The use of injectable peptides for a range of perceived health benefits is surging, fueled by aggressive marketing campaigns and miraculous claims from celebrities and influencers about their ability to clear up facial blemishes, aid muscle repair, promote longevity and more.<\/p>\n
Some peptide products, such as collagen supplements for skin care, are applied topically or ingested in pill form. According to doctors, these are considered safe, even if there isn\u2019t always strong evidence behind their claims. But far riskier, scientists say, are peptides purchased as powders to be reconstituted as self-administered injections without approval by the Food and Drug Administration.<\/p>\n
Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. <\/a><\/p>\n Of the unregulated injectables, BPC-157, TB-500 and CJC-1295, marketed as promoting muscle growth, fat loss and recovery from injury, are among the most popular. None are backed by large-scale, peer-reviewed clinical trials in humans, and all are sold as \u201cresearch chemicals\u201d not subject to FDA regulation. All three raise red flags, experts say, warning that their claimed health benefits are unproven, their advertised ingredients are often incorrect, and their potential side effects are inadequately studied.<\/p>\n The hype around peptides has been growing since 2020, but in recent months interest has surged, with backing from top figures in the Make America Healthy Again movement. In a podcast interview this year, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he would end the FDA\u2019s \u201cwar on peptides.\u201d He did not specify which peptides he was referring to – the category is vast – but he said Americans should be free to make their own informed health decisions.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s what to know about peptides, their uses and their risks.<\/p>\n – – –<\/p>\n Peptides include many different things<\/p>\n Simply put, peptides are short strings of amino acids that naturally occur in the cells of the human body. They are somewhat analogous to proteins, which are formed of longer strings of amino acids. There are thousands of types, many of which perform essential bodily functions. Widely known examples include pain-numbing endorphins and blood sugar regulating insulin.<\/p>\n Peptides can also be produced synthetically. GLP-1 drugs (glucagon-like peptide-1) like Ozempic are an FDA-approved class of peptide, taken by some 16 million Americans to manage diabetes and treat obesity. Federal regulators have not approved GLP-1 drugs for behavioral health, but doctors are already prescribing them off-label – to treat alcohol and drug addiction, for example – encouraged by early research suggesting that they could reshape addiction treatment.<\/p>\n Buoyed in part by the effectiveness of GLP-1s, there is growing hype around other classes of injectable peptides. These are often bought online as \u201cresearch only\u201d powders, which users then mix with sterile water and self-administer by injection in the hope of promoting muscle growth, injury repair or skin elasticity.<\/p>\n – – –<\/p>\n Experts warn against injecting unregulated peptides<\/p>\n There is no high-quality evidence that any of these unapproved injectable peptides are effective, scientists say. Yet a range of vendors are selling them, from pharmaceutical companies offering to ship them from China to private clinics that will administer them in person.<\/p>\n Stuart Phillips, a professor of physiology at Canada\u2019s McMaster University, cautioned that it was unwise and potentially risky to self-administer any chemical that has not been approved for human use. \u201cThere are zero high-quality peer-reviewed human trials,\u201d he said, referring to the spectrum of unapproved injectable peptides. \u201cWe don\u2019t even know if they work at all.\u201d<\/p>\n In a phone interview, Phillips said that he was open to the possibility of future research convincing him otherwise, but that the existing research does not match the hype. \u201cThey likely have some drug-like actions, and they may even be in some cases clinically validated. But they\u2019re generally dominated by exaggerated claims and very aggressive marketing,\u201d he said. \u201cIn most cases, they have very limited high-quality evidence.\u201d<\/p>\n Self-administering injectable peptides poses a higher risk than consuming them in pill form or applying them topically, experts say, because they are absorbed directly into the bloodstream, without the gut or skin providing protection. Injecting peptides also requires clean needles, access to sterile water and an understanding of safe injection practices.<\/p>\n David Holt, a health care attorney, warned that it is illegal to sell unapproved injectable peptides for human medical consumption – even with a warning against such use. \u201cIf a vendor provides dosing instructions or implies health benefits, they are demonstrating \u2018intent for human use,\u2019 rendering the \u2018research\u2019 label void,\u201d he said in an email.