Every zero-result search is logged — it is how we decide what to curate next.
Also: BPC157 · Body Protection Compound 157 · Body Protective Compound 157 · stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 · Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 · PL 14736 · PL-14736 · PL14736 · PCO-02 · Bepecin · the Wolverine peptide · body protection compound · BCP-157 · BPC 175 · BCP157
Four separate measurements, never averaged. Independent evidence counts only studies with no sponsor attached. Methodology version v2.0-2026-10 · how we grade evidence
Not approved by any regulator, anywhere, for any indication. Marketing and community claims — stated here as claims, not findings — include accelerated healing of tendon, ligament, muscle and bone injury, gut healing and relief of inflammatory bowel conditions, joint pain relief, wound healing, protection against NSAID-induced gastrointestinal damage, neuroprotection and "systemic healing."
The human record is five clinical studies and one registration, and none of them supports those claims. FDA’s systematic PubMed and Embase search in May 2026 found one randomised trial — a 53-patient meeting abstract in ulcerative colitis whose confidence interval crosses zero — two uncontrolled case series from one private peptide-prescribing clinic with no statistical analysis at all, a healthy-volunteer study in which the peptide was not detected in plasma, a two-person infusion report, and one registered trial that produced no public results. Jozwiak et al. 2025 state flatly that "there are no completed clinical studies describing its efficacy in humans." The Vasireddi 2025 systematic review in HSS Journal, which the research package could not retrieve an identifier for and which therefore carries no source row here, reported that 35 of its 36 included studies were preclinical and that "No study assessed the safety or adverse events of BPC-157 in humans."
FDA’s own assessment of safety is that there is "insufficient clinical safety information" to characterise it, that "we did not identify any studies that formally investigated the immunogenicity of BPC-157 products," and that the substance is, in the words of its staff at the July 2026 committee meeting, "not well-characterized" — one reviewer saying of quality standards, "We cannot establish quality standards" until more is known. The longest human exposure in any identified study is two weeks, and no animal study examined adverse events beyond six weeks.
Products are sold outside any regulatory quality framework, usually labelled "research use only." In the only quantitative survey of grey-market supply, 3.5% of BPC-157 samples failed identity testing — the labelled peptide was not detected at all — while median measured abundance was 103.50% of label claim, the highest of the fourteen peptides examined. That survey is a non-peer-reviewed preprint of voluntarily submitted samples, so it describes identity failures and dose inaccuracy and nothing wider.
One naming point matters for anyone reading labels: "Pentadeca Arginate" or PDA is a different, structurally modified analogue marketed separately. It is not a synonym for BPC-157 and its evidence, whatever it is, is not this evidence.
At a glance
Proposed mechanisms include promotion of angiogenesis via VEGFR2 signalling, modulation of nitric oxide pathways, upregulation of growth-factor receptors, and general cytoprotective or organoprotective effects. All of it is derived from animal and in vitro work. No human mechanistic study exists. FDA’s 2026 review found no human study that established a mechanism and noted that whether the peptide is endogenously produced at all has been questioned; the Jozwiak 2025 review adds that no molecular target has been definitively established. A separate concern raised in the peer-reviewed literature is that pro-angiogenic activity could in principle feed an existing tumour; the originating group disputed this in a published reply and the question is unresolved.
Dated determinations, each flagged for whether it is final and whether it covers safety only. A safety review is not an efficacy finding, and most reporting in this category conflates the two.
At the 23 to 24 July 2026 meeting the committee recommended 6 of 7 peptides over the objection of FDA’s own scientists: BPC-157 (8-6-1), KPV (8-6-1), TB-500 (8-6-1), MOTS-c (7-5-2), Semax and Epitalon; emideltide (DSIP) was rejected 7-6-1. These are non-binding recommendations only. FDA must still issue a proposed rule, take comments and issue a final rule; no final rule had issued as of 13 October 2026, and the precedent cited for comparison took from December 2016 to February 2019. Law-firm analysis in August 2026 put it plainly: "FDA has not approved these peptides through the drug approval process." Recommended is not approved, and the distinction matters because the former will be marketed as if it were the latter. The readable record for these votes is trade coverage rather than an FDA minutes document. Political context, recorded neutrally: additions require the approval of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who has expressed support for compounding peptides, and two members of Congress have asked FDA to limit enforcement.
FDA’s systematic PubMed and Embase search identified five clinical studies plus one trial registration, and there is no completed, published, adequately powered randomised controlled trial of BPC-157 for any indication. FDA found "insufficient clinical safety information" to characterise the safety profile, noting the identified studies were short, small and had unclear safety monitoring, and stated: "we did not identify any studies that formally investigated the immunogenicity of BPC-157 products," which "may pose a significant risk for immunogenicity, potentially amplified by aggregation," particularly for parenteral or nasal routes. Three injection-associated FAERS reports were retrieved and none was interpretable — one involved concurrent thymosin, one lacked detail, and one involved a combined BPC-157 and TB-500 product — so FDA could not attribute any of them to BPC-157.
FDA removed 12 peptides from Category 2 on 15 to 16 April 2026, BPC-157 among them, and scheduled an advisory committee meeting. Removal from Category 2 did not make these substances compoundable: they were never in Category 1, the only category covered by FDA’s interim enforcement-discretion policy. On the FDA page, content current as of 22 April 2026, BPC-157 appears only in the "nominated but withdrawn" table.
S0 covers any pharmacological substance not addressed elsewhere on the list and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use. BPC-157 is named as an example, which is a statement about its regulatory status as much as about sport.
Recorded from the Department of Defense Operation Supplement Safety listing dated 29 April 2025. It is not a lawful dietary supplement ingredient, and products are widely sold online labelled "research use only" or "not for human consumption."
One of 19 substances added to Category 2 on 29 September 2023, alongside Thymosin Beta-4 Fragment (LKKTETQ), MOTs-C, ipamorelin acetate, CJC-1295 and AOD 9604. Category 2 is a safety-concern listing and says nothing about efficacy.
Educational information only
Educational information only. Not medical advice, not a diagnosis, and not a substitute for your clinician. Never start, stop, or change a prescription medication based on anything you read here. We do not sell, prescribe, dispense or recommend any medication, peptide or supplement, and we do not link to anyone who does. If you are having a medical emergency, call 911.
The proposed mechanism for this ingredient has not been confirmed in humans. Marketing copy frequently states it as settled. It is not.
Published by Nu Link, 10111 Clodine Rd, Richmond, TX 77407.