Repair and pain · part of Immune system and inflammation
Does it help the immune system?
Vague as a goal and specific as a measurement. The trials here counted infections or counted cells; those are very different claims.
1,315
people in trials
8
studies in people
5
compounds, animal or lab only
4
compounds people report on
2
trials found nothing
Measured in people
A trial that gave people the compound comes first. A study that only watched people, who happened to have more or less of something related, comes after. Both are studies in people and both are here. Only the first kind tested the thing you are asking about, and the watch-only ones are labelled. Within that, the most people come first. That is a fact about the studies, not a judgement about the compound. Counts are never added up across compounds, because the same person can be in more than one trial.
Peptides and blends
3 compounds · 1,312 people given one of themWhat this archive is for. Trials of the compound come first, ranked by how many people were actually given it. Studies that only observed people are below them and labelled.
- 01Thymalin with epitalonBlendStrong. At least two finished studies in people, and at least 1,000 people who took it. 2 completed trials, 1,106 people given it.7 reported1,106 people given it1 trial1 found nothing
found nothingA defined thymus peptide was put through a modern study, and it failed. Just over a thousand people seriously ill with sepsis got either thymosin alpha-1 or a dummy shot, and nobody involved knew which. A month later, the same share had died in each group. It is on this page as a contrast. When a thymus peptide is finally tested at full size under modern rules, the answer can come back empty, and this one did.
The numbers 1,106 adults with sepsis, 22 centres, double blinded and placebo controlled. 28 day all cause mortality was 23.4% on thymosin alpha-1 and 24.1% on placebo, hazard ratio 0.99, p = 0.93. Included here as the contrast: this is what a defined thymic peptide looks like when tested under modern conditions, and the result was null.
BMJ, 2025· 1,106 people
What people using it report
- Fewer colds over a winter, which people credit to the thymus peptide.
- 02ThymopentinPeptideModerate. At least one finished study in people, and at least 100 people who took it. 3 completed trials, 306 people given it.3 reported206 people given it2 trials1 found nothing
found nothingIt was tested properly for preventing infections after cancer surgery and it did not work. Two hundred and six patients were split by chance around the time of their operation. Infections happened slightly less often on thymopentin, and the gap was small enough that chance explains it. Infections were no less severe overall either. Among the older patients only, the drug did hold up immune cell counts that otherwise fell after surgery, and their infections were less severe. That is a finding about one group, found after the fact.
The numbers 206 cancer surgery patients randomised to perioperative thymopentin or control, all receiving antibiotic prophylaxis and postoperative parenteral nutrition. The trial missed on its main question: the postoperative infection rate was 17.5 percent on thymopentin against 24.3 percent on control, not significant, and the mean sepsis score was 6.7 against 9.4, also not significant. In the elderly subgroup thymopentin prevented the postoperative fall in CD3 and CD4 positive T cells seen in controls (p < 0.05) and the sepsis score was lower, 6.9 against 11.3. The authors conclude it did not significantly reduce the infection rate.
British Journal of Surgery, 1994· 206 people
People kept more of a key immune cell, and that is all this shows. Adults with HIV who had no symptoms were given thymopentin or a dummy injection for about six months, and nobody involved knew which. Those on the drug held on to a higher share of CD4 cells, the cells HIV destroys. That is a blood marker, not how anyone felt or how long they lived. This was done before modern HIV treatment existed.
The numbers Thymopentin-treated asymptomatic patients maintained higher CD4+ cell percentages over 24 weeks.
AIDS, 1992· number of people not given
- 03ThymalinPeptideModerate. At least one finished study in people, and at least 100 people who took it. 4 completed trials, 308 people given it.7 reported0 people given it1 trial
A small Russian trial about timing the dose, not about whether the drug works. Women of reproductive age with long-running inflammation of the tubes and ovaries were given thymalin, timed to their own immune cells' activity. Improvement in symptoms, blood tests and immune measures was more common when the drug was given while that activity was present. The study was small, nobody was kept in the dark, and it was never designed to separate thymalin from the rest of the treatment.
