No plain explanation of what this changes is stored.
No recorded use is stored in reader language.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 26 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 40 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Strength
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
…Waiting for a reviewer1 registered performance measure of this kind.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Body weight
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved1 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Blood sugar
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved1 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Strength
improvement in muscle strength
Body weight
body weight
Blood sugar
glucose metabolism
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
1 registered performance measure of this kind.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
1 registered test measure.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Infant Developmental quotient (DQ)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04586348
How many people
794
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Number of Participants With Return of Spontaneous Circulation
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05564130
How many people
778
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Aronchick scale
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT03992365
How many people
472
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
serum uric acid
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06966635
How many people
312
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Salt Sensitivity of Blood Pressure
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04258332
How many people
281
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Need for hospital admission
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04751669
How many people
252
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
■Living longer, or avoiding a major eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.1 registered measure of this kind. No reviewed result.
■What a body can do day to dayEvidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.1 registered measure of this kind.
■Measured performanceEvidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.1 registered measure of this kind.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.15 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Yeast, C. elegans (roundworm), Mouse, Rat, Dog, Non-human primate. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years
bone mineral density under treatment an anabolic agent
lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months
bone mineral density
bone mineral density t from baseline to 12 months
blood lead concentration plasma lead concentration
serum age levels
ambulatory blood pressure
lumbar spine bone mineral density at month 24
improvement in muscle strength
and 6 more.
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
cardiovascular event free survival time
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (23)
mammographic density at 1 year on exemestane
lumbar spine bmd at 24 months
lumbar spine bmd at 36 months
lumbar spine bmd at 60 months
lumbar spine bmd at 120 months
colorectal adenomas
base study + first extension rate of adverse events
second extension number of who experienced an adverse event
bone formation rate
that experienced an adverse event
that discontinued study drug due to an ae
that discontinued study treatment due to an ae
kidney stones
bone neoplasms
postoperative parathyroid hormone level
predefined tier 1 adverse events
all type cancer
who experienced an adverse event
who discontinued treatment due to an ae
improvement in s skin appearance senile purpura
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Temporarily relieves occasional discomfort and weakness in the lower back, raw and sore nostrils, and sour belching. Label footnote: Claims based on traditional homeopathic practice, not accepted medical evidence. Not FDA evaluated. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Varies by country
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Oral
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Not usually supervised: sold as a supplement or food ingredient where recorded. That is a legal category, not a safety judgement.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
The identity record classes it as a supplement ingredient; no medicines register records an approval.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as liquid, pellet, solution, solution/ drops, given by the oral, sublingual, topical route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Oral
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
983 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 544 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 899f057a-914d-49ca-a9fd-9fc48149782a · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human otc drug and human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 899f057a-914d-49ca-a9fd-9fc48149782a · read 2026-08-29
7549 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as mineral, other combinations and single vitamin and mineral.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
Watching one thing carefully can tell you whether it moved. It cannot tell you what moved it.
This is sold without a prescription, so a person can sensibly watch one thing and see whether it moves.
Pick one goal. One goal only. Two at once cannot be told apart afterwards.
Pick one thing to watch. Registered studies measured things like: bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years; bone mineral density under treatment an anabolic agent; lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months.
Measure before you start. Take the same measurement several times first. One reading is not a starting point.
Know the swing. Write down how much it moves on its own across a normal week.
Change one thing. Change nothing else at the same time, including training and sleep.
Give it the study length. No finished study window is recorded, so no length is suggested here.
Track whether you took it. Missed days are the most common reason a home test shows nothing.
Read the trend. Look at the line across weeks. A single reading tells you almost nothing.
What not to measure
Anything that swings more day to day than the change you are looking for.
A wearable estimate of sleep stages, which is an estimate and not a measurement.
Weight on one morning, which mostly records water.
A feeling you did not write down before starting.
When to stop
Stop if something new and unpleasant starts, and ask a pharmacist or doctor.
Stop if you cannot keep everything else steady, because the result will not mean anything.
Stop at the end of the window you set, and read the trend then.
