Peptide Questions, Answered

Keep the freeze-dried powder cold, dry, and out of light. For a short time, the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius is fine. For anything longer than about three months, the freezer at around minus 20 degrees Celsius is better. Keep the vial sealed and dry. Try not to freeze and thaw it over and over.

Open this answer on its own page

Stored well, the freeze-dried powder keeps for a long time. In the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, most last roughly 12 to 24 months. In the freezer at around minus 20 degrees Celsius, many last two years or more. Cold, dark, and dry conditions slow the breakdown a lot.

Open this answer on its own page

For a short time, the fridge is fine. If you plan to keep the powder for more than a few months before you use it, the freezer is the safer choice. What matters most is a steady temperature. Swinging between frozen and thawed stresses the peptide more than steady cold does.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Light, especially UV light, is one of the main things that breaks peptides down. Keep vials in their box or in a container you cannot see through. Heat, damp, air, and light are often called the four enemies of a peptide, and light is one of the easiest to control.

Open this answer on its own page

It helps. Damp is a big cause of breakdown. Putting vials in an airtight container with a drying pack (the little silica packet) adds useful protection, mostly for long freezer storage. Peptides soak up water from the air once a vial is opened.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Let a vial from the fridge or freezer come up to room temperature before you add water. Squirting liquid into a very cold vial can stress the seal and the peptide, and water droplets can form inside. Letting it warm up first gives a cleaner, more reliable mix.

Open this answer on its own page

It means mixing the freeze-dried powder with a liquid, usually bacteriostatic water (sterile water with a preservative), so it dissolves into a liquid you can use. The powder keeps the peptide stable while dry. Adding water turns it back into a liquid. This is educational information, not dosing guidance. Step by step math at /calculator.

Open this answer on its own page

Add the water slowly. Let it run down the inside wall of the vial instead of blasting it onto the powder. Then let it sit, or gently swirl or roll the vial between your fingers until the liquid turns clear. Running the water down the side cuts down on foam and protects the fragile peptide.

Open this answer on its own page

Peptides are fragile chains of amino acids (the building blocks of protein). Hard shaking can make them clump or come apart, which can make them work less well. Shaking also makes foam and bubbles. Gentle swirling or rolling is enough. Most peptides dissolve in about 30 to 60 seconds.

Open this answer on its own page

There is no single right amount. The amount of water sets how strong the mix is. More water spreads the same peptide through more liquid, which can make small amounts easier to measure. The mixing calculator at /calculator does the math from the vial strength, the water you add, and your target amount. It is a math tool and does not recommend a dose. BPC-157 prefills: /calculator/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

Usually less than a minute of gentle swirling. If some powder is left, keep swirling gently and give it a little time. Do not shake it. A fully mixed peptide should look clear.

Open this answer on its own page

Bacteriostatic water is the usual choice. It has a preservative, so one vial can be used over several weeks. Sterile water also works, but it has no preservative, so it is best for one use. Do not use tap water, spring water, or plain distilled water. They are not sterile and are not meant for this.

Open this answer on its own page

Once mixed with bacteriostatic water and kept in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, most peptides are generally thought to be usable for about 28 to 30 days. At room temperature a mixed peptide breaks down much faster, often within 24 to 48 hours. So keep it in the fridge.

Open this answer on its own page

That time limit comes from the bacteriostatic water. It has about 0.9 percent benzyl alcohol as a preservative. The preservative reliably holds back germs for roughly 28 days, which is why vials used more than once are usually dated to that point. After that, the risk of germs gets higher, even in the fridge.

Open this answer on its own page

No. The roughly 28-day figure is a general rule set by the preservative. How long the peptide itself stays stable varies. Some are more fragile than others. If a shelf life is published for a specific compound, follow that. If not, the 28-day fridge rule is the usual guide.

Open this answer on its own page

In the fridge, at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius. This protects the peptide, not the water. Keep the vial in the main part of the fridge, not the door, where the temperature swings most. Keep it out of light.

Open this answer on its own page

You can with some peptides. But freezing and thawing a liquid stresses the peptide, and doing it again and again is a bad idea because it can break the peptide down. If a mix is frozen, it is usually frozen once and thawed once. For most people, keeping it in the fridge and using it within the normal time is simpler and safer.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Writing the mixing date on the vial is the easiest way to track the roughly 28-day window and know when to stop using it. It takes the guesswork out of how old a mixed vial is.

Open this answer on its own page

Mixed peptides break down fast at room temperature. They often become unreliable within a day or two, and the risk of germs goes up. A few minutes out of the fridge while you measure is different from leaving a vial out overnight. If a mixed vial has been left out for a long time, it is safest not to count on it.

Open this answer on its own page

Bacteriostatic water is sterile water with about 0.9 percent benzyl alcohol. That is a preservative that stops bacteria from growing. The preservative is what lets you put a needle into a vial many times and use it over several weeks, not just once.

Open this answer on its own page

Bacteriostatic water has a preservative, so one vial can be used many times over about 28 days. Sterile water is clean and germ-free but has no preservative, so it is meant for one use. Distilled water is filtered but not always germ-free, and it is not right for mixing peptides. Never use tap or spring water.

Open this answer on its own page

An opened vial of bacteriostatic water is generally thought to be good for about 28 days in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius. After the expiry date on the label, you cannot count on it being germ-free or on the preservative still working. Do not use an expired vial.

Open this answer on its own page

Unopened, it can usually be kept at room temperature, as its label says. Once opened, keeping it in the fridge helps it last through its roughly 28-day use window. Always follow the maker's label.

Open this answer on its own page

A properly mixed peptide should be clear. Cloudiness can mean a temperature shock, the peptide clumping, or germs getting in. If the liquid is cloudy and does not clear with gentle swirling, it is safest not to use it.

Open this answer on its own page

Powder that has not dissolved can sometimes clear with more gentle swirling and a little patience. Floating bits, fibers, or specks that will not dissolve can mean clumping or germs. If so, do not use the vial. The finished liquid should be clear, with nothing floating in it.

Open this answer on its own page

Warning signs you can see include cloudiness, floating bits, a color change, or a powder cake that clearly melted into liquid before you mixed it. Chemical breakdown is not always visible, which is why storage and dates matter. If you are unsure whether a vial is damaged, do not count on it.

Open this answer on its own page

Dry, freeze-dried peptides usually handle a short spell of warmth during normal shipping without much breakdown. That is why sellers often ship them without ice. A mixed (liquid) peptide is different and should never be shipped or left warm. Once a dry vial arrives, what matters is keeping it cold from then on.

Open this answer on its own page

A freeze-dried cake can loosen and move in transit. The peptide may show up as a small pellet, a thin film, or be barely visible at all. All of these can be normal. What matters is whether it dissolves into a clear liquid when you mix it the right way. A cake that has clearly melted into liquid before you add water is a warning sign.

Open this answer on its own page

Freeze-dried peptides generally do not need ice for a short trip. Data show freeze-dried peptides stay stable through normal shipping of a few days, at room temperatures below about 30 degrees Celsius. That is why many sellers ship them without ice. Cold storage matters mostly for keeping them a long time, not for a short trip.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Once a peptide is mixed into a liquid, it has to stay cold. Mixed peptides should travel in the cold, at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, for short trips, or frozen for longer ones. A mixed, liquid peptide should never sit at room temperature for a long time.

Open this answer on its own page

Keep them cool and steady. Dry, unmixed vials handle short trips well. If you are carrying mixed vials, use an insulated cooler with an ice pack. If you fly, keep peptides in your carry-on, not checked bags, to avoid the hot and cold swings of the cargo hold.

Open this answer on its own page

A peptide is a short chain of amino acids, the same building blocks that make up proteins. Many hormones and signal chemicals in the body are peptides. Research peptides are lab-made versions studied for how they act on specific targets in the body.

Open this answer on its own page

It is mostly about length. Peptides are short chains of amino acids. Proteins are longer, bigger, and folded into more complex shapes. There is no exact cutoff, but peptides are generally the smaller ones.

Open this answer on its own page

It used to. Every profile carried a research strength and an evidence level. Both were removed, because a letter grade squeezes the one thing a reader needs into a label that hides it. What replaced them is a number you can count: how many studies in people a profile cites, how many people were in them, and what those studies measured. That number is on every profile, and you can check it against the studies listed below it. Which compound or plan is best for you also depends on facts about you that a web page does not have. So nothing here picks a winner.

Open this answer on its own page

Half-life is the time it takes for the amount of a compound in your body to drop by half. After about four to five half-lives, most of it is gone. Our half-life reference puts every compound on one scale, so you can see how long each one sticks around.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on the compound and the country. Some are approved prescription medicines. Some are sold as supplements. Many are labeled research chemicals that are not approved for people to use. Every profile on this site shows the legal status for the US, UK, Australia, and Canada.

Open this answer on its own page

It means regulators have not approved the compound for people to use, and it is meant for lab research. Many peptides carry this label. It is a legal label, and this site shows it as information, not as encouragement.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Everything here is for learning. We sum up published research. We do not give dosing plans, personal advice, or medical advice. For any personal health decision, talk to a licensed health professional.

Open this answer on its own page

We do not sell peptides, and we do not take sponsorships or paid placements. Knowledge stays free. No vendor has a say in what a page says.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on the compound. This site's legal fields are national. The UK is one of four countries we store, and we do not map it county by county. Approved peptide drugs such as semaglutide and tirzepatide are licensed and prescription only (MHRA, the UK drug regulator). GHK-Cu is allowed as a cosmetic ingredient, which is not the same as an injectable drug. Most research peptides, including BPC-157, TB-500, ipamorelin, CJC-1295, MOTS-c, KPV, and epitalon, are listed not licensed. PT-141 is listed not widely licensed. Sub-national UK detail is missing from this dataset. Compound pages: /legal.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on the compound. This site's legal fields are national, and Canada is one of four countries we store. Approved peptide drugs such as semaglutide and tirzepatide are Health Canada approved and prescription only. GHK-Cu is allowed as a cosmetic ingredient. Most research peptides on this site, including BPC-157, TB-500, ipamorelin, CJC-1295, MOTS-c, KPV, and epitalon, are listed not approved. PT-141 is listed not approved. Those are national fields, not provincial rules. This dataset has not filled in any Canadian province. Compound pages: /legal.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold a US import classification. Our legal fields record whether a compound is approved nationally or sold for research use. They do not record customs rules, personal import allowances, or whether a parcel labeled research use only can cross a border. Import is a different legal question from the US field on /legal. This FAQ will not fill that gap with a guess, and it does not invent a state or port rule. Check the compound's US legal page for the national status this site does store.

Open this answer on its own page

No, going by this site's national fields. Retatrutide is still experimental. It is not approved in the US, not licensed in the UK, not registered in Australia, and not approved in Canada. It is not a legal over-the-counter medicine in those four countries, and it is not a legal prescription drug there either. Sellers offering it are selling an unapproved research chemical. This dataset has no state-by-state map of over-the-counter rules. National status: /legal/retatrutide/us.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Our legal fields are national only: US, UK, Australia, and Canada. They do not record state, provincial, or territorial rules, and this FAQ will not invent a California, Texas, or Florida statute. What the US field can say, compound by compound, is on /legal. A national 'not approved, research use only' line is not a state criminal law. An FDA approval is not a map of state pharmacy rules.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's US legal field for KPV is not approved, research use only. It is not an FDA approved drug. The FDA took it off its Category 2 list of drugs pharmacies may not mix (compound) in April 2026. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted 8 to 6 to recommend allowing pharmacies to make it, against its own reviewers. That vote is advice only and is not an approval. UK: not licensed. Australia: not approved, banned in sport (WADA, the world anti-doping agency). Canada: not approved. This site has not filled in any country beyond those four. Sub-national detail is not in this dataset. National status: /legal/kpv/us.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's US legal field for epitalon is not approved, research use only. It is not an FDA approved drug. The FDA took it off its Category 2 list of drugs pharmacies may not mix (compound) in April 2026. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted 7 to 4, with 1 abstaining, to recommend allowing pharmacies to make it for insomnia, against its own reviewers. That vote is advice only and is not an approval. UK: not licensed. Australia: not approved, banned in sport (WADA, the world anti-doping agency). Canada: not approved. This site has not filled in any country beyond those four. Sub-national detail is not in this dataset. National status: /legal/epitalon/us.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Every compound on this site has national fields for four countries only: the US, the UK, Australia, and Canada. Those four are required and filled in. This site has not filled Germany, Japan, Mexico, India, or any other country. If you ask where a peptide is legal in a country outside those four, the honest answer is that we do not hold that field. The four national pages are at /legal. Empty here means unread, not invented as banned or allowed.

Open this answer on its own page

There is no single national rule that makes peptides, as a group, illegal. This site's legal fields are national and go compound by compound: US, UK, Australia, and Canada. Some peptides are approved prescription medicines (semaglutide, tirzepatide, tesamorelin, and PT-141 as Vyleesi). Many others are listed not approved, research use only. Research use only is a regulator's label. It is not a criminal law, and it is not permission to take the vial. Selling an unapproved product as a drug for people is a different legal question from the national field on /legal. This dataset has not filled in any US state, UK county, or Canadian province. This FAQ does not invent a ban and does not invent a state statute. Compound pages: /legal.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's US legal field for noopept is not approved. It is sold as a research chemical or supplement in some places. It is not an FDA approved drug. UK: not licensed. Australia: prescription only, not approved as a supplement. Canada: not approved. It is approved in Russia, but that is a foreign rule, not a US approval. The one study in people on that page tracked brain waves (EEG) in people with mild memory problems. Everyone knew what they were taking. It is not a US label. Sub-national detail is not in this dataset. This FAQ does not invent a state statute. National status: /legal/noopept/us.

Open this answer on its own page

You enter the vial strength, how much bacteriostatic water you are adding, and your target amount. It tells you the exact volume and the mark to draw to, in units on an insulin syringe or in millilitres on a 3 or 5 mL luer syringe. It only does the math with your numbers and does not recommend a dose. Open it at /calculator.

Open this answer on its own page

The AI Coach answers questions about the compounds in this database and links back to the profiles and their sources. It sticks to our data, stays educational, and does not give dosing or medical advice.

Open this answer on its own page

Profiles are reviewed as new research comes out, and each one shows a review date. We also track new drugs still in development, so newly reported drugs and studies get added as they appear.

Open this answer on its own page

Research peptides are lab-made chains of amino acids sold with a research use only label. That means no regulator has approved them for people to use. Some are close copies of hormones the body already makes. Others are drugs still being tested in studies. A few are simply unapproved. The label is a legal status. It does not promise the product is pure or safe.

Open this answer on its own page

Peptides sit between small drugs and big proteins. So they can hit one exact target on a cell, and they are still cheap enough to make in large amounts. That mix has already given us some of the best-selling drugs in the world: the GLP-1 drugs for diabetes and obesity. It has also given approved treatments for HIV-related fat loss, hepatitis, sexual problems, and a rare skin condition triggered by light. Most compounds sold as research peptides have not reached that bar.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on which one. Semaglutide, tirzepatide, and liraglutide are FDA approved for weight loss, based on large, careful studies in people. Retatrutide, cagrilintide, and survodutide are still-experimental drugs from the same family (they act on GLP-1 and glucagon, two gut and blood-sugar hormones), and they show similar results in studies. AOD-9604 was sold for years as a fat-loss peptide. In its own obesity study in people, it did no better than a dummy pill. What decides whether a peptide works is what it acts on, not the word peptide.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on the peptide. Approved drugs like semaglutide have large safety records. Research chemicals like BPC-157 have little or no safety data in people. Semaglutide and tesamorelin are FDA approved, with safety data from many people. BPC-157 and TB-500 are unapproved research chemicals with little to no published safety data in people, at any dose. Whether a peptide is safe depends on the specific compound. This site's compound pages say exactly how much evidence in people exists for each one, including when the honest answer is not much.

Open this answer on its own page

Most peptides work by latching onto a specific receptor (a docking spot) on the surface of a cell. That is the same way the body's own hormones and signal chemicals work. It sets off a chain of events inside the cell. Semaglutide latches onto the GLP-1 receptor to slow digestion and cut appetite. Ipamorelin latches onto the ghrelin receptor to set off a burst of growth hormone. What happens next depends on the receptor it hits, not on the fact that it is a peptide.

Open this answer on its own page

Nearly all of them are made by chemistry in a lab. They are built one amino acid at a time on a solid bead, not taken from animals or people. That is why a 15 amino acid peptide like BPC-157, or a longer one like semaglutide, can be made in bulk by any lab with the right gear. It is also why so many sellers can offer the same molecule at very different prices and purity.

Open this answer on its own page

It is a sales term with no legal definition. It usually hints that the product is for lab research, not for people to take, the same as 'research use only'. But the phrase does not promise any purity, testing standard, or way of making it. A certificate of analysis (a test report) from an independent lab is the only way to check a specific vial. This site's lab profiles describe what each testing lab tells you about how it reports.

Open this answer on its own page

In most cases, yes. Buying and owning a compound labeled research use only is not a crime in itself, because the label says it is sold for lab research, not as a drug for a person. That legal gap is not approval. It just means no regulator has checked the product for use in people. Using it on yourself goes beyond what the label allows.

Open this answer on its own page

Some already face action, and lately it has gone against the sellers more often than for them. In April 2026 the FDA took BPC-157, TB-500, and MOTS-c off its Category 2 list, which meant compounding pharmacies (pharmacies that mix their own versions) were told to stop making them. In July 2026 an FDA advisory panel then voted on whether to recommend several of these peptides, including BPC-157 and TB-500, for compounding. The results were mixed and are still working through the process.

Open this answer on its own page

Some are, most are not. Semaglutide, tirzepatide, tesamorelin, and bremelanotide (PT-141) are FDA approved drugs for specific conditions. The peptides most talked about in fitness and longevity circles, including BPC-157, TB-500, CJC-1295, ipamorelin, and epitalon, are not FDA approved for any use. They are sold as research chemicals. Approval goes compound by compound. It is never true of peptides as a group.

Open this answer on its own page

It is a short peptide, usually two to four amino acids long. It comes from a Soviet and Russian research school (the Khavinson group). Their idea is that tissues age because they stop making enough of their own control peptides. Epitalon, thymalin, cartalax, and pinealon are the best-known examples. Almost all the evidence in people for this family comes from that one research group, and outside groups have not repeated it.

Open this answer on its own page

Collagen supplements are made of short bits of peptide. The collagen protein is broken down so it is easier to absorb when you swallow it. That sets it apart from the injectable research peptides on this site. Collagen peptides have their own record of studies in people for skin and joints, summed up on this site's collagen peptides profile. That is separate from the growth hormone and melanocortin peptides most people mean when they ask about research peptides.

Open this answer on its own page

The FDA approved peptides, like semaglutide, tirzepatide, tesamorelin, and bremelanotide, need a prescription in the US. The unapproved research peptides, like BPC-157, TB-500, and the growth hormone releasers, are not prescription drugs at all. They are sold as research chemicals not meant for people, so there is no path for a doctor to prescribe them. A compounding pharmacy that hands one out for a person is in a legal gray area that this site does not give advice on.

Open this answer on its own page

A peptide drug, like semaglutide or tesamorelin, went through FDA approval. That means factory standards, careful studies in people, and an approved label with a stated dose. A research peptide is the same kind of molecule sold without that process. It is labeled for lab use, with no standard checks on how it is made. For most of them, no study in people has been published at all. The chemistry can be identical. The evidence and oversight behind the vial are not.

Open this answer on its own page

For the FDA approved peptides, the label gives a maximum dose and says what happens above it. For the GLP-1 drugs that is mostly stomach and gut problems. For the unapproved research peptides, most have no published study in people that tested different doses. So there is no known safe range and no known overdose level to point to. That lack of data is the honest answer. It does not mean any amount is safe.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on which peptide. Some, like gonadorelin and kisspeptin-10, act directly on the body's reproductive hormones and are studied for fertility uses. Most peptides talked about for muscle, healing, or thinking have no published data in people on fertility at all. So the evidence does not support a blanket answer for peptides as a group, either way.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends on the test and the compound. Normal workplace drug tests generally do not look for research peptides at all. But anti-doping tests in sport do target several of them. This site's legal data lists BPC-157, TB-500, ipamorelin, CJC-1295, and GHRP-2 as banned in sport under the World Anti-Doping Agency code. Each one is listed on its own, not as a blanket rule for all peptides.

Open this answer on its own page

Nearly all research peptides are made by chemistry. The chain is put together one amino acid at a time on a solid bead. It is a well-known factory process, not something taken from an animal or plant. That is why the same product can come from many different makers with very different quality control. And that is exactly why an independent test report (certificate of analysis) matters more than the seller's own description.

Open this answer on its own page

They are not the same legal picture. This site's legal-status fields are national lines on approval or research use, not a pharmacy directory. Where the law allows it, a compounding pharmacy makes a product for a named patient with a prescription. Sermorelin's US field says its old approval was dropped and it is now available through compounding pharmacies, the leftover of Geref. Tesamorelin, semaglutide, and tirzepatide have FDA approved finished products (Egrifta, Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Mounjaro, Zepbound) that are not research chemicals. A research seller labels a vial research use only and not for people. Compounding is not that research-chemical route, and it is not the approved branded pen either. This dataset does not name pharmacies, does not track state-by-state compounding rules, and does not tell you where to buy. Check the compound's /legal page for the national field this site stores.

Open this answer on its own page

No. A peptide is a short chain of amino acids. A steroid is a hormone built on a four-ring, fat-based frame. That family includes testosterone. Tesamorelin, semaglutide, and BPC-157 are peptides. Testosterone is a steroid, with its own pages on this site, not a peptide. Some growth hormone releasers get talked about next to steroids at the gym, because people use both to change their body. That is a social grouping, not chemistry. MK-677 is a small molecule, not a peptide and not a steroid. Being talked about together does not make them the same kind of molecule. This site does not rank them.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. They break down with heat, damp, light, and time. This site already covers storage on /faq, under storing unmixed peptides and shelf life after mixing, instead of printing one expiry date for every vial. Freeze-dried powder kept cold, dark, and dry is described there as lasting roughly 12 to 24 months in the fridge, or longer frozen. Once mixed with bacteriostatic water and kept in the fridge, the usual window on those pages is about 28 to 30 days. That limit comes from the preservative, not from a set chemical clock for every peptide. A seller's date stamp is not a stability test we hold. This FAQ does not invent a new expiry number beyond those storage answers.

Open this answer on its own page

There is no one shelf life for all peptides. This site's storage answers split it into unmixed powder versus mixed liquid. Freeze-dried powder, stored well, is described as lasting roughly 12 to 24 months in the fridge and often two years or more frozen. After mixing with bacteriostatic water, the usual window in the fridge is about 28 to 30 days. That is how long the preservative is trusted. It does not mean every peptide goes bad on day 29. How stable the peptide itself is still varies. When a specific compound page gives a different figure, that page wins. This FAQ does not invent a new clock. Full storage answers start at /faq/how-long-do-lyophilized-peptides-last-before-reconstitution.

Open this answer on its own page

There is no complete count. The body makes thousands of its own peptides, and labs have made thousands more. This site does not hold a count of every peptide in nature or in every catalogue. What it can count is the compound profiles published here, a number worked out and printed on /methodology, plus the studies in people those profiles hold. A sales list of '200 peptides' or '500 peptides' is not that count. This FAQ does not invent a world total.

Open this answer on its own page

The compound count is derived from the published profiles and printed on /methodology. It is not typed into this answer, where it would go out of date. That number counts compound profiles. It is not a count of every peptide that exists, or every vial on the internet. Some profiles are approved peptide drugs, some are still experimental, some are research chemicals, and a few are small molecules often talked about next to peptides, such as MK-677. Headline counts and what they mean are on /methodology.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not rank or recommend sellers, sell peptides, or take money from any seller of them. So there is no 'best' name to give you. What we do track: of the 99 peptide sellers in our seller files, 65 publish a test report that names an independent testing lab. 29 only claim to test, with no report you can check. The rest show neither. Before you look at price, check for a named lab and a batch number you can verify.

Open this answer on its own page

Look for a test report (certificate of analysis) that names an independent lab and a batch or lot number. Then check that it matches a real lab report and is not just a generic PDF. Our lab profiles track 21 testing labs and what each one shares, including whether it has a public website where you can check a report by code. A seller that only says 'third party tested' without naming who tested it is making a claim, not showing evidence.

Open this answer on its own page

No, for two reasons. First, a report posted by the seller is a PDF they chose to upload. That is different from the lab's own website confirming that exact report. Second, lab accreditation has limits. We found that one major peptide testing lab's ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation, the actual document filed with the body that accredits it, does not include the HPLC purity test most buyers assume it covers. Read what the accreditation covers, not just the logo.

Open this answer on its own page

It should mean an independent lab, not the seller, measured how pure the vial is and how much is in it, and published a report. In practice the phrase is used loosely. When we looked at the market's own reports, we found everything from reports linked to a named lab you can check, down to pages that just claim testing with no report at all. Ask which lab did it. Ask for the report number. Check whether that lab has a website where you can look up the report without going through the seller.

Open this answer on its own page

Mostly vial size and testing costs, not always quality. In this site's price data, tirzepatide has run from about $1.14 to $12.75 per milligram across sellers, and semaglutide from about $1.50 to $34 per milligram, even with vial size held the same in some comparisons. A seller that pays for independent lab testing on every batch has a real cost that a seller who skips it does not. That is one honest reason the cheapest listing is not always the same product.

Open this answer on its own page

Usually yes, per milligram. Across the sellers this site tracks, a bigger vial almost always costs less per milligram than a small one of the same compound. Packaging, shipping, and testing costs get spread over more product. That is a point about price per unit. It is not advice to buy more of anything than you need, and it ignores that a peptide stays stable for only about 28 days once it is mixed.