The numbers Novosibirsk clinical trial in chronic salpingitis and oophoritis timing thymalin to each patient's own lymphocyte succinate dehydrogenase response. Clinical, laboratory and immunological improvement was more frequent when the drug was given while that response was present. An example of the broader Russian clinical literature; small, unblinded, and not designed to isolate thymalin's effect.
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2015· number of people not given
Also measured in animals or in the lab
In a dish. In human blood stem cells, thymalin cut two stem cell markers 2 to 3 times and raised a mature T cell marker 6.8 times. The authors read this as a push toward mature T cells.
The numbers In cultured human hematopoietic stem cells, Thymalin reduced CD44 and CD117 expression 2 to 3-fold and raised the mature T-cell marker CD28 6.8-fold, which the authors read as differentiation toward mature T lymphocytes.
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2020· lab (cells in a dish)
Other compounds
3 compounds · 3 people given one of themApproved drugs, biologics and hormones that have been measured for this. They are here because leaving them out would misrepresent the evidence, and they are below the peptides because that is not what most people come here to read.
- 01LeptinBiologicModerate. At least one finished study in people, and at least 100 people who took it. 6 completed trials, 844 people given it.5 reported3 people given it1 trial
Give leptin to the rare children who have none and it transforms them. Three children born unable to make leptin were injected daily for up to four years. Appetite fell, fat mass fell, insulin and blood fats came back towards normal, and puberty arrived at the right age. Immune cells that had been depleted recovered too. This is replacing a missing hormone in people who lack it. It says nothing about giving leptin to people who have plenty. Public money paid for the work.
The numbers Three children with congenital leptin deficiency treated with daily subcutaneous recombinant human leptin for up to 4 years: sustained reductions in appetite, fat mass, hyperinsulinaemia and hyperlipidaemia, rapid rise in thyroid hormones, appropriately timed puberty, and reversal of reduced CD4 T cell numbers and impaired T cell function. Non-US government funded.
Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2002· 3 people
- 02Dimethyl fumarateSmall moleculeLimited. People have taken it in a published study, but fewer than 100 of them. 3 completed trials, 54 people given it.4 reported0 people given it2 trials
In relapsing multiple sclerosis, dimethyl fumarate roughly halved the relapse rate over two years compared with a dummy pill, and slowed disability. 27% and 26% on the two doses had a relapse, against 46% on the dummy pill. This is the trial behind the approval. Flushing, gut problems and lower lymphocyte counts were the price.
The numbers Patients with relapsing-remitting MS randomised double-blind to BG-12 (dimethyl fumarate) 240 mg twice daily, three times daily, or placebo for 2 years (DEFINE). Proportion with a relapse 27% and 26% versus 46% on placebo (p<0.001); annualised relapse rate 0.17 and 0.19 versus 0.36, relative reductions 53% and 48%; confirmed disability progression 16% and 18% versus 27%, relative reductions 38% (p=0.005) and 34% (p=0.01). Fewer gadolinium-enhancing and new T2 lesions. Flushing, gastrointestinal events, lower lymphocyte counts and raised aminotransferases on BG-12.
The New England Journal of Medicine, 2012· number of people not given
The second approval trial, with an injected drug, glatiramer, as well as a dummy pill for comparison. Dimethyl fumarate cut relapses compared with the dummy pill, and so did glatiramer. Neither clearly slowed disability. It was not built to say which drug is better.
The numbers Patients with relapsing-remitting MS randomised to BG-12 240 mg twice or three times daily, glatiramer acetate, or placebo for 2 years (CONFIRM). Annualised relapse rate 0.22 and 0.20 on BG-12 and 0.29 on glatiramer versus 0.40 on placebo (relative reductions 44%, 51% and 29%). Reductions in disability progression of 21%, 24% and 7% versus placebo fell short of significance. Fewer new or enlarging T2 and new T1 lesions on all three (p<0.001). Flushing and gastrointestinal events on BG-12; lymphocyte counts fell; no malignancies or opportunistic infections reported.
