Source comparison
TB-500 Research Sleep Depth Considerations: Protocol Comparison
Rodent Tissue Repair Model (2mg/kg, 2×/week) Twice weekly for 14 days EEG polysomnography −21% (day 5) +14% (day 7) Standard tissue repair protocol without sleep controls. Confounds recovery metrics if cognitive or metabolic endpoints are measured Human Anecdo
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- Rodent Tissue Repair Model (2mg/kg, 2×/week)
- Twice weekly for 14 days
- EEG polysomnography
- −21% (day 5)
- +14% (day 7)
- Standard tissue repair protocol without sleep controls. Confounds recovery metrics if cognitive or metabolic endpoints are measured
- Human Anecdotal (Off-Label, ~2mg daily)
- Daily subcutaneous, 4-week cycle
- Self-reported sleep logs
- Not quantified
- No objective data. Subjective reports of 'deeper sleep' and vivid dreams align with rodent REM density increases but lack EEG validation
- Controlled Research Protocol (Stanford)
- 2mg/kg, 2×/week with baseline + repeated polysomnography
- Full polysomnography at baseline, day 4, day 7, day 14
- Documented −18% (day 4)
- Documented +12% (day 7)
- Gold standard. Isolates sleep architecture changes as independent variable, allows differentiation of TB-500 direct effects vs sleep-mediated recovery