Open this answer on its own page

HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography) is the standard lab test for how pure a peptide is and how much of the labeled compound is really in the vial. It separates the peptide you want from leftovers of the making process and from broken-down bits. It is the test most reports in this market are talking about. A lab can be accredited in general and still not have this test covered by its accreditation. That is why the document listing what is covered matters more than the logo.

Open this answer on its own page

Treat a report a seller uploads to its own site as a claim until you can check it with the lab itself. Some labs in this market run a public website where a batch or report code pulls up the original result, separate from what the seller posted. That is much stronger proof than a PDF. Our lab profiles list which of the 21 labs we reviewed offer that kind of independent lookup.

Open this answer on its own page

A linked lab report names a specific, real, independent lab. You can usually check it against that lab's own records or website. A claim-only listing is a seller saying testing happened, without naming who did it or posting anything you can check. Among the sellers this site tracks, 65 of 99 peptide sellers had a linked lab report and 29 were claim only. That is a real, checkable difference in how far you can trust the number on the label.

Open this answer on its own page

Some do and publish it. Most listings do not mention it at all. Endotoxin testing checks for leftover bacterial toxins that a purity test will not catch. That matters more for something you inject than for a capsule. This site's lab profiles record which testing labs in this market offer endotoxin testing as a named test you can order. A report that only gives purity has not checked for contamination.

Open this answer on its own page

It carries real, specific risks this site can name without telling you to take them. No regulator checks these products before sale. Purity and dose vary by seller, even for the same compound. For most of these molecules there is no published safety data in people at any dose. The market also has real sellers who publish lab reports you can check yourself. Both facts are true at once: the risk is real, and the quality is uneven but can be checked.

Open this answer on its own page

A higher price per milligram sometimes just means a smaller vial. Price per milligram drops as vial size grows for nearly every compound this site tracks. It can also reflect testing and sourcing costs that a cheaper seller has not paid. On its own, a higher price is not proof of higher purity. Only a test report you can check with the lab tells you that. This site's price pages hold vial size the same so the comparison is fair.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold that information. The national legal fields for tirzepatide record FDA approved, prescription only, in the US, and licensed prescription status in the UK, Australia, and Canada. They do not list fillers, buffers, or other added ingredients a compounding pharmacy uses. Approved Mounjaro and Zepbound pens are finished drugs with their own listed ingredients. A compounded vial is a different product. This FAQ cannot name what any one pharmacy puts in the vial, and it does not invent a filler list. No seller is named here.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold that information. Semaglutide's legal fields record FDA approved, prescription only, in the US, and licensed prescription status in the UK, Australia, and Canada. That covers Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus as finished products. Those fields do not describe the liquid, preservative, or other added ingredients a compounding pharmacy uses. A compounded semaglutide vial is not the same product as an approved pen. This FAQ does not invent a formula and does not name a pharmacy.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not know. Compounding pharmacy ads sometimes mention B12, glycine, or other add-ins, and those claims are not in this catalogue. Our legal fields record country-level approval for tirzepatide, not the extra ingredients in a compounded vial. An approved Mounjaro or Zepbound pen is a finished, labeled product. A compounded vial is a different product. This FAQ does not invent a B12 formula, does not name a seller, and does not treat an ad as a measured recipe.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold that information. The national legal fields for BPC-157 record not approved, research use only, in the US. It is not licensed in the UK and not approved in Canada. In Australia it is not approved and is banned in sport (WADA, the world anti-doping agency). There is no approved finished product whose listed ingredients this FAQ can quote. Country fields do not list the buffers, liquids, or carriers a compounding pharmacy uses. This FAQ does not invent a formula and does not name a pharmacy.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold that information. PT-141's US legal field is FDA approved, prescription only, as Vyleesi (bremelanotide). Approved Vyleesi is a finished drug with its own listed ingredients. A compounded or research-chemical vial labeled PT-141 is a different product. UK: not widely licensed. Australia and Canada: not approved. Country fields do not list what any one pharmacy adds as a filler. This FAQ does not invent a formula.

Open this answer on its own page

No. This catalogue holds national legal fields and the names of approved finished products. It does not hold pharmacy-by-pharmacy recipes, filler lists, or ingredient tables, and it does not name compounding sellers. If you ask what a compounded vial is 'compounded with', the honest answer is that this site does not know that vial. Coach, not a pharmacist. Ask the pharmacy that filled it and the prescribing clinician what is actually in it.

Open this answer on its own page

Sermorelin is a piece of growth hormone releasing hormone (GHRH), the body's signal to make growth hormone. It is the first 29 amino acids of the natural 44 amino acid molecule. That is enough to latch onto the GHRH receptor and tell the pituitary gland to release its own growth hormone. It was FDA approved as Geref, to diagnose and treat growth hormone deficiency, before that product was pulled. Today it is mainly available through compounding pharmacies for off-label use.

Open this answer on its own page

Sermorelin latches onto the GHRH receptor on the pituitary gland. That is the same docking spot the body's own growth hormone releasing hormone uses. It sets off a burst of growth hormone, not a constant rise. The body clears half of it in only about 10 to 20 minutes. So it gives a short signal, not steady hormone levels. That is closer to how the body releases growth hormone in bursts than a shot of growth hormone itself would be.

Open this answer on its own page

It was, as Geref, to diagnose and treat growth hormone deficiency. But the maker has since stopped making that product. Sermorelin is not sold as an approved drug in the US today. It is available through compounding pharmacies, which work under different rules than an FDA approved maker. It is not licensed in the UK, Australia, or Canada.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the sellers this site tracks, sermorelin has run from about $2.50 to $13.80 per milligram, with a middle price around $6.80. That covers 23 sellers and vial sizes from 2 to 100 milligrams. Price per milligram drops as the vial gets bigger. This is a price range from research chemical sellers. It is not a pharmacy price for the old Geref product or for a compounded prescription.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations, but a record exists. The old FDA approved product, Geref, used a 1 microgram per kilogram test dose, given into a vein, for diagnosis. For treatment it used 30 micrograms per kilogram daily in children with growth hormone deficiency who had not yet hit puberty. A separate small study gave 10 healthy older men 1 milligram twice daily for 14 days. It brought their growth hormone and IGF-1 (a growth signal the liver makes) back to young adult levels. Both are records of what was studied, not a recommendation for you.

Open this answer on its own page

Its approved use was to diagnose and treat growth hormone deficiency. Doctors checked whether it set off a normal growth hormone response. Outside that history, it is used off label and in research for its effect on growth hormone and IGF-1 (a growth signal the liver makes). It is often talked about next to ipamorelin and CJC-1295 for changing body shape. But this site's own review found only one study in people for sermorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

They cannot be compared that simply. No study has tested them head to head. The body clears half of sermorelin in just 10 to 20 minutes, which is closer to the body's own on-and-off bursts. CJC-1295 was built on purpose to last longer, with a half-life of roughly 6 to 8 days, for a steady rise. Which pattern of growth hormone is better is a question this site's data does not settle.

Open this answer on its own page

Tesamorelin is a longer-lasting lab version of growth hormone releasing hormone (the body's signal to make growth hormone). It is FDA approved as Egrifta, only to reduce extra deep belly fat in people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup (lipodystrophy). It works by telling the pituitary gland to release growth hormone, not by supplying growth hormone itself. It is also being studied for thinking and memory in older adults at risk of Alzheimer's disease.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, for one specific use: cutting extra deep belly fat in people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup (lipodystrophy), under the brand name Egrifta. It is prescription only in the US and is also approved in Canada for that use. Using it for general fat loss, bodybuilding, or anti-aging in someone without that diagnosis is outside its approved label, even though the drug itself is FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations. What is public: the approved Egrifta label describes a 2 milligram shot under the skin each day for its approved use, HIV-related belly fat, as set by the studies that led to approval. That is what the label says for one diagnosis. It is not a dose for general use. It comes from the maker's own prescribing information, not from this site.

Open this answer on its own page

Its proven use is cutting deep belly fat in people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup, backed by studies with more than 800 people in total. It is also being studied in older adults for thinking and memory, since the growth hormone signal it copies may be linked to brain aging. That research is newer and separate from the approved fat-loss use. Claims about building muscle or general anti-aging go beyond what has been measured.

Open this answer on its own page

Its own studies measured deep belly fat and body shape in people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup. They did not measure muscle building in the general public, and that belly-fat use is what its FDA approval covers. Drugs like it can shift body shape by raising growth hormone and IGF-1 (a growth signal the liver makes), so a muscle effect is possible in theory. But tesamorelin's published studies in people have not measured strength or muscle gain.

Open this answer on its own page

It is being studied for this, which is not the same as proven. The growth hormone signal it copies is thought to matter for brain aging, so tesamorelin is now in studies of older adults, including people with a higher genetic risk of Alzheimer's disease. Its approved use is still cutting deep belly fat. A benefit for thinking is an open research question, not a shown effect.

Open this answer on its own page

Among the research chemical sellers this site tracks, tesamorelin runs from about $2.50 to $10 per milligram, with a middle price near $6. That covers 27 sellers and vial sizes from 5 to 200 milligrams. This is the price on the unregulated research market. It is not the cost of Egrifta from a pharmacy with insurance, which is a different, and usually much more expensive, product and process.

Open this answer on its own page

Ipamorelin is a lab-made peptide that tells the pituitary gland to release a burst of growth hormone. It does this by switching on the ghrelin receptor (the docking spot for the body's hunger hormone). It is often called 'selective' because, next to older drugs in the same family, it causes less of a rise in cortisol (a stress hormone) and prolactin, based on the lab data available. It is not FDA approved and is sold as a research chemical.

Open this answer on its own page

It latches onto the ghrelin receptor on the pituitary gland, the same docking spot the hunger hormone ghrelin uses. That sets off a burst of growth hormone. Drugs that copy growth hormone releasing hormone, like sermorelin or CJC-1295, use a different route. That is why the two families are sometimes paired: one makes the bursts bigger, the other makes them more frequent. But no study has tested that pairing in people.

Open this answer on its own page

There is very little published safety data in people to go on. This site's review found one study in people for ipamorelin, with 117 people in it. It is not FDA approved in the US, not licensed in the UK, and banned in Olympic sport under the World Anti-Doping Agency code. Calling it 'selective' describes what it does to certain hormones in the data we have. It is not a proven safety record at any dose.

Open this answer on its own page

It acts on the same ghrelin receptor that drives hunger, so an appetite effect is possible. But research describes it as more selective than older drugs like GHRP-6, which are well known for making people very hungry. Whether ipamorelin itself makes people noticeably hungrier has not been measured directly in the studies in people this site has reviewed.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 31 sellers this site tracks, ipamorelin has cost from about $2.10 to $14.62 per milligram, with a middle price of about $5.20, in vial sizes from 2 to 100 milligrams. As with other research peptides, bigger vials cost less per milligram. This figure covers all sellers, not only those that pass a purity and testing bar.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Ipamorelin tells your own pituitary gland to release growth hormone. An HGH shot supplies lab-made growth hormone (somatropin) directly. That difference matters for how each is regulated and dosed. Ipamorelin's effect is capped by how much growth hormone your pituitary can still make. Injected HGH raises levels directly, no matter what your pituitary can do.

Open this answer on its own page

CJC-1295 is a changed version of growth hormone releasing hormone (the body's signal to make growth hormone). It was built to last much longer than the natural hormone or sermorelin. The 'DAC' version has an add-on that sticks to albumin, a protein in the blood. That stretches its half-life to roughly 6 to 8 days, compared with minutes for the version without DAC. It is not FDA approved and is sold as a research chemical.

Open this answer on its own page

The DAC add-on lets the molecule stick to albumin, a protein in the blood. That stretches its half-life from minutes to roughly 6 to 8 days. The result is a steady rise in growth hormone and IGF-1 (a growth signal the liver makes), not a single burst. CJC-1295 without DAC acts more like a short-acting version, closer to sermorelin's on-and-off bursts. Neither version is FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

It latches onto the GHRH receptor on the pituitary gland and tells it to release growth hormone, the same way the body's own growth hormone releasing hormone does. But its changed shape resists the fast breakdown that limits the natural hormone and sermorelin to minutes of action. The DAC version lasts a long time, so its effect on growth hormone lasts for days instead of coming as one burst.

Open this answer on its own page

It has not been tested for that in any published study in people this site has reviewed. Only two studies in people exist at all. It raises growth hormone and IGF-1, which affect fluid balance and body shape. So some water retention is possible, like what is reported with growth hormone itself. But no careful study of CJC-1295 in people has measured weight change to confirm or rule that out.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 18 sellers this site tracks, CJC-1295 has cost from about $2.50 to $13.80 per milligram, with a middle price around $6.60, in vial sizes from 2 to 50 milligrams. Listings do not always say whether the vial holds the DAC or non-DAC version. That matters for how long it stays active, so read the product description instead of guessing.

Open this answer on its own page

GHRP-2, also called pralmorelin, is a peptide that switches on the ghrelin receptor to set off growth hormone release. It is approved in Japan as a test for growth hormone deficiency, but it is not FDA approved in the US. Next to GHRP-6, an older peptide in the same family, it gives a strong growth hormone release with less effect on appetite.

Open this answer on its own page

Both switch on the ghrelin receptor to set off growth hormone release, and both cost about the same in this site's data. But GHRP-6 is well known for making people very hungry. GHRP-2 was made to give a similar growth hormone effect with less hunger. GHRP-2 also has an approval in Japan as a diagnostic test. GHRP-6 has no approval anywhere, and only animal work and small lab-style studies in people behind it.

Open this answer on its own page

It is a peptide studied for setting off a strong burst of growth hormone through the ghrelin receptor. It is also known for making people very hungry through that same receptor, the route ghrelin itself uses to signal hunger. It is not FDA approved anywhere. This site's review found no studies in people for it, only animal and lab data.

Open this answer on its own page

Hexarelin is a strong lab-made peptide, six amino acids long, from the same ghrelin receptor family as GHRP-2 and GHRP-6. It has been studied for growth hormone release. In animal and lab research it also had direct effects on heart muscle. It is not FDA approved. This site's review found 3 studies in people behind it, mostly small studies of how it works, not a large study record.

Open this answer on its own page

Heart-protecting effects have been seen in animal and lab research. They are described as working through a different route from its growth hormone release, which is why it is talked about differently from others in this family. That describes what has been studied. It is not a proven benefit for a heart patient. This site's review found no large study in people showing that effect at any specific dose.

Open this answer on its own page

MK-677, also called ibutamoren, is a small molecule you swallow, not a peptide. It switches on the ghrelin receptor to raise growth hormone and IGF-1 (a growth signal the liver makes). It went through studies for problems like frailty in old age, but it did not win FDA approval after late-stage testing. It is sold as a research chemical. It is often grouped with the peptides because it works through the same receptor.

Open this answer on its own page

It finished late-stage studies, but the results did not support approval. One well-known study in older adults found it raised growth hormone and IGF-1 as planned. But it also raised blood sugar and did not improve the physical function it was tested for. That result, not a lack of testing, is why a pill that got to late-stage studies never reached the market.

Open this answer on its own page

No. MK-677 is a small molecule. It is not related to the amino acid chains that make up peptides like ipamorelin or CJC-1295, even though it acts on the same ghrelin receptor and gives a similar rise in growth hormone. It works as a pill, not a shot, because it is not a peptide. Most peptides get broken down by digestion before they can act.

Open this answer on its own page

In its two year study in older adults, MK-677 raised fasting blood sugar and made insulin resistance worse. Lean mass went up, but strength and physical function did not improve. A separate mid-stage study in people with hip fractures was stopped early over a safety warning sign for heart failure, before most of its function measures showed a benefit. Those are the two careful studies in people this site's review found. Both turned up a real safety concern next to a partial result.

Open this answer on its own page

IGF-1 LR3 is a changed, longer-lasting version of IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor 1, a growth signal the liver makes). It was built to dodge the proteins that normally clear natural IGF-1 from the blood quickly. In animal research it is studied for muscle growth and repair, by waking up muscle stem cells. This site's review found no studies in people for it, only animal and lab data. It is not FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

No. This site's review found animal studies on muscle growth and muscle stem cells, but no published study in people. That gap is the honest answer if you are asking whether its effects in animals hold up in people. As of this review, they have not been tested in a published study in people.

Open this answer on its own page

Tesamorelin's own studies, with more than 800 people, were built to measure the drop in deep belly fat in people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup. They have not shown a cancer risk. Raising growth hormone and IGF-1 is a theory-based worry researchers watch for with this whole drug family, since IGF-1 plays a role in cell growth. But that is a caution based on how it works. It is not something this drug's own published studies have found.

Open this answer on its own page

This copies the body's natural pattern of releasing growth hormone during sleep. Timing a drug like tesamorelin to match that window is a common reason given for how it is used. This site does not give advice on how to take it. The approved Egrifta label sets its own instructions. Any timing choice for a compounded or research product should follow the product's own label or a prescriber's direction.

Open this answer on its own page

Discomfort where the needle goes in is often reported with peptide shots under the skin in general. It is linked to how acidic and how strong the liquid is, and is not unique to tesamorelin. The studies this site reviewed do not list injection-site feeling as a measured result. If the discomfort is strong or keeps going, ask whoever supplied the product or a health care provider. Do not self-diagnose from a general answer.

Open this answer on its own page

Its FDA approved use, as Egrifta, is cutting extra deep belly fat in people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup (lipodystrophy). That is backed by studies with more than 800 people in total. It is also being studied, but not approved, for thinking and memory in older adults at higher risk of Alzheimer's disease. Uses outside those two go beyond its proven evidence.

Open this answer on its own page

Discomfort where the needle goes in is often reported with mixed peptide liquids in general. It can come from the water used, how strong the mix is, or personal sensitivity, and is not unique to sermorelin. The studies of sermorelin in people that this site reviewed do not measure injection-site feeling. So this is a general peptide experience, not a recorded finding about sermorelin itself.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found one study in people for sermorelin, and it measured hormone levels in older men, not body weight. Drugs that raise growth hormone can affect fluid balance, which people sometimes report as weight change. But no careful study of sermorelin in people in this site's review measured weight to confirm or rule that out.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give advice on timing. Sermorelin's studied and once-approved use, as Geref, followed set instructions from its FDA approved label before it was pulled. Drugs that raise growth hormone are often talked about alongside the body's natural release of growth hormone at night. Any timing choice should follow a prescriber's direction or the product's own instructions, not a general answer.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found one study in people for sermorelin. It was a small study in older men that measured growth hormone and IGF-1 levels, not body fat or belly fat. Growth hormone does affect how the body handles fat in general, which is the reasoning behind this claim. But no careful study of sermorelin in people in this site's review has measured fat loss to confirm it.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found one study in people for sermorelin, and it did not report blood pressure. No careful study in people in this site's review shows a blood pressure effect either way for sermorelin. So this is still an open question, not a recorded finding.

Open this answer on its own page

The idea is indirect. Sermorelin tells the pituitary gland to release the body's own growth hormone, which affects how the body handles fat and muscle in general. This site's review found one study in people for sermorelin. It was a study in older men that measured hormone levels, not weight or body shape. So no study has confirmed that idea by measuring weight loss directly.

Open this answer on its own page

Once mixed with bacteriostatic water, sermorelin should follow this site's general storage advice for mixed peptides: in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, and usually usable for about 28 days. The unmixed freeze-dried powder is more stable. It can usually be kept in the fridge or freezer for longer, following the same rules as other freeze-dried peptides.

Open this answer on its own page

It is not FDA approved, not licensed in the UK, and not approved in Canada. It is banned in Olympic sport under the World Anti-Doping Agency code. It is sold as a research chemical, which in most places is not illegal to own in itself. But that legal gap is not approval, and it is not a green light for use in people.

Open this answer on its own page

As a freeze-dried powder, CJC-1295 follows the same storage rule as other freeze-dried peptides: cold, dark, and dry. Use the fridge for shorter storage and the freezer for longer. Once mixed, this site's general advice applies: in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, with roughly a 28 day window to use it. The DAC version lasts much longer in the body, but that is a separate fact from how long the mixed liquid stays stable.

Open this answer on its own page

It depends a lot on which version. CJC-1295 without DAC has a short half-life, measured in minutes, like the body's own GHRH. The DAC version sticks to albumin, a protein in the blood, and has a half-life of roughly 6 to 8 days. So it stays active in the body far longer. Product listings do not always say which version is in the vial, and that matters for this exact question.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found two studies in people for CJC-1295, and neither measured skin problems like acne. Drugs that raise growth hormone and IGF-1 are sometimes linked to skin changes in personal stories, like reports about other growth hormone drugs. But no careful study of CJC-1295 in people in this site's review measured this.

Open this answer on its own page

Both are changed versions of growth hormone releasing hormone, and both act on the same docking spot on the pituitary gland. That is the whole reason for the comparison. The real difference is approval and evidence. Tesamorelin is FDA approved as Egrifta, with a study program of more than 800 people for one specific use. CJC-1295 has never been approved anywhere and has only two studies in people in this site's review. So the two molecules are closer than the evidence behind each one.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found one study in people for ipamorelin, with 117 people, and it did not measure muscle mass. Drugs in this family raise growth hormone and IGF-1, which could plausibly support muscle building. But no careful study of ipamorelin in people has measured muscle gain to confirm it.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for ipamorelin. This site's review found one study in people for it, and that study does not compare a cycle against steady use. The cycle lengths passed around online are unverified habits, not a finding. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's tesamorelin studies do not measure water retention or swelling. What they do report is deep belly fat in people with HIV. In 412 people at 26 weeks, belly fat fell 15.2%, while it rose 5.0% in people on a dummy shot. Across both large final-stage studies, 806 people pooled, the drug cut deep belly fat by 15.4% more than the dummy shot, with no change in the fat just under the skin. A 20-week study in 152 older adults raised IGF-1 by 117%, staying within the normal range, and measured thinking, not fluid balance. A 61-person liver-fat study found fasting blood sugar and long-term blood sugar (HbA1c) did not differ between groups. Having no counted swelling rate does not prove nobody swells. It proves that this FAQ cannot publish one. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain. New or worse swelling is a question for a clinician. Full record at /compounds/tesamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's tesamorelin studies do not report numbness, tingling, or carpal tunnel problems. What they cover is deep belly fat (412 people at 26 weeks; 806 pooled), thinking in 152 older adults over 20 weeks, and liver fat in 61 people over 12 months. In that liver study, problems at the injection spot were more common, and none were judged serious. None of those results is a list of nerve symptoms. This FAQ does not invent a mechanism or a numbness rate from a growth hormone result nobody counted that way. Numbness that is new or getting worse is a question for a clinician, not a percentage this page can quote. Full record at /compounds/tesamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's ipamorelin studies do not measure water retention or swelling. The one study in people, in 117 patients who had part of their bowel removed, found ipamorelin given by IV drip was well tolerated. They reached a first meal they could keep down a bit sooner than people on a dummy drip (25.3 versus 32.6 hours), but the gap was small enough that it could have been chance. The 1998 paper that first described ipamorelin measured growth hormone release, and how little it raised cortisol and prolactin, in animals, not fluid balance in people. Raising growth hormone is not the same thing as holding water. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain. Full record at /compounds/ipamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's ipamorelin studies do not report headache as a counted result. The 117-person study after surgery measured time to a first meal patients could keep down, and called the drip well tolerated. It did not publish a headache count. The 1998 paper was growth hormone work in animals, not a list of side effects in people. User reports of headache are not a counted study result either. This FAQ does not invent a headache percentage from that silence. A headache that will not go away is a question for a clinician. Full record at /compounds/ipamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's CJC-1295 studies do not measure joint pain. Two 2006 studies in healthy adults found its half-life was 5.8 to 8.1 days. A single shot raised average growth hormone two- to tenfold for six days or more, and IGF-1 rose 1.5- to threefold for nine to eleven days. A related study found growth hormone at its lowest point was still 7.5-fold higher a week later, while the body's normal hormone pulses did not change. Those results are hormone levels, not joint pain. This FAQ does not invent a joint-pain rate the studies do not contain. Full record at /compounds/cjc-1295.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's sermorelin studies do not report joint pain. The record in people is a 14-day study in ten healthy older men. GHRH(1-29) brought their 24-hour growth hormone and IGF-1 back to levels close to those of young men. There is also a review of its old use as Geref in children with growth hormone deficiency. Neither is a list of joint pain. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain. Full record at /compounds/sermorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's ipamorelin studies do not report diarrhea. The one study in people, in 117 patients who had part of their bowel removed, found ipamorelin given by IV drip was well tolerated. They reached a first meal they could keep down a bit sooner than people on a dummy drip (25.3 versus 32.6 hours), but the gap was small enough that it could have been chance. That study measured how the gut recovered after surgery, not how often the peptide caused diarrhea. The 1998 paper measured growth hormone release in animals, not bowels in people. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain.

Open this answer on its own page

Tesamorelin latches onto the GHRH receptor on the pituitary gland, the same docking spot the body's own growth hormone releasing hormone uses. It sets off a burst of growth hormone, instead of supplying growth hormone as a drug. This site's profile says the body clears half of it in about 26 to 38 minutes. Its molecular weight is 5,135.9 daltons. The approved product, Egrifta, is for HIV-related deep belly fat. In 412 people at 26 weeks, belly fat fell 15.2%, while it rose 5.0% on a dummy shot. Across 806 people pooled, the drug cut deep belly fat by 15.4% more than the dummy shot, with no change in the fat just under the skin. That is a belly-fat result in that group of people, not a general fat-burning finding. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/tesamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

MK-677, also called ibutamoren, is a small molecule you swallow, not a peptide. It switches on the ghrelin receptor (GHS-R1a), the same docking spot ipamorelin uses, and raises growth hormone and IGF-1. This site's profile says its half-life is about 24 hours. Its molecular weight is 624.8 daltons. A two-year study in 65 adults aged 60 to 81 found growth hormone and IGF-1 rose to young-adult levels. Lean mass went up 1.1 kg, while people on a dummy pill lost 0.5 kg. But strength and function did not improve, and fasting blood sugar and insulin resistance rose. A mid-stage study in 123 people with hip fractures was stopped early over a safety warning sign for heart failure. Raising growth hormone is not the same as a measured fat-loss result. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/mk-677.

