝

Project Gigabrain has a winner. 🧠 We received 16 proposals aimed at growing bigger and more realistic brain organoids. We're sending $25k to @jdpereira's lab at @UABHeersink to grow spatially patterned human brain organoids. By modeling the regional patterning seen in the human brain, Dr. Pereira's work can make brain organoids more realistic models for studying neurodevelopment and disease. Top-ranked by our editorial team. Perfect 5.0 expert peer review score.

Our home page offers a single feed of preprints from multiple servers, with peer reviews already attached. Browse by topic and field, and customize your feed to match your research interests. Browse the feed: researchhub.com/for-you

We will be resubmitting this manuscript this week after over 1 year of revisions, >4,500 views, >350 downloads, and even one citation in an article on endometriosis (which is exactly what we would hope!). @RHubJournal @ResearchHub @ResearchHubF @Nature @researchsquare @AllenPhil_ @IcahnMountSinai @SinaiImmunol @SinaiBrain @MSHSDerm researchhub.com/paper/9308830/…

Scientists are putting the $RSC they earn to work by creating endowments on @ResearchHub to help fund their own lab work