In my early twenties, I used BCP157, TB500, and CJC-1295 DAC. To make sure that I got what I paid for, I contacted the peptide supplier (one of the most renowned suppliers in the EU at the time) and they sent me their certificates of analysis. At the time, I sprained both of my ankles doing a stupid stunt. I used the BCP157 and the TB500 only on one ankle (superficial subcutaneous injection) and not the other.
I have not noticed a difference in their healing rate. The peptides could have been bunk/scam (as everyone can fake a certificate), or they did not work for my particular injury, or it could be that peptides do not work at all (even if you got exactly the molecule you paid for) and most of the people who claim “amazing results” are just sham-treating themselves.
Most people criticize the FDA for banning the sale of peptides (e.g., BCP-157, Dihexa, MOTS-C, etc.) – “Big pharma is only wanting to make money”. The FDA basically said that peptides need to be studied like other drugs are required to be studied – a perfectly rational and valid reason and this is how it should be. Drugs, particularly if they are injected by people, need to be studied properly because there are more things that can go wrong than the average lay person realizes.
The truth is, few of these peptides have been studied systematically. Yes, there may be a handful of scientific papers on them. However, usually, the papers around a specific peptide come from a single obscure research group, sometimes from Eastern bloc countries.
Having co-authored a few papers myself and being friends with people who made the mistake to go into academia made me realize how untrustworthy many “scientific” papers are – particularly if they have been published by low-quality journals, or worse even, by open-access journals (i.e., just pay money to publish a paper, often without the peer-review process). Many people have long realized that people are incredibly gullible and quite easy to fool, which resulted in publishing scientific papers having become the latest marketing scam.
I do not trust most papers published on peptides and pretty much none have been replicated. I am sure there is a lot of bullshitting going on for profit.
It may very well be that some of these peptides deliver on their promises. However, the truth is, for most of them there is a lack of human exposure data. Furthermore, if one does believe their mechanism of action (I personally do find at least 50% not credible), how do you know you are not also impacting highly regulated biological processes leading to potentially disastrous consequences?
One cannot make the same argument for currently approved drugs. For most approved drugs we know pretty well how they work (with a few exceptions) but we know for close to 100% of them what their side effects are and whether there are rare idiosyncratic reactions. Furthermore, every single drug approved by the FDA or EMA needs to go through very extensive toxicology testing, including generating multi-generational exposure data and histology examinations. For peptides, none of that data has ever been generated. So, for approved drugs, I can do proper research about what can go right and wrong – which cannot be said for peptides.
Sure, occasionally, there was some bullshitting done by big pharma companies (particularly before the 2000s). Also sure, there may be some “statistical lying” going on. But outright fraud is pretty rare, in my opinion.
Moreover, I do not trust the underground manufacturing process, including most compounding pharmacies. There is a host of bodybuilders who use underground lab growth hormone (with impurities and/or amino acid alterations), leading to the build-up of antibodies, some of which are neutralizing. Immunogenicity for protein hormones is a concern and was one of the most commonly cited reasons for the FDA to ban a specific peptide – the concern is 100% valid. If you inject strains of an amino acid (i.e., peptide) the immune system may detect this as “foreign” and generate antibodies. Sometimes these antibodies may crossreact with endogenous proteins.
Furthermore, there is no way for the user to know whether he is getting what he paid for. It is reconstituted white powder that could be a thousand different things. The most common case is probably harmless white powder of nothingness (i.e., no active ingredient – a scam) – and given the human propensity to feel different after sham treatment (particularly after “invasive” injections) people often come back for more.
When I worked in the ER department, quite a few times people came in claiming to be sick. After some time (and with the use of objective tests) you get the hang of who is sick and who is not. Quite a few times, I have seen somebody feeling “a lot” better after an infusion of saline water or vitamin C.
From the examination of supplement companies, we know that a large number of them scam their users. For example, ephedrine pills often contain caffeine instead, 1mg melatonin pills often contain 3mg, and various herbal extracts with artificially scientific sounding names to appeal to the average bro (e.g., KSM-66) are often very underdosed (and/or laced with impurities). Sometimes because of an outright scam, and sometimes because of incompetence by the manufacturer – I do not know which one is worse. In fact, most supplement companies usually only buy powder from China and then fill it into capsules or press it into tablets. As a side note, herbal supplements from overseas are a common cause of fulminant liver failure in ER departments.
Given all of this, it is a mystery to me why many people are wary of “big pharma” (which, for the most part, does not actively scam – only in rare isolated instances that are then blown up by the media), but are willing to inject an obscure white powder from the internet, which they know has been manufactured in clandestine conditions.
In sum, I have two major issues with peptides. Firstly, we know little about their efficacy and safety. Secondly, the likelihood that you are not injecting what you think you are injecting (e.g., identity, dosage, purity) is very high. The second point cannot even be disregarded for compounding pharmacies, which quite often are too incompetent to compound correctly (compounding peptides is quite hard actually and needs a lot of expertise in peptide chemistry to synthesize it, test it for the correct folding and sequence, purify it and then lyophilize it).
I personally feel comfortable experimenting widely with approved molecules (including peptides such as semaglutide or teriparatide which are manufactured by big pharma players) but, knowing what can go wrong, I am quite scared of peptides, more so if they are bought from obscure “research sites”.
Again, it may very well be that some peptides are perfectly safe and work the way they are touted to work. And that you are also getting a perfectly compounded (i.e., right AA structure & folding) and pure product. Nonetheless, the absence of credible knowledge in the face of injecting amino acid sequences is playing with fire.
Weekly observations
I share two Weekly Observations in my newsletter every week, similar to the one above. You can find the full archive here.
Disclaimer
The content available on this website is based on the author’s individual research, opinions, and personal experiences. It is intended solely for informational and entertainment purposes and does not constitute medical advice. The author does not endorse the use of supplements, pharmaceutical drugs, or hormones without the direct oversight of a qualified physician. People should never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something they have read on the internet.