For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.
29 likes 7mo
Topic summary
Analytical identity of BPC-157: a 15-mer with a simple mass — does this still hold?
This is a generated summary. It shows the 5 most-liked posts from a topic of 34, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.
Analytical identity of BPC-157: a 15-residue peptide with an unambiguous mass (≈1419.5 Da). Identity confirmation by LC-MS is trivially easy, which means there is no excuse for an unverified identity on this compound.
30 likes 5mo
dr_bhattacharya, post #14: post #13 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. What would change the position on repair peptides: adequately powered, published, peer-reviewed randomised controlled human trials with pre-specified outcomes. That is the standard applied to every other therapeutic claim on this site and it is the standard… Go to post
On post #13 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
For anyone arriving from search engines: this subcategory discusses published preclinical work and the absence of published clinical work. It does not endorse or recommend these compounds.
e.ferreira, post #19: I read post #17 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite. Reading a preclinical wound-healing model: the model shows whether a mechanism is plausible in a specific context. It does not show magnitude of effect in humans, does not show safety profile in humans, and does not show whether the effect survives in a more… Go to post
Publication patterns in the BPC-157 literature: a large proportion of the evidence comes from one research group. That is not necessarily wrong — one group can do excellent work — but it is worth noting when evaluating the breadth of support for a claim.
post #31 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
What would change the position on repair peptides: adequately powered, published, peer-reviewed randomised controlled human trials with pre-specified outcomes. That is the standard applied to every other therapeutic claim on this site and it is the standard applied here.
25 likes 1mo
Read the full topic (34 posts)
This topic was referenced in
- Stability of BPC-157 in solution: what has been measured — one year onCompounds › Repair & healing peptides · 98 replies
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Why plausible mechanism is not evidence of effect — one year on
The question in the title: Why plausible mechanism is not evidence of effect — one year on I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Session topic: STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021). Please read…
|
+3 | 7 | 3.6k | 13mo |
|
What would change my mind about repair peptides: a specific answer
What would change my mind about repair peptides: a specific answer — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Session topic: SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024). Please…
|
+26 | 30 | 1.1k | 23h |
|
Oral versus injected administration claims for BPC-157
Oral versus injected administration claims for BPC-157 — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have seen FLOW ( N Engl J Med , 2024) cited in support of a claim I do not think…
|
+20 | 24 | 47k | 4mo |
|
BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — a second dataset
On the subject in the title: BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2019)…
|
+77 | 84 | 54k | 11mo |
|
Why plausible mechanism is not evidence of effect
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Why plausible mechanism is not evidence of effect Session topic: STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021). Please read it before posting; the discussion is much…
|
+14 | 18 | 57k | 13mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags needs a source, preprint, BPC-157
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
About the Other compounds category
Anything not covered by a dedicated subcategory, including research-use-only material with no human data. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is…
|
+8 | 12 | 51k | 7mo |
|
Common supplements people ask about, assessed one at a time — a second dataset
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Common supplements people ask about, assessed one at a time — a second dataset Everything below is what sits behind that. Reporting something rather than asking…
|
+97 | 104 | 15k | 3mo |
|
Second pass at: How to research a compound with no human data without deceiving yourself
Second pass at: How to research a compound with no human data without deceiving yourself Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Comparing STEP 1 ( N Engl J Med ,…
|
+64 | 71 | 2.5k | 13mo |
|
Why a glucagon receptor agonist in a weight-loss compound is not a contradiction — one year on
Why a glucagon receptor agonist in a weight-loss compound is not a contradiction — one year on — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I have seen SURPASS-2 (…
|
+3 | 7 | 1k | 2mo |
|
Coming back to: Grapefruit: why this class is not the class that cares
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Grapefruit: why this class is not the class that cares Everything below is what sits behind that. I have read the maintained page on this and I still have a gap, so…
|
+44 | 48 | 12k | 18mo |