Peptide Injections Touted as ‘Fountain of Youth.’ Spoiler Alert: They’re Not

• Injectable “wellness” peptides have become wildly popular among health and wellness enthusiasts, despite lacking credible evidence for their safety and effectiveness.
• Social media influencers and biohackers tout wellness peptides as a “fountain of youth” to achieve longevity and fitness gains.
• Experts in the medical community have raised alarms about the safety of compounded peptides marketed for wellness, calling for federal oversight of these products, which are largely sold online.

During the 1980s, anabolic steroids emerged out of elite athletic circles and rose to popularity among fitness and gym enthusiasts. 

It didn’t take long for the medical community to question their safety. Researchers and athletic organizations raised concerns over the health risks associated with recreational anabolic steroid use, such as cardiovascular disease. By 1991, the substances were banned for non-medical use under the Anabolic Steroids Control Act. 

But the quest for fast-tracked, unproven methods to achieve peak fitness is far from over. 

Today, influencers and biohackers tout peptide injections as a “fountain of youth,” a one-stop shop to achieve muscle gain, longevity, and more.

Echoing the past, so-called “wellness” peptides have become ubiquitous despite lacking any credible evidence. No studies to date have verified their safety for use in humans.

A recent position paper by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices on the safety and efficacy of wellness peptides highlights an “alarming safety concern” about their widespread use.

Unlike well-studied commercial peptide drugs (i.e., insulin and GLP-1s), compounded peptide products marketed for “wellness” are unregulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

While no states have outright banned non-FDA-approved peptides, some have stepped up public health messaging, aiming to crack down on online sales. For instance, Alabama’s medical regulator recently issued a warning against the use of non-FDA-approved research-grade peptides due to health and safety risks.

The FDA is expected to decide in July whether certain compounded wellness peptides should be officially authorized for use. 

Experts are concerned that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an avid supporter of peptides who oversees the FDA, could ease some of the red tape.

“This has nothing to do with wellness,” said Bert Mandelbaum, MD, sports medicine specialist, orthopedic surgeon, and co-director of the Regenerative Orthobiologic Center at Cedars-Sinai Orthopedics in Los Angeles. 

“I would call it more of an uninformed fad. It’s worse than that — it’s criminal. The influencers, including RFK Jr., are abusing the system and not following the science,” he told Healthline.

Healthline spoke with Mandelbaum to learn more about the dangers of unregulated peptides and why most people should probably steer clear.

This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity and length.

What are wellness peptides?

Mandelbaum: Peptides are a group of compounds that come together to have a wide variety of functions in our body. 

Peptides are leucine, the amino acid that’s fantastic for building muscle, and it’s been well studied. Since peptides are protein derivatives, they’ve been exploited on social media. 

The peptides BPC-157, TB-500, and CJC-1295 have been marketed by influencers for anything from performance to joint healing to fat loss and anti-aging. They’re just peptides that are being abused. There’s no research, there’s no label, there’s no associated effects.

Fortunately, our real athletes haven’t fallen prey to this. The good news is we have biologics that can make a difference in many of the things that peptides claim to do.

If you’re a bodybuilder and you’re trying to build your muscles, you might think that peptides are going to do it for you. At one time, that was about anabolic steroids and combinations of anabolic steroids, but we have since proven the titanium to be unsafe.

Are compounded peptides illegal? 

Mandelbaum: In the sense of the legality of these self-injections, this whole thing is a farce.

From a regulatory perspective, they’re not FDA-approved. They’re banned by the World Anti-Doping Administration (WADA), the Department of Defense (DoD), and the Department of Justice (DoJ). 

BP-157 (15-amino acid pentadecapeptide) is a synthetic derivative of human gastric juice, and it’s promoted online as having incredible healing capabilities and also for performance and longevity, none of which have ever been substantiated in anything other than rodents. 

It’s almost like a group of gym rats got together and said, “Let’s see how much of this stuff we could sell.” It’s totally unregulated. 

What are the risks of wellness peptide injections?

Mandelbaum: There are risks, some of which we don’t know, like tumor risk, for example. 

There’ve been infections; there may be negative impacts on the heart or the immune system, or risks to bone or tissue, none of which we know or don’t know. These things have to be investigated.

We don’t even know the safety profile, but I’ve seen patients inject this stuff into their knees, and there’s been contamination. 

Any effectiveness of BP-157 is a myth. There’s no evidence in terms of doing any of these things on the clinical side, and the safety side is really a tremendous hole of issues, because now these influencers are selling it, using the leverage of social media to convince people to inject themselves in their knees with this stuff. 

Beyond safety, these things are also extremely expensive.  

Are there safer, proven alternatives to wellness peptides?

Mandelbaum: In sports and performance medicine, we want to promote healing, and we want to improve our muscles and optimize performance — preservation is what we call it. 

There’s a whole family of orthobiological compounds that have been proven with very high levels of evidence to be safe and effective to support healing. 

If we’re talking about longevity, health span, or play span in athletes, when you’re trying to preserve performance over time, it’s not just one thing. 

It’s about your fitness, VO₂ max, and load. It’s all about the nutritional aspects: recovery, sleep, and injury prevention. Creatine can help build muscle.

Right now, we are limited to what we call “autologous products,” which include platelet-rich plasma (PRP), bone marrow aspirate concentrate, and adipose tissue, all of which are allowed by the FDA and none of which are prohibited.

Orthobiologics do have a role, but all of those things add up to 100%. 

Each of these factors can influence an athlete’s performance, but to do so, it’s all those variables. Understanding free radicals and inflammation in our bodies is critical. 

Should the FDA propose a ban on peptides?

Mandelbaum: That’s what we would want from the FDA. 

I would hope that the government’s first response would be that there’s a tremendous amount of appeal here. 

We need more research, more, more efficacy — the number of steps we have to go to approve a biological process through the FDA is extremely challenging.

As physicians and scientists, we have to ask ourselves and answer the questions: Is it effective for that specific use? And is it safe? Is it safe in animals? Is it safe in humans? And the only way we learn this is to study that. Peptide influencers have gone through the back door with this. 

Until we have more evidence, until it’s been well studied, until we have that information, the onus is on our government to close the gap between hope and knowledge.

Public health officials have a responsibility. Let’s study it; let’s sponsor a 5- to 10-year research protocol to examine it, and let the FDA evaluate that data when it’s complete. 

Take PRP, for instance. In 2007, we said we needed more research to determine its safety and to ensure its efficacy for muscle, tendon, and joint healing. We had to go through this vigilance over the last 19 years, just with PRP, to understand how it could help athletes.

To respond at the governmental level without performing due diligence would really hurt our population.