**About Dosyne — What We Publish and What We Refuse To**

> Who builds Dosyne, why a site about peptide arithmetic sells no peptides, how it is paid for, and the editorial rules we hold ourselves to on every page.

Source: https://dosyne.com/about/

[Home](https://dosyne.com/)/About

About

# A calculator company that sells no compounds and prints no protocols.

Dosyne publishes free browser calculators and reference material for reconstitution
arithmetic, built by a small independent software team. We are not a clinic, a pharmacy, a compounding
facility or a supplier, and we have no financial relationship with anyone who is. That
matters more here than it would in most categories, and it is the first thing you
should know about this publication.

## Why the conflict of interest matters

Search for almost any question in this subject — how much bacteriostatic water to add,
how to read a syringe, what a dosage chart means — and the pages that come back are
published by companies selling the compounds being discussed. That is not a
conspiracy. It is simply who had a commercial reason to write the page.

But it has a consistent effect on the writing. A vendor page explains the mechanics
cheerfully and stops just before the parts that would dampen a purchase: that most of
these compounds are not approved for human use, that research-grade material is not
made to pharmaceutical standards, that the published evidence for many of them is
animal work, and that the confident cycle lengths circulating online are forum
consensus rather than pharmacology. We can say all of that because we are not selling
any of it, and saying it is most of the reason this site exists.

## What we publish

Arithmetic, technique and reference material. Concentration and volume, unit
conversion, syringe graduations, storage stability, injection-site rotation drawn from
the decades of diabetes research that actually exists on the subject. These things have
correct answers, they can be checked, and getting them wrong is how people are harmed
— so we are exhaustive about them and we show the working rather than returning a
number.

## What we refuse to publish

No recommended amounts. No protocols. No cycle designs. No vendor links, no discount
codes, no affiliate arrangements, and no sponsored placements of any kind. If a page
here starts to read like a plan someone could follow, it has failed and we rewrite it.

We refuse for a practical reason rather than a squeamish one. A dose decision requires
knowing the person: their history, their other medications, what they are actually
trying to achieve and whether any of this is appropriate at all. A website knows none
of that, and a website that pretends otherwise is dangerous in a way a wrong calculator
never is. So we do the part that generalises, and we are direct about where that part
ends.

## How the site is paid for, stated plainly

Dosyne began as a mobile app. That app is no longer sold in the App Store or Google
Play, and nothing on this site asks you to buy anything: the calculators are free and
need no account. The site is published by Vast Flow, LLP at its own cost. It carries no
advertising and no affiliate links, and it never will while it covers this subject —
the moment a page here earns a commission on something a reader buys, everything else
on the site becomes harder to believe.

If you subscribed to the app before it was withdrawn, the subscription is still managed by
Apple or Google rather than by us. The [contact page](https://dosyne.com/contact/) sets out how to
cancel it on each platform and how to ask the store for a refund.

## Editorial rules

We do not invent numbers. Where a figure would require a study we do not have, we
describe the mechanism qualitatively instead of manufacturing a statistic. Where the
evidence base is thin, we say it is thin rather than dressing up a plausible sentence
as a finding.

We show our working. Every calculator publishes the formula it uses so you can check
the result by hand, and every reference table states the concentration it assumes,
which is the exact thing whose absence makes most charts in this subject unusable.

Our comparison pages name situations in which a competitor is the better choice, and
mean them. Facts about other apps come from public store listing data on a stated date
and from the developers' own descriptions; we do not speculate about features we cannot
verify and we do not accuse anyone of anything.

We correct errors visibly. In a subject where a decimal place matters, silently editing
a page after somebody points out a mistake would be the wrong instinct. Write to
[support@dosyne.com](mailto:support@dosyne.com) if you find one.

## How the calculators are actually built

There is no AI in the arithmetic. The reconstitution engine is a few hundred lines of
JavaScript running in your browser, and every build of this site checks it against the
same syringe and conversion table that the [public data](https://dosyne.com/api/) is generated
from. That check is the reason we are willing to put a syringe drawing in front of you
and say the plunger is where the answer is.