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki does not work out an amount for anyone.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Potassium Carbonate are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
BQN1B9B9HA
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✗ Not passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries no source: the record holds neither an explanation nor a recorded use.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
The identity record classes it as a supplement ingredient; no medicines register records an approval.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What to learn next
Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (12)
Q1
What did Potassium Carbonate's largest trial (16071 people) and its longest (12 years) measure?
16071 people in Potassium Carbonate's largest registered study, 12 years in its longest registered window, measuring Rate of Biological Aging. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
37 na, 30 phase2, 23 phase3, 19 phase4, 8 phase1, 3 early phase1; NCT00153816; 2016-06. Last human test completed 2026, NCT05424263.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Potassium Carbonate was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
na
37
phase2
30
phase3
23
phase4
19
phase1
8
early phase1
3
1 more recorded row
Last recorded human testNCT05424263
2026-03-19
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From yeast to human: where has Potassium Carbonate shown lifespan?
C. elegans: lifespan, NHP: mechanism-only, yeast: mechanism-only, mouse: lifespan, rat: biomarker, dog: lifespan and human: mechanism-only (116): the rungs where Potassium Carbonate has a recorded finding. Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov · organism ladder · 2026-09-01
Interpretation Rate of Biological Aging — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
C. elegans
lifespan
NHP
mechanism-only
yeast
mechanism-only
mouse
lifespan
rat
biomarker
dog
lifespan
1 more recorded row
humanNCT05302713
mechanism-only; Rate of Biological Aging; 116
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
7 of Potassium Carbonate's trials stopped: safety, accrual/recruitment, other?
safety (1), accrual/recruitment (4) and other (2): Potassium Carbonate's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
"Withdrawn due to poor accrual/lack of funding"; 7 of 116 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00470353
terminated; "Withdrawn due to poor accrual/lack of funding"
NCT00650637
terminated; "The study was prematurely discontinued due to administrative reasons on August 18, 2003. There were no safety concerns that led to the decision to terminate."
NCT00837655
withdrawn; "PI retired"
NCT02282384
withdrawn; "Sites were unable to recruit participants"
NCT03113994
terminated; "COVID-19 Pandemic"
NCT03612466
withdrawn; "Study withdrawn before any participants could be enrolled. Issues being able to effectively recruit participants into the study."
1 further recorded trialNCT05302713
withdrawn; "No participants were enrolled"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Potassium Carbonate used Calcium Carbonate 1200 mg — over how long?
3 recorded entries; human; also "Calcium Carbonate 500 MG", "Calcium Carbonate 500 MG Oral Tablet"
Show the evidence
human
NCT01762995
Calcium Carbonate 1200 mg
NCT04479566
Calcium Carbonate 500 MG
NCT05577507
Calcium Carbonate 500 MG Oral Tablet
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Did Potassium Carbonate move Horvath, and by how much?
Horvath: "The Horvath-Kawazoe (HK) method was used to analyze micropore size distributions, and the results show that, under the same mass ratio of potassium hydroxide to carbonized sample (KOH/C), the positions of extreme points on the two curves are similar, but the extreme values are different, and new extreme points appear…" Europe PMC · epigenetic clock search · 2020-01-10
2 recorded sentences; 2020, 2017; biomarker
Show the evidence
Horvath
PMID 35494566
2020; "The Horvath-Kawazoe (HK) method was used to analyze micropore size distributions, and the results show that, under the same mass ratio of potassium hydroxide to carbonized sample (KOH/C), the positions of extreme points on the two curves are similar, but the extreme values are different, and new extreme points appear at larger pore sizes with increases in the KOH/C ratio."
PMID 28924617
2017; "A recent experimental study by Horvath et al. has shown that the amplitude of the late component of the Na current is as large as potassium (K) and Ca currents (∼1 pA/pF)."
recorded 2020-01-10 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Could one person measure Potassium Carbonate's effect on bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years?
Bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years: measured in Potassium Carbonate's trials.
bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years; 2026-09-01
mammographic density at 1 year on exemestane; 2026-09-01
bone mineral density under treatment an anabolic agent; 2026-09-01
lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months; 2026-09-01
lumbar spine bmd at 24 months; 2026-09-01
lumbar spine bmd at 36 months; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
lumbar spine bmd at 60 months; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
lumbar spine bmd at 120 months; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
colorectal adenomas; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
bone mineral density; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
bone mineral density t from baseline to 12 months; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
base study + first extension rate of adverse events; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
second extension number of who experienced an adverse event; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
blood lead concentration plasma lead concentration; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
bone formation rate; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
that experienced an adverse event; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
that discontinued study drug due to an ae; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
that discontinued study treatment due to an ae; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
kidney stones; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
bone neoplasms; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
26
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
0; NCT00837655; NA; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q8
Which of all type cancer, ambulatory blood pressure and base study + first extension rate of adverse events did Potassium Carbonate's trials measure?
all type cancer, ambulatory blood pressure and base study + first extension rate of adverse events lead 40 outcome terms across Potassium Carbonate's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months, lumbar spine bmd at 24 months, lumbar spine bmd at 36 months, lumbar spine bmd at 60 months, lumbar spine bmd at 120 months and colorectal adenomas follow.
Show the evidence
bone mineral density by test at 1 and 2 years
1
mammographic density at 1 year on exemestane
1
bone mineral density under treatment an anabolic agent
1
lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months
1
lumbar spine bmd at 24 months
1
lumbar spine bmd at 36 months
1
14 more recorded rows
lumbar spine bmd at 60 months
1
lumbar spine bmd at 120 months
1
colorectal adenomas
1
bone mineral density
1
bone mineral density t from baseline to 12 months
1
base study + first extension rate of adverse events
1
second extension number of who experienced an adverse event
1
blood lead concentration plasma lead concentration
1
bone formation rate
1
that experienced an adverse event
1
that discontinued study drug due to an ae
1
that discontinued study treatment due to an ae
1
kidney stones
1
bone neoplasms
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which of Potassium Carbonate's 5 ongoing trials reports first?
Change in bone loss at lumbar site; Duration of induction time; latest 2028-11
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05571514
"Study of the Impact of Mother-of-pearl Nutritional Supplementation on the Prevention of Post-menopausal Osteoporosis"; n 200; "Change in bone loss at lumbar site"; 2028-11
NCT06352775
"Calcium Carbonate on Labor Induction"; n 250; "Duration of induction time"; 2026-12-30
NCT06580782
"Calcium Carbonate to Augment Labor Contractions"; n 60; "Number of Participants Consented"; 2025-12
NCT06660524
"Calcium-Phosphorus Regulation Therapy on Heart Valve Disease"; n 196; "The change of valve calcification score on CT scan from baseline to 1 year of treatment."; 2025-12
NCT07763509
"Calcium-Rich Food Versus Calcium Carbonate for Bone Health"; n 217; "Continuous Adherence to Assigned Calcium Intervention"; 2027-10-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q10
Which 56 trials of Potassium Carbonate posted no result?
Posted no result
56 of 56 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00000429, NCT00686192, NCT00004488, NCT00004489, NCT00302627 and NCT00558623, and 50 more
Completion dates
oldest 2001-05; newest 2024-05-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00000429
2001-05
NCT00686192
2002-07
NCT00004488
2002-09
NCT00004489
2002-09
NCT00302627
2002-11
NCT00558623
2005-04
14 further recorded trials
NCT03813329
2005-12-31
NCT03878667
2005-12-31
NCT00630214
2006-02
NCT01514851
2006-05
NCT00061256
2006-09
NCT00560300
2006-11
NCT03286673
2007-03
NCT00054418
2008-05
NCT01049815
2009-02
NCT01578434
2009-04
NCT01755078
2009-06
NCT00263185
2009-11
NCT00043069
2010-01
NCT00967629
2010-02
Q11
At the median, Potassium Carbonate's trials enrolled 71.5 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
71.5
Largest enrolment
16071
Registered trials counted
116
Q12
Was Potassium Carbonate studied with exercise?
exercise is named in Potassium Carbonate's label sentences: "Additionally, caffeine consumption moderated the increase in plasma potassium levels in TT genotype carriers, while A allele carriers exhibited elevated potassium levels 15 min post-exercise, regardless of caffeine or placebo intake (<i>p</i> < 0.05)." openfda-label+europepmc · 2024-12-21
1 recorded statement; exercise
Show the evidence
exercise
Additionally, caffeine consumption moderated the increase in plasma potassium levels in TT genotype carriers, while A allele carriers exhibited elevated potassium levels 15 min post-exercise, regardless of caffeine or placebo intake (<i>p</i> < 0.05).
recorded 2024-12-21 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q13
What is recorded about Potassium Carbonate and autophagy?