Open this answer on its own page

It cut deep belly fat in the group it was approved for. In people with HIV-associated lipodystrophy (abnormal fat buildup), 412 people at 26 weeks saw deep belly fat fall 15.2%, while it rose 5.0% on a dummy shot. Across both large final-stage studies, 806 people pooled, the drug cut deep belly fat by 15.4% more than the dummy shot, with no change in the fat just under the skin. A 61-person study in people with HIV and fatty liver found liver fat fell 4.1 percent more on tesamorelin than on the dummy shot. Those are belly-fat and liver-fat results in people with HIV. They are not a general fat-burning result in people without that diagnosis, and they say nothing about fat under the skin. A research-chemical vial labeled tesamorelin is not Egrifta. This FAQ does not move those VAT numbers onto a general weight-loss claim. Full record at /compounds/tesamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

GHRP stands for Growth Hormone Releasing Peptide. The 2 is the catalogue number of this six-amino-acid peptide. This site's profile lists the full name as Pralmorelin (Growth Hormone Releasing Peptide 2), with the alias Pralmorelin and a molecular weight of 817.0 daltons. It is approved in Japan as a test of how much growth hormone the pituitary gland releases. The test was checked in 77 healthy people and 58 people with growth hormone deficiency, using a 100 microgram test dose into a vein. That is a diagnostic test record, not a treatment approval in the US, UK, Australia, or Canada. The letters are a lab code, not a ranking and not a dose. Full record at /compounds/ghrp-2.

Open this answer on its own page

IGF-1 stands for Insulin-like Growth Factor 1. LR3 names the Long R3 change: one amino acid is swapped for arginine and a short piece is added to one end, so the proteins that normally grab IGF-1 hold onto it less. This site's profile lists the full name as Long R3 Insulin-like Growth Factor 1, a half-life of about 20 to 30 hours, and a molecular weight of 9,111 daltons. This site's review found no published study in people. The letters describe a chemical change, not an approval. This FAQ does not invent a human muscle result. The studies on that page are animal work, including one in rats given a steroid drug (dexamethasone), where it was 2.5-fold stronger than natural IGF-I. Full record at /compounds/igf-1-lr3.

Open this answer on its own page

Geref is the old, discontinued brand name for sermorelin. It is the same GHRH 1-29 molecule this site's profile lists as Geref, GHRH 1-29, and GRF 1-29. Geref was FDA approved to diagnose and treat growth hormone deficiency, and it has since been taken off the market. Sermorelin's US legal line reads prior approval discontinued, available via compounding pharmacies. A research-chemical vial labeled sermorelin is not that old approved product. The molecule name can match. The finished medicine and the unlabeled vial are not the same product. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/sermorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Ibutamoren is the generic name for MK-677. It is the same pill that switches on the ghrelin receptor, which this site's profile lists as Ibutamoren and MK-0677. It is a small molecule with a molecular weight of 624.8 daltons, not a peptide. It is not FDA approved. The two-year study in older adults and the stopped hip-fracture study are the record in people on that page. The names are two labels for one molecule, not two drugs. Full record at /compounds/mk-677.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Pralmorelin is the generic name for GHRP-2, listed as another name on this site's GHRP-2 profile. It is approved in Japan as a test for growth hormone deficiency. It is not FDA approved as a treatment. A research-chemical vial labeled GHRP-2 is not that Japanese test product. The names are two labels for one molecule. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/ghrp-2.

Open this answer on its own page

Hexarelin is a lab-made peptide, six amino acids long. It switches on the ghrelin receptor (also called the growth hormone secretagogue receptor) to release a burst of growth hormone. This site's profile says the body clears half of it in about 55 minutes. Its molecular weight is 887.0 daltons. In 12 healthy volunteers, hexarelin given into a vein released about twice as much growth hormone as GHRH. Bigger doses gave bigger responses, whether it went into a vein, under the skin, up the nose, or by mouth. When 12 healthy older people used it twice a day for 16 weeks, their growth hormone response dropped by roughly half. The drop was partial and went away four weeks after stopping. A small short study found hexarelin into a vein improved how well the heart pumped in people with heart damage from blocked arteries, but not in people with an enlarged, weak heart, even though growth hormone rose about the same in both. It is not an approved drug. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/hexarelin.

Open this answer on its own page

GHRP-6 is an early six-amino-acid peptide. It switches on the ghrelin receptor, GHS-R1a, to release growth hormone. It also raises appetite through the same receptor ghrelin uses for hunger. This site's profile says the body clears half of it in about 15 to 60 minutes. Its molecular weight is 873.0 daltons. This site's review found no human trial citations for it. The receptor itself was discovered in 1996 as the target of GHRP-6 and similar drugs. The 1991 Bowers paper and the 1998 comparison with ipamorelin are animal and cell work. They found it acts on both the brain and the pituitary gland, and releases about as much growth hormone as ipamorelin. But GHRP-6 was less selective and more likely to raise cortisol, prolactin, and appetite. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human outcome. It is not an approved drug. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/ghrp-6.

Open this answer on its own page

No. They are different six-amino-acid peptides in the same ghrelin receptor family. Hexarelin's profile lists a molecular weight of 887.0 daltons and three studies in people. One found that in 12 volunteers, a dose into a vein released about twice as much growth hormone as GHRH. Another followed 12 healthy older people for 16 weeks as the response faded. GHRP-6's profile lists a molecular weight of 873.0 daltons and no studies in people on this site. It is the older one in the family that makes people hungrier. Sharing a receptor family does not make them the same molecule or give them the same evidence. This site does not rank them. Full records at /compounds/hexarelin and /compounds/ghrp-6.

Open this answer on its own page

GHRP-2, also called pralmorelin, switches on the ghrelin receptor (also called the growth hormone secretagogue receptor) to release a burst of growth hormone from the pituitary gland. This site's profile says the body clears half of it in about 30 to 60 minutes. Its molecular weight is 817.0 daltons. It is approved in Japan as a test of how much growth hormone the pituitary releases. The test was checked in 77 healthy people and 58 people with growth hormone deficiency, using a 100 microgram test dose into a vein, with a cut-off peak of 15 micrograms per litre. In a separate test, a drip of it made seven lean men eat about 36% more when they could eat freely, along with a strong rise in growth hormone. So the appetite effect is smaller, not gone. Those are a diagnostic test and a one-time eating measure, not a treatment approval in the US, UK, Australia, or Canada. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/ghrp-2.

Open this answer on its own page

IGF-1 LR3 is a changed version of insulin-like growth factor 1 (a growth signal the liver makes). One amino acid is swapped for arginine and a short piece is added to one end. That makes the proteins that normally grab IGF-1 hold onto it less, so it can stay active longer. This site's profile says it switches on the IGF-1 receptor. Its half-life is about 20 to 30 hours. Its molecular weight is 9,111 daltons. This site's review found no published human trial. The studies on that page are animal work. In rats given a steroid drug (dexamethasone), LR3 IGF-I was about 2.5-fold stronger than natural IGF-I at stopping muscle breakdown. In pigs, four days of it by drip lowered daily weight gain, food intake, growth hormone, and the pigs' own IGF-1. In mice bred to make extra IGF-1 in muscle, the muscles stayed bigger into old age. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human muscle result. It is not FDA approved and is banned in sport at all times. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/igf-1-lr3.

Open this answer on its own page

No. This site's US field is not approved, research use only. GHRP-2, also called pralmorelin, is approved in Japan as a test of how much growth hormone the pituitary releases, not as a treatment. That Japanese test approval does not carry over to the FDA. It is not licensed in the UK and not approved in Canada. In Australia it is not approved and is listed as banned in sport (WADA). A research-chemical vial labeled GHRP-2 is not that Japanese test product. This FAQ does not invent a US approval. Full record at /compounds/ghrp-2.

Open this answer on its own page

Somatropin is lab-made human growth hormone, identical to the hormone the pituitary gland makes. This site's profile says it switches on growth hormone receptors directly. That raises IGF-1 and drives growth, protein building, and other effects on how the body uses energy. The body clears half of a shot under the skin in about 3 to 4 hours. Its molecular weight is 22,124 daltons. It is FDA approved for growth hormone deficiency and several other listed uses. In 24 adults with growth hormone deficiency, six months of it raised lean mass by 5.5 kg and cut fat by 5.7 kg compared with a dummy shot, with no change in body weight. In 60 adults with a failing pituitary gland who were taken off growth hormone for four months, IGF-1 fell from 168 to 98 micrograms per litre. Two parts of their quality of life got worse, and their waist and deep belly fat grew. Those are results from treating a deficiency. They are not a finding in people whose own growth hormone is normal. Drugs like ipamorelin set off a burst of your own growth hormone. Somatropin is the hormone itself. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/somatropin.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, as names. HGH, rhGH, Genotropin, and Norditropin are other names listed on this site's somatropin profile for lab-made human growth hormone, molecular weight 22,124 daltons. Somatropin is the generic name. Genotropin and Norditropin are brand-name prescription products. A research-chemical vial labeled HGH is not those labeled medicines. The approved uses are growth hormone deficiency and a short list of other listed conditions, not general anti-aging. Sharing a hormone name does not make a research vial the same as the finished drug. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/somatropin.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish on and off schedules for peptides as a group. For most of this catalogue, no study has tested a cycle length against steady use. So any specific schedule is a habit, not a finding. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. The one measured exception is the growth hormone releaser family. In healthy men, a steady GHRH signal partly dulled the pituitary's response within hours. In a small study in people, daily GHRP-2 lowered peak growth hormone over five days. Even those studies did not test a four-weeks-on, two-weeks-off calendar. Full breakdown at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for sermorelin. It works through the same GHRH receptor where, in other studies in people, a steady signal partly dulled the response within hours. So the body can get used to drugs in this family. But nobody has compared a sermorelin cycle to steady use. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. When sermorelin was an approved product (Geref), children with growth hormone deficiency got it daily for as long as they needed treatment, not on a cycle the user picked. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for thymosin alpha 1. It is approved as Zadaxin in more than 30 countries, mostly for hepatitis and as an add-on to help the immune system. That label sets a fixed course of treatment, not an open-ended cycle the user picks. On and off schedules for research vials are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for BPC-157, for TB-500, or for the two together. In a small early study in people, the body cleared half of BPC-157 from the blood in under 30 minutes. How fast people clear TB-500 has never been measured. Neither figure tells you whether a break changes anything, because nobody has studied that. The cycle lengths passed around online are unverified habits. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for CJC-1295. In people, one shot under the skin kept growth hormone about 7.5-fold higher a week later, even at its lowest point. The body's normal hormone pulses did not change. That suggests the body does not quickly get used to it over a week. It says nothing for or against any cycle length. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full citations at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

The DAC version of CJC-1295 has a reported half-life of about 6 to 8 days. So roughly five half-lives, about 5 weeks, would clear an estimated 97% of a single dose. That is an estimate of how long it takes to leave the body. It says nothing about whether repeated doses change how the pituitary gland responds.

Open this answer on its own page

Its own FDA label answers this. Tesamorelin (Egrifta) is approved as a daily shot taken without breaks for as long as treatment for HIV-related deep belly fat is needed. The approved plan has no cycling schedule, even though tesamorelin is in the same GHRH family discussed above.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for GHK-Cu. Its published work in people is on the skin, as a cream or gel, and even that does not compare cycling with steady use. The cycle lengths passed around for injected GHK-Cu are unverified habits. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

No study has tested a cycle length for MOTS-c. This site's review found no published study in people of repeated MOTS-c doses over weeks. So nobody has measured whether the body gets used to it or whether there is a rebound when you stop. Any cycle length for it does not come from a study.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for retatrutide. It is still experimental. Its large final-stage studies gave it without breaks, the same way the approved GLP-1 drugs it is related to are used, not as a cycle. The schedules passed around online that stop and restart it are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

No careful study has tested a cycle length for either. In Russia, both are used as needed or as a set course for the uses they are approved for there. That is different from a repeating on and off cycle a user picks. Neither has published data on whether the body gets used to it with steady or repeated use.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for epitalon. The course lengths passed around online trace back to one Russian research school. No study compared that course against steady use or against a different course. As a cycling rule, those schedules are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for BPC-157 and TB-500 together, or for either one alone. No published study has compared using the two together on a cycle versus steadily. The stack schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish a cycle length for GHK-Cu. The work in people on this peptide is on the skin, not an on and off calendar of shots. The cycle lengths passed around online for injected GHK-Cu are unverified habits. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

On this site, cycling means a planned time on, followed by a planned time off. That habit was borrowed from steroid culture. It is not a study result for peptides as a group. Studies in people do not establish on and off schedules for peptides as a group. When a seller page or a forum prints a specific calendar, this site treats it as a habit, unless a study compared that calendar to steady use. This site does not invent a schedule. Aaron is a coach, not a doctor, and this answer is for learning. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Time on, time off is a calendar the user picks. Approved drugs taken without breaks are used for as long as the condition on the label is being treated. Semaglutide, tirzepatide, and tesamorelin are approved to be taken without breaks, with no time off on the label. That is a fact about how those products were approved. It does not mean every unapproved peptide should be used the same way. It also does not mean a cycle is needed for the ones that were never approved. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Half-life is the time for the amount in your body to drop by half. The usual rule is that after about five half-lives, roughly 97 percent is gone, which is what people mean by out of your system. That is an estimate for one dose. It does not tell you whether your body still responds the same way after repeated doses, and it is not a cycle length. A compound can clear in minutes and still belong to the one family where the body has been shown to get used to it. Another can linger for days with no such measurement. Full table at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

The idea that a peptide makes its docking spots stop working as well (downregulation) is a specific claim. It is not true of peptides by default. The one family measured in people is the growth hormone releasers. In healthy men, a steady GHRH signal partly dulled the pituitary's response within hours. Daily GHRP-2 lowered peak growth hormone over five days in nine healthy men. But the same research group found no dulling after 14 days of steady GHRH. Nobody has measured downregulation for BPC-157, TB-500, GHK-Cu, MOTS-c, or the other compounds people ask about. A forum claim that you must cycle to rest your receptors is not a finding unless someone has measured it. Full citations at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish a cycle length for any peptide in this catalogue, alone or stacked. Putting two compounds together does not create a schedule that was missing for each one. Stack calendars passed around online, including four weeks on and two off for BPC-157 plus TB-500, are unverified. This site does not invent a stack cycle. How many peptides people stack is a separate open question at /faq/how-many-peptides-can-i-stack. Full cycling breakdown at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Stopping has been measured for semaglutide. In the follow-up to the STEP 1 study, people who stopped after 68 weeks gained back about two thirds of the weight they had lost within a year. That is the original condition coming back once the drug wears off. It is not a withdrawal problem, and nothing measured got worse than where people started. It is the evidence-based reason these drugs are approved for use without breaks, not in cycles. Coming off is a medical decision to make with your prescriber, not a forum week off. Aaron is a coach, not a doctor. This site does not invent a taper. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

A pause is a cycle by another name. In healthy men, a steady GHRH signal partly dulled the response within hours. In a small study in people, daily GHRP-2 lowered peak growth hormone over five days. A separate 14-day study of steady GHRH found no such dulling. CJC-1295's own week-long data in people show the body's normal hormone bursts kept going. Even those studies did not test a pause calendar. The schedules passed around online that add a week off are unverified. This site does not invent a pause. Full citations at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

When a seller or a plan page prints a specific on and off calendar without a study that compared that calendar to steady use, the number is marketing or habit, not a finding. Four weeks on, two weeks off is the most common example. It did not come from a peptide study. The one measured reason to cycle in this catalogue is the body getting used to growth hormone releasers, over hours to days. Even that research is a real dispute, not a printed schedule. If the page cannot name the comparison that produced the weeks, treat the weeks as sales copy. Full breakdown at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish a cycle length for peptides as a group. The lengths passed around, four weeks, eight weeks, twelve weeks, are the same ratios used in steroid culture, applied to a different kind of molecule. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

No study has measured the best break length for any peptide in this catalogue. The break lengths passed around, one week off for every four on, or two weeks off for every eight on, are the same ratios used in steroid cycling culture. They were applied to a different kind of molecule with no study behind the switch. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

True withdrawal, meaning harm from stopping, has not been measured for the peptides in this catalogue. Something related but different has been measured for the GLP-1 drugs. In the follow-up to the STEP 1 study, people who stopped semaglutide gained back about two thirds of the weight they had lost within a year. That is the original condition coming back once the drug wears off. It is not a withdrawal problem. It is the real, evidence-based reason these drugs are approved for use without breaks, not in cycles. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Its FDA labels answer this. Semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy) is approved as a once-weekly treatment without breaks, for as long as type 2 diabetes or long-term weight management is being treated. The label has no time off. The follow-up to the STEP 1 study measured what stopping does: about two thirds of the lost weight came back within a year. The schedules passed around online that cycle it are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Coming off is a medical decision. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Its FDA labels answer this. Tirzepatide (Mounjaro, Zepbound) is approved as a once-weekly treatment without breaks, for as long as the condition on the label is being managed. The label has no time off. The schedules passed around online that stop and restart it as a cycle are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Stopping is a medical decision with your prescriber, not a forum calendar. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for BPC-157. No published study has given it to people for longer than two weeks. So nobody has measured whether the body gets used to it or whether there is a rebound when you stop. The cycle lengths passed around online are unverified habits. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for TB-500. No published study has given TB-500 to a person in any way. So there is no figure for how fast people clear it, and no study of a cycle versus steady use. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish a cycle length for BPC-157. The longest anyone has given it to people in a published study is two weeks. That is how long a study ran, not a recommended cycle. The four to eight week calendars passed around online are unverified habits. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish a cycle length for CJC-1295. In people, one shot under the skin kept growth hormone about 7.5-fold higher a week later, even at its lowest point. The body's normal hormone pulses did not change. That suggests the body does not quickly get used to it over a week. It says nothing about how many weeks to use it. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full citations at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Its own FDA label answers this. Tesamorelin (Egrifta) is approved as a daily shot taken without breaks, for as long as treatment for HIV-related deep belly fat is needed. The main studies measured 26 weeks of daily use, then longer follow-ups, not an on and off cycle the user picks. Cycle lengths passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish a cycle length for sermorelin. When it was an approved product (Geref), children with growth hormone deficiency got it daily for as long as they needed treatment. In practice that meant years, not weeks on and weeks off. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for ipamorelin. This site's review found one study in people for it, and that study does not compare a cycle against steady use. It acts on the same ghrelin receptor family where daily GHRP-2 lowered peak growth hormone over five days in nine healthy men. So the body can get used to drugs in this family. But nobody has tested a pause calendar for ipamorelin. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for melanotan 2. The small studies in people that exist, three men for two weeks and a ten-man study where each man tried both the drug and a dummy, did not compare a cycle to steady use. The 'loading then maintenance' calendars passed around online are unverified as a cycling rule. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

Usually because a forum or a seller printed four to eight weeks as if it were a finding. Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for BPC-157. In a two-person early study, the body cleared half of it from the blood in under 30 minutes. That is a fact about how fast it leaves, not a reason to take a break. No published study has looked at whether the body gets used to it or rebounds when you stop. The schedules passed around online are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

As a rule of thumb, about five half-lives, when a half-life has actually been measured. That is roughly 97 percent gone. The table on /cycling works out that figure from the published half-lives already on each profile. Where none has been published, that page says so instead of guessing. Leaving your body is not the same as your body's response going back to normal, and it is not a cycle length.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people do not establish an on and off schedule for MK-677 (ibutamoren). It is a pill that switches on the ghrelin receptor, not a peptide. Its longest careful study in people gave it daily without breaks for about two years in 65 older adults, not in a cycle. The schedules passed around online that add time off are unverified. This site does not invent a schedule. Full detail at /cycling.

Open this answer on its own page

There are four spots with enough fat under the skin for a shot under the skin: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. The belly and outer thigh are the two most people can reach and see without help. Rotate spots instead of reusing one. Skip skin that is bruised, hard, red, or broken. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Every compound on this site sold to individuals is described, by sellers and in the plans people actually follow, as a shot under the skin using an insulin syringe. That is also what this site's mixing calculator assumes. Under the skin means into the fat layer, not into muscle. No published study in people has compared the two ways for any compound this site tracks.

Open this answer on its own page

Research on insulin shots shows that a liquid straight from the fridge makes a shot hurt more. That is why many people keep the vial they are using at room temperature instead of in the fridge. This is a comfort question, not a safety one. It has not been tested for the compounds this site tracks.

Open this answer on its own page

The lump is a buildup of fatty tissue (lipohypertrophy) from hitting the same small patch of skin again and again. A 2026 review that pooled 51 studies of people using insulin found that not rotating spots properly was the biggest measured risk. It came with roughly nine times the odds of a lump compared with proper rotation, a bigger risk than reusing the same needle. The lump itself soaks up medicine more slowly and less evenly than normal skin. Full detail at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not sell products and does not recommend a specific needle. Research on insulin shots found that a needle 4 to 5 millimeters long, pushed straight in at 90 degrees, stays in the fat under the skin in nearly all adults. Needles 8 millimeters or longer are clearly more likely to reach muscle, especially in the thigh and in thinner people. That is why standard insulin syringes come in roughly the 4 to 12.7 millimeter range.

Open this answer on its own page

Research on injected medicines points to several things that make a shot hurt: how acidic the liquid is, its temperature, how fast it goes in, and preservatives such as the benzyl alcohol in bacteriostatic water, which is mildly acidic at roughly pH 5.7. Injecting through rubbing alcohol that has not dried is another known cause of extra stinging. None of this has been tested on the compounds this site tracks, only on injected medicines in general. So treat it as the best explanation we have, not a proven finding for any one peptide. Full detail at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

This site found no published study that measured shot pain for GHK-Cu. For injected liquids in general, the known causes of pain are how acidic the mixing liquid is, its preservative, its temperature, and how fast it is pushed in. Whether those explain the sting people report after GHK-Cu is a guess from the wider research on shots, not a finding about GHK-Cu itself.

Open this answer on its own page

A small bruise from nicking a tiny blood vessel under the skin is common. The FDA-approved labels for well-studied injected medicines list it as an expected reaction, along with redness, itching, pain, and swelling. On its own, it is not a reason to stop. Redness that is spreading, red streaks, warmth, pain that keeps getting worse, pus, or a fever are different. Those need a clinician, not waiting to see.

Open this answer on its own page

Never in household trash or recycling, and never flushed. The FDA recommends an FDA-cleared sharps container. If you do not have one, use a heavy-duty plastic household container with a tight lid that needles cannot poke through. When it is full, take it to a pharmacy, hospital, health department, or police or fire station drop-off. Local rules on getting rid of a full container vary, so check before assuming any one way is allowed everywhere.

Open this answer on its own page

The standard safety rule is one needle, one syringe, one time. A needle counts as dirty the moment it has been used, and it should not be used again to draw or inject. Poking the rubber vial top again and again with the same needle can also shave tiny bits of rubber into the liquid. That risk is lower with a fine insulin needle than with a bigger one, but it is not zero.

Open this answer on its own page

No published study has given TB-500 to a person in any way, so no study sets a spot to inject it. Claims that you should inject it near an injury are unverified. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots as any other: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

Published studies of GHK-Cu on its own used a cream or gel on the skin. The studies that injected it were hair clinics that injected the scalp with mixes that contained it. So no study says where on the body to inject it. If you mean a research vial injected under the skin, the body is the same, with the same four spots: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. That is not a finding about GHK-Cu. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/ghk-cu.

Open this answer on its own page

The approved product, Vyleesi (bremelanotide), is labeled for a shot under the skin in the belly or thigh, at least two inches from the belly button. A research-chemical vial sold as PT-141 is not that labeled product, and no separate study names a spot for it. This is a list of spots from that label, not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. How to inject and rotate spots is at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/pt-141.

Open this answer on its own page

As Zadaxin, thymosin alpha-1 is labeled for a shot under the skin, not into a vein. That label does not choose between belly, thigh, or arm. A research-chemical vial is not Zadaxin. The four general spots for a shot under the skin still apply: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/thymosin-alpha-1.

Open this answer on its own page

No published study of the lab-made four-amino-acid peptide sold today sets a spot to inject it. Claims about where to inject it are unverified. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots as any other: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/epitalon.

Open this answer on its own page

The approved labels for Ozempic and Wegovy shots name three spots under the skin: the belly, thigh, or upper arm. The amount that reached the blood was about the same at each. Rotate spots. The label of a prescribed product comes before general advice. This is a list of spots from those labels, not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. How to inject, rotate spots, and stay safe is at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

The approved labels for Mounjaro and Zepbound name three spots under the skin: the belly, thigh, or the back of the upper arm if someone else gives the shot. The amount that reached the blood was about the same at those spots. Rotate spots. The label of a prescribed product comes before general advice. This is a list of spots from those labels, not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. How to inject, rotate spots, and stay safe is at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/tirzepatide.

Open this answer on its own page

Studies in people gave CJC-1295 as a shot under the skin to healthy adults, and the published record does not say belly, thigh, or arm. No study sets a spot for it. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots as any other: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/cjc-1295.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give a protocol. The approved labels for the shots name the spots (belly, thigh, or upper arm) and tell you to rotate them. The hands-on steps that apply to any shot under the skin, like needle length, letting the alcohol dry, one needle for one use, and getting rid of used needles safely, are at /injecting. Nothing there is a dose or a frequency. A prescribed product's own Instructions for Use come before this page. Profile at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give a protocol. The approved labels name the spots (belly, thigh, or the back of the upper arm if someone else gives the shot) and tell you to rotate them. The hands-on steps that apply to any shot under the skin are at /injecting. Nothing there is a dose or a frequency. A prescribed product's own Instructions for Use come before this page. Profile at /compounds/tirzepatide.

