Channel
@tgzheln
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
11subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001483567793 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @tgzheln |
| Description | We share inside stories from high-quality and impactful health research. Validate the evidence: https://zheln.com |
| Created | Between 1 April 2019 and 30 September 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 12 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/tgzheln |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 08:00 | 11 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 23:51 | 11 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 5 January 2024 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 19 posts for this entry, the most recent from 6 October 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Measured directly from 1 video with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
3 reactions across 3 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 3 | 100.0% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 3 of the 19 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 3reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 5 January 2024 to 6 October 2025, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
⚡️ Legit health science masquerading as fake news. Meet Zheln on Sora – a new era in the dissemination of health research evidence. Here is how the pipeline works 👇 👭 Patients generously share their data 🔬 Researchers conduct experiments 📊 Metaresearchers synthesize findings 🤖 AI generates content 🍒 Human editors cherry-pick best content 🔎 Transparent reporting like @WriteInStonePublic helps verify provenance and …
🔎 Here is a sneak peek of what @tgzheln new AI pree review module can do (spelling intended). 👩💼👨🏽⚕️🧑🎓 🖼️ The attached screenshot is a critical summary of a recent systematic review by Sana Mohammadi et al., performed with a large language model from a patient advocate’s perspective. A text version is in the comments! 👇 You may leave a topic or article you would like to run through the tool in the comments below…
Health Research Stories pinned «“Most companies do not reveal exact details of how their systems work.“ We do. This post announces a public test of Zheln AI for systematic reviews and explains how it works. Zheln AI is a human-machine pipeline that curates published systematic reviews and…»
“Most companies do not reveal exact details of how their systems work.“ We do. This post announces a public test of Zheln AI for systematic reviews and explains how it works. Zheln AI is a human-machine pipeline that curates published systematic reviews and other syntheses of health research to translate them into digestible news stories. Thus, it is not a tool to do a systematic review (sorry, fellow academics). Ra…
No skincare products proved effective against acne, a review finds. The market size of acne cosmetics is estimated at 4.5 billion U.S. dollars. 42,226 patients studied. Zero media coverage. Thoughts?
The study confirmed that the evidence base for UBI is limited. As of October 2022, researchers identified 28 articles describing 10 experiments conducted between 1968 and 2020 in the USA, Canada, Spain, Finland, and the Netherlands. “The results of the included studies were difficult to synthesize because of the heterogeneity in the reported outcomes,” the researchers noted. This is due to the multifaceted nature of…
Can Universal Basic Income solve the problem of poverty? * According to statistics, low income levels are associated with higher mortality rates and worse outcomes in the treatment of chronic diseases. Moreover, a report by the World Bank and World Health Organization shows that high healthcare costs push many people to the brink of poverty, forcing them to choose between buying food and paying for medical services.…
Probiotics won’t make you poop, but lactulose will, with moderate certainty. Taking lactulose for an average of 4 weeks leads to at least one more additional stool per week in adults with positive Rome criteria for constipation. This post has been immortalized on a blockchain.
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors do not work. The market share is US$ 11.6 billion. They are not effective at all, with high certainty. DPP4 inhibitors are one of the newer drugs people with type 2 diabetes use to lower their blood sugar levels. They include medications such as Januvia (sitagliptin), Onglyza (saxagliptin), Tradjenta (linagliptin), Nesina or Vipidia (alogliptin), and Galvus (vildagliptin). …
Zheln’s (impolite) take on hazard vs. risk and some pieces of health research – and their authoritative academic publishers – that still fail to use a comprehensive search strategy in a systematic review and overlook the existence of ROBINS-E in 2024: https://hey.xyz/posts/0x04fcbd-0x09-DA-2c9ba1a1
What evidence do we have of the association between fluoride exposure and thyroid function? Check this funny summary of findings table: https://hey.xyz/posts/0x04fcbd-0x08-DA-a7d09302
Zheln went #SocialFi, and here is a short post on opioid use disorder: https://hey.xyz/posts/0x04fcbd-0x05
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @tgzheln. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Health Research Stories” (@tgzheln), 11 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/tgzheln.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.