The New England Journal of Medicine, 2012· number of people not given
- 03EverolimusSmall moleculeStrong. At least two finished studies in people, and at least 1,000 people who took it. 3 completed trials, 1,024 people given it.0 people given it1 trial
The follow up was larger and the result held. Older adults took a low dose combination of two mTOR blocking drugs for six weeks. They reported fewer infections over the following year and their immune response improved. This is the strongest positive result the programme produced. The large trial that came next did not repeat it, and that trial is on the RTB101 page. Read the two together, never this one alone.
The numbers The multicentre follow-up reporting enhanced immune function and reduced infections in older adults with TORC1 inhibition. Together with the 2014 trial this is the positive half of the programme, and the phase 3 that followed is on the RTB101 page.
Science Translational Medicine, 2018· number of people not given
What people using these actually report
These are people describing their own use. They come from clinic write-ups, complaint records kept by regulators, and public forums, and they are shown as written. They are the best guide on this page to what people actually do, what they expect, and what goes wrong. They cannot show that anything works. Nobody was compared with people on a dummy pill, and people who saw no effect mostly stopped posting. Both things are true at once. The bad reports are kept in for the same reason.
- Fewer colds over a winter, which people credit to the thymus peptide.
Sources: Longevity and peptide forums including r/peptides, and vendor pages. Uncontrolled self-reports on outcomes that cannot be assessed by an individual over a short period, since the original study's claim was about dying.
- The most substantial negative raised is not a side effect but the product itself. It is a crude extract rather than a defined molecule, and batch to batch variability is treated as the core problem. A theoretical worry about provoking an immune response against the recipient's own tissue is raised in the same discussion.
Sources: A Bluelight harm reduction thread on Cerebrolysin, read directly, September 2026. LongeCity, where most of the long form discussion of this compound lives, would not load from this environment during this pass, so this entry rests on a narrower base than the others in this file. Nothing above is attributed to any specific post and no post is reproduced.
- What people track is bloodwork rather than how they feel. Rising white cell and lymphocyte counts within roughly two weeks are the most repeated observation, and a matching report is that those numbers drift back within about two weeks of stopping, which posters take to mean continuous use rather than a course.
Sources: Threads on ExcelMale, found by site-restricted search and read directly, September 2026. Nothing above is attributed to any specific post and no post is reproduced.
- Flu-like symptoms or tiredness in the first days, which people describe as an immune response.
Sources: Clinic write-ups, chronic infection and peptide forums. Uncontrolled self-reports in a domain where seasonal variation dominates and where infection frequency is rarely counted before starting.
Measured in animals or in the lab, not yet in people
These are kept apart from the studies in people, not ranked against them. They answer a different question. A result in a rat is a real result, and a reason somebody ran the study. It is not a measure of what happens in you. When the work in people is missing, the reason is usually money, not failure. The bottom of this page explains why.
Peptides and blends
- 01VilonPeptideAnimal or lab only. Only animal or lab studies on this page. No study in people yet. 1 animal study, 1 lab study, no human study.6 reported1 animal or lab study
Measured in animals or in the lab
In a dish. In human and rat thymus cells, Vilon pushed young immune cells to mature.
The numbers Increased CD5 expression and T-helper precursor differentiation in cultured human and rat thymic cells.
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2013· lab (cells in a dish)
- 02BronchogenPeptideAnimal or lab only. Only animal or lab studies on this page. No study in people yet. 2 lab studies, no human study.4 reported1 animal or lab study
Measured in animals or in the lab
In a test tube. Bronchogen made DNA from calf and mouse cells a little harder to pull apart. That is a chemistry result, not a lung effect. Like the rest of this peptide's research, it comes from one research group. The paper lists the building blocks in a different order from the one sellers use.
