Can this source support the claim?
Use four plain questions to see whether a source contains enough context to interpret. Open the technical explanation only when you need it.
This checks completeness, not study quality, compatibility, or clinical relevance.
Read the claim from the outside in.
You do not need to know the technical terms before you start.
01Do we know exactly what was tested?+
Look for the precise molecule, product presentation, formulation version, and any salt or sequence modification. A generic peptide name is not enough to transfer a result.
02Do we know what was in the final vial?+
Look for the diluent, final pH, concentration, and listed excipients. These describe the actual mixture behind the claim.
03Do we know how it was handled?+
Look for time, temperature, light, agitation, transfers, and freeze-thaw exposure. Stability claims only apply to the recorded handling window.
04Do we know how the result was measured?+
Look for the analytical method, measured endpoint, acceptance rule, and exact source location. Visual clarity alone cannot establish chemical stability.
What does the source actually report?
Mark only what is explicitly present. The site will keep missing context visible.
No source checked yet.