Open this answer on its own page

Treat each of the four areas for shots under the skin as its own zone: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Move through a zone in order instead of picking a random spot. Keep each new shot at least one inch from the last one in that zone. Skip skin that is bruised, hard, red, broken, or has a stretch mark or scar over it. This is the rotation plan from research on insulin shots, not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Patient guides on shots say to keep each new shot at least one inch, about two and a half centimeters, from the last one in the same zone. That spacing is what makes rotating real, instead of a new hole next to yesterday's hole. It does not rank belly, thigh, or arm, and it is not a dose. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Using the same small patch over and over is the biggest measured cause of fatty lumps (lipohypertrophy) in people who use insulin. A 2026 review that pooled 51 studies found that not rotating properly came with roughly nine times the odds of a lump, compared with proper rotation. The lump then soaks up the liquid more slowly and less evenly than normal skin. Rotate. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

You can physically put a needle into the lump. That is the wrong move. NHS patient advice says medicine soaks in more slowly and less evenly through the fatty buildup that forms when the same spot is used again and again. The fix in insulin research is to move to unused skin, not to keep using the lump. This site does not publish a week count for how long a lump takes to flatten. Full detail at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Reusing needles is a measured risk, but it is not the biggest one. In the same 2026 review of 51 studies of people using insulin, not rotating properly came with roughly nine times the odds of a fatty lump. Reusing the same needle came second, at about three times the odds. That was ahead of more than five years of use and more than two shots a day. One needle, one syringe, one time still stands, to keep germs out. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not sell products and does not recommend a specific needle. Gauge is how thick the needle is, and the numbers run backwards: a higher gauge means a thinner needle. Insulin syringes are usually sold in the 28 to 31 gauge range, which is thin enough that thickness is rarely what makes a shot hurt. Length matters more, because it decides whether the shot stays in fat or reaches muscle. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not recommend a specific needle. Here is what ultrasound scans in adults with diabetes measured. An 8 millimeter needle pushed straight in, without pinching the skin, had about a 25 percent chance of reaching muscle at the thigh and about 9.7 percent at the belly. A 4 millimeter needle at the same spots had 1.6 percent and 0.1 percent. A 4 to 5 millimeter needle at 90 degrees stayed in the fat under the skin in nearly all adults tested. Leaner people and the thigh leave the least room for error. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

No published study of either compound sets a needle for it. The layers of skin and fat do not change with the name on the vial. Research on insulin shots found that 4 to 5 millimeter needles at 90 degrees stay in the fat under the skin in nearly all adults. Needles 8 millimeters or longer raise the chance of reaching muscle, especially at the thigh. This site does not recommend a specific needle, a dose, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profiles at /compounds/bpc-157 and /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

Pinching lifts fat away from muscle. It is not a ritual that belongs to any one peptide. The standard way to give a shot under the skin is at a 90 degree angle, straight in. Where the fat layer is thin, often in a lean person, at the thigh, or on the back of the arm, a 45 degree angle or a pinched fold lowers the chance that a longer needle hits muscle by mistake. It does not remove that chance. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

The usual angle in patient guides for a shot under the skin is 90 degrees, straight in. A 45 degree angle is the other choice when the fat layer is thin. Those two angles are about staying in the fat. They are not a ranking of compounds and not a dose. A shot into muscle is a different, deeper shot with its own landmarks, and it is not what this site's calculator assumes. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Skip it. Patient guides for shots under the skin say to avoid skin that is bruised, hard, red, broken, or has a stretch mark or scar over the spot. Scars and thick skin change how the liquid spreads and how evenly it soaks in. That is about the body, not a finding about any peptide this site tracks. Move to unused, healthy skin. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Wash your hands first. Wipe the rubber top with alcohol before every needle goes in, even on a vial you are already using. Draw with a needle that has not touched skin. Swab the shot spot with 60 to 70 percent alcohol for 30 seconds, and let it air dry for 30 seconds before the needle goes in. Injecting through wet alcohol is a known cause of extra sting. One needle, one syringe, one time, then straight into a sharps container. This is handling, not a dose. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Wipe the rubber top before every needle goes in, including on a vial you opened yesterday. Care of the shot spot and the vial is one of the topics the expert guidance on insulin shots covers directly. Wiping only once when you first open it is a myth, not a proven shortcut. Poking the top again and again can also shave tiny bits of rubber into the liquid. That risk is lower with a fine insulin needle than with a big one, but it is not zero. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

No. The CDC safety rule for shots is one needle, one syringe, one time. It says never to draw from a shared vial with a needle or syringe that has already been used on anyone. Putting a fresh needle into a vial someone else already used does not make it a shared bottle. This site does not publish a shared-vial protocol. The preservative in bacteriostatic water is not permission to share. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

No. The roughly 28-day window in the fridge is how long the preservative is known to hold back germs. It does not promise the vial is germ-free after that, and it does not replace wiping the top, using a new needle, or never sharing the vial. After that window, the risk of germs goes up, even in the fridge. A given peptide may also break down sooner than the preservative window. This is not a dose. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Used needles travel in a sharps container they cannot poke through. Never loose in a bag, never in household trash, and never flushed. The FDA's travel advice for needles treats them as medical waste, whatever was in the syringe. Keep unused syringes in a hard case, not rattling around a toiletry bag. Keep mixed vials cold. Dry powder handles a short trip better. This is handling, not a packing list that makes an unapproved research chemical legal to carry. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Those are two different questions. People on prescribed shots often carry unused syringes and a small sharps container in their carry-on. Used needles still follow FDA sharps rules, not the seat-back pocket. A research-chemical vial is not a prescribed medicine, and this site does not clear it through an airport or a border. Airline, TSA, and destination rules vary, and none of them is a dose or a protocol. How to inject and get rid of needles is at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

For research peptides, no published human trial ranks the belly against the thigh against the back of the upper arm, the spot people often call the deltoid. The fat layer does not change with the name on the vial. Ultrasound scans in adults found the fat was about 13.9 millimeters deep on average at the belly, 10.8 at the arm, and 10.4 at the thigh. That is why an 8 millimeter needle had the highest measured risk of hitting muscle at the thigh. The approved labels for similar weight-loss shots that found about the same amount reached the blood at those three spots describe those labeled products, not a research vial. This is not a dose. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

Subq is short for subcutaneous, which means into the fat layer between skin and muscle, using an insulin syringe. That is how sellers and user plans describe taking compounds sold to individuals, and it is what this site's mixing calculator assumes. For most research peptides here, it is not how any published study in people actually gave them. Muscle soaks things up faster than fat, so hitting muscle by mistake can change how a dose acts. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

No published study has given BPC-157 as a shot into muscle, or as the shot under the skin that buyers actually use. The FDA's 2026 count of five studies in people covers an early safety study, a study giving it rectally for ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease), and clinic reports with no comparison group. Those clinic reports include shots into a knee joint or the bladder wall, which are not intramuscular shots. Claims that shots into muscle or near an injury work better are unverified. This site's calculator assumes a shot under the skin. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

The FDA's 2026 review found no published data in people on the safety of compounded MOTS-c, or on how the body handles it, by any route. So no study compares a shot into muscle with a shot under the skin. Claims about muscle versus under the skin are unverified. This site's calculator and sellers' material for compounds sold to individuals assume a shot under the skin, into fat, not muscle. That is how the market uses it. It is not a finding that a MOTS-c shot reaches the body in a working form. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/mots-c.

Open this answer on its own page

No published study has given BPC-157 as the shot under the skin that buyers use, so no study sets a spot to inject it. Claims that you should inject it near an injury are unverified. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots as any other: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found one study in people for ipamorelin, with 117 people, and it does not say belly, thigh, or arm. No study sets a spot for it. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots as any other: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/ipamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

Published work on sermorelin in people does not name a spot to inject it, as far as this catalogue shows. Where a country still has a labeled sermorelin product, that label comes before this page. A research-chemical vial is not that labeled product. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/sermorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

Tesamorelin is FDA approved as Egrifta, a daily shot under the skin for people with HIV who have abnormal fat buildup (lipodystrophy). That product's own label, not this page, names the spots and the steps. This FAQ does not reprint a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. A research-chemical vial sold as tesamorelin is not Egrifta. For a research vial given under the skin, the body is the same, with the same four spots, and you should rotate them. How to inject is at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/tesamorelin.

Open this answer on its own page

The FDA's 2026 review found no published data on compounded MOTS-c in people by any route. So no study can set a spot to inject it. Claims about where to inject it are unverified. If you mean a research vial given under the skin, the body is the same, with the same four spots: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. That is not a finding about MOTS-c. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/mots-c.

Open this answer on its own page

Retatrutide is still experimental. No approved Instructions for Use on this site say belly, thigh, or arm for it. Claims about where to inject it are unverified. A shot under the skin uses the same four spots as any other: the belly at least two inches from the belly button, the outer thigh, the back of the upper arm, and the upper outer buttock. Rotate spots. Approved labels for similar weight-loss shots say about the same amount reaches the blood at each spot, but that does not carry over to this molecule. This is not a dose, a frequency, or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting. Profile at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Stop and get in-person care if redness is spreading, red streaks run away from the spot, the area is warm, pain or swelling is getting worse instead of fading, there is pus or leaking, or you have a fever. Standard guidance on shots under the skin lists those as signs of a possible infection or abscess (a pocket of pus). They need a clinician, not a forum thread. A small bruise, mild redness that fades in a day, or a firm spot that softens over a few days is listed as an expected reaction on approved labels for injected medicines. This page is coach language, not a diagnosis. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

A drop of blood on the skin after nicking a tiny blood vessel is common. Approved labels for injected medicines list bruising as an expected reaction at the spot. Press on it, and use a different spot next time. On its own, it is not a reason to keep injecting into that exact point. Spreading redness, red streaks, warmth, pain that keeps getting worse, pus, or a fever are different, and need a clinician. This is not a dose or a protocol. Full walkthrough at /injecting.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations, but the approved label is public record. Wegovy is raised step by step up to a 2.4 milligram shot once a week. A higher 7.2 milligram dose was approved in March 2026. That followed a study where people on it lost 18.7% of their weight at 72 weeks, more than on lower doses, but about 23% of that group had odd skin feelings as a side effect. A 25 milligram daily pill was also approved in December 2025. Dosing is a medical decision between you and a prescriber.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, in large studies where it was compared with a dummy shot. It is one of the best-studied compounds this site tracks, with studies covering more than 17,000 people. It is FDA approved for long-term weight management and for type 2 diabetes. Later studies added a pill form and a higher shot dose, each tested in its own careful study before approval.

Open this answer on its own page

The evidence says no, at least so far. The evoke and evoke plus studies, both large final-stage studies, tested semaglutide in 3,808 people for Alzheimer's disease. It did not slow the disease on the main thing they measured. That is a real, finished result, not a lack of research. Semaglutide still has strong evidence in diabetes, obesity, and lowering heart risk, and the Alzheimer's result does not change that.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, as a prescription medicine. It is FDA approved in the US, licensed by the MHRA in the UK, registered by the TGA in Australia, and approved by Health Canada. In every case it is a prescription only drug for type 2 diabetes or long-term weight management. That is different from the unapproved research peptides on this site, most of which have no approval anywhere.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 10 research chemical sellers this site tracks, semaglutide has cost from about $1.50 to $34 per milligram, with a middle price around $9, in vial sizes from 2 to 100 milligrams. That is the price on the unregulated compounding and research chemical market. It is not a pharmacy price for Ozempic or Wegovy, which need a prescription and are priced in a totally different way, through insurance or cash-pay programs.

Open this answer on its own page

Hair loss is not one of semaglutide's most common side effects in studies. Those are mostly stomach and gut problems. But fast, large weight loss of any kind is a known trigger for a short-term shedding pattern called telogen effluvium. Whether that applies to someone on semaglutide is a personal medical question. This site's own studies for the drug do not report hair loss as a measured result.

Open this answer on its own page

Semaglutide is the drug itself. Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus are three brand names for it, at different doses. Rybelsus is also taken a different way, as a pill instead of a shot. Ozempic is approved for type 2 diabetes. Wegovy is approved for long-term weight management at a higher dose. Rybelsus is the pill form. All three are FDA approved, prescription only, and made by the same company.

Open this answer on its own page

Tirzepatide switches on two receptors, GIP and GLP-1 (two gut hormones that control blood sugar and appetite), instead of GLP-1 alone like semaglutide. In a head to head study of nearly 1,900 people with type 2 diabetes, every tirzepatide dose lowered blood sugar more than semaglutide's 1 milligram dose. At the highest dose, people lost up to 5.5 kilograms more weight. That two-hormone action is the basis for its FDA approval in both diabetes and obesity.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations, but a study record exists. In SURMOUNT-1, nearly 2,540 adults without diabetes took 5, 10, or 15 milligrams once a week. At 72 weeks they lost 15%, 20%, and 21% of their body weight, compared with 3.1% on a dummy shot. Higher doses gave bigger results. The approved label's dose range is built on that, but it is not a recommendation for your own use.

Open this answer on its own page

In one direct head to head study, yes, on the things it measured. Nearly 1,900 people with type 2 diabetes took tirzepatide or semaglutide for about nine months. Every tirzepatide dose beat semaglutide's 1 milligram dose on blood sugar control. The highest tirzepatide dose gave up to 5.5 kilograms more weight loss. One catch matters: the semaglutide dose used, 1 milligram, is lower than the 2.4 milligram dose approved for weight loss.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, as of August 2026. A study of more than 13,000 people with type 2 diabetes and existing heart disease found major heart and blood vessel events happened in 12.2% of people on tirzepatide versus 13.1% on dulaglutide, a drug already proven to protect the heart. That met the bar to add heart protection to tirzepatide's label.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. This is now an FDA approved use, under the brand name Zepbound. Two large final-stage studies in adults with obesity and moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (breathing that keeps stopping during sleep) found these pauses fell by about 25 more per hour than with a dummy shot at 52 weeks. That drop was big enough to move many people down a full level of severity.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 9 sellers this site tracks, tirzepatide has cost from about $1.14 to $12.75 per milligram, with a middle price around $5.42, in vial sizes from 5 to 200 milligrams. This is the unregulated research chemical market. It is separate from pharmacy prices for the FDA approved Mounjaro or Zepbound, which need a prescription.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not rank doses or make recommendations. What the studies show: in SURMOUNT-1, weight loss went up with the dose. People lost 15% at 5 milligrams, 20% at 10 milligrams, and 21% at 15 milligrams once a week, at 72 weeks. Higher doses gave more weight loss in that group of people. Whether a dose is right for a specific person is a decision for a prescriber, not a ranking this site gives.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations, but there is a public study record. An earlier study gave adults with obesity 4, 8, or 12 milligrams once a week for 48 weeks. They lost 17.1%, 22.8%, and 24.2% of their weight, compared with 2.1% on a dummy shot. The larger, final-stage TRIUMPH-1 study found up to 28.3% weight loss at 80 weeks on the 12 milligram dose. Retatrutide is still experimental and is not an approved drug.

Open this answer on its own page

It switches on three receptors at once: GLP-1, GIP, and glucagon (three gut and blood-sugar hormones). That is one more than tirzepatide and two more than semaglutide. The extra glucagon action is thought to make the body burn more energy and burn more fat in the liver, on top of the appetite-cutting effect of the other two. Researchers think that explains why its studies have reported the biggest weight loss of any drug in this family so far.

Open this answer on its own page

No, it is still experimental. Its large final-stage study, TRIUMPH-1, included 2,339 people and reported results in May 2026. The company was expected to ask for approval later in 2026. Until the FDA reviews and approves it, retatrutide is not a legal prescription drug anywhere. That is why every seller offering it is selling an unapproved research chemical, not a medicine.

Open this answer on its own page

In the large final-stage TRIUMPH-1 study, about 12.5% of people on the highest dose, 12 milligrams, reported dysesthesia, an odd tingling or numb feeling in the skin. The earlier study also reported a bonus for the liver: 86% of people on the top dose reached a normal level of liver fat on scans, compared with none on a dummy shot. That was on top of the drug's main weight-loss result.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 9 sellers this site tracks, retatrutide has cost from about $1.50 to $14.17 per milligram, with a middle price around $7.25, in vial sizes from 5 to 200 milligrams. It is an experimental drug still waiting for FDA review, so there is no approved pharmacy price to compare. Every dollar figure in this market is for an unapproved research chemical.

Open this answer on its own page

Cagrilintide is an experimental once-a-week drug that switches on the amylin receptor. It has been studied mixed with semaglutide in a single shot called CagriSema, to get more weight loss than either drug alone. Amylin is a different appetite hormone from GLP-1, so the pair hits two different signals at once. This site's review found 3 studies in people covering more than 1,200 people. It is not FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

No. It is still experimental in the US, UK, Australia, and Canada. It has been studied on its own and, more often, mixed with semaglutide as CagriSema, aiming for more weight loss than either drug alone. Until it clears FDA review, cagrilintide sold to individuals is an unapproved research chemical, not a prescription medicine.

Open this answer on its own page

Survodutide is an experimental once-a-week drug that switches on two receptors, GLP-1 and glucagon. It is studied for obesity and for MASH, a liver disease where fat builds up in the liver and causes swelling and damage, beyond simple fatty liver. This site's review found 3 studies in people for it, covering 387 people. It is not FDA approved anywhere.

Open this answer on its own page

Mazdutide is a drug that switches on both the GLP-1 and glucagon receptors. It was approved in China in 2025 for obesity and type 2 diabetes, the first drug of its exact type approved anywhere in the world. It is not FDA approved and is still experimental in the US, UK, Australia, and Canada. So buying it outside China means buying an unapproved research chemical.

Open this answer on its own page

In its own obesity study in people, it did no better than a dummy pill, even though AOD-9604 was sold for years as a fat-loss peptide. It is a changed piece of growth hormone that boosted fat burning in animal studies. In some countries it has been notified as generally safe to use as a food ingredient (GRAS). But that status is not proof that it causes weight loss in people, and its own study did not show that.

Open this answer on its own page

Each one switches on one more receptor than the last. Semaglutide hits only GLP-1. Tirzepatide adds GIP. Retatrutide adds glucagon on top of both. In their own studies, average weight loss went up the same way: roughly 15% for semaglutide's approved dose, up to 21% for tirzepatide, and up to 28% for retatrutide's dose in its large final-stage study. But these come from separate studies in different groups of people, not one head to head study of all three.

Open this answer on its own page

Semaglutide, liraglutide, dulaglutide, and exenatide are peptides. They are chains of amino acids built to resist the fast breakdown that limits the body's own GLP-1 hormone to minutes of action. Tirzepatide and retatrutide are also peptide-based, built to hit more receptors than GLP-1 alone. The whole family comes from exenatide, which was based on a peptide found in Gila monster venom.

Open this answer on its own page

No study has compared the two head to head on weight loss. Liraglutide was the first GLP-1 drug approved for obesity. It is a daily shot, not weekly, and the body clears half of it in about 13 hours, compared with roughly 7 days for semaglutide. Across the separate studies each drug has been tested in, semaglutide has usually given bigger average weight loss. But that compares different studies, not one study that measured both.

Open this answer on its own page

Exenatide, approved as Byetta. It was based on a peptide called exendin-4, found in Gila monster venom. It started the whole GLP-1 drug family that semaglutide and tirzepatide later built on. Its own studies covered nearly 15,000 people, looking at blood sugar control in type 2 diabetes.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Its own careful study showed it lowered heart risk, which is part of why that use is on its FDA approved label as Trulicity. That is a result for this one drug. It does not apply to every GLP-1 drug just because they act on the same receptor.

Open this answer on its own page

Tirzepatide slows how fast the stomach empties. It also acts on GLP-1 and GIP receptors that control digestion. Stomach and gut problems, including diarrhea, nausea, and constipation, are among the most common side effects across its studies. Other GLP-1 drugs like semaglutide share this. It comes from the same slowing of digestion that also helps cut appetite and, in the end, weight.

Open this answer on its own page

Semaglutide's most common side effects in studies are stomach and gut problems, like nausea and slow digestion. Tiredness can come with eating fewer calories and the body getting used to new appetite and blood sugar patterns. This site's review of semaglutide studies did not find tiredness measured as a main result on its own. So this is a likely knock-on effect of what the drug is known to do, not a separately recorded finding.

Open this answer on its own page

The FDA approved pens, Ozempic and Wegovy, follow the maker's storage instructions. In general, they stay in the fridge before first use and can be kept at room temperature for a limited time after. For mixed research chemical vials, this site's general mixing advice applies: keep them in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, and expect roughly a 28 day window to use them once mixed, which is how peptide liquids generally behave.

Open this answer on its own page

Researchers have looked at this, since the brain's appetite and mood systems overlap. So far, the picture from large studies is reassuring, not alarming. This site's review of semaglutide studies, covering over 17,000 people, did not find depression as a main result. Anyone with a history of mood problems who starts a GLP-1 drug should talk about it directly with their prescriber, and not rely on a general answer.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations. The approved Wegovy label lays out a plan that starts low and goes up over time, to a 2.4 milligram, or now up to a 7.2 milligram, dose once a week. Going up slowly is meant to cut down on stomach and gut side effects. That plan is set by the FDA approved label and a prescriber. Do not piece it together from a general answer.

Open this answer on its own page

Retatrutide's large final-stage study reported dysesthesia, an odd tingling or numb feeling in the skin, in about 12.5% of people on its highest dose. It also had the stomach and gut effects common to this drug family, from slower digestion. This site's review did not find tiredness measured as a main result in its studies. So tiredness would come under the general effects of eating fewer calories and the drug's wider action, not a clearly recorded finding.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review of retatrutide's studies did not find hair loss measured as a result. As with any drug that causes big, fast weight loss, short-term hair shedding, called telogen effluvium, is a known effect of large weight change itself. It is not tied to how retatrutide works.

Open this answer on its own page

It is still experimental, not FDA approved. So its safety record is still being built through ongoing studies, not years of real-world use. Its large final-stage study reported dysesthesia, an odd tingling or numb feeling in the skin, in about 12.5% of people on the highest dose. It also had the stomach and gut effects common to this drug family. That is real safety data from studies. It is not the full safety record from years on the market that an approved drug like semaglutide has.

Open this answer on its own page

It is not approved yet. Its large final-stage study, TRIUMPH-1, reported results in May 2026. As of this site's latest review, the company was expected to ask the FDA for approval later in 2026. Two more TRIUMPH studies were still reporting. Until the FDA finishes its review and approves it, retatrutide is not a legal prescription drug. Any timeline beyond what has been stated publicly is a guess.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's semaglutide studies do not publish a counted constipation rate. What they do count for the gut is one group of stomach and gut side effects in OASIS 4: 74.0% of people on the drug versus 42.2% on a dummy pill. That study described them as nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea, in 307 adults over 64 weeks. STEP 1 (1,961 adults, down 14.9% at 68 weeks) and SELECT (17,604 adults, about 39.8 months on average, 20% fewer major heart events) are weight and heart results on this site, not a constipation count. A general gut effect is not the same as a constipation percentage this FAQ can quote. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain. Gut symptoms that are new or severe belong with a clinician. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's tirzepatide studies do not publish a counted constipation percentage. SURMOUNT-1 reported weight in 2,539 adults at 72 weeks (up to 20.9% average loss on 15 milligrams, versus 3.1% on a dummy shot). The SURPASS-2, SURPASS-CVOT, and SURMOUNT-OSA results cover blood sugar, major heart events, and how often breathing stops during sleep. Stomach and gut effects are the pattern for this drug family, already covered in this FAQ for diarrhea. That is not a constipation rate this page can make up. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain. Full record at /compounds/tirzepatide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's retatrutide studies do not report constipation as a counted result. What they do report is weight and one side effect. In TRIUMPH-1, 2,339 people lost up to 28.3% of their weight on average at 80 weeks on 12 milligrams, versus 2.2% on a dummy shot. In an earlier study, 338 adults lost up to 24.2% at 48 weeks. In TRIUMPH-1, about 12.5% on the 12 milligram dose had dysesthesia, an odd tingling or numb feeling in the skin. Stomach and gut effects are the pattern for this drug family. Constipation is not a published percentage in those results. This FAQ does not invent one. Full record at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold a citation that measures when semaglutide stops working for one person, or that names a point where the body gets used to it. What it holds is how long the studies ran: STEP 1 to 68 weeks, OASIS 4 to 64 weeks, STEP UP to 72 weeks, SELECT for heart events over about 39.8 months on average in 17,604 adults, and evoke to 104 weeks for Alzheimer's, where the drug did not slow decline. An average weight-loss curve that levels off during a study is not the same as the drug failing. Common reasons, not about the drug, that a person might see less change include missed doses, a change in food intake, and a research-chemical vial that is not the labeled pen. Those are medical questions, not a date this FAQ will invent. Talk with the clinician who prescribed it. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site holds no study that sets a date when semaglutide stops working as well for a person. SELECT followed 17,604 adults for about 39.8 months on average. It still found 20% fewer major heart events (6.5% versus 8.0%). That is a long time, but it is not a study of the effect fading. Weight studies (STEP 1 at 68 weeks, STEP UP at 72 weeks, OASIS 4 at 64 weeks) report a set time period. They do not publish a timeline for one person's body getting used to it. A plateau, a missed dose, a diet change, or a vial that is not the approved product are different problems from a proven loss of drug effect. This FAQ does not invent a fade date. A clinician can look at your actual course. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold a study that measures the body getting used to tirzepatide, or a date when it stops working for a person. The study time windows it does hold are SURMOUNT-1 at 72 weeks (2,539 adults without diabetes; up to 20.9% average weight loss on 15 milligrams), SURMOUNT-OSA at 52 weeks, and SURPASS-2 at 40 weeks against semaglutide 1 milligram. SURPASS-CVOT compared heart events in 13,299 people and did not look at whether it stopped working. Missed doses, a change in diet, and a research-chemical vial that is not Mounjaro or Zepbound are common reasons, not about the drug, that a response can look weaker. Those belong with a clinician, not a percentage this FAQ will invent. Full record at /compounds/tirzepatide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site holds no study on one person losing the effect, or on a date when retatrutide fades. What it holds is how long studies ran. In TRIUMPH-1, with 2,339 people, a company release reported up to 28.3% average weight loss at 80 weeks on 12 milligrams, versus 2.2% on a dummy shot. An earlier study ran 48 weeks in 338 adults, with up to 24.2% loss at 12 milligrams. Those are averages over a set time. Retatrutide is still experimental. A research-chemical vial is not the product used in the studies. Missed doses and diet changes are still the first questions, not about the drug, a clinician would ask. This FAQ does not invent a fade clock. Full record at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not hold a study that measures when retatrutide stops working for a person. TRIUMPH-1 ran 80 weeks. An earlier study ran 48 weeks. Those are how long the studies lasted, not a date after which the drug fails. By this site's national fields, retatrutide is not an approved medicine in the US, UK, Australia, or Canada. This FAQ does not invent a stop date or a personal timeline for the body getting used to it. See a clinician, not a plan on the internet. Full record at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Wegovy is a brand name for semaglutide, the GLP-1 drug this site's profile lists as Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus. They are not the same labeled medicine. Wegovy is the brand for long-term weight management (a shot, a pill approved in December 2025, and a 7.2 milligram shot approved in March 2026). Ozempic is approved for type 2 diabetes. Rybelsus is the pill for type 2 diabetes. STEP 1 used 2.4 milligrams once a week for weight in 1,961 adults, who lost 14.9% at 68 weeks. A prescription for one brand is not automatically a prescription for another. A research-chemical vial labeled semaglutide is not any of those approved products. This site does not rank the brands. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

CagriSema is a fixed mix of two drugs in one weekly shot: cagrilintide, a long-acting drug that switches on the amylin receptor, plus semaglutide, a GLP-1 drug. It is not cagrilintide alone and not semaglutide alone. The largest study of CagriSema, REDEFINE 2, in 1,206 people with type 2 diabetes, found 13.7% weight loss versus 3.4% at 68 weeks. A smaller study in 92 adults with type 2 diabetes found 15.6% at 32 weeks, versus 5.1% on semaglutide alone and 8.1% on cagrilintide alone. On its own, cagrilintide gave 6.0% to 10.8% weight loss at 26 weeks in 706 people, versus 3.0% on a dummy shot. On its own, semaglutide as Wegovy 2.4 milligrams gave 14.9% at 68 weeks in STEP 1. CagriSema is still experimental. Full record at /compounds/cagrilintide.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Semaglutide's US legal field is FDA approved, prescription only. That covers the finished products sold as Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus, with the same licensed prescription status in the UK, Australia, and Canada. A research-chemical vial labeled semaglutide is not that approved product and is not approved for use in people. Compounding is a third pathway, and this site's country fields do not list it pharmacy by pharmacy or state by state. Those fields are national labels. They are not a list of which pharmacies may make it, and not a green light to buy an unapproved vial. This FAQ does not name sellers and does not give sourcing tips. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Tirzepatide's US legal field is FDA approved, prescription only, as Mounjaro and Zepbound, with licensed prescription status in the UK, Australia, and Canada. A research-chemical vial labeled tirzepatide is not either approved pen and is not approved for use in people. Compounding is a third pathway, and this site's country fields do not list it pharmacy by pharmacy. The legal pages here are national labels, not a state-by-state compounding map, and not a where-to-buy list. This FAQ does not name sellers. Full record at /compounds/tirzepatide.

