Published by Pinnacle Pulse, maker of a self-tracking app. We have no affiliate or sales relationship with any peptide seller. Editorial policy →
Research on peptides and GLP-1 medicines: what the evidence shows
By Pinnacle Pulse Editorial Team · Status as of 16 October 2026 · Next scheduled update: 14 January 2027
Short answer: This section summarizes the published research on 14 substances people log in tracking apps, from BPC-157 to retatrutide. The evidence is wildly uneven. Two are authorized medicines tested in trials with thousands of participants, and one is in late-stage trials. Several have never been tested in a human trial at all.
Why this section exists
Pinnacle Pulse makes a tracking app, and people use it to log substances that are discussed online with a great deal of confidence and, often, very little evidence. We think anyone logging something deserves a plain account of what is known about it. These pages are that account. They are written separately from the product, they carry no calls to action, and they don’t tell anyone to use or avoid anything.
Each article follows the same structure, so you can compare them. A short answer comes first. Then what the substance is, what has been studied (sorted by type of evidence), a section on what the research does not show, the legal and anti-doping position, and the sources, with the date we last checked them.
How we sort evidence
Not all studies count equally, and a lot of online writing about peptides blurs that. We sort what we find roughly from weakest to strongest:
- Cell and tissue experiments, which show whether something can happen in a dish.
- Animal studies, which show whether it happens in a living organism, usually a rodent.
- Human reports without a control group, such as case series and chart reviews, where it is hard to separate the substance’s effect from expectation, natural recovery or chance.
- Randomized controlled trials, where people are assigned at random to the substance or a comparison, ideally without knowing which they got.
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that pool several trials.
A substance can have hundreds of papers on rungs one and two and still nothing on rung four. That is the situation for BPC-157.
The substances
The table groups them loosely: the first three are peptides discussed for repair and skin, the next eight act on the growth hormone axis or on muscle growth (epitalon, pitched for aging, is the odd one out), and the last three are GLP-1 drugs.
| Substance | What it is | Strongest human evidence | Article |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPC-157 | Synthetic 15-amino-acid peptide, not an authorized medicine | Retrospective chart review, two-person pilot; no RCT indexed | BPC-157 research |
| TB-500 | Seller’s name for a fragment of thymosin beta-4 | None for the fragment; small eye-drop trials of the full protein | TB-500 research |
| GHK-Cu | Copper-binding tripeptide used in cosmetics | Very few clinical studies, per a 2025 review | GHK-Cu research |
| IGF-1 LR3 | Lab-made analogue of the growth factor IGF-1, not a medicine | None; no clinical trial indexed in PubMed | IGF-1 LR3 research |
| CJC-1295 | Long-acting GHRH analogue that binds albumin, not a medicine | Two small 2006 studies in healthy adults, hormone levels only | CJC-1295 research |
| Sermorelin | GHRH fragment, a former FDA-approved drug withdrawn in 2009 | Small pediatric trials, e.g. 43 children randomized | Sermorelin research |
| Ipamorelin | Synthetic ghrelin-receptor pentapeptide, not a medicine | One phase 2 RCT after bowel surgery, 114 analysed, no benefit | Ipamorelin research |
| GHRP-6 | Synthetic ghrelin-receptor hexapeptide, not a medicine | Open-label stroke trials with EGF; phase 3 missed its endpoint | GHRP-6 research |
| MK-677 | Oral non-peptide ghrelin mimetic (ibutamoren), not a medicine | RCTs, e.g. 563 patients with Alzheimer’s disease, no effect | MK-677 research |
| Follistatin | Myostatin-binding protein, studied as gene therapy | Two uncontrolled gene-therapy trials, six treated patients each | Follistatin research |
| Epitalon | Synthetic tetrapeptide based on a pineal extract | Small studies, mostly from one group; no adequately powered RCT | Epitalon research |
| Semaglutide | GLP-1 receptor agonist, prescription medicine | Large RCTs, e.g. SELECT with 17,604 participants | Semaglutide research |
| Tirzepatide | GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, prescription medicine | Large RCTs, e.g. SURMOUNT-1 with 2,539 participants | Tirzepatide research |
| Retatrutide | Investigational GIP, GLP-1 and glucagon receptor agonist, not approved | Phase 3 RCTs published in 2026, e.g. TRIUMPH-1 with 2,339 participants | Retatrutide research |
For the first five substances, the legal and anti-doping position in the EU and the US is covered in a separate section, Legal status. The newer articles carry a short status box of their own instead.
What the research does not show
Every article has a section with this heading, because what is missing is often the most useful thing to know. Across all 14 substances, a few gaps come up again and again.Research on a molecule says nothing about a product bought outside the regulated supply chain. Regulators in the US and the EU have warned about falsified, contaminated and mislabeled products, including copies of the two authorized medicines. FDA has also warned about retatrutide sold as a “research” product.
Studies in animals or cells don’t show an effect in people. And a lack of reported side effects in a handful of people is not evidence of safety.
Even for semaglutide and tirzepatide, trials ran for a few years at most and enrolled selected participants under medical supervision.
How we keep these pages current
Each page shows the date it was last fact-checked and a change log at the bottom. We recheck every article at least every 90 days and sooner when a regulator or a major study changes the picture. If you spot an error, our editorial policy explains how to tell us and how corrections are handled.
FAQ
Who writes these articles?
The Pinnacle Pulse editorial team, the people who make the app. No physician or lawyer reviews them, which is why we work only from primary sources and leave out anything we can’t check against one. Our editorial policy explains the details.
Does Pinnacle Pulse recommend any of these substances?
No. We make a tracking app and don’t sell, recommend or link to any substance or seller. These articles are for information only.
How often are these pages updated?
At least every 90 days, and sooner when a regulator acts or an important study is published. The date of the last fact check is shown at the top of each article.
Sources
Each article lists its own sources with PubMed IDs or links to the regulator’s page, and the date they were last checked. Facts on this overview page were last checked on 16 October 2026.
Facts last checked: 16 October 2026.
About this article
Written by: the Pinnacle Pulse Editorial Team, the people who make the Pinnacle Pulse app. We work only from primary sources such as regulators, legal texts, trial registries and PubMed, and we remove claims we can’t check against one.
This article has not been reviewed by a physician. It is general information, not medical advice.
Spotted an error? Our editorial policy explains how to report it and how we correct mistakes.
Change log
- 16 October 2026: First published.
From the makers of this site: Pinnacle Pulse is a neutral tracking app. We don’t sell or recommend any substance. About Pinnacle Pulse
This article is for general information only. It is not medical advice and does not recommend the use of any substance. Decisions about medicines belong with a qualified healthcare professional.