The design decision we are most confident about is unglamorous: every result states the
concentration it was computed from, alongside the amount and the syringe reading. It
sounds like bookkeeping. It is the difference between a note that still means something
in eight months and a column of numbers nobody can interpret, because the moment a vial
is mixed differently, a bare unit figure stops being enough to reconstruct what was
actually administered. Many tracking apps in this category do not record it, which is
the single most useful thing we found while building the
[comparison pages](https://dosyne.com/compare/).

If you keep your own record — on paper, in a spreadsheet, in any app — write the
concentration beside every entry. A dose history is sensitive enough that the safest
place for it is somewhere you control, and a record with the concentration in it is
one a clinician can actually read.

## Who this is for

Three kinds of reader. Somebody who has been prescribed a GLP-1 medication and needs to
turn a milligram figure into a number they can find on a barrel, reliably, at seven in
the morning. Somebody mixing a research compound who wants the arithmetic checked and
the honest state of the evidence rather than a vendor's enthusiasm. And somebody who
simply wants a record they can hand to a clinician without reconstructing four months
from memory.

There is a fourth reader we are not trying to serve, and saying so saves time: if you
want a protocol, a stack recommendation, a source, or a community telling you what
works, this is the wrong site. We do not publish any of it and we are not going to
start.

## What we are not

We are not clinicians, pharmacists or pharmacologists, and we do not present ourselves
as any of those. The material here is written carefully, sourced from public
references, and built by people who had to understand this subject well enough to
implement it correctly in software — which is a real form of understanding and also a
bounded one. Where a question is genuinely clinical, we say so and point at the person
who should answer it. If you have professional expertise here and something on this
site is wrong, we would genuinely like the correction.

## Privacy, briefly

The calculators on this site run in your browser and do not send what you type to a
server. There is no account to create, so there is no database of what people inject,
and we would rather keep it that way than hold one. The site uses Microsoft Clarity for
aggregate usage statistics; that, and what still applies to anyone who installed the
former mobile app, is set out in the [privacy policy](https://dosyne.com/privacy/).

## Why the site is called The Lab and not The Blog

A small naming decision that reflects an editorial one. A blog implies opinion,
frequency and personality. What this section actually contains is reference material —
pages meant to be returned to, checked against, and quoted, rather than read once in a
feed. Several of them exist because we needed them ourselves while building the engine
and could not find a version on the open web we trusted enough to link to instead.

That also sets the standard for whether something gets published. The test is not
whether a topic would attract traffic; it is whether we can say something true and
specific that the pages currently ranking do not. Where the honest answer is that the
existing material is already good, we would rather link to it than manufacture a
competing page. That happens less often in this subject than it should.

## Where to start

If you have a vial in front of you, the
[reconstitution calculator](https://dosyne.com/tools/peptide-reconstitution-calculator/) is
the fastest route and it shows every intermediate number. If you are trying to decide
how much diluent to use, the
[bacteriostatic water calculator](https://dosyne.com/tools/bacteriostatic-water-calculator/)
solves it in both directions. If you want to understand the subject rather than compute
one answer, start with [how to read an insulin syringe](https://dosyne.com/lab/read-an-insulin-syringe/), which corrects the misunderstanding underneath most of the serious errors
in this field, then [why most peptide dosage charts are unusable](https://dosyne.com/lab/peptide-dosage-charts/) — the piece that will make you distrust most of what else you
find, for reasons we set out in full.

---

HTML version: https://dosyne.com/about/
Structured data for this site: https://dosyne.com/api/v1/openapi.json · https://dosyne.com/llms.txt
Dosyne publishes arithmetic, not protocols: nothing here is a dose recommendation,
and dosing decisions belong to a licensed prescriber.
Free to quote and reuse with a link back to the source URL above (CC BY 4.0).