Open this answer on its own page

By this site's national fields, retatrutide is still experimental. It is not approved in the US, not licensed in the UK, not registered in Australia, and not approved in Canada. There is no approved finished product for a compounding pharmacy to copy. A compounded vial and a research-chemical vial are two unapproved products. This dataset does not treat them as the same, and does not list them by pharmacy or by state. This FAQ does not invent a legal green light, a formula, or a seller. Full record at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Saxenda is a brand name for liraglutide, the daily GLP-1 drug this site's profile lists as Victoza and Saxenda. They are not the same labeled medicine. Victoza is approved for type 2 diabetes. Saxenda is the brand for long-term weight management. In LEADER, the largest study, 9,340 people with type 2 diabetes and high heart risk were followed for about 3.8 years (the middle value). Major heart events happened in 13.0% on liraglutide versus 14.9% on a dummy shot. SCALE enrolled 3,731 adults without diabetes. At 56 weeks, people lost 8.4 kg on average on 3.0 milligrams, versus 2.8 kg on a dummy shot. A prescription for one brand is not automatically a prescription for the other. This site does not rank the brands. Full record at /compounds/liraglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's tirzepatide studies do not report headache as a counted result. The record they hold covers weight (SURMOUNT-1: 2,539 adults, up to 20.9% average weight loss at 72 weeks on 15 milligrams, versus 3.1% on a dummy shot), blood sugar head to head (SURPASS-2: 1,879 people over 40 weeks), heart events (SURPASS-CVOT: 13,299 people; major heart events in 12.2% versus 13.1% on dulaglutide), and sleep apnea (SURMOUNT-OSA at 52 weeks). Headache is not given a percentage here. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's retatrutide studies do not report dizziness as a measured result. What they do report on feeling is dysesthesia, an odd tingling or numb feeling in the skin. It showed up in about 12.5% of people on the 12 milligram dose in TRIUMPH-1. That study had 2,339 people, who lost up to 28.3% of their weight on average at 80 weeks, versus 2.2% on a dummy shot. Tingling is a skin-feeling finding, not a count of dizziness. Stomach and gut effects are the pattern for this drug family. This FAQ does not invent a dizziness rate from that skin-feeling finding.

Open this answer on its own page

Semaglutide switches on the GLP-1 receptor. That raises insulin when blood sugar is high, lowers glucagon (a hormone that raises blood sugar), slows how fast the stomach empties, and cuts appetite through signals in the brain and body. This site's profile says its half-life is about 7 days. Its molecular weight is 4,113.6 daltons. The evidence in people on this site includes SELECT (17,604 adults, about 39.8 months on average, 20% fewer major heart events) and STEP 1 (1,961 adults without diabetes, down 14.9% at 68 weeks, versus down 2.4% on a dummy shot). The evoke and evoke plus Alzheimer's studies in 3,808 people found it did not slow decline. Changes in appetite and stomach emptying are how it works. They do not promise that a given person will lose a set amount of fat. A research-chemical vial is not Ozempic, Wegovy, or Rybelsus. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Cagrilintide is a long-acting drug that switches on the amylin receptor. Amylin is a fullness hormone separate from GLP-1, so it works on different docking spots, in the parts of the brain that make you feel full and slow stomach emptying. This site's profile says its half-life is about 7 days. Its molecular weight is about 3,700 daltons. On its own, 706 people at 26 weeks lost 6.0% to 10.8%, versus 3.0% on a dummy shot. Mixed with semaglutide as CagriSema, a smaller study in 92 adults with type 2 diabetes found 15.6% loss at 32 weeks, versus 5.1% on semaglutide alone and 8.1% on cagrilintide alone. CagriSema is still experimental. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/cagrilintide.

Open this answer on its own page

It caused large average weight loss in studies. That is not the same as a measured fat-burning result in a person. In TRIUMPH-1, with 2,339 people, a company release reported up to 28.3% average weight loss at 80 weeks on 12 milligrams, versus 2.2% on a dummy shot. An earlier study ran 48 weeks in 338 adults, with up to 24.2% loss at 12 milligrams. A small part of an early study found 86% of people on 12 milligrams got their liver fat below 5% at 24 weeks, versus 0% on a dummy shot. The extra glucagon action is thought to make the body burn more energy and more liver fat. That is a theory plus average weight and liver-fat results, not a counted fat-burning rate for one person. Retatrutide is still experimental. A research-chemical vial is not the product used in the studies. This FAQ does not invent a fat-oxidation percentage. Full record at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Not as a published result of giving this piece to a person as a finished drug. This site's profile says the product sold as HGH Fragment 176-191 is chemically the same changed piece of growth hormone as AOD-9604 (Tyr-hGH177-191). The AOD-9604 page has the history of its official studies. Six careful studies in people, summed up for AOD-9604, found no effect on IGF-1 or on how the body handles sugar, and no more side effects than a dummy pill. The program did not establish efficacy for weight loss. Animal studies on the fragment page report more fat breakdown and less weight gain in rats and mice. Those animal findings do not transfer into a human fat-burn result. This FAQ does not invent one. Full record at /compounds/hgh-fragment-176-191.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's AOD-9604 profile does not treat AOD as short for anything. AOD-9604 is a lab code for a changed piece from the end of growth hormone (building blocks 177 to 191, with one extra amino acid, tyrosine, added at the front). Its molecular weight is about 1,815 daltons. It is also written Tyr-hGH177-191. The letters are a lab code, not a proven fat-loss result. Six careful studies in people, summed up on that page, did not establish efficacy for weight loss. This FAQ does not treat the name as a finding. Full record at /compounds/aod-9604.

Open this answer on its own page

Victoza is a brand name for liraglutide, the daily GLP-1 drug this site's profile lists as Victoza and Saxenda. They are not the same labeled medicine. Victoza is approved for type 2 diabetes. Saxenda is the chronic weight-management brand. In LEADER, 9,340 people with type 2 diabetes and high heart risk were followed for about 3.8 years (the middle value). Major heart events happened in 13.0% on liraglutide versus 14.9% on a dummy shot. SCALE enrolled 3,731 adults without diabetes. At 56 weeks, people lost 8.4 kg on average on 3.0 milligrams, versus 2.8 kg on a dummy shot. A prescription for one brand is not automatically a prescription for the other. This site does not rank the brands. Full record at /compounds/liraglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Trulicity is the brand name for dulaglutide, the once-weekly GLP-1 drug this site's profile lists as another name. It is approved for type 2 diabetes. REWIND included 9,901 people, only about a third of whom already had heart disease. Over about 5.4 years (the middle value), major heart events happened in 12.0% on dulaglutide versus 13.4% on a dummy shot. AWARD-6 found weekly dulaglutide 1.5 milligrams worked about as well as daily liraglutide 1.8 milligrams on long-term blood sugar (HbA1c) at 26 weeks, in 599 people. People do lose some weight, but usually less than with semaglutide or tirzepatide in their own separate studies. This site does not rank the brands. Full record at /compounds/dulaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Byetta is a brand name for exenatide, the GLP-1 drug this site's profile lists as Byetta and Bydureon. They are not the same labeled product. Byetta is the twice-daily, fast-acting form (the body clears half of it in about 2.4 hours). Bydureon is the once-weekly form. Exenatide comes from exendin-4, found in Gila monster venom. It was the first FDA approved GLP-1 drug, in 2005. The largest study, EXSCEL, followed 14,752 people on weekly exenatide. Major heart events happened in 11.4% versus 12.2% on a dummy shot, which showed it was no worse, not that it was better. In the study behind its approval, 336 people on 10 micrograms twice daily saw long-term blood sugar (HbA1c) fall 0.78%, versus a 0.08% rise on a dummy shot. A prescription for one brand is not automatically a prescription for the other. Full record at /compounds/exenatide.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Wegovy is a brand name for semaglutide alone. CagriSema is a fixed combination of cagrilintide plus semaglutide in one weekly shot. On its own, semaglutide as Wegovy 2.4 milligrams gave 14.9% weight loss at 68 weeks in STEP 1. On its own, cagrilintide gave 6.0% to 10.8% at 26 weeks in 706 people, versus 3.0% on a dummy shot. Together, a smaller study in 92 adults with type 2 diabetes found 15.6% at 32 weeks, versus 5.1% on semaglutide alone. CagriSema is still experimental. Wegovy is an approved weight-management brand. The shared drug is one half of CagriSema, not the whole product. This site does not rank them. Full record at /compounds/cagrilintide.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Ozempic is a brand name for semaglutide, a GLP-1 drug. Retatrutide is a different investigational molecule that switches on the GLP-1, GIP, and glucagon receptors. TRIUMPH-1 is a retatrutide study (2,339 people; a company release reported up to 28.3% weight loss at 80 weeks on 12 milligrams). STEP 1 used semaglutide 2.4 milligrams in 1,961 adults (down 14.9% at 68 weeks). Those are separate studies of separate drugs. By this site's national fields, retatrutide is not approved in the US, UK, Australia, or Canada. This site does not rank them. Full records at /compounds/retatrutide and /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Survodutide is an experimental once-a-week drug that switches on two receptors, GLP-1 and glucagon. The GLP-1 side is the appetite and blood sugar route known from semaglutide. The glucagon side is studied for burning more energy and for effects on the liver. This site's profile says its half-life is about 6 days. Its molecular weight is about 4,900 daltons. A 46-week obesity study in 387 adults without diabetes found an average weight change of down 14.9% at 4.8 milligrams a week, versus down 2.8% on a dummy shot. A 48-week study in 293 adults with MASH (a fatty liver disease with liver damage) found the liver improved under the microscope, without more scarring, in 47 to 62% on survodutide versus 14% on a dummy shot. A large final-stage study, SYNCHRONIZE-MASLD, in 216 adults, found 84% versus 24% cut their liver fat by at least 30%, with body weight down 12.2% versus down 1.0% at 48 weeks. It is not FDA approved. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/survodutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Mazdutide is a once-a-week drug that switches on two receptors, GLP-1 and glucagon. It is based on oxyntomodulin, a natural gut hormone that acts on both. This site's profile says its half-life is about 5 to 7 days. Its molecular weight is about 4,800 daltons. Other names on the profile are IBI362 and LY3305677. A study in 731 Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes found both mazdutide doses beat dulaglutide 1.5 milligrams on long-term blood sugar (HbA1c), with 3.8 to 5.8 percentage points more weight loss at 28 weeks. GLORY-1 included 610 Chinese adults. At week 32, average weight change was down 10.1% at 4 milligrams and down 12.6% at 6 milligrams, versus up 0.5% on a dummy shot. It was approved in China in June 2025 for obesity and in September 2025 for type 2 diabetes, the first drug of this two-hormone type approved anywhere. It is not FDA approved. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/mazdutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Illegal is internet shorthand. This site's national fields list retatrutide as investigational: not approved in the US, not licensed in the UK, not registered in Australia, and not approved in Canada. Investigational means it is still being tested and is not a legal prescription medicine in those four countries. It is not a criminal label for owning it, and it is not a state law this dataset has filled in. Selling an unapproved product as a drug for people is a different legal question from the investigational field. A research-chemical vial is not a finished medicine under review. TRIUMPH-1 included 2,339 people. As of this site's last review, the company was expected to ask for approval later in 2026. This FAQ does not invent a ban and does not invent a state law. National status: /legal/retatrutide/us.

Open this answer on its own page

By this site's national fields it is investigational, not approved. That is a regulator's status, not a ruling that owning the molecule is a crime. Until the FDA, and the matching agencies in the UK, Australia, and Canada, approve a finished product, retatrutide is not a legal prescription drug in those countries. Sellers offering it are selling an unapproved research chemical. Investigational is the accurate word for a drug still being tested. Illegal is the loose word people use when they mean not approved for use in people. This dataset has no state-by-state map. This FAQ does not invent a criminal code. Full record at /compounds/retatrutide.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's national fields do not show any path to a ban for the approved products. Semaglutide is FDA approved, prescription only, as Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus, with the same licensed prescription status in the UK, Australia, and Canada. SELECT (17,604 adults, 20% fewer major heart events) and STEP 1 (1,961 adults, down 14.9% at 68 weeks) are the record in people on that page, not a move to pull it from the market. A research-chemical vial labeled semaglutide is not those approved pens or pills, and it is not approved for use in people. Crackdowns on compounding and research chemicals are a different track from taking an approved medicine off the market. This FAQ does not invent a future ban. Full record at /compounds/semaglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. IBI362 and LY3305677 are lab codes listed as other names on this site's mazdutide profile. They name the same drug, which switches on the GLP-1 and glucagon receptors, with a molecular weight of about 4,800 daltons. It was approved in China in 2025 for obesity and type 2 diabetes and is not FDA approved. The codes are lab labels, not a second drug and not a US approval. Full record at /compounds/mazdutide.

Open this answer on its own page

No. They are different experimental drugs that happen to hit the same two receptors, GLP-1 and glucagon. Survodutide's profile holds a 387-person obesity study (down 14.9% versus down 2.8%) and liver-disease studies in 293 and 216 adults. It is not approved anywhere this site tracks. Mazdutide's profile holds a 731-person head to head study against dulaglutide and GLORY-1 in 610 adults, and it is approved in China, not by the FDA. Sharing two receptors does not make them the same molecule, the same study, or the same approval. This site does not rank them. Full records at /compounds/survodutide and /compounds/mazdutide.

Open this answer on its own page

AOD-9604 is a changed piece from the end of growth hormone: building blocks 177 to 191, with one extra amino acid, tyrosine, added at the front. It is also written Tyr-hGH177-191. This site's profile says it boosts fat breakdown and blocks fat building in fat cells in animal studies, without real effects on IGF-1 or blood sugar. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 1,815 daltons. Six careful studies in people, summed up on that page, compared it with a dummy pill. They found no effect on IGF-1 or on how the body handles sugar, and no more side effects than the dummy pill. The program did not establish efficacy for weight loss. It is not an approved drug. Being notified as a safe food ingredient (GRAS) is not a weight-loss approval. In animal studies on that page, it lowered body weight and fat in obese mice, and cut weight gain in obese rats without causing insulin resistance. Those animal findings do not transfer into a human fat-loss result the six studies already failed to show. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/aod-9604.

Open this answer on its own page

5-Amino-1MQ is a small molecule, not a peptide. This site's profile says it blocks an enzyme called NNMT (nicotinamide N-methyltransferase), which is involved in how fat cells use energy and in NAD-related pathways. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is 159.2 daltons. This site's review found two studies, neither of them human. It is not FDA approved. In mice, turning off NNMT in fat and liver protected them from obesity on a fattening diet. In mice made obese by diet, blockers from the 5-amino-1MQ family lowered body weight and fat. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/5-amino-1mq.

Open this answer on its own page

Adipotide, also written FTPP, is an experimental two-part peptide. This site's profile says one part latches onto a protein (prohibitin) on the blood vessels that feed fat tissue. The other part damages those cells' power plants (mitochondria), which cuts off blood supply to white fat. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 2,600 daltons. This site's review found two studies, both non-human. It is not FDA approved and has never come into general medical use. In obese rhesus monkeys, it caused 7.4 to 14.7% weight loss in four weeks, with kidney effects that grew with the dose and went away after. The first mouse work used a homing tag (CKGGRAKDC) attached to a cell-killing peptide. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human mechanism. The kidney damage seen in monkeys is why it has not moved forward. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/adipotide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. LY3305677 and IBI362 are lab codes listed as other names on this site's mazdutide profile. They name the same drug, which switches on the GLP-1 and glucagon receptors, with a molecular weight of about 4,800 daltons. It was approved in China in 2025 for obesity and type 2 diabetes and is not FDA approved. GLORY-1 included 610 Chinese adults. The codes are lab labels, not a second drug and not a US approval. Full record at /compounds/mazdutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, chemically. This site's HGH Fragment 176-191 profile says the product sold under that name is the same changed piece of growth hormone as AOD-9604 (Tyr-hGH177-191). The AOD-9604 page has the history of its official studies: six careful studies in people found no effect on IGF-1 or on how the body handles sugar, and did not establish efficacy for weight loss. Sharing the same chain is why the fat-loss claim travels with both names. It is not a second molecule with its own success in people. A research-chemical vial labeled 176-191 is not an approved drug. This site does not rank the names. Full records at /compounds/hgh-fragment-176-191 and /compounds/aod-9604.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. FTPP, short for fat-targeted proapoptotic peptide (a peptide that makes cells feeding fat die off), is the full name listed on this site's adipotide page. It names the same experimental peptide, with a molecular weight of about 2,600 daltons, built to target the blood vessels that feed white fat. This site's review found two studies, both non-human. One found 7.4 to 14.7% weight loss in four weeks in obese rhesus monkeys, with kidney effects that grew with the dose. The letters are a lab description, not a study in people and not an approval. Full record at /compounds/adipotide.

Open this answer on its own page

Liraglutide switches on the GLP-1 receptor. That makes the body release more insulin when blood sugar is high, holds back glucagon, slows how fast the stomach empties, and cuts appetite. The body clears half of it in about 13 hours. Its molecular weight is 3,751.2 daltons. It is FDA approved as Victoza for type 2 diabetes and as Saxenda for long-term weight management. In LEADER, 9,340 people with type 2 diabetes and high heart risk were followed for about 3.8 years (the middle value). Major heart events happened in 13.0% on liraglutide versus 14.9% on a dummy shot, a 13% drop in risk. SCALE enrolled 3,731 adults without diabetes. At 56 weeks, people lost 8.4 kg on average on 3.0 milligrams, versus 2.8 kg on a dummy shot. That it is taken daily is a fact about how fast the body clears it, not a plan this FAQ will write. A research-chemical vial is not Victoza or Saxenda. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/liraglutide.

Open this answer on its own page

Orforglipron is a small molecule you swallow, not a peptide. It switches on the GLP-1 receptor. The body clears half of it in about 29 to 49 hours. Its molecular weight is about 735 daltons. It has been FDA approved as Foundayo since April 1, 2026, for long-term weight management, with a boxed warning about thyroid tumors. ATTAIN-1, a large final-stage study in 3,127 adults, found 11.2% weight loss at 72 weeks on 36 milligrams, versus 2.1% on a dummy pill, counting everyone the way they were assigned. 36% lost 15% or more. An earlier study found 9.4% to 14.7% weight loss at 36 weeks, versus 2.3% on a dummy pill. ACHIEVE-1, in people with early type 2 diabetes, found long-term blood sugar (HbA1c) fell 1.24 to 1.48 points at 40 weeks, versus 0.41 on a dummy pill. Those are results for a labeled medicine, not a research-chemical claim. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/orforglipron.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Foundayo is the brand name for orforglipron, listed in the full name on this site's orforglipron page. They name the same GLP-1 pill, a small molecule with a molecular weight of about 735 daltons, FDA approved on April 1, 2026, for long-term weight management. ATTAIN-1 included 3,127 adults. A research-chemical tablet labeled orforglipron is not that labeled product, and the approval does not cover an unapproved vial. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/orforglipron.

Open this answer on its own page

Tesofensine is a small molecule, not a peptide. This site's profile says it stops the brain from clearing away three chemical messengers: noradrenaline, dopamine, and serotonin. That boosts fullness signals and cuts how much people eat. The body clears half of it in about 8 days. Its molecular weight is 381.9 daltons. It is still experimental and not FDA approved. A mid-stage study in 203 people reported 4.5%, 9.2%, and 10.6% weight loss at 24 weeks, versus 2.0% on a dummy pill. Resting heart rate went up 7.4 beats per minute at 0.5 mg. In April 2013, The Lancet published an Expression of Concern about that study. The paper has not been retracted, and it is still the main result in people on this page, labeled as such. A smaller follow-up found the weight change came mostly from less appetite and eating less, not from a measured fat-burning result. Being sold on a peptide store does not make it a peptide. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/tesofensine.

Open this answer on its own page

Both are sold for healing tendons, ligaments, muscle, and the gut. That is based on a lot of animal research. But the two have very different records in people. BPC-157 has five small studies in people, with fewer than 110 people in total. They include a Croatian study in ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease) and clinic reports. TB-500 has no published study in people at any dose or in any form. The FDA's own 2026 review found no data of any kind on it in people. Neither is FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

For BPC-157, no published study has given it by mouth, or as the shot under the skin most buyers use. The only way it has been given to people in studies is as an enema, in two Croatian studies, and it could not be found in the blood after that. For TB-500, the FDA's 2026 review found no study in people in any form at all. Taking either one by mouth or by shot is untested ground, not a proven plan.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations, and for these two there is little data in people to base one on. BPC-157's studies in people used an enema form, at doses set for ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease), not the shots or pills sold today. TB-500 has no published dosing study in people at all, in any form. The plans passed around online are self-reported and unverified, not drawn from a careful study. Profiles: /compounds/bpc-157 and /compounds/tb-500. Chart: /dosing-guide. Side by side: /compare/bpc-157-vs-tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

Neither has a published study in people with arthritis. BPC-157's animal research covers repair of tendons, ligaments, and joints in general. A mid-stage injury study in people was signing people up as of the FDA's 2026 review. But arthritis has not been tested in people for either one. TB-500 has no study in people of any kind, arthritis or anything else, according to that same FDA review.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not sell peptides or recommend sellers. One thing worth knowing before buying either: the FDA's 2026 review found that some vials sold as TB-500 are actually labeled as full-length thymosin beta-4, a different, bigger molecule. A buyer cannot tell which one is in the vial without a test report (certificate of analysis) that confirms the exact molecular weight. Check the report, not just the label.

Open this answer on its own page

Neither has a published study in people that measured muscle growth. Both are studied and sold for repair and healing, not for building muscle size. The ways they are said to work, growing new blood vessels and helping cells move for BPC-157, and acting on a cell-shape protein (actin) for the TB-500 fragment, are about recovering from injury, not building muscle. Any muscle-building claim for either one goes beyond what their own research has measured.

