Independent & evidence-basedPeer-reviewed citationsUpdated monthlyFree monthly research digest
About

About mots-c.com

Last reviewed: · Reviewed by the mots-c.com Editorial Team

mots-c.com is an independent research and education hub focused entirely on MOTS-c, the mitochondrial-derived peptide. We translate peer-reviewed studies into plain English, with no product to sell.

Our editorial process

Every page on this site is written and reviewed by the mots-c.com Editorial Team — a group of contributors with backgrounds in molecular biology, metabolic research, and health writing. We follow a four-step process for every article:

  • Source selection. We prioritize peer-reviewed studies indexed in PubMed and major journals (Cell Metabolism, Nature Communications, Aging).
  • Plain-English summary. Findings are restated without jargon, with effect sizes and limitations preserved.
  • Editorial review. A second contributor checks every claim against the cited source.
  • Periodic re-review. Pillar pages are revisited at least quarterly so the "last reviewed" date is never stale.

What we will not do

  • We do not sell MOTS-c, peptides, or supplements.
  • We do not recommend self-administration of research peptides.
  • We do not accept paid placements that influence editorial content.
  • We do not present preclinical findings as if they were proven in humans.

Corrections

If you spot a factual error or a citation that is out of date, email hello@mots-c.com. Substantive corrections are published on the relevant page and the "last reviewed" date is bumped.

Disclaimer

mots-c.com is for education only. Nothing on this site is medical advice. Speak to a licensed clinician before starting any peptide protocol.

How we handle medical claims

MOTS-c sits at the intersection of metabolic medicine, exercise physiology, and longevity research — fields where overstatement is common. Three rules keep our coverage honest:

  • Species labelling. We say "in mice" or "in humans" in the same sentence as the result — never just "MOTS-c improves X".
  • Effect size, not direction. "Improved insulin sensitivity" is not enough. We try to give a sense of magnitude where the source data supports it.
  • Limits of inference. Correlational human findings (e.g. lower MOTS-c in diabetes) are reported as associations, not causes.

What we cite

  • Peer-reviewed primary research, prioritized over reviews.
  • Indexed in PubMed or major journal databases.
  • Published by groups with an established mitochondrial-biology track record where possible.
  • We avoid unindexed preprints unless the topic has no peer-reviewed coverage yet.

Standards & sources we follow

  1. National Library of Medicine — PubMed. Primary index used for sourcing peer-reviewed MOTS-c research. View source →
  2. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. View source →
  3. Google Search Central. Helpful content and E-E-A-T guidance for health publishers. View source →

Links open on PubMed or the original journal. Last reviewed dates reflect when our editorial team last verified each citation.

Get the MOTS-c research digest

One short email a month with new studies, takeaways, and protocols. No spam.