https://fasolati.life/evidence/Selected editorial changes, with sources and interpretation boundaries. Dates identify the review day; no automatic monitoring or cadence is promised.en-ushttps://fasolati.life/evidence/#exposure-route-2026-09-12fasolati-evidence-exposure-route-2026-09-12The summary now states that the zebrafish experiments used direct systemic injection, not oral exposure. Interpretation limit: This does not calibrate an oral-rinse measurement to vascular leak, heart attack, or stroke risk in a person. Why changed: Prevent a model-delivery experiment from reading as a demonstrated natural oral-to-systemic route. Published support: Farrugia et al., 2020: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7684789/https://fasolati.life/evidence/#hepatic-setting-2026-09-12fasolati-evidence-hepatic-setting-2026-09-12Mouse liver translocation and glycogen findings are separated from the HepG2 insulin-signaling experiment. Interpretation limit: This is not proof that a person’s glucose excursions are caused by oral vesicles, and it does not establish the same effect in muscle or adipose tissue. Why changed: Readers should be able to tell which experimental system supports each statement. Published support: Seyama et al., 2020: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32088316/https://fasolati.life/evidence/#foma-identity-2026-09-12fasolati-evidence-foma-identity-2026-09-12The summary specifies five paired samples and greater FomA signal in EV-enriched tumor fractions, with a non-exclusive-marker caveat. Interpretation limit: FomA is not a vesicle-exclusive marker. Human tissue enrichment and model mechanisms are separate observations; they do not establish oral origin in an individual or validate an oral-rinse cancer predictor. Why changed: Distinguish observed signal, the authors’ interpretation and separate model experiments. Published support: Zheng et al., 2024: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11414721/; Marker-specificity context: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12003102/https://fasolati.life/evidence/#glycemic-context-2026-09-12fasolati-evidence-glycemic-context-2026-09-12The wording includes no active treatment or usual care as the comparator and the 95% confidence interval. Interpretation limit: This concerns periodontal treatment in a defined population. It does not identify OMVs as the mediator or demonstrate Fasolati or Loria efficacy. Why changed: A treatment effect should travel with the comparison and its uncertainty. Published support: Simpson et al., Cochrane, 2022: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35420698/https://fasolati.life/evidence/#crp-duration-2026-09-12fasolati-evidence-crp-duration-2026-09-12The summary separates the six-month result from the smaller, limited longer-term analysis. Interpretation limit: A change in CRP is not proof of oral-vesicle mediation, a universal sustained effect, or benefit from a Fasolati product. Why changed: Avoid implying a demonstrated durable effect across follow-up periods. Published support: Luthra et al., 2023: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10087558/