Instances of RPC-XXX are non-aggressive, and will generally avoid subjects who are not suffering from any disease or sickness. Subjects who possess any form of sickness will produce a seemingly aggressive response from instances of RPC-XXX, despite whether or not a subject engages in disrupting activity.
Suggest you add
a line
break after the last sentence.
"Subjects who possess any form of sickness" is somewhat ambiguous. Does this mean physical sickness, or extend to psychological illness or neurodivergence? If exclusively physical, does malnutrition count? What about immunological weakness, or other forms of biological insufficiency?
I know that the following quote is in the article:
RPC-XXX-A does not appear to be able to cure physical injuries, as RPC-XXX instances are not attracted to any such afflictions.
… but this should be specified here nevertheless.
"Seemingly" is an incorrect term here I believe. Should be "apparently" in case you're willing to subvert that appearance later (as I gather from the Utility rating).
aggressive response from instances of RPC-XXX, despite whether or not a subject engages in disrupting activity.
"[…] aggressive response from instances of RPC-XXX, regardless of whether or not the subject in question engaged in disruptive activity."
Instances of RPC-XXX will reproduce up to two (2) times a year, making population control unnecessary when combined with continued use.
This sentence is out of place. The sentence immediately before it talks about how the bees get provoked, and the one immediately after talks about what happens when it stings. If anything, it seems better placed in the Containment Protocols: "continued use" is a neat attention grabber when combined with an image of a bee.
In general, information in the description is organized by topic. Anything pertaining to physical appearance comes first, then behavior, leading into XXX-A, then reproductive specifics.
Don't queen bees lay eggs continuously? I may be wrong here.
as they degrade into proteins
Any specific example?
Study or recreation of RPC-XXX-A is currently impossible, due to the compound immediately dissolving upon contact with the atmosphere.
Why could they not examine its presence inside the blood? One could theoretically extract a significant enough amount of blood from the bloodstream immediately after injection to catch some of the substance, which can then be analyzed without exposing it to the atmosphere.
I also think the term you're looking for is "vaporizing" or "demanifesting". Were it to simply dissolve, one could still view its components separating. This is remarkably more difficult if it vaporizes, and impossible if it simply disappears.
When injected into a subject, RPC-XXX-A immediately begins seeking out and counteracting any afflictions the subject may have, usually leading to a subject being cured of their affliction within a maximum of two (2) days.
I would personally prefer some more specifics here. Do we know how this mechanism works or do we not? Maybe it's complementary to the normal immune system: works as a kind of "boost" that temporarily strengthens it. This could be quickly explained in just a few additional sentences, and would make the article feel more grounded in reality, less of a fantasy/scifi thing. Makes things generally more enjoyable to read.
Suggest you also specify it only cures one affliction per dose. This is implied later, but should be directly stated to prevent confusion.
When in this state, RPC-XXX-B functions identically to natural human tissue, with the exception of retaining it's coloration and texture.
Also suggesting more specifics here. How does it imitate tissue (maybe a clump of molecules can work like a kind of stem cell)? How does it avoid rejection?
► Show XXX/Application ◄
Suggestion: add a space for a written recommendation/approval or signature by a Site doctor/paramedic/other medical personnel. This would make the avenue of submission a little clearer and make the process more formal, akin to IRL medication requests.
► Show XXX/RPC-XXX-A injection results ◄
► Show XXX/RPC-XXX-B application results ◄
I did not really enjoy these. They feel like a wasted opportunity to elaborate on how exactly these work rather than restating what's already in the Description. You could really cook up some bizarre mechanisms by which -A and -B achieve their properties, whether by complementing already-present systems or working parallel to them — i.e. what if once inside the body, -A forms bee-like pathogens that "sting" bacteria and other organisms with enzymes that tear them apart?
Other than that, this is a nice little article. It should be AOK to post once these final addenda are corrected.