Open this answer on its own page

No published study has tested these two together, at any dose, in any form, or in any ratio. Plans online that pair them are self-reported, not the result of a careful study, and this site does not turn unverified stories into advice. Each one alone has a thin record in people, which is the more basic fact to know before combining them at all. Side by side at /compare/bpc-157-vs-tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

BPC-157 is a 15 amino acid peptide based on a sequence found in human stomach juice. In people, the FDA's 2026 review counted five small studies with fewer than 110 people in total, including a Croatian study in ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease). It has a very large body of animal research. A 2025 review found 36 studies of injured tendons, ligaments, muscle, bone, gut, liver, and nerves, and 35 of them were animal or lab studies. It is not FDA approved. Full profile at /compounds/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

In most places it is legal to own as a research chemical. But it is not an approved drug and not a legal dietary supplement in the US, where the FDA has flagged it by name. It is banned in Olympic sport under the World Anti-Doping Agency's S0 group, which covers unapproved substances. In April 2026 the FDA took it off its Category 2 compounding list. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted 8 to 6 to allow pharmacies to make it, against the FDA reviewers' own advice. Country pages: /legal/bpc-157/us and /legal/bpc-157/uk. Four-country hub at /legal/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, five small ones as of the FDA's July 2026 review, with fewer than 110 people in total. They are a 53-patient study in ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease), a Croatian early safety study, and three US clinic reports with no comparison group, on knee pain, bladder pain (interstitial cystitis), and giving it through a vein. Two of the five were only published as short conference summaries. No study has run longer than two weeks, or used the shots under the skin or pills most buyers actually use.

Open this answer on its own page

The only data on how the body handles it in people comes from a two-person early study. Blood levels fit with a half-life of under 30 minutes. That is much shorter than the hours to days of effect described in animal research. The FDA's 2026 review said that gap is unexplained, since nobody has found the specific target in the body that the peptide acts on.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 32 sellers this site tracks, BPC-157 has cost from about $2 to $14.07 per milligram, with a middle price around $5.23, in vial sizes from 5 to 200 milligrams. That is the most sellers of any compound in this site's price data. Price alone says nothing about purity. Check for a test report you can verify with the lab. Live board at /prices/bpc-157. Seller grades at /vendors.

Open this answer on its own page

In the US it is not FDA approved for anything, so a normal prescription for it does not exist the way it does for an approved drug. Some compounding pharmacies have made it under the 503A rules. But the FDA took BPC-157 off its Category 2 bulks list in April 2026. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted to recommend it for compounding anyway, against the agency's own reviewers, and that is still not settled.

Open this answer on its own page

The strongest data in people on this is a 53-patient study in ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease). It used an enema form under the Pliva drug code PL 14736. It is one of only five studies in people the FDA counted in its 2026 review. That is real evidence in people. But it used a set enema dose in one bowel disease. It did not test the shots or pills sold today for general gut health.

Open this answer on its own page

TB-500 is the name for a seven amino acid piece of thymosin beta-4, Ac-LKKTETQ. It is not the full 43 amino acid protein it is often mixed up with. The FDA's July 2026 review found no published study giving this piece to a person in any form, and no side-effect reports in its safety database. The study record often quoted for TB-500 actually belongs to full-length thymosin beta-4, a different molecule. Full profile at /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

No, though the names are swapped almost everywhere the product is sold. Thymosin beta-4 is the full 43 amino acid protein, about 4,963 daltons in weight. It has been through early, mid-stage, and late-stage studies in people. TB-500 is a lab-made 7 amino acid piece of it, about 889 to 949 daltons depending on the salt form, with no published study in people at all. A 2012 lab test at Ghent University confirmed that products sold as TB-500 really did contain this shorter piece.

Open this answer on its own page

No. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving TB-500 to a person in any form, and no side-effect reports for it in the FDA's safety database. The first registered study of the piece in people only began signing people up in February 2026. It is a small early study in 80 people with stable hardening of the arteries. Every claim about TB-500's effects in people is currently borrowed from a different molecule, the full-length parent peptide. Profile at /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

Nobody knows. The FDA's 2026 review found no study at all of how the body handles TB-500 in people. So there is no measured half-life, clearance rate, or length of effect in people to report. Claims about how long it lasts are borrowed from animal work on the related full-length parent peptide, thymosin beta-4. Read them as guesses, not measurements.

Open this answer on its own page

It is sold as a research chemical, not an approved drug, and it is not a legal dietary supplement in the US. The FDA took it off its Category 2 compounding list in April 2026. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted to recommend it for compounding anyway, against the agency's own reviewers, who found no data of any kind on the substance in people. It is also banned in Olympic sport.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 30 sellers this site tracks, TB-500 has cost from about $2.50 to $16.50 per milligram, with a middle price around $5.90, in vial sizes from 5 to 100 milligrams. The FDA's 2026 review also warned that some vials labeled TB-500 actually contain full-length thymosin beta-4 instead, a different and bigger molecule. Price alone will not tell you that.

Open this answer on its own page

Size and evidence. Thymosin beta-4 is the complete 43 amino acid natural protein. It has been through early, mid-stage, and late-stage studies in people for wound healing, heart repair, and eye problems. TB-500 is a lab-made 7 amino acid piece of it. In animal studies it copies part of the parent's effect on actin (a protein that shapes cells), but it has no published study in people of its own. Selling one using evidence that belongs to the other is the exact mix-up the FDA's 2026 review flagged.

Open this answer on its own page

The full-length, 43 amino acid natural peptide has been studied in finished early, mid-stage, and late-stage studies in people for wound healing, heart repair after injury, and problems of the cornea (the clear front of the eye) and other eye conditions. It is the parent molecule of the shorter piece sold as TB-500. Its study record belongs to it, not automatically to that piece, which the FDA's 2026 review treated as a separate, largely untested substance.

Open this answer on its own page

GHK-Cu is a small peptide, three amino acids long, that the body makes naturally and that holds copper. It is widely used in skin care for its studied effects on building collagen and renewing skin. It is also researched for wound healing. It is not an approved drug. It is allowed as a cosmetic ingredient in the US, UK, Australia, and Canada. This site's review found that the evidence in people is mostly cosmetic research on the skin, not studies of shots.

Open this answer on its own page

There is a real research basis for its role in building collagen and renewing skin. That is why it is a long-standing cosmetic ingredient, not a fringe one. This site's review found no study in people of GHK-Cu shots. Its evidence leans on skin creams and work in cells in a lab. It is approved for cosmetic use, not as a medical drug, in every country this site tracks.

Open this answer on its own page

This is a real concern with peptides you swallow. Digestion breaks down most peptides before something like GHK-Cu could be absorbed whole. That is why its research and cosmetic use is on the skin, not swallowed. No study in people in this site's review has tested whether a GHK-Cu capsule is absorbed or does anything. So a capsule rests on a different, unproven idea than the skin products that have real research behind them.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 35 sellers this site tracks, GHK-Cu is by far the cheapest compound in this site's price data. It runs from about $0.12 to $1.70 per milligram, with a middle price around $0.58, in vial sizes from 50 to 1,000 milligrams. That reflects that it is widely made as a cosmetic ingredient, and that vials for skin use are usually much bigger than vials of injected research peptides.

Open this answer on its own page

KPV is a small peptide, three amino acids long, that calms inflammation. It is a piece of alpha-MSH, a natural hormone. It has mostly been studied in cells in a lab and in animals, for gut inflammation and skin problems. This site's review found no published study in people. In April 2026 the FDA took it off its Category 2 compounding list. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted 8 to 6 to recommend it for compounding, against the FDA reviewers' own view.

Open this answer on its own page

Larazotide is an experimental peptide built to tighten the gut lining in celiac disease. It was studied in people who keep reacting to gluten even on a strict gluten-free diet. It reached a large final-stage study with 342 people, but the company behind it ended the program without publishing a result that met its main goal. It is still unapproved and is not being developed for that use now.

Open this answer on its own page

As a freeze-dried powder, BPC-157 follows the same storage rule as other freeze-dried peptides: cold, dark, and dry. Use the fridge for shorter periods and the freezer for longer storage. Once mixed, this site's general advice applies: in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, with roughly a 28 day window to use it, which is how peptide liquids generally behave.

Open this answer on its own page

It has been a cosmetic ingredient for a long time and is allowed in the US, UK, Australia, and Canada. So its use on the skin has a long safety history. This site's review found no study in people of GHK-Cu shots. So there is less direct safety data in people for shots than for its long-standing use on the skin.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found no published study in people of BPC-157 for back pain. Its five small studies in people cover safety, ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease), and reports with no comparison group on knee pain, bladder pain, and giving it through a vein. None looked at back pain. Its animal research on healing tendons, ligaments, and connective tissue is the reasoning behind this use. It is not a recorded result in people.

Open this answer on its own page

No study in this site's review has linked GHK-Cu on the skin to cancer. It is allowed as a cosmetic ingredient in the US, UK, Australia, and Canada, which reflects a known safety record for that use. Copper does complicated things in the body. But this site's review found no study of GHK-Cu in people that reported on cancer.

Open this answer on its own page

The World Anti-Doping Agency bans it under a general rule that covers substances that could boost performance or help recovery and are not named elsewhere. BPC-157 falls under the same broad group. That is a sports rule, separate from FDA drug approval. TB-500 is banned in competition even though, unlike many banned substances, the FDA's own 2026 review found no published study of it in people at all.

Open this answer on its own page

Nobody knows. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study of how the body handles TB-500 in people. So there is no measured clearance time or half-life in people to quote. Any time claimed online is borrowed from the unrelated full-length parent peptide, thymosin beta-4. It was not measured for the piece sold as TB-500.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, GHK-Cu liquid is normally blue. The copper held by the peptide soaks up light in a way that makes that color. That is a normal, expected trait of the compound, not a sign of germs or breakdown. A liquid that is not blue, at a strength where blue is expected, would be the thing to question.

Open this answer on its own page

It is made by chemistry in a lab. The 15 amino acid chain is built one link at a time on a solid bead. That is the standard way to make peptides in large amounts, instead of taking them from a living source. It is the same basic method used for nearly every research peptide, from BPC-157 to semaglutide. But the equipment, quality checks, and purity vary a lot from maker to maker.

Open this answer on its own page

It is researched for building collagen and renewing skin, which is linked to skin firmness. It is a long-standing, approved cosmetic ingredient on that basis. This site's review found no study in people, of shots or creams, that measured loose or saggy skin. So this is a reasonable stretch of its research, not a directly measured result.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's BPC-157 studies do not measure cancer. The FDA's 2026 review counted five studies in people with fewer than 110 people in total: a 53-patient ulcerative colitis study using an enema, a Croatian early safety study using an enema, and three clinic reports with no comparison group. No published study has given it for longer than two weeks. Mentions of cancer supportive care for other peptides are not a finding that BPC-157 causes cancer. This FAQ does not invent a cancer rate from that short, thin record. Full record at /compounds/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's BPC-157 studies do not report nausea as a counted side effect. The early enema study in 32 healthy volunteers, as described in the FDA's 2026 review, reported headache and gas, and those happened about as often on a dummy enema. The two-person pilot, given through a vein, reported no side effects. The 53-patient ulcerative colitis study counted people who dropped out because their colitis got worse, not a nausea count. Having no counted nausea rate does not prove nobody feels sick. It proves that this FAQ cannot publish one. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain. Full record at /compounds/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's TB-500 studies do not measure cancer. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving the piece to a person in any form, and no reports in the FDA's side-effect database (FAERS) through March 26, 2025. The study record usually quoted for it belongs to the full 43-amino-acid parent peptide, thymosin beta-4, which is a different molecule. This FAQ does not invent a cancer rate from a record in people that is empty. Full record at /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's GHK-Cu studies do not measure copper toxicity. A 2015 review of cosmetic studies in people described firmer skin. The rest is lab and animal work: skin cells making collagen in a dish, and wound healing in rats. GHK-Cu is allowed as a cosmetic ingredient in the US, UK, Australia, and Canada, and it is not an approved drug. Shots of it are far less studied. Being listed as a cosmetic is not a counted copper-toxicity rate for a research-chemical shot. This FAQ does not invent one. Full record at /compounds/ghk-cu.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's BPC-157 studies do not report headache as a counted result. The FDA's 2026 review counted five studies in people with fewer than 110 people in total, and none was built to study headache. No serious side effects were reported in those studies. But they had few people, gave it for two weeks at most, and said little about how safety was checked. The FDA has three side-effect reports about BPC-157 shots: redness and swelling where it was injected, an emergency room visit for shortness of breath, and darkened skin and gums. Headache is not among them. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's BPC-157 studies do not report diarrhea as a counted side effect. The record in people is five small studies, with fewer than 110 people. That includes a 53-patient study in ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease), which measured how active the disease was, not how often the peptide caused diarrhea. The FDA's three side-effect reports name reactions where it was injected, shortness of breath, and darkened skin, not diarrhea. Having no counted rate does not prove nobody's gut is affected. It proves that this FAQ cannot publish one. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect rate the studies do not contain.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's TB-500 studies do not measure hair loss. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving the piece to a person in any form, and no reports in the FDA's side-effect database (FAERS) through March 26, 2025. Nobody counted hair because nobody ran a study that gave it to people. User reports are counted separately and are not a study rate. This FAQ does not invent a side-effect percentage the studies do not contain.

Open this answer on its own page

KPV is the amino-acid chain lysine-proline-valine, the last three building blocks of the hormone alpha-MSH. This site's KPV profile lists that chemical name, a molecular weight of 342.4 daltons, and says it gets into cells and turns down NF-kB, an inflammation switch. The letters are short for the chain. They are not a brand and not a result in people for gut healing. Evidence in people on this site is limited. The studies cited are in mice with colitis and in cells in a lab, plus a July 2026 advisory vote on compounding. The letters alone do not mean a vial has been tested in people.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's GHK-Cu profile lists the full name Copper Tripeptide-1 (GHK-Cu). GHK is the chain glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine. Cu stands for the copper. A 1988 paper on skin cells cited on that page spells the complex as glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine-Cu2+. The profile lists molecular weights of 340.38 daltons for the peptide alone and 402.92 daltons with the copper. Copper peptide is listed as another name. The full name is a chemical label. It is not an approval, and it does not mean a shot has been tested the way a cream has.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's BPC-157 profile says there is no receptor or molecular target identified in people. The FDA's 2026 review gave that missing target as one reason it could not judge whether the claimed effects make biological sense. The work in people on this site that bears on how it works is small. After an enema dose, the peptide could not be found in the blood. A two-person early study fit with a half-life in the blood of under 30 minutes. The FDA counted five studies in people with fewer than 110 people in total, none using the shots under the skin or pills most buyers use. Animal research describes new blood vessel growth, nitric oxide signals, and more growth hormone receptors in tendon cells. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human healing mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a target. Full record at /compounds/bpc-157.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's TB-500 profile defines it as a piece of thymosin beta-4, building blocks 17 to 23, with an acetyl group on the front: Ac-LKKTETQ. The idea is that the LKKTET part grabs single units of actin (a protein that shapes cells), the way the parent peptide does. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving this fragment to a person in any form, no data on how the body handles it in people, and no reports in the FDA's side-effect database (FAERS) through March 26, 2025. The review also notes that the wound-healing work was done mostly with a version without the acetyl group, or with the full parent peptide. Those results cannot be carried straight over to the piece sold as TB-500. The first registered study of the piece, NCT07487363, is signing people up. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism from a parent peptide. Full record at /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

GHK-Cu is a three-amino-acid peptide that holds copper. This site's profile lists the chemical name Copper Tripeptide-1, with molecular weights of 340.38 daltons for the peptide alone and 402.92 daltons with the copper. Reviews describe firmer skin in cosmetic studies in people. A 1988 paper cited on that page found it made skin cells in a dish build more collagen, starting at tiny amounts and peaking at 1 nM. GHK-Cu is allowed as a cosmetic ingredient and is not an approved drug. Shots of it are far less studied. In rats, repeated shots into wound chambers increased wound tissue, collagen, and other repair material. A result in a dish or on the skin is not a counted result for an injected vial. This FAQ does not invent an injectable mechanism. Full record at /compounds/ghk-cu.

Open this answer on its own page

Neither has a published study in people that measured weight or fat. BPC-157's five small studies in people, with fewer than 110 people, cover ulcerative colitis, knee pain, bladder pain, and giving it through a vein, not body shape. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving TB-500 to a person in any form. Selling them for tissue repair is not a weight-loss finding. This FAQ does not invent a fat-loss rate from a healing claim. Full records at /compounds/bpc-157 and /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

This site cannot publish a safety rate in people. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving the fragment to a person in any form, and no reports in the FDA's side-effect database (FAERS) through March 26, 2025. US legal status: not approved, research use only. UK: not licensed. Australia: banned in sport (WADA) and not approved. Canada: not approved. User reports on the TB-500 profile mention feeling sluggish or flu-like after a first large dose. Those reports are counted separately and are not a study rate. The first registered study, NCT07487363, is still signing people up. Having no counted safety table is the honest answer. It does not mean the fragment is harmless. Full record at /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

KPV is the last three building blocks of alpha-MSH, the chain lysine-proline-valine. This site's profile says it gets into cells and turns down NF-kB, a switch that drives inflammation. Its molecular weight is 342.4 daltons. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). This site's review found no published human trial. The FDA took it off its Category 2 compounding list in April 2026. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted 8 to 6 to recommend it for compounding, against the reviewers. That vote is advice only and is not an approval. The studies cited are in mice with colitis and in cells in a lab. In a dish, tiny amounts of KPV turned down two inflammation signals (NF-kappaB and MAP kinase). In mice, KPV by mouth reduced chemically caused colitis (DSS and TNBS), working through a gut carrier called PepT1. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human gut-healing mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/kpv.

Open this answer on its own page

No. KPV is a three-amino-acid piece of alpha-MSH, not the full hormone. This site's KPV profile lists a molecular weight of 342.4 daltons. It says KPV keeps much of alpha-MSH's anti-inflammation effect without causing tanning. Alpha-MSH itself is the parent hormone. It also drives skin color through MC1R, the route melanotan products use. Coming from the same parent does not make it the same molecule, does not give a tan, and is not a study in people. This site's KPV review found no published study in people. Full record at /compounds/kpv.

Open this answer on its own page

Larazotide acetate, also listed as AT-1001, is a peptide you swallow. This site's profile says it blocks zonulin, a protein that loosens the gut lining. The goal is to tighten the seals between gut cells and keep bits of gluten from getting through. It is listed as short-acting, and it works inside the gut. Its molecular weight is about 732 daltons. The final-stage study (307 people signed up) was terminated by the company, with no published result on whether it worked. A mid-stage study in 342 adults found only the 0.5 mg dose met its main goal for symptoms. Higher doses did not. In 184 people with celiac disease who were given gluten on purpose, 1 mg cut gluten symptoms and dulled the rise in celiac antibodies (anti-tTG). But a test of gut leakiness (the LAMA ratio) came out the same as the dummy pill. So the gut-lining effect it was built for was not shown there. It is not approved. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/larazotide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. AT-1001 is the lab code listed as another name on this site's larazotide profile. It names the same peptide that blocks zonulin, with a molecular weight of about 732 daltons, studied for celiac symptoms that do not go away. The final-stage program was stopped without a published main result. The code is a lab label, not a second drug and not an approval. Full record at /compounds/larazotide.

Open this answer on its own page

LL-37 is the 37-building-block active form of cathelicidin, the only one of its kind people make. This site's profile says it breaks open the outer walls of germs and adjusts immune cells, wound repair, and inflammation. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is 4,493.3 daltons. The larger mid-stage study, in 148 people with leg ulcers, found no real improvement over a dummy treatment across everyone. A benefit showed up only when researchers looked back at a subgroup with large wounds, after the fact. An earlier first-in-people study, in 34 people with hard-to-heal leg ulcers from poor vein blood flow, found LL-37 on the skin at 0.5 mg/mL healed wounds about sixfold faster than a dummy treatment. The early sixfold result did not hold up. Reviews on that page describe it as a double-edged sword: it fights infection, and it is also tied to some inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. It is a research peptide, not an approved treatment. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/ll-37.

Open this answer on its own page

ARA-290, also called cibinetide, is an 11-amino-acid peptide taken from the tissue-protecting part of erythropoietin (EPO, a kidney hormone). This site's profile says it switches on a repair receptor without making more red blood cells. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 1,257 daltons. The largest study, a mid-stage study in 64 people, found 4 mg a day clearly grew the area of small nerve fibers in the cornea (the clear front of the eye) compared with a dummy treatment. But pain got better in every group, so the pain effect could not be told apart from the dummy treatment. A 28-day study of shots under the skin, compared with a dummy shot, reported better nerve-pain symptoms and more small nerve fibers in the cornea. A 4-week pilot in 22 people with sarcoidosis nerve damage, given through a vein, reported better symptom scores and better pain and physical function on a quality-of-life survey. It is still experimental and not FDA approved. In animal models of stroke, kidney injury, and nerve injury, an 11-amino-acid piece of EPO protected tissue and did not make more red blood cells. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted general-repair result. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/ara-290.

Open this answer on its own page

Cathelicidin is the family name listed as another name on this site's LL-37 profile. LL-37 is the 37-building-block active peptide from the only human cathelicidin, with a molecular weight of 4,493.3 daltons. The names are not two drugs. The record in people on that page is a 148-person mid-stage study that missed its healing goal across everyone, and a 34-person pilot on skin ulcers. Sharing a family name is not an approval. Full record at /compounds/ll-37.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Cibinetide is the generic name listed as another name on this site's ARA-290 profile. It names the same 11-amino-acid peptide taken from EPO, with a molecular weight of about 1,257 daltons, studied for small nerve fiber damage in sarcoidosis. The mid-stage study in 64 people moved a measure of nerves in the cornea, but pain relief could not be told apart from the dummy treatment. The names are two labels for one molecule, not a second drug and not an FDA approval. Full record at /compounds/ara-290.

Open this answer on its own page

No. This site's US legal field is not approved, research use only. UK: not licensed. Australia: not approved, banned in sport (WADA). Canada: not approved. The record in people on that page is a 148-person mid-stage study that missed its goal and a 34-person pilot on skin ulcers, not an approval file. Sub-national detail is not in this dataset. This FAQ does not invent a US approval. Full record at /compounds/ll-37.

Open this answer on its own page

Creatine here means creatine monohydrate, also listed as CrM. This site's profile says it fills up muscle stores of phosphocreatine, which quickly recharges the muscle's energy (ATP) during hard efforts lasting a few seconds. That extra work capacity over months is the likely source of most of the strength gain, not a direct muscle-building effect. Its molecular weight is 131.1 daltons. The body clears half of it from the blood in about 3 hours. Muscle stores run down over roughly 4 to 6 weeks after stopping. It is sold as a dietary supplement and is not an approved drug. Strength and short, hard work capacity are the claims that hold up across decades of studies. When muscle growth is measured directly with scans, instead of whole-body measures, the pooled effect is small and could be zero. Thinking: a 123-person study found no benefit, and more side effects on creatine than on a dummy pill. The European Food Safety Authority rejected a maker's claim that it helps thinking. Hair: the 2009 hormone study in 20 rugby players never measured hair. A 2025 study in 45 men who lift weights, 38 of whom finished, found no difference between groups in male hormones or hair. Kidneys: a 12-week study in adults who lift weights and eat at least 1.2 g/kg/day of protein found kidney filtering, measured by a top-standard tracer test, was the same as on a dummy pill. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/creatine.

Open this answer on its own page

Glutathione is a peptide made of three amino acids (glutamate, cysteine, and glycine). It is the body's main antioxidant inside cells, also listed as GSH and reduced glutathione. This site's profile says it mops up harmful oxygen molecules directly and through an enzyme, recycles other antioxidants, and helps the body tag toxins for removal. It is listed as lasting minutes in the blood. Its molecular weight is 307.3 daltons. Glutathione pills are sold as a supplement. Injected forms are not an FDA-approved drug. A six-month study in 54 adults found glutathione pills raised glutathione in the blood and red blood cells by 17 to 35%, and improved its balance of used to fresh forms. Levels went back to where they started after people stopped. That study did not measure any health change a person would notice. A one-month pilot in 12 adults, with no comparison group, found a liposomal form raised blood glutathione by up to 40%. The FDA linked at least 30 side effects, including fever, chills, shock-like symptoms, and hospital stays, to compounded IV glutathione made from supplement-grade material that was contaminated with bacterial toxins. A rise in blood levels is not a skin-lightening or detox result. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/glutathione.

Open this answer on its own page

Both are lab-made peptides developed in Russia and approved there for certain uses, but they aim at different things. Semax, a piece of the hormone ACTH, is approved for stroke and thinking problems. It is studied for protecting nerve cells through BDNF (a protein that helps brain cells grow) and for focus. Selank, a lab-made copy of tuftsin (a small immune peptide), is studied for easing anxiety and stress without the drowsiness typical of sedatives (benzodiazepines). Neither is FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

Semax is a piece of the hormone ACTH. It is thought to work by raising BDNF, a protein that helps brain cells grow and survive, which may protect nerve cells and help thinking. Selank is a lab-made copy of tuftsin, a small immune peptide. It is studied for easing anxiety, and for mild effects on thinking, through a different route tied to stress hormones. Both are given as a nose spray. The body clears them in minutes, so they would not survive digestion or last long in the body another way.

Open this answer on its own page

No. They are different molecules from the same Russian research school. They are often talked about together because both are nose-spray peptides that the body clears quickly, and neither is FDA approved. Semax comes from ACTH and is researched mainly for thinking, focus, and stroke recovery. Selank comes from tuftsin and is researched mainly for anxiety and stress. They are sometimes used together, but no study has tested that combination.

Open this answer on its own page

Selank is a lab-made peptide developed in Russia as a copy of tuftsin, a small immune peptide the body makes. It is studied for easing anxiety without the drowsiness typical of sedatives like benzodiazepines. It is approved in Russia but not FDA approved, and not approved in the UK, Australia, or Canada. This site's review found one study in people for it.

Open this answer on its own page

The evidence is limited. This site's review found one study in people for selank. That is too little to draw a firm conclusion from, even though it is approved and used in Russia. The claim that it eases anxiety without drowsiness is real and specific, and worth testing more. But it has not been proven by the kind of large, independent, careful study that would settle the question.