The numbers Calorimetry showed bronchogen raised the melting temperature of calf-thymus and mouse-liver DNA by 3.1 degrees C, with no base-pair specificity. This is a physical-chemistry result, not evidence of a lung effect, and like the rest of the bronchogen literature it comes from the single Khavinson research lineage. The paper spells the sequence Ala-Asp-Glu-Leu rather than the Ala-Glu-Asp-Leu used by vendors.
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2011· lab (cells in a dish)
Other compounds
- 01DT2216Small moleculeLimited. People have taken it in a published study, but fewer than 100 of them. 1 completed trial, 20 people given it.3 reported1 animal or lab study
Measured in animals or in the lab
In mice and in a dish. DT2216 worked against a type of lymph cancer that needs BCL-xL. That adds to the lab case for destroying the protein instead of just blocking it.
The numbers Cells and mice. Activity against BCL-xL-dependent T cell lymphoma models, extending the preclinical case for selective degradation over inhibition.
Journal of Hematology and Oncology, 2020· animal study
- 02ISRIBSmall moleculeAnimal or lab only. Only animal or lab studies on this page. No study in people yet. 3 animal studies, 1 lab study, no human study.4 reported1 animal or lab study
Measured in animals or in the lab
In mice. This is the only ageing result. In old mice, ISRIB undid memory loss for places and improved short-term memory. In the memory part of the brain, nerve cells worked more like young ones and regrew contact points. Signs of immune activity in the brain went down. It measured memory, not lifespan. Several authors have business interests in this type of drug.
The numbers The ageing result, and the only one. ISRIB reversed integrated stress response activation in the aged mouse brain, reversed spatial memory deficits and improved working memory in old mice, and in hippocampus restored intrinsic neuronal electrophysiological properties and spine density while reducing interferon and T cell mediated immune profiles. Memory endpoints, not lifespan or healthspan. Several authors disclose commercial interests in the compound class.
eLife, 2020· animal study
- 03Senolytic vaccine (anti-GPNMB)BiologicAnimal or lab only. Only animal or lab studies on this page. No study in people yet. 3 animal studies, no human study.1 animal or lab study
Measured in animals or in the lab
In mice. A different team built a tiny-particle vaccine against GPNMB. Given as a shot under the skin, it switched on killer immune cells that cleared zombie fat and heart cells in fast-ageing mice on a high-fat diet. Fat handling and heart function improved. A second team got a similar result, still in mice.
The numbers Mouse. A separate group built a self-assembling nanovaccine carrying a Gpnmb seno-antigen peptide. After subcutaneous immunisation it activated CD8-positive T cells and selectively eliminated senescent adipocytes and cardiomyocytes in high-fat-diet progeroid mice, improving adipose metabolic measures and cardiac function. Independent replication of the concept, still in mice.
Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics, 2025· animal study
Why the trial record looks like this
A missing trial usually means nobody would pay for it. Nobody spends hundreds of millions of dollars on a molecule they cannot own. So the compounds with the thinnest record in people are often the oldest and easiest to get, not the weakest. Taking DT2216 as the example, because it states the problem most clearly:
DT2216 is the clearest case in this field of a smart fix for a known problem being carried into people. The problem, named in 2010, was that blocking BCL-xL kills platelets. The fix, published in 2019, was to destroy BCL-xL using a tool platelets barely have. The first data in people, from 2025, fit the fix. One person had a severe platelet drop that cleared in 48 hours. On navitoclax, platelets dropped to dangerous levels in 29 of 55 patients.
That is a drug design success, not an ageing result. Every DT2216 study is in cancer. No ageing study is registered. The case for it as a clean-up drug is still all in mice. A children's cancer study is paused for harsh side effects, and that belongs on the same page as the good safety news from the first study.
A compound shows up here only when a study on its own page names this goal and reports a result for it. Just naming it is not enough. Work in people, in animals and in the lab is counted separately and never mixed. People counts come from the study lines, and when in doubt they count low. Nothing here is advice. Nothing here tells you to take or to avoid anything.