A record of what the sources say

Public writing about these compounds is dominated by vendors and by summaries of summaries. Figures circulate with no attribution, regulatory status is described as though it were the same everywhere, and the gap between an investigational molecule and an authorised medicine is routinely blurred. This reference exists because that record is difficult to check.

Each entry documents identity and specification data, the analytical methods used to confirm them, regulatory classification recorded separately for every jurisdiction covered, and the documented safety signals and registered trials for that compound. Every figure carries the primary document it came from and the date that document was read.

Compounds are grouped by the regulatory regime that governs them, because that determines how each may lawfully be described. A compound authorised as a medicine and an ingredient assessed for cosmetic use are not the same kind of thing, and presenting them alike would misrepresent both. One compound covered here holds no marketing authorisation in any jurisdiction, and its entry says so wherever it appears.

Where a value is not published by a primary source, it is recorded as a gap. Nothing is estimated, inferred from a comparable molecule, or filled in from secondary coverage to make an entry look complete. An incomplete entry that says so is more useful than a complete-looking one that cannot be checked.