Open this answer on its own page

There is very little published data in people to answer that. This site's review found one study in people for selank. It is approved in Russia, which suggests some review by regulators there. But it is not FDA approved, not licensed in the UK, and not approved in Australia or Canada. So the kind of safety record most people in those countries would rely on has not been built for it by independent checks.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations. Selank is usually studied and used as a nose spray, because the body clears it in minutes. That is also why it would not survive being swallowed. Beyond how it is given, this site's review found no large published study in people that tested different doses, so there is no specific number to point to.

Open this answer on its own page

Its main studied effect is easing anxiety. Some of that stress relief could, in theory, help sleep indirectly. But this site's review found only one study in people for selank in total, and none of it measured sleep. Any sleep benefit is, for now, a guess based on its anxiety effect, not a measured result.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 31 sellers this site tracks, selank has cost from about $1.75 to $10.20 per milligram, with a middle price around $4.05, in vial sizes from 5 to 100 milligrams. It is most often sold and used as a nose spray, not a shot. Check the specific product listing.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's storage advice for mixed peptides generally applies. Once mixed into a liquid, keeping it in the fridge at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius helps it stay stable. Selank only lasts minutes in the body once taken, but that is a separate fact from how long the product stays stable in the bottle. Check the maker's storage instructions for the exact product you have.

Open this answer on its own page

Semax, a lab-made piece of the hormone ACTH, is approved in Russia and Ukraine for stroke and thinking problems. It is also studied for protecting nerve cells through BDNF (a protein that helps brain cells grow), for focus, and for a mild boost to thinking. It is not FDA approved. In July 2026 a US advisory panel voted to recommend it for use by compounding pharmacies, but that vote is advice only and the FDA has not finished its rules.

Open this answer on its own page

It is the nose-spray form semax is usually sold and studied in. The body clears the peptide in minutes, so it would not survive being swallowed or last long given another way. A nose spray lets it reach the blood, and maybe the brain, more directly than a pill would. This site's review found one study in people for semax, covering 110 people.

Open this answer on its own page

It has not gone through the FDA's drug approval process at all. That process needs the maker to run the specific studies the FDA reviews. Semax is approved in Russia and Ukraine based on research done there, but that approval does not carry over to the US. A US advisory panel did vote in July 2026 to recommend it for use by compounding pharmacies, but the FDA has not finalized any rule based on that vote.

Open this answer on its own page

It is studied for this. Its approved uses in Russia and Ukraine include thinking problems. It is thought to work by raising BDNF, a protein that helps brain cells grow and survive. This site's review found one study in people for semax, covering 110 people. That shows the idea is being studied seriously, but it is thinner evidence than large, careful studies repeated by many groups would give.

Open this answer on its own page

DSIP, short for delta sleep inducing peptide, is a peptide the body makes. It is studied for sleep, stress, and pain. But this site's review found no published human trial for it, and the evidence that exists in people is limited and mixed. It is not FDA approved. In July 2026, the same US advisory panel that recommended several other peptides for compounding voted against recommending DSIP.

Open this answer on its own page

The evidence is thin and mixed. It is not a confirmed effect. This site's review found no published study in people for DSIP, even though its name and marketing are built around the idea that it brings on sleep. In July 2026 an FDA advisory panel reviewed it with other peptides and voted against recommending it for compounding. That suggests the reviewers did not see a strong case in the record either.

Open this answer on its own page

Pinealon is a short lab-made peptide 'bioregulator' from the Khavinson research group. It is studied for protecting the brain and for thinking, as part of the same Russian school that produced epitalon and thymalin. This site's review found one study in people for it. It is not FDA approved and has not been reviewed by regulators in the UK, Australia, or Canada.

Open this answer on its own page

Cerebrolysin is a set mix of small brain proteins (neuropeptides) taken from pig brain. Doctors in more than 30 countries use it for stroke, dementia, and brain injury. This site's review found one study in people covering 1,773 people. It is not FDA approved, and it is not licensed in the UK, Australia, or Canada, even though it is widely used elsewhere.

Open this answer on its own page

Its studied role is about thinking, protecting nerve cells, and focus, through BDNF (a protein that helps brain cells grow). It is not a stimulant-type energy boost. This site's review found one study in people for semax, covering 110 people, and it did not measure energy or a stimulant effect.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give advice on when to take it. Selank's studied effect is easing anxiety, not making you sleepy. This site's review found one study in people for it, and that does not set any timing plan. Any timing choice should follow the product's own instructions or a health care provider's direction.

Open this answer on its own page

ADHD is not one of semax's approved uses in Russia or Ukraine, which cover stroke and thinking problems more broadly. This site's review found one study in people for semax, covering 110 people, and it did not study ADHD. Its link to BDNF (a protein that helps brain cells grow) is sometimes stretched online into claims about attention and focus. That is a guess, not a study result for ADHD.

Open this answer on its own page

Easing anxiety is its main studied and marketed use. The claimed advantage over drugs like benzodiazepines (sedatives such as those used for anxiety) is that it eases anxiety without making you drowsy. But this site's review found only one study in people for selank. That is real but limited evidence, too thin for a firm, general conclusion, even though the claim itself is specific.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not describe how it feels. Our review found only one study in people for selank, and we cannot check personal reports of how it feels. Its studied effect is easing anxiety without the drowsiness typical of benzodiazepine sedatives. That is a specific claim about what the drug does. It is not a recorded description of what using it feels like.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's Semax studies do not report anxiety as a counted side effect. The finding in people is a series of 110 stroke patients, where everyone knew what they were getting. Semax courses raised BDNF (a protein that helps brain cells grow) in the blood and went along with faster recovery on a daily-living score (the Barthel index). There was no dummy-treatment group, and it was not a count of what causes anxiety. The animal studies measured BDNF in the brains of rats. Selank, a different peptide, is the one studied for anxiety. This FAQ does not invent an anxiety rate from Semax silence, and it does not move Selank's anxiety study onto Semax. Full record at /compounds/semax.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's Selank studies do not report drowsiness as a counted side effect. The one study in people put 62 patients with anxiety disorder or nervous exhaustion (neurasthenia) on either Selank or medazepam, an older anti-anxiety drug. Both eased anxiety about equally. Selank also seemed to fight tiredness and gave a mild lift. There was no dummy-pill group. Those results lean away from drowsiness, but that is not the same as a published drowsiness rate of zero. This FAQ does not invent a drowsiness percentage. Full record at /compounds/selank.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's selank studies do not measure hair loss. The one study in people put 62 patients with anxiety disorder or nervous exhaustion (neurasthenia) on either Selank or medazepam, an older anti-anxiety drug. It compared how well they eased anxiety and did not report on hair. The profile says the body clears it quickly, in minutes. Hair loss is not a counted study result here, and this FAQ does not invent one.

Open this answer on its own page

DSIP stands for Delta Sleep-Inducing Peptide, the full name on this site's profile. It is a nine-amino-acid peptide with a molecular weight of 848.9 daltons. The name comes from the sleep idea that came with its first discovery. It is not a proven sleep result. Studies in people on this site are limited and mixed. A 2006 review cited on the page says the link to sleep was never pinned down. At the July 2026 Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee meeting, DSIP (emideltide) was the peptide the panel voted not to recommend for compounding. The name is a lab label, not an approval.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's DSIP profile says the exact receptor targets remain unclear. It is a nine-amino-acid peptide with a molecular weight of 848.9 daltons, and the body clears it quickly, in minutes. A 2006 review cited on that page says the link to sleep was never pinned down: nobody found a gene, a parent molecule, or a receptor for it. So the sleep idea is still weak. This site's review found no published study in people. In July 2026 the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee voted against recommending DSIP, also called emideltide, for compounding. Having sleep in the name is not a counted sleep effect. This FAQ does not invent a receptor. Full record at /compounds/dsip.

Open this answer on its own page

Pinealon is a lab-made peptide of three amino acids, Glu-Asp-Arg, from the Khavinson 'bioregulator' school. This site's profile suggests it turns genes up or down in nerve cells and protects them from damage by harmful oxygen molecules and low oxygen. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is 418.4 daltons. The one study in people on that page is a 32-patient Russian study of Pinealon and Vesugen that looked at markers of biological age. No outside group has repeated it. Markers are not a health outcome, and 32 people is a thin base. It is not FDA approved. In cells in a lab, Glu-Asp-Arg cut down harmful oxygen molecules and cell death in nerve cells. In rats, it improved thinking in the young of mothers with high homocysteine (an amino acid linked to brain harm). Those findings do not transfer into a counted human brain-protection mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/pinealon.

Open this answer on its own page

Cerebrolysin is a set mix of small brain proteins and amino acids taken from pig brain. This site's profile says parts of the mix copy natural brain growth signals like BDNF and NGF, and switch on nerve-protecting signals. How long it lasts varies by part of the mix. There is no single molecular weight. A 2023 Cochrane review pooled seven studies in 1,773 people with stroke caused by a blocked artery. It found no convincing benefit on death or on how well people could function, and rated its confidence in that as low. CASTA, a study of 1,070 patients, found no real difference from a dummy treatment on its main measure. It is used in more than 30 countries and is not FDA approved, not licensed in the UK, and not approved in Australia or Canada. A mix plus a brain-growth-signal story is not a counted stroke benefit in those two reviews. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/cerebrolysin.

Open this answer on its own page

Selank is a lab-made copy of tuftsin, a small immune peptide. This site's profile says it acts on the brain's calming (GABA) and mood chemical systems, and affects how natural painkillers (enkephalins) break down and how much BDNF is made. Together, that eases anxiety. The body clears it quickly, in minutes, and it is used as a nose spray. Its molecular weight is 751.9 daltons. The one study in people on that page is a 62-patient Russian study in people with anxiety disorder or nervous exhaustion (neurasthenia). 30 got Selank and 32 got medazepam, an older anti-anxiety drug. Both eased anxiety about equally, and Selank also seemed to fight tiredness and give a mild lift. There was no dummy-pill group. It is approved in Russia and not FDA approved. In rats and mice, animal studies on that page report anti-stress effects of Selank and related tuftsin-family peptides. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted Western replication. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/selank.

Open this answer on its own page

Semax is a lab-made copy of a piece of the hormone ACTH (building blocks 4 to 10). This site's profile says it raises BDNF and NGF, two proteins that help brain cells grow, and acts on the brain's melanocortin and dopamine systems. The body clears it quickly, in minutes, and it is used as a nose spray. Its molecular weight is 813.9 daltons. The one study in people on that page is a Russian 110-person series of stroke patients, where everyone knew what they were getting. Semax courses raised BDNF in the blood and went along with faster recovery on a daily-living score (the Barthel index). There was no dummy-treatment group to compare against. It is approved in Russia and Ukraine and not FDA approved. In July 2026 the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee voted to recommend it for compounding, against the advice of FDA scientists. The vote is advice only. In rats, one dose of 50 micrograms per kilogram raised BDNF in the brain's memory center by 1.4-fold. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted Western cognitive trial. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/semax.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Emideltide is the generic name used for DSIP at the July 2026 Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee meeting, where the panel voted not to recommend it for compounding. This site's DSIP profile lists the full name Delta Sleep-Inducing Peptide, a nine-amino-acid peptide with a molecular weight of 848.9 daltons. Its exact targets in the body are still unclear. A 2006 review cited on that page says the link to sleep was never pinned down. The names are aliases of one molecule, not a proven sleep result and not an approval. Full record at /compounds/dsip.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's US legal field for cerebrolysin is not approved. UK: not licensed. Australia: not approved. Canada: not approved. The profile notes it is used by doctors in more than 30 other countries for stroke, dementia, and brain injury. That use abroad is not an FDA approval. The record in people on that page is a 2023 Cochrane review of 1,773 people and the 1,070-patient CASTA study, not a US approval. Sub-national detail is not in this dataset. This FAQ does not invent a state statute. Full record at /compounds/cerebrolysin.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. TP-7 is another name listed on this site's selank profile, along with NA-Selank and N-acetyl selank. It names the same lab-made copy of tuftsin, with a molecular weight of 751.9 daltons. The one study in people is the 62-patient anxiety comparison with medazepam. The code is a lab label, not a second drug and not an FDA approval. Full record at /compounds/selank.

Open this answer on its own page

Cortexin is a mix of small peptides taken from the brain surface (cortex) of cattle. This site's profile suggests it acts like a brain growth signal and protects nerve cells. How long it lasts varies, because it is a mix. There is no single molecular weight. The one study in people on that page is a Russian study of repeated low-dose Cortexin courses in stroke patients. It was not independently replicated outside that research school. Doctors use it in Russia and nearby countries. It is not FDA approved. A 2021 study in rats and mice found Cortexin protected nerve cells in short-term and long-term models of low blood flow to the brain, compared with Cerebrolysin and Actovegin. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted Western stroke result. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/cortexin.

Open this answer on its own page

Davunetide is an eight-amino-acid piece of a brain-protecting protein called ADNP. This site's profile says it steadies the inner support tubes (microtubules) and tau-linked framework inside nerve cells. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 827 daltons. Other names are NAP and AL-108. A 52-week study in 313 people with progressive supranuclear palsy (a rare brain disease) found people on davunetide did no better than people on a dummy treatment, on the disease rating scale or on a daily-living scale. A schizophrenia study found it was well tolerated. It did not really change scores on a thinking test (MCCB). There was a small hint of better everyday functioning (UPSA), but that was not the main question. It is not approved. A failed key study is the record in people, not a thinking result this FAQ will invent. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/davunetide.

Open this answer on its own page

Noopept, also called omberacetam, is a small two-amino-acid compound. This site's profile says it raises BDNF and NGF, two proteins that help brain cells grow, and adjusts glutamate, a brain signal chemical. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is 318.4 daltons. Russian drug research describes it as working at doses roughly 1,000-fold lower than piracetam, an older brain drug. The study in people is a Russian study in people with mild memory problems, where everyone knew what they were taking. It reported brain-wave (EEG) changes typical of brain-boosting drugs. There was no dummy-pill group, and it did not measure memory, attention, or daily life. It is approved in Russia and not FDA approved. In rats, one dose and 28 days of use both raised NGF and BDNF signals in the brain's memory center, and the rats did not get used to it. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted Western cognitive trial. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/noopept.

Open this answer on its own page

Dihexa is a small peptide made from angiotensin IV, a piece of a blood pressure hormone. This site's profile says it boosts a growth signal (HGF) and its receptor (c-Met) to help brain cells form new connections. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 564 daltons. Another name is PNB-0408. This site's review found no human clinical trials. The 2013 paper that introduced dihexa carries an Expression of Concern from the journal. Three related papers from the same lab on how it works are marked retracted on PubMed. It is not FDA approved. In rats, the 2013 paper reported that it reversed memory loss caused by a drug (scopolamine) and grew more connections in the brain's memory center. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human cognitive result, and the paper it all rests on is under journal concern. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/dihexa.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. NAP and AL-108 are aliases listed on this site's davunetide profile. They name the same eight-amino-acid piece of ADNP, with a molecular weight of about 827 daltons. The study in 313 people with progressive supranuclear palsy missed both of its main goals. The letters are a lab short name, not a second drug and not an approval. Full record at /compounds/davunetide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. AL-108 is a lab code listed as another name on this site's davunetide profile, along with NAP. It names the same eight-amino-acid peptide that steadies nerve cell support tubes, used in the 313-person study in progressive supranuclear palsy and the schizophrenia thinking study. The code is a lab label, not a second drug and not an approval. Full record at /compounds/davunetide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Omberacetam is the generic name listed as another name on this site's noopept profile, along with GVS-111. It names the same small two-amino-acid compound, with a molecular weight of 318.4 daltons. The study in people is an open EEG study, where everyone knew what they were taking, with no dummy-pill group. It is not a careful test of thinking. The names are aliases of one molecule, not a US approval. Full record at /compounds/noopept.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. GVS-111 is a lab code listed as another name on this site's noopept profile, along with omberacetam. It names the same small two-amino-acid compound, with a molecular weight of 318.4 daltons. The code is a lab label, not a second drug and not an FDA approval. Full record at /compounds/noopept.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. PNB-0408 is the lab code listed as another name on this site's dihexa profile. It names the same compound made from angiotensin IV, with a molecular weight of about 564 daltons. This site's review found no study in people, and the 2013 paper that introduced it carries an Expression of Concern. The code is a lab label, not a counted thinking result and not an approval. Full record at /compounds/dihexa.

Open this answer on its own page

Thymosin Alpha-1 is a peptide that adjusts the immune system. It is approved in more than 30 countries as Zadaxin, mainly for hepatitis, and is used as an add-on in some infection and cancer support care. In the US it has orphan drug status (for rare diseases), but it is not fully FDA approved there. This site's review found two studies in people for it, covering more than 1,100 people.

Open this answer on its own page

Not fully. In the US it has orphan drug status, which helps a drug get developed for a rare disease. That is not the same as full approval. It is not licensed in the UK, Australia, or Canada. It is approved as Zadaxin in more than 30 other countries, mainly for hepatitis. That is why its status looks mixed depending on where you look.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found two studies in people for thymosin alpha 1, and neither sets a simple timeline for when it starts to work. Its approved use, hepatitis, in the countries where it is licensed as Zadaxin, is measured over a treatment course set by that approval, not by one quick response. This site's review found no published data giving a simple timeline that fits everyone.

Open this answer on its own page

This is not one of its studied or approved uses. Thymosin Alpha-1's approved use, as Zadaxin, is hepatitis. Its wider research has looked at adjusting the immune system in infection and in cancer support care. This site's review found two studies in people for it, and neither looked at allergies. So a claimed allergy benefit goes beyond what its own published record has measured.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Zadaxin is the brand name under which thymosin alpha 1 is approved and sold in more than 30 countries, mainly for hepatitis. In the US it has no approved brand name. It only has orphan drug status, a narrower label that helps a drug get developed for a specific rare use, without being full approval.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations. Where it is approved, as Zadaxin, it is given as a shot, following a set plan on that country's approved label for hepatitis. This site's review found two studies in people for it, and neither replaces the guidance a prescriber would give for an approved use. Dosing yourself outside that setting has no matching published record to point to.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 19 sellers this site tracks, thymosin alpha 1 has cost from about $2.50 to $13 per milligram, with a middle price around $6.80, in vial sizes from 5 to 100 milligrams. This is the price on the unregulated research chemical market. It is separate from the cost of the approved Zadaxin product where it is prescribed.

Open this answer on its own page

Thymalin is a peptide mix taken from calf thymus (a gland in the chest that trains immune cells). It has been used by doctors in the Soviet Union and Russia since the 1980s, and there is a lot of Russian medical writing behind it. That includes a group followed for 6 to 8 years, which reported roughly twofold lower death rates in those treated, and a 92-patient COVID-19 study where everyone knew what they were getting. This site's review found 8 studies for it, 4 of them in people, and none repeated by research groups outside that school.

Open this answer on its own page

One long-running Russian study reported a roughly twofold lower death rate over 6 to 8 years in people who got it. That is a real, cited finding, not a made-up one. But it comes from one research school, independent groups outside Russia have not repeated it, and it was not run as a modern careful study with a dummy-treatment group. Read it with that in mind, not as a settled result that applies to everyone.

Open this answer on its own page

No. It is not FDA approved. It was not among the seven peptides the FDA's Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee reviewed at its July 2026 meeting, unlike BPC-157, TB-500, and MOTS-c. Its history of use by doctors is limited to the Soviet Union and Russia, and it has not gone through the study and review process any Western regulator requires.

Open this answer on its own page

Epitalon is a lab-made peptide, four amino acids long, based on a peptide from the pineal gland (a small gland in the brain that helps set the body clock). It is studied for longevity, telomeres (the protective caps on the ends of chromosomes), the body clock, and eye damage in the retina. It has more data in people than its online reputation suggests. That includes 266 older people watched for 6 to 8 years, and a 12 to 15 year comparison in people with heart disease. But almost all of it comes from one research group, and in none of it were people kept from knowing what they got.

Open this answer on its own page

It is thought to act on the pineal gland and the body clock. Researchers are interested in whether it switches on telomerase, an enzyme that rebuilds the caps on chromosomes, as the reason for its studied effects on aging and eye damage. This site's review found 13 studies for epitalon, 6 of them in people. They include a study that watched 266 people for 6 to 8 years and a 12 to 15 year comparison in people with heart disease. All come from one research school, and in none of them were people kept from knowing what they got.

Open this answer on its own page

No. In July 2026 a US advisory panel voted 7 to 4, with one member abstaining, to recommend epitalon for compounding, only for insomnia. That vote is advice only, and the FDA has not finished its rules. It is not licensed as a drug in the UK, Australia, or Canada either.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations. Epitalon's research in people includes its longest study, which watched 266 older people for 6 to 8 years, and a 12 to 15 year comparison in people with heart disease. It all comes from one research group using its own study plans, and in none of it were people kept from knowing what they got. That is a different basis from a modern study that tests a range of doses, which is what a general recommendation would need.

Open this answer on its own page

The two headline studies are a group of 266 people followed for 6 to 8 years, and a 12 to 15 year comparison in people with heart disease. Both are truly long and truly in people, which is unusual for a compound this obscure. The catch matters just as much: nearly all of this evidence comes from one research group, in none of it were people kept from knowing what they got, and no outside lab has repeated the findings.

Open this answer on its own page

MOTS-c is a peptide made by mitochondria (the power plants inside cells), and there is real research on it in people. A common gene variant affecting it is found in East Asian people. Its blood levels have been measured across ages and diseases. And it has been shown to respond to exercise. A first careful study that gives it to people is now signing people up. None of the existing evidence shows a benefit from giving it to someone as a drug. That is a different question, and the new study is built to test it.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found 13 studies for MOTS-c, 8 of them in people, covering more than 27,000 people. But that evidence only watched people, it did not give them the peptide: gene variant studies, blood level measures across age and metabolic disease, and a response to exercise. No study has yet given MOTS-c to a person and measured weight change. That is exactly what its first careful mid-stage study, now signing people up, is built to find out.

Open this answer on its own page

No. The FDA took it off its Category 2 compounding list in April 2026. In July 2026 an advisory panel voted 7 to 5 to recommend it for compounding anyway, against the FDA reviewers' own advice. One mid-stage study (NCT07505745) was signing people up as of this site's latest review. It would be the first careful study that gives it to people as a drug.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 38 sellers this site tracks, MOTS-c has cost from about $0.88 to $11 per milligram, with a middle price around $3.50, in vial sizes from 10 to 400 milligrams. It has more sellers and offers than almost any other compound in this site's price data.

Open this answer on its own page

The evidence in people shows its levels in the blood change with exercise. That fits with a role in how the body uses energy. But it is not the same as a study showing that giving someone MOTS-c raises their energy or exercise capacity. This site's review of 13 studies did not find that. The mid-stage study now signing people up is the first one set up to test it directly.

Open this answer on its own page

Humanin is a peptide made by mitochondria (the power plants inside cells). There is real research that watched it in people. Its levels drop with age. They run higher in the children of centenarians (very long-lived people). They track with heart and metabolic risk. And they rise in the muscle of people with one specific mitochondrial disease. This site's review found 9 studies, 5 of them in people. No study has given it to people as a drug.

Open this answer on its own page

They come from the same place. Both are made from the DNA inside mitochondria, not the DNA in the cell's center. And both have data in people that links their natural levels to aging and metabolic health, not data from giving them as drugs. Humanin's record in people centers on families of centenarians (very long-lived people) and on heart risk. MOTS-c's centers on a gene variant and on exercise. Neither has a finished, published study of giving it to people yet.

Open this answer on its own page

No. This site's review found 9 studies for humanin, 5 of them in people. Every one only watched people. They measured how natural humanin levels relate to age, long-lived families, heart risk, or one mitochondrial disease. None of them gave humanin to a person. It is also not among the peptides nominated for the FDA's compounding bulks list as of the July 2026 review, unlike BPC-157, TB-500, and MOTS-c.

Open this answer on its own page

Cartalax is a three amino acid peptide 'bioregulator'. The Khavinson research group that made it has studied it almost only in cells in a lab, looking at aging of cartilage cells and at osteoarthritis. This site's review found 5 studies, none of them a first-hand study in people. The only claim about people is one sentence in a 2023 review saying it was given by mouth to older people with osteoarthritis. Nobody has found the original report of that.

Open this answer on its own page

Not in any first-hand study this site's review has found. One sentence in a 2023 review claims it was given by mouth to older people with osteoarthritis. But no original study in people reporting that use, its dose, or its result could be found. No study of how the body handles this peptide exists at all, in people or animals. That says more about how little is known than anything else.

Open this answer on its own page

5-Amino-1MQ is an experimental small molecule, not a peptide. It blocks an enzyme called NNMT and is studied in animals for fat burning and muscle. This site's review found 2 studies, neither of them in people. It is popular on longevity sites despite that gap. It is not FDA approved.

Open this answer on its own page

Adipotide is an experimental peptide that attacks the blood supply of white fat. In monkey studies it caused dramatic weight loss by making the cells of those blood vessels die. In that same research it also caused serious kidney damage, which is why it has not moved on to studies in people. This site's review found 2 studies, both non-human.

Open this answer on its own page

The evidence is mixed. Glutathione is the body's own main antioxidant inside cells. It is sold as a supplement for detox and skin lightening, including in shot forms that the FDA has flagged as not approved drugs. This site's review found 3 studies, 2 of them in people. Across that record, the evidence that supplements really raise the body's own glutathione levels is not strong in a steady way.

Open this answer on its own page

NAD+ is a key helper molecule in how cells make energy. It is sold as IV drips and shots for anti-aging and recovery. Its natural levels are well known to drop with age, which is the idea behind topping it up. But this site's review found only one study in people. The proof that topping up NAD+ really changes anything for people is small compared with how widely it is sold.

Open this answer on its own page

Its approved form, Zadaxin, is given as a shot. This site's review found no published data showing that taking it by mouth works the same way. Peptides this size are generally broken down by digestion before they can act. That is why shot peptides are not simply turned into pills without research that proves the body absorbs them.

