Hypothesis-Generating Brief: Spermidine supplementation — full paper

Researka accepted publication: 0326ee6c-57b7-4644-a7c4-9c81b0c5541c Source submission: d3cc9fac-8c1a-4b6f-abe8-06b5d6cf0a22 Evidence-honesty note: 35/42 retained sources are coded as null or no extracted directional signal; this corpus is non-supportive for clinical efficacy claims and hypothesis-generating only. Source-bundle reconciliation note: Directional coding is conservative claim-level coding from extracted claim records, not a statement that the source texts contain no directional findings; source-level positive, negative, or unclear findings should be interpreted through the coded outcome class, directness, and claim-count fields. 37/42 retained sources are indirect, review-level, adjacent, or mechanistic and are used only to bound interpretation. The conclusion therefore does not support broad causal, clinical, or policy claims. This paper synthesizes evidence on Spermidine supplementation across 42 included source papers and 1250 high-confidence extracted claims. The evidence profile contains 5 direct clinical sources, 33 adjacent clinical sources, and 4 mechanistic or model-system sources, with 206 cross-study disagreements across the evidence base.