The five preclinical studies

Biosash has run preclinical evaluations on five of its formulations and publishes them as images. Here they are as text, with the context the artwork has no room for — including what each study does not say.

Cardiosash

Protection against doxorubicin-induced cardiac damage

≈26% overall cardioprotective effect across the measured parameters.

Read the findings →

Diabo

Supporting healthy glucose metabolism

48–50% reduction in blood glucose in the model.

Read the findings →

Livosash

Dose-dependent liver protection

55–65% reduction in SGOT and SGPT, the two standard liver enzymes.

Read the findings →

Trimfit

Weight-reducing activity in a high-fat diet model

63–64% reduction in obesity-induced body weight gain.

Read the findings →

Turmeric Oil

Immune restoration and balanced inflammatory response

99.1% reduction in TNF-α, the principal inflammatory marker measured.

Read the findings →

What "preclinical" means, before anything else

Preclinical means animal studies. It is the stage of research that comes before anything is tested in people. A result here is a reason to keep investigating — it is not evidence that a product does the same thing in a human being, and no percentage on these pages should be read as a benefit you can expect.

Biosash's own artwork says this at the foot of every study: "results are intended for scientific communication and require confirmation through future clinical studies." That is the correct framing and it is repeated here rather than buried.

Why these pages exist

On biosash.com this data is published as images. That means the numbers in it cannot be read by a search engine, cannot be quoted by an answer engine, and cannot be read aloud by a screen reader. Transcribing them into text makes the work visible — and lets the findings be set out with the context the artwork has no room for.

What these studies do not tell you

Read alongside the findings. None of the five infographics states:

the species and strain used
how many animals were in each group
the dose given, and for how long
which institution ran the work
whether any of it has been published or peer-reviewed

That is not unusual for manufacturer-published research, and it is not a reason to dismiss the work. It is a reason to describe it as what it is: internal preclinical evaluation, not independent clinical evidence.

The products