Open this answer on its own page

Its studied role is adjusting the immune system in general, mainly shown through its approved use for hepatitis. General immune support is a reasonable stretch from that, but it has not been measured. This site's review found two studies in people for thymosin alpha 1, and neither counted how many colds people got. So this is still a guess from how it works on the immune system, not a shown result.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. These are two spellings of the same compound. Both mean the lab-made four amino acid peptide from the pineal gland, studied for longevity, telomeres (the protective caps on chromosomes), and the body clock. This site lists it as Epitalon, with Epithalon as another name. Either spelling means the exact same molecule and the same evidence.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's review found 13 studies for epitalon, 6 of them in people. They include a study that watched people for 6 to 8 years and a 12 to 15 year comparison in people with heart disease. The review did not find cancer reported as a result in that record. Interest in whether it switches on telomerase (an enzyme that rebuilds chromosome caps) does raise a general, theory-based question that researchers think about for anything acting on that pathway. But it is not a finding this compound's own studies have shown.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give advice on when to take it. Epitalon's studied role in the body clock is sometimes used as a reason to take it in the evening. But its research in people, including a study that watched people for 6 to 8 years and a long comparison study, used plans set by that one research group. It is not a general timing rule this site can pass on to other users.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing recommendations. This site's review found 13 studies for MOTS-c, 8 of them in people. But that evidence only watched people: gene variants, blood levels, and a response to exercise. None of it tested doses. Its first careful study that gives it to people, a mid-stage study now signing people up, is the first one set up to find anything like a studied dose.

Open this answer on its own page

MOTS-c is made from the DNA inside mitochondria (the power plants of cells). It is thought to act on how cells use energy and how well the body responds to insulin. That idea rests on data that watched people: its link to a common gene variant, its response to exercise, and how its levels change with age and metabolic disease. Whether giving it as a drug does the same thing is exactly what its first careful study, now signing people up, is built to test. The existing data cannot answer that alone.

Open this answer on its own page

This site's MOTS-c studies do not measure headache. The evidence in people on this site only watched people: blood levels, a mitochondrial gene variant in 27,527 people, and a rise in the body's own MOTS-c with exercise. There is also a mid-stage study still signing people up (NCT07505745). Nobody on this site has yet published a study of giving MOTS-c to a person as a finished drug. So there is no side-effect table from such a study to quote. This FAQ does not invent a headache rate from blood level studies.

Open this answer on its own page

Thymosin alpha-1 is described as adjusting T cells (immune cells) and the body's first-line immune defense. This site's profile cites a review of how it signals through Toll-like receptors, alarm sensors on certain immune cells. The body clears half of it in about 2 hours. Its molecular weight is 3,108 daltons. The largest study in people on this site is the TESTS sepsis study, in 1,106 adults: 23.4% died within 28 days, versus 24.1% on a dummy treatment. A 98-person hepatitis B study found the virus was fully cleared at 18 months in 40.6% after a 26-week course, versus 9.4% of people who were not treated. Those are hepatitis and sepsis results, not a general result for how it works in anyone. Its approval as Zadaxin in more than 30 countries is a fact about hepatitis, not a US approval. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/thymosin-alpha-1.

Open this answer on its own page

NAD+ is a helper molecule (coenzyme), not a peptide. This site's profile lists the full name Nicotinamide Adenine Dinucleotide, with a molecular weight of 663.4 daltons. It carries energy in the chemical reactions that power cells, and it is used up by enzymes called sirtuins and PARPs. Reviews cited on that page show NAD+ in the body's tissues drops with age. Whether giving NAD+ by IV or shot changes anything for a person is a different question. The one study in people on this site, a six-hour IV drip, found no rise in NAD+ or its breakdown products in the blood for the first two hours. It did not measure any symptom, energy, or disease result. This FAQ does not invent an anti-aging result from a coenzyme role. Full record at /compounds/nad-plus.

Open this answer on its own page

NAD+ stands for Nicotinamide Adenine Dinucleotide, the full name on this site's profile, also listed as NAD. Its molecular weight is 663.4 daltons. The plus sign marks the form of the molecule that is ready to pick up energy (the oxidized form). The letters are a chemical name, not an approval and not a finding that an IV drip reverses aging. Full record at /compounds/nad-plus.

Open this answer on its own page

Not as a measured result of giving it to a person. This site's review found 2 studies, neither of them human. It is a small molecule, not a peptide, with a molecular weight of 159.2 daltons, that blocks an enzyme called NNMT. In mice, turning off NNMT protected them from obesity on a fattening diet. In mice made obese by diet, blockers from the 5-amino-1MQ family lowered body weight and fat. Those animal findings do not transfer into a human fat-burn result. This FAQ does not invent one. Full record at /compounds/5-amino-1mq.

Open this answer on its own page

Not in any published study in people this site holds. This site's review found 2 studies, both non-human. Adipotide is an experimental peptide, with a molecular weight of about 2,600 daltons, built to attack the blood supply of white fat. In obese rhesus monkeys it caused 7.4 to 14.7% weight loss in four weeks, with kidney effects that grew with the dose and went away after. The first mouse work used a homing tag attached to a cell-killing peptide. The kidney damage in those monkey studies is why it has not moved into general medical use. This FAQ does not invent a human fat-burn rate from a primate result. Full record at /compounds/adipotide.

Open this answer on its own page

No. They are different short peptides from the same Khavinson research school. Epitalon (also spelled epithalon) is a lab-made four-amino-acid peptide based on one from the pineal gland. It is studied for longevity, telomeres, and the body clock. Its record includes a study that watched 266 people for 6 to 8 years and a 12 to 15 year comparison in people with heart disease. All of it comes from one research group, and in none of it were people kept from knowing what they got. Pinealon is a different three-amino-acid peptide, Glu-Asp-Arg, with a molecular weight of 418.4 daltons, studied for protecting the brain. This site's review found one study in people: a 32-person Russian study of biological-age markers with Vesugen, not repeated by anyone else. Coming from the same research school does not make them the same molecule. Full records at /compounds/epitalon and /compounds/pinealon.

Open this answer on its own page

No. They are different molecules that come from different parent peptides. Thymosin alpha-1 (thymalfasin, Zadaxin) is an immune-adjusting peptide from the thymus, with a molecular weight of 3,108 daltons. Its record includes the 1,106-person TESTS sepsis study and a 98-person hepatitis B study. TB-500 is a piece of thymosin beta-4 (building blocks 17 to 23, with an acetyl group on the front), with the chain Ac-LKKTETQ and a molecular weight of 889.01 daltons in its plain form. The FDA's 2026 review found no published study giving TB-500 to a person. Sharing the word thymosin does not mean they share a molecule or an evidence record. This site does not rank them. Full records at /compounds/thymosin-alpha-1 and /compounds/tb-500.

Open this answer on its own page

Humanin is a 24-amino-acid peptide made from the DNA inside mitochondria. This site's profile gives its molecular weight as about 2,687 daltons. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). No published study has given humanin, or a version of it, to a person. So that page has no measurement in people of how the body handles it or what it latches onto. What exists only watched people. Blood humanin drops with age. It was higher in 18 adult children of centenarians (very long-lived people) than in 19 people of the same age. Blood humanin was 124.3 versus 204.8 pg/mL in 23 people with high fasting blood sugar versus 58 people without it. In 94 people on kidney dialysis, risk was highest at both low and high levels. And blood humanin rose after one endurance workout in 30 adults. Work in cells and animals describes cell-protecting signals through two proteins (IGFBP-3 and Bax), and effects on insulin through a brain signal (STAT-3) in rats. Those findings do not transfer into a counted human drug effect. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/humanin.

Open this answer on its own page

No. They are different molecules with different targets, different evidence, and different approval status. Epitalon is a lab-made four-amino-acid peptide based on one from the pineal gland, Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly, with a molecular weight of 390.3 daltons, also spelled epithalon. It is studied for longevity and telomeres by one Russian research group. SS-31 is another name for elamipretide, a peptide aimed at mitochondria, with a molecular weight of 639.8 daltons. It sticks to cardiolipin, a fat in the inner wall of mitochondria. Elamipretide got FDA fast-track (accelerated) approval on September 19, 2025, as Forzinity, for Barth syndrome (a rare inherited disease) in patients who weigh 30 kg or more. That approval does not cover longevity, and it does not turn epitalon into SS-31. Sitting on the same longevity shelf does not make them the same molecule. This site does not rank them. Full records at /compounds/epitalon and /compounds/elamipretide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. SS-31 and MTP-131 are aliases on this site's elamipretide profile for the same peptide aimed at mitochondria, with a molecular weight of 639.8 daltons. It sticks to cardiolipin in the inner wall of mitochondria. The FDA approved name is elamipretide. The finished medicine is Forzinity, given fast-track (accelerated) approval on September 19, 2025, for Barth syndrome (a rare inherited disease) in patients who weigh 30 kg or more. A research-chemical vial labeled SS-31 is not that labeled product, and the approval does not cover longevity or tiredness. MMPOWER-3, a large final-stage study in 218 people with a muscle disease caused by faulty mitochondria, missed both of its main goals. The names are aliases of one molecule. Full record at /compounds/elamipretide.

Open this answer on its own page

Forzinity is the brand name for elamipretide, the same peptide aimed at mitochondria that this site's profile lists as SS-31 and MTP-131. But what is in every vial is not the same legal product. Forzinity is the FDA product given fast-track (accelerated) approval on September 19, 2025, for Barth syndrome (a rare inherited disease) in patients who weigh 30 kg or more. The approval was based on a muscle-strength measure, and a follow-up study to confirm it is required. A research-chemical vial labeled SS-31 or elamipretide is not that labeled product. The wider study record includes MMPOWER-3, in 218 people, which missed its goals for walking distance and tiredness. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/elamipretide.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. MTP-131 is a lab code listed as another name on this site's elamipretide profile, along with SS-31. It names the same peptide that sticks to cardiolipin, with a molecular weight of 639.8 daltons. The approved brand is Forzinity, for Barth syndrome only. The code is a lab label, not a second drug and not a longevity approval. Full record at /compounds/elamipretide.

Open this answer on its own page

No, and the difference matters when you read the evidence. Epithalamin is an extract of cow (bovine pineal) gland, which is a mix. Epitalon is the lab-made four-amino-acid peptide Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly, with a molecular weight of 390.3 daltons. It was picked out as one active part of that extract, and is also spelled epithalon. The long studies on death rates on this site, 266 older people followed for 6 to 8 years and a comparison of 39 versus 40 people with heart disease, used Epithalamin. The vials sold today contain Epitalon. Nobody has run the death-rate study on the lab-made peptide. Coming from the same research group does not make them the same substance. Full record at /compounds/epitalon.

Open this answer on its own page

Cartalax is Ala-Glu-Asp, a three-amino-acid peptide also written AED or Kartalax. This site's profile suggests it works by changing which genes are switched on: a very short peptide that gets into the cell and interacts with DNA and the proteins it wraps around. Its half-life is not known. No study of how the body handles it, in people or animals, was found. Its molecular weight is about 333 daltons. This site's review found no primary human study. The only claim about people is one sentence in a 2023 review from the institute that created it. The published work on how it works is all in cells in a lab. AED and a cartilage peptide mix brought aging markers in cartilage cells back toward normal. Short peptides changed which genes were active in aged human stem cells in a dish. Cartilage cells in a dish are not a joint, and those findings do not transfer into a counted human cartilage mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/cartalax.

Open this answer on its own page

Thymalin is a mixture of small proteins taken from calf thymus, not one defined peptide. This site's profile says it is meant to make up for the thymus making less as we age. It suggests two small two-amino-acid peptides, Lys-Glu and Glu-Trp (later developed as Thymogen), as the active parts. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). There is no single molecular weight. In 266 older people followed for 6 to 8 years, the Thymalin group reported 2.0 to 2.4-fold fewer chest and airway infections, and a death rate 2.0 to 2.1-fold lower than the comparison group. Everyone knew what they got, and it comes from one research school. A 2020 COVID-19 study, where everyone knew what they got, put 42 people on thymalin 10 mg as a shot into muscle for 5 days plus standard care, and 50 on standard care alone. Nobody died in either group. Lung scans got worse in 2 of 42 versus 5 of 50. It is not FDA approved. In human blood stem cells in a dish, Thymalin cut two stem-cell markers (CD44 and CD117) 2 to 3-fold and raised a mature T-cell marker (CD28) 6.8-fold. That is a lab-dish finding, not a counted medical mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/thymalin.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Pineamin is a related pineal protein mix, not the synthetic tetrapeptide. This site's epitalon page cites a 55-person series where everyone got the treatment. A 100 mg course of Pineamin raised a melatonin breakdown product in night urine 1.9-fold above each person's own level before treatment. There was no comparison group. That study is tagged as being about another product. Epitalon is Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly, with a molecular weight of 390.3 daltons, also spelled epithalon. The long death-rate studies on that page used Epithalamin, the cow pineal extract, not Pineamin and not the lab-made peptide sold today. Sitting on the same pineal shelf does not make them the same substance. Full record at /compounds/epitalon.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Thymogen is one defined peptide of two amino acids, Glu-Trp, with a molecular weight of 333.3 daltons. It was pulled out of Thymalin and developed on its own. Thymalin is a calf thymus extract, a mixture. This site's Thymogen page has a Russian medical report in type 1 diabetes with no comparison group, and a 2024 review that pairs it with its mirror-image form, thymodepressin. Thymalin's record in people is the 266-person death-rate study and the 42-versus-50 COVID-19 study. Pulling a piece out of an extract does not make the extract and the piece the same product. This site does not rank them. Full records at /compounds/thymogen and /compounds/thymalin.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Kartalax is the spelling used in the 2023 Russian-language review cited on this site's cartalax profile, for the same Ala-Glu-Asp peptide, also written AED. Its molecular weight is about 333 daltons. That one review sentence is the whole published basis for the claim that it was used for osteoarthritis in people. No first-hand study report was found. The names are two spellings of one chain, not a second drug and not a study in people that anyone has found. Full record at /compounds/cartalax.

Open this answer on its own page

No. Cartalax is one defined lab-made peptide of three amino acids, Ala-Glu-Asp. Sigumir is an extract, a protein mix from the cartilage and bone of young animals. This site's cartalax page says the closest report in people from that family is for Sigumir. It was given to 62 older patients with jaw joint disease along with other treatment, with no comparison group, and it is a different product. Being mentioned in the same review does not make them the same product. Full record at /compounds/cartalax.

Open this answer on its own page

Elamipretide sticks to cardiolipin, a fat in the inner wall of mitochondria (the power plants of cells). That steadies the folds of that wall and helps the cell make energy (ATP) more efficiently. The body clears half of it in about 2 to 3 hours. Its molecular weight is 639.8 daltons. Other names are SS-31 and MTP-131. The FDA gave it fast-track (accelerated) approval on September 19, 2025, as Forzinity, for Barth syndrome (a rare inherited disease) in patients who weigh 30 kg or more. The approval was based on a muscle strength measure, and a follow-up study to confirm it is required. That approval does not cover longevity, tiredness, or research-grade SS-31. MMPOWER-3, a large final-stage study in 218 people with a muscle disease caused by faulty mitochondria, missed both of its main goals. On a six minute walk, people on the drug did 3.2 metres worse than people on a dummy shot (minus 3.2 metres), which is strong evidence of no effect on walking or tiredness at 24 weeks. A follow-on in ten Barth patients, where everyone got the drug, reported they walked 96.1 metres further at week 168, with no untreated group to compare. In rats, SS-31 stuck to cardiolipin and sped up energy recovery after blood flow to the kidney was cut off. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted longevity mechanism. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/elamipretide.

Open this answer on its own page

Thymogen is a lab-made peptide of two amino acids, glutamic acid and tryptophan, Glu-Trp. This site's profile suggests it adjusts T cells (immune cells) as the smallest working piece of thymus peptides like Thymalin. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is 333.3 daltons. The one study in people is a 1996 Russian medical report in type 1 diabetes. It described signs of a weakened immune system going away as T cells matured. Everybody got the drug, and there was no comparison group. A 2024 review pairs it with its mirror-image form, thymodepressin, as immune drugs that act in opposite directions. It is used in Russia and is not FDA approved. A report without a comparison group is not a counted study showing the immune system was restored. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/thymogen.

Open this answer on its own page

Rapamycin, also called sirolimus, blocks the mTOR pathway, a growth switch inside cells. This site's profile says that copies parts of eating less, and boosts the cell's clean-up and upkeep (autophagy). The body clears half of it in about 60 hours. Its molecular weight is 914.2 daltons. It is FDA approved as Rapamune to prevent the body from rejecting a transplant. Using it for longevity is off-label and still experimental. PEARL found 48 weeks of low-dose rapamycin, taken on and off, was fairly safe in normally aging adults. Lean mass and pain improved in women on 10 mg, one finding among many measures. Kraig 2018 put 25 generally healthy adults aged 70 to 95 on 1 mg daily or a dummy pill. 11 on rapamycin and 14 on the dummy pill finished at least 8 weeks. That was a small safety test, not a lifespan study. No careful study has tested whether rapamycin extends human life. In mice with mixed genes, rapamycin given late in life extended lifespan by 14% in females and 9% in males, measured at the point where 90% had died. That is a mouse finding and it stays one. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/rapamycin.

Open this answer on its own page

Metformin is a biguanide, a type of diabetes pill. This site's profile says it blocks one step in the mitochondria (complex I) and switches on AMPK, an energy sensor in cells. That cuts the sugar the liver releases and helps the body respond to insulin. How much each route matters is disputed. The body clears half of it from the blood in 4 to 9 hours. Its molecular weight is 129.2 daltons, or 165.6 as the hydrochloride salt. It has been FDA approved for type 2 diabetes since 1994 and is not approved for aging. DPP and DPPOS followed 3,234 adults at high risk of diabetes for about 21 years (the middle value). Neither metformin nor lifestyle changes cut deaths from any cause, cancer, or heart disease. UKPDS 34 put 342 overweight adults with new type 2 diabetes on metformin, compared with 411 on diet. Over about 10.7 years, deaths from any cause were 36% lower on metformin. That is a diabetes study. MASTERS, in 94 adults over 65, found people on a dummy pill gained more lean mass from 14 weeks of weight training. It is not a longevity approval. A 2013 study in one mouse strain (C57BL/6) reported better health and longer life. The Interventions Testing Program did not find a real lifespan effect in either male or female mice. Those animal findings do not transfer into a human ageing result. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/metformin.

Open this answer on its own page

SLU-PP-332 is a small molecule, not a peptide. This site's profile says it switches on estrogen-related receptors (ERRs), master switches for how the body uses energy. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 424 daltons. This site's review found two studies, neither of them human. It is not FDA approved. In mice, SLU-PP-332 set off a gene pattern in muscle like aerobic exercise does, and the mice could run longer. In mice made obese by diet and in mice bred to be obese, it improved metabolic measures without exercise. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human exercise-mimetic result. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/slu-pp-332.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Thymalfasin is the generic name listed as another name on this site's thymosin alpha-1 profile, along with Zadaxin. It names the same immune-adjusting peptide from the thymus, with a molecular weight of 3,108 daltons. The findings in people on that page are the 1,106-person TESTS sepsis study and a 98-person hepatitis B study. Zadaxin is the brand approved in more than 30 countries. A research-chemical vial labeled thymosin alpha-1 is not that labeled product. The names are aliases of one molecule. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/thymosin-alpha-1.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, as a name. Glucophage is a brand name listed as another name on this site's metformin profile, along with metformin HCl and dimethylbiguanide. It names the same diabetes drug, with a molecular weight of 129.2 daltons. It has been FDA approved for type 2 diabetes since 1994 and is not approved for aging. The record in people on that page is the 21-year DPP follow-up and UKPDS 34, not a longevity label. A prescription for Glucophage is not permission to treat metformin as an anti-aging plan. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/metformin.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Sirolimus is the generic name listed as another name on this site's rapamycin profile, along with Rapamune. It names the same mTOR blocker, with a molecular weight of 914.2 daltons. Rapamune is the FDA approved brand for preventing transplant rejection. Using it for longevity is off-label and still experimental. PEARL and the 25-person Kraig pilot are the aging-related record in people on that page, not a lifespan approval. The names are aliases of one molecule. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/rapamycin.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes, for one condition. This site's US field says FDA-approved as Forzinity for Barth syndrome only, prescription only, with other uses still experimental. UK: not licensed. Australia: not registered. Canada: not approved. The fast-track (accelerated) approval on September 19, 2025, covers patients who weigh 30 kg or more. It was based on a muscle strength measure, and a follow-up study to confirm it is required. MMPOWER-3, in 218 people with a muscle disease caused by faulty mitochondria, missed its goals for walking distance and tiredness. A research-chemical vial labeled SS-31 is not Forzinity. This FAQ does not invent a longevity approval. Full record at /compounds/elamipretide.

Open this answer on its own page

NMN is nicotinamide mononucleotide. The body turns it into NAD+, a key helper molecule for making energy, through the salvage pathway (its recycling route). This site's profile lists a molecular weight of 334.2 daltons and says it leaves the body quickly. It is not an approved drug. In 2022 the FDA ruled it out as a US dietary supplement, because it had already been cleared for testing as a drug. Its US supplement status is still disputed. Findings in people on this site: a 60-day study in 80 adults raised blood NAD and slightly improved how far they could walk in six minutes, with a measure of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) unchanged. In 30 overweight or obese adults, MIB-626, a pharmacy-grade NMN tablet, for 28 days led to 1.9 kg more weight loss than a dummy pill, with lower bottom blood pressure number and lower LDL cholesterol. Muscle strength, fitness, and insulin response did not differ. The maker paid for that study. A 10-week study in overweight or obese women past menopause with prediabetes found their muscles responded better to insulin than on a dummy pill, while other metabolic measures did not change. In 14 older men with diabetes and weak physical performance, average age 81.1, grip and walking speed were no different from the comparison group over 24 weeks. Teijin paid for that study. A rise in blood NAD is not a real-world aging result. No study on this page has tested whether NMN slows aging in a person. Twelve months of oral NMN in aging mice improved insulin response, energy use, activity, and eye function, with no obvious harm. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human ageing result. This FAQ does not invent a dose. Full record at /compounds/nmn.

Open this answer on its own page

FOXO4-DRI is a lab-designed peptide meant to clear out 'zombie' cells (senescent cells, old cells that stop dividing but do not die). This site's profile says it breaks up the FOXO4-p53 link only in those cells. That frees p53 to make those cells self-destruct while healthy cells are spared. It is listed as leaving the body quickly (a short half-life). Its molecular weight is about 5,200 daltons. It is not FDA approved. This site's review found no human clinical trial. How it works in people has not been measured. In mice, the 2017 Cell paper reported better fitness, thicker fur, and better kidney function in mice bred to age fast and in naturally old mice. In old mice, a 2020 study found it made zombie testosterone-making cells (Leydig cells) self-destruct and improved testosterone output. Those animal findings do not transfer into a counted human senolytic result. This FAQ does not invent a human mechanism. Full record at /compounds/foxo4-dri.

Open this answer on its own page

Yes. Nicotinamide mononucleotide is the full chemical name on this site's NMN profile. Both name the same molecule the body turns into NAD+, with a molecular weight of 334.2 daltons. MIB-626 is a pharmacy-grade NMN tablet used in one 28-day study of 30 overweight or obese adults. That is a form of NMN, not a second molecule. A store capsule labeled NMN is not automatically the same as the pharmacy-grade tablet used in that study. Raising blood NAD is not an aging result. This site does not rank brands. Full record at /compounds/nmn.

Open this answer on its own page

It is FDA approved as Vyleesi, only for low sexual desire that causes distress (hypoactive sexual desire disorder) in women who have not reached menopause. That approval rests on studies with more than 1,200 people, so it is a real approval, not a marketing claim. It works through the brain's melanocortin system, not through blood flow like erectile dysfunction drugs. That is also why its most common side effects, nausea and flushing, differ from those drugs.

Open this answer on its own page

PT-141, also known as bremelanotide, is FDA approved as Vyleesi for low sexual desire that causes distress (hypoactive sexual desire disorder) in women who have not reached menopause. It is sold more widely as a research chemical for sexual problems in general, including in men. But its FDA approval covers only that one use in that one group.

Open this answer on its own page

Its FDA approved use, as Vyleesi, is treating low sexual desire that causes distress (hypoactive sexual desire disorder) in women who have not reached menopause. That is based on studies with more than 1,200 people. It acts on melanocortin receptors in the brain, not directly on blood flow. That is how it is thought to affect desire, not just physical arousal.

Open this answer on its own page

It can, as a side effect, not its purpose. PT-141 (bremelanotide) switches on melanocortin receptors, the same receptor family that melanotan 2 targets on purpose for tanning. So some skin darkening could happen as a spillover effect. But PT-141 was developed and approved for sexual desire, not tanning. It is a different compound from melanotan 2, which was built around the tanning effect on purpose.

Open this answer on its own page

This site does not give dosing or timing advice. PT-141's FDA approved form, Vyleesi, is a shot under the skin, not a pill. So food timing, which matters for pills, is not really the issue. Its approved label gives timing in relation to sexual activity, not meals. If you have a prescription, follow the approved product's own label.

Open this answer on its own page

Across the 30 sellers this site tracks, PT-141 has cost from about $1.50 to $10.20 per milligram, with a middle price around $3.70, in vial sizes from 5 to 100 milligrams. This is the price on the unregulated research chemical market. It is separate from the pharmacy cost of the FDA approved Vyleesi, which needs a prescription.

Open this answer on its own page

Melanotan II is a lab-made drug that switches on melanocortin receptors. It is studied for tanning and sex drive, and came out of research on the same receptor family that PT-141 (bremelanotide) also targets. It is not FDA approved, not licensed in the UK, not approved and banned from supply in Australia, and not approved in Canada. The research on it raises real safety concerns.

Open this answer on its own page