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.

honestly this template gets ignored like 50% of the time and then people wonder why they get roasted in the comments. the "budget + source posture" line is gold tho, catches so many "I found this sketchy place" posts before they spiral. only thing I'd add is making bloodwork mandatory instead of "at minimum" because half the dudes posting have no idea what their baseline even is and we're just throwing darts at a board.