Protocol template — use this format when you post a stack

Co-signing the bloodwork list. The single biggest reason I can't give a useful opinion on a stack is because the poster has never drawn labs. You're flying blind and asking strangers to plot your course.

I'd add: state your measurement cadence. Weekly weigh-ins? Monthly DEXA? Waist tape? If you're running a protocol without a feedback loop you're not running a protocol, you're taking drugs and hoping.

Template saved. Honestly this should be a form you have to fill out before the post even submits.

Enforcing this as of today. If you post a stack and it's missing bloodwork or stats, you'll get one nudge to edit. Second time, post gets unlisted until you fix it.

Strong template. One addition I'd push for: 'what would change your mind?' If a user can't articulate what outcome would make them pull the plug on a stack, they're not running an experiment, they're running a belief.

Agree with dr_doubt. Stopping criteria are more important than starting criteria. 'I'll run this for 8 weeks or until X marker moves, whichever comes first' is a protocol. 'Imma try it and see' is not.

Can we add variability bands to the bloodwork request? One draw is a data point, not a trend. Even two draws separated by a week will blow your mind how much some of these markers bounce.

Suggestion: require 'route' field to include needle length and gauge for IM. Seen too many people claim IM glute while using a 5/16" insulin pin. That's Sub-Q. Changes the kinetics conversation entirely.

Add a row for 'past cycles.' Someone's 4th run of BPC is not the same as their 1st. Tolerance, expectations, and baseline all shift.

I'd like a titration schedule field. Frontloaders and slow-starters read the same prescription very differently. 'Start 250mcg, increase by 125mcg weekly to 1mg' is a protocol. '1mg daily' tells me nothing about the on-ramp.

Pinning this was overdue. The 'rate my stack with no stats' posts were 40% of my ignore list.

'Rationale' field is doing a lot of work. Most people will write 'saw on YouTube.' Maybe add a suggested format: mechanism + outcome expectation + timeline. Forces thought.

Love the template. Adding one: 'exit plan.' What's the off-cycle look like? What bridges, if any? If you're running a GH secretagogue for 16 weeks and have no plan for after, you don't have a protocol.

I'll make the bloodwork list more actionable — here's my standard: CBC w/ diff, CMP, lipid panel w/ ApoB, HbA1c, fasting glucose + insulin (calc HOMA-IR), IGF-1, free+total test, E2 sensitive, SHBG, prolactin, TSH, fT3, fT4, DHEA-S, cortisol AM, vit D, ferritin, homocysteine, hs-CRP. Quest or LabCorp codes available on request.

Second panel_maxer's list. Add urinalysis if you're running anything renal-adjacent. And if you're running GLP-1s, lipase + amylase at baseline and at week 12.

Template is clean. Real question — is anyone going to enforce the rationale section? Because 'because I want to' is going to be the modal answer.

Yes. At least in my replies. If you can't articulate why a compound is in your stack, it doesn't belong in your stack. Cutting a line is faster than adding one.

This is incredibly helpful for newbies. Saving. One question — for bloodwork, how recent is 'recent enough'? Is 6 months ago fine?

@wanderlite for a baseline before a new stack, <90 days ideal, <180 acceptable if you haven't changed anything material. For midcycle checks, relevant to what you're running — some markers shift in weeks, others in months.

Can we get a pinned reply thread of worked examples? Like three gold-standard posts that hit every field so newbies can see what 'good' looks like?

@kineticdrift good idea. I'll curate a few from the last six months and link them here. Reply-in-place rather than a new pin.

Suggestion for the 'goals' field: force a single primary goal plus up to two secondary. 'Recomp' is not a goal, it's a direction. 'Lose 2% bf over 12 weeks while holding bench +/- 5%' is a goal.

Strong plus one to @the_architect_p. Numbers or it's not a goal.

The whole template is downstream of one thing: can you state a hypothesis your protocol would falsify? If no, it's not science and you shouldn't expect scientific-quality feedback.

Coming from zero background — is there a walkthrough somewhere of how to actually read a CMP? I can get labs but I don't know what's telling me something vs what's in range.

@new2peptides yes — separate thread in lab-nerd corner, I'll drop link. Short version: learn reference ranges vs optimal ranges, and learn the trend that matters for each marker. Individual values matter less than trajectory.