Peptides, without the hype.
You have probably heard the names — BPC-157, Ozempic-style GLP-1s — from a podcast or a friend. This page is the honest version: what each one is, what human evidence actually exists, and which claims are running ahead of the data.
First time here? Read this bit.
A peptide is a short chain of amino acids — a fragment of a protein — that acts as a signal in the body. Some are licensed medicines with strong trial evidence (the GLP-1 weight-loss drugs are peptides). Many others sold online are research chemicals with little or no human data, whatever the marketing says. The grade on each card below tells you which kind you are looking at — and most people reading this site need nothing on this page: the basics on the rest of the site matter far more.
Peptide database
Tesamorelin
Visceral fat, growth hormone axis
Thymosin Alpha-1
Immune modulation
GHK-Cu
Skin, collagen, wound repair
BPC-157
Tissue repair, gut integrity
MOTS-c
Mitochondrial signaling
Epithalon
Telomerase activation (research)
SS-31 (Elamipretide)
Mitochondrial membrane stabilization
CJC-1295
Long-acting GHRH analogue
Ipamorelin
Selective GH secretagogue
Dihexa
Cognitive plasticity (preclinical)
Pinealon
Cognitive resilience (research)
TB-500
Soft tissue regeneration
ARA-290 (Cibinetide)
Neuropathy, inflammation
Retatrutide
Triple GIP/GLP-1/glucagon agonist
How we grade evidence
Every compound and protocol on this site carries one of three grades. The grade describes the strength of the human evidence, not how promising the mechanism looks or how much we like it. Grades move when the literature moves — down as often as up.
- Grade AStrong human trial evidence
- Multiple randomised controlled trials in humans, ideally with a meta-analysis, showing a consistent effect on an outcome that matters — not just on a biomarker. Safety at the stated dose is well characterised.
- Grade BPromising but incomplete
- Some randomised human evidence, but the trials are small, short, conflicting, or measure surrogate endpoints. A reasonable bet with real uncertainty attached.
- Grade CMechanism, animals, or observation only
- The rationale rests on cell and animal work, on epidemiology, or on human trials that moved a biomarker without moving an outcome. Interesting, unproven, and priced accordingly.
A high grade is not a recommendation and a low grade is not a dismissal. Creatine and NMN are both worth understanding; only one of them has the trial record to back the claims made for it.
Before any of this: the basics.
No peptide has evidence remotely close to sleep, strength training and getting your blood markers right. Start where the payoff is proven.
The Sunday briefing
One email a week: what changed in the evidence, what it means for the markers you track, and the occasional thing worth stopping. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.