"In this study, we identify potassium homeostasis as a previously unknown regulator of autophagy through the phosphatase activities of Ppz1 and Ppz2." — where Potassium Carbonate and autophagy appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-06-15
"In this study, we identify potassium homeostasis as a previously unknown regulator of autophagy through the phosphatase activities of Ppz1 and Ppz2."
AMPKPMID 39050160
"The level of interaction between Beclin-1 and the α<sub>1</sub> subunit of sodium/potassium-adenosine triphosphates (Na<sup>+</sup>/K<sup>+</sup>-ATPase), and phosphorylated forms of IGF-1 receptor/insulin receptor (IGF-1R/IR), forkhead box protein O1 (FOXO1) and AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) were measured."
IGF-1PMID 39050160
"The level of interaction between Beclin-1 and the α<sub>1</sub> subunit of sodium/potassium-adenosine triphosphates (Na<sup>+</sup>/K<sup>+</sup>-ATPase), and phosphorylated forms of IGF-1 receptor/insulin receptor (IGF-1R/IR), forkhead box protein O1 (FOXO1) and AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) were measured."
mTORPMID 42491139
"We systematically elucidate how hyperglycemia, oxidative stress, and inflammation disrupt sodium, calcium, potassium, and chloride channel networks through interconnected pathways such as AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), NLR family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3), and PIEZO1."
AMPKPMID 42491139
"We systematically elucidate how hyperglycemia, oxidative stress, and inflammation disrupt sodium, calcium, potassium, and chloride channel networks through interconnected pathways such as AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), NLR family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3), and PIEZO1."
senolyticPMID 40354378
"The senolytic activity of Lana C was inhibited by potassium chloride (KCl) and Z-VAD-FMK (ZVF), a widely used pan-caspase inhibitor."
2 more recorded rows
IGF-1PMID 38622478
"We previously demonstrated that insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) regulates sodium/potassium adenosine triphosphatase (Na<sup>+</sup>/K<sup>+</sup>-ATPase) in vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMC) via phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K)."
mTORPMID 41979005
"We conclude that Kir4.1 deletion drives ENaC hyperactivity in the DCT via the mTORC2-dependent SGK1/Nedd4-2 signaling pathway, promoting low potassium diet-induced hypokalemia."
autophagy
PMID 41906654
"Bafetinib directly targets and binds to the potassium channel KCNK6/TWIK2, blocking its degradation via the chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA) pathway to promote potassium efflux, thereby triggering NLRP3 inflammasome activation."
PMID 40267139
"Our findings reveal a physiological role for neuronal autophagy in the regulation of neuronal excitability via the control of RYR-mediated calcium release, and thereby, calcium-activated potassium channel function in the mammalian brain."
sirtuinPMID 38791311
"To characterize the cytotoxic effects of DOX on isolated ventricular cardiomyocytes, focusing on the expression of specific microRNAs (miRNAs) and their molecular targets associated with endogenous cardioprotective mechanisms such as the ATP-sensitive potassium channel (KATP), Sirtuin 1 (SIRT1), FOXO1, and GSK3β."
recorded 2026-06-15 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
Kali Carbonicum Kit Refill, Kali Carb, Bestmade Natural Products Kali Carb, Kalium Carbonicum 6x, Kali Carbonicum / Kali Carbonicum Kit Refill / Kali Carb / Bestmade Natural Products Kali Carb / Kalium Carbonicum 6x
Sources (10)
Sources
ClinicalTrials.govclinicaltrials.gov ·
ClinicalTrials.govClinicalTrials.gov API v2 snapshot 2026-09-01T09:00:05 ·
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 10 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.