<\/p>\n – – –<\/p>\n The most popular \u2018research only\u2019 peptides<\/p>\n None of these popular injectables are approved by the FDA for human clinical use, and all three are banned by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which warns on its website that they pose \u201csignificant health risks for athletes,\u201d including immune reactions, cardiac events and even death.<\/p>\n BPC-157: This peptide, which is derived from acids in the gut, is designed to promote muscle growth and recovery, but \u201ceverything remains highly speculative,\u201d said Phillips, referring to its potential benefits for recovery. In a podcast episode last year, Joe Rogan said he took it to clear up tendinitis, or inflammation of the tendon, in his elbow.<\/p>\n The FDA says it \u201clacks sufficient information\u201d to determine whether it could be harmful. In its notice about the peptide\u2019s prohibition, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency warned that it has not been extensively studied in humans. \u201cNo one knows if there is a safe dose, or if there is any way to use this compound safely to treat specific medical conditions.\u201d<\/p>\n TB-500: This is derived from thymosin-beta 4 (TB4), a naturally occurring peptide that the body releases after injury to aid repair. Some people self-administer it in the hope of promoting post-injury recovery. The FDA says it \u201clacks important information regarding any safety issues raised by this drug, including whether it would cause harm if administered to humans.\u201d<\/p>\n CJC-1295: This peptide, intended to promote the release of growth hormones, is used to improve muscle mass, aid fat loss or accelerate recovery from injury. It promotes the release of IGF-1, a growth factor that Phillips warned at high levels has been linked to elevated risk of some cancers. The FDA said in its most recent guidance that it \u201chas identified serious adverse events associated with CJC-1295 including increased heart rate and systemic vasodilatory reaction. Available clinical data are limited.\u201d<\/p>\n The FDA did not respond to a request for comment on its latest guidance on peptides.<\/p>\n – – –<\/p>\n Elevated risk of impurity<\/p>\n Research chemicals are not subject to the same oversight as medical drugs, making them particularly vulnerable to impurity and contamination, according to experts and medical regulators. Their origins, ingredients and handling history are often unclear.<\/p>\n Testing of some of the most popular peptides online has revealed their purity can vary widely. \u201cVery often when they test what\u2019s been bought on the illicit market, the doses do not match what\u2019s on the label,\u201d said Luke Turnock, a sociologist at Britain\u2019s Lincoln University who studies peptides.<\/p>\n According to Finnrick Analytics, a firm that tests unregulated peptides, the purity of CJC-1295 samples purchased in the past 11 months varied from 1.7 to 100 percent, the purity of TB-500 from 3.2 to 99.9 percent, and the purity of BPC-157 from 81.6 to 100 percent.<\/p>\n – – –<\/p>\n \u2018Peptide stacking\u2019 could increase risks<\/p>\n Some users are taking multiple varieties of peptides at once, a practice known as stacking or compounding. \u201cStacking is essentially poly-substance use, where they\u2019re putting multiple drugs on top of each other to get a desired effect,\u201d Turnock explained. He said the compounding practice, long used by bodybuilders and powerlifters who take anabolic steroids, has now become more mainstream as peptides become more readily available.<\/p>\n On social media, influencers have given some combinations marketable nicknames. The \u201cWolverine Stack,\u201d for example, refers to compounding BPC 157 and TB-500 and is claimed to accelerate healing and reduce inflammation. Following a tip-off, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency in September placed a triathlete under sanction after an investigation uncovered evidence that he had possessed and used both of the peptides, and promoted them and others to his followers on social media.<\/p>\n Phillips, the physiology professor, cautioned that stacking could increase the risk of side effects due to unforeseen interactions – as is sometimes seen with people who suffer complications from being on several prescriptions simultaneously. \u201cIf there are any side effects that are not great, you could imagine stacking three of these things could increase your risk.\u201d<\/p>\n Related Content<\/p>\n With Bowser on her way out, D.C. braces for its uncertain future<\/a><\/p>\n Meet Beef the bulldog, who takes slow walks with his 78-year-old friend<\/a><\/p>\n