/u/MaximilianKohler isn't authoritative at all on the prescript assist issue. He's personally had bad experiences and has provided online resources of other people reporting the same negative issues and provides an anecdotal warning.

When someone reads that, they're supposed to weigh other people's experiences with how they want to proceed. Plus, no one's microbiome, genetic makeup or chemistry is going to be the same. Some people can't eat the same diets, live the same lifestyles, use the same sleep pills. The same rules apply to supplements ten fold. What "heals" one person can do absolutely nothing for another. What puts someone tucked in bed sick for a day, or glued to the toilet, might do nothing to someone else too.

MK is the only reason this sub and a handful of others have any content in them at all. He's just one person. He's done an exceptional job providing information to people, completely free and as source cited as possible, without these topics being his actual source of income AFAIK. That doesn't mean anyone isn't allowed to critique the posts, info etc. But do so constructively.

What's your alternative? What information are you providing? And at least be sensible in the criticisms. You'd rather this sub have absolutely no information on Prescript Assist, positive or negative, until MK or someone decides to personally run peer reviewed studies on it? Lol okay. Any info I've read here has been blatantly obviously anecdotal, unless otherwise sourced & cited. When the only info we can find, as a community, on something like Prescript Assist is anecdotal than that's better than nothing. It's down to reader discretion at that point: put some stock, no stock, etc into whatever anecdotal info you read from strangers on the internet.