PUBLIC REVIEW ROOM · MVNI / FAST

A concise starting packet for an initial feasibility critique.

Prospective investigators, clinicians, methodologists, and institutional reviewers can inspect the premise, evidence, decision brief, governance boundaries, and unresolved scientific choices before a meeting.

Download the two-page brief (PDF)Request a feasibility conversation

Planning stage
No principal investigator
No host institution
No IRB submission or approval
No recruitment or intervention

START HERE

A five-part public packet.

Each item serves a different review task. None is an approved protocol, consent document, clinical recommendation, or invitation to participate.

Current status

Plain-language premise, present gate, scientific questions, proposed use cases, and the path to legitimate institutional ownership.

Open the public overview →

Source-linked evidence guide

Fasting physiology, protein loss, stored-fat use, BCAAs versus EAAs, measurement limits, performance, and unresolved safety questions.

Review the evidence guide →

Decision brief

Neutral question, candidate design paths, regulatory decision matrix, commercial firewall, and the exact feasibility request.

Read the investigator brief →

Governance and corrections

Program ownership, AI-assisted drafting, conflicts, non-affiliation, sponsor independence, correction routes, and publication boundaries.

Review governance →

Study-by-study evidence registry

A curated, non-systematic registry of 11 primary human studies. Search completeness and risk-of-bias appraisal have not yet been independently reviewed.

Download the evidence registry (CSV) →

DECISION DISCIPLINE

Begin with risk, feasibility, and interpretability.

A useful first meeting can recommend advancement, redesign, a lower-risk phase, referral, hold, or decline. The value is a documented decision and a defensible next step—not endorsement.

Conceptual editorial illustration—not a current investigator team, institutional review, study meeting, or approval.

Use the 20-minute agenda

Conceptual illustration of four scientific reviewers examining protocol documents and a red, amber, and green decision boundary

20-MINUTE FEASIBILITY AGENDA

Use the meeting to make decisions—not to retell the website.

0–3 minutes · Status and ask
Confirm that the concept has no PI, institutional sponsor, IRB approval, recruitment, or active intervention. Ask for critique, not endorsement.
3–8 minutes · Fatal-flaw review
Test the premise, intervention logic, scientific value, confounding, safety burden, and whether a one-person design could answer anything worth knowing.
8–13 minutes · Lowest-risk informative phase
Consider measurement validation, an observational baseline, a lower-risk nutrition question, or a conclusion that the proposed intervention should not proceed.
13–17 minutes · Ownership and institutional fit
Identify the needed disciplines, clinical authority, site capability, regulatory route, data system, and legitimate responsible party.
17–20 minutes · Concrete next step
Record a referral, required pre-read, internal intake route, redesign task, or clear stop decision with an owner and date.

DECISION RECORD

Capture six decision fields after every feasibility conversation.

Record these items after a conversation. The website does not collect them publicly.

Post-meeting decision fields
Decision field	What to capture
Scientific viability	Worth pursuing, not worth pursuing, or uncertain—and the reviewer’s principal reason.
Fatal flaws	Safety, ethics, design, measurement, interpretation, operational, regulatory, or institutional barriers.
Lowest-risk informative next phase	The smallest defensible activity, including measurement validation or no intervention.
Required owners	PI discipline, medical monitor, biostatistician, research dietitian, regulatory owner, site, and data-system owner.
Referral or intake route	Named person, department, official form, introduction owner, and permission to mention the referrer.
Next action	Specific deliverable, accountable person, due date, and the condition that closes or advances the path.

OPEN DECISIONS

The scientific package is not “finished” until qualified owners make these choices.

Founder preference cannot resolve them.

Question and design

Primary estimand, comparator, baseline, duration, intervention composition, endpoints, missing-data rules, learning effects, and analysis.

Clinical safety

Eligibility, exclusions, medications, laboratory schedule, adverse events, stopping thresholds, emergency access, refeeding, and follow-up.

Regulatory and ethics

Human-subjects status, IRB or ethics route, FDA or IND implications, registration duties, conflicts, insurance, and institutional activation.

Data and publication

Approved data system, access, audit trail, privacy, retention, deidentification, analysis ownership, authorship, null results, and adverse-event reporting.

DATA BOUNDARY

No health records belong in this public room.

This site may receive a professional inquiry through the dedicated contact form. Do not submit medical records, laboratory results, diagnoses, medication lists, genetic data, participant identifiers, or urgent clinical information. Any future research data system must be selected and governed by the responsible institution.