Meta-analysis & systematic review
Pooled RCTs — the most robust evidence we can find in biohacking topics. Examples: creatine monohydrate for strength output, NMN for plasma NAD+ levels.
Germany's biohacking scene is growing fast — but the gap between influencer recommendations and serious research is wide. We bridge it with an AI that backs every claim with clickable PubMed studies.
More than 200,000 Germans identify as active biohackers. The scene spans athletes optimizing HRV and sleep stages, longevity enthusiasts running NMN and berberine stacks, and tech professionals using creatine and magnesium to boost cognitive performance. What unites them: a desire for solid evidence instead of YouTube anecdotes. The problem: German-speaking study aggregators are largely missing. Charité, Max Planck institutes and DKFZ publish at the highest level — but searching for “magnesium glycinate for restless legs syndrome” usually lands on supplement shops, not on PubMed. That's the gap an evidence-based AI platform closes: live access to 35M+ scientific papers, with structured German-English translation and transparent source citations.
In the US, biohacking is a market: Bulletproof-Coffee brands, Joe-Rogan podcasts, high-priced longitudinal programs. Germany operates with a different culture — scientifically more cautious, health-policy-wise more tightly regulated, with pharmacy-grade standards for supplements and a skeptical eye on US marketing. Concretely: many substances (e.g. higher-dose NMN, exotic peptides) are only available through imported pharmacies or controlled sources here. The German research landscape, in turn, produces high-quality data — Charité's ALLN study on sauna and mortality, the ZUTRAUEN program on cold exposure, ongoing TwinsUK cohort analyses. A German biohacking platform must contextualize for DACH instead of copy-pasting US stacks 1:1.
What used to be scattered across 20 Telegram groups, 5 German podcasts and various YouTube channels now consolidates on a forum platform with real evidence depth. Instead of “worked for me,” the AI surfaces the matching studies for every post — sorted by evidence tier (meta-analysis, RCT, cohort). The result: a German-speaking biohacking community where discussions don't loop on anecdotes but grow with scientific substance.
Evidence, not hallucination
Evidence-based biohacking means every claim about sleep, supplements, longevity or performance stands or falls with the study it cites. Biohacking AI makes that study trail visible — with clickable PubMed links, transparent evidence tiers and honest labeling where research is still thin. Every biohacker should know whether they're following a meta-analysis or a mouse paper.
Pooled RCTs — the most robust evidence we can find in biohacking topics. Examples: creatine monohydrate for strength output, NMN for plasma NAD+ levels.
Gold standard for single studies. Causal claims are possible, but effect sizes vary widely. Examples: magnesium for cramps, ashwagandha for cortisol-driven stress.
Large population data, but no causality — useful hypothesis generators. Examples: vitamin D levels and mortality, sleep duration and dementia risk.
Plausibility yes, clinical proof no. We label this transparently so no one reads a mouse result as "proven." Examples: peptides like BPC-157, red-light therapy at the cell level.
Those four tiers underpin every answer on the platform — no study is cited without a tier label, and when the evidence is thin the AI says so openly.
Search 35M+ PubMed studies live, build your stack on verified evidence, discuss with the German community.