Americans are injecting themselves with unproven peptides sold by influencers and RFK Jr. allies

Associated Press — More and more Americans are injecting unapproved chemicals that are touted as ways to build muscle, rejuvenate skin and prolong life, the latest example of the nation’s fascination with alternative therapies and wellness hacks.

Behind this trend is the growing popularity of GLP-1 weight loss drugs, a class of so-called peptides approved to help users lose weight quickly.

But the peptides promoted by influencers, celebrities, and wellness gurus are different: Many have never been approved for human use, and much of their purported evidence comes from studies in rats and other animals. Several peptides, such as BPC-157 and TB-500, are banned as doping substances by international sports authorities.

“None of them are proven,” said Dr. Eric Topol, a research methods expert and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute. “None of them have undergone what would be considered adequate clinical trials, but nevertheless, many people are following them. It’s actually quite extraordinary.”

Among those who have emphasized the benefits of peptides is Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has built a national following among Americans deeply skeptical of health experts, pharmaceutical companies and traditional medicine.

For years, the Food and Drug Administration has tried to crack down on this space, sending warning letters to clinics that promote the products and adding more than two dozen peptides to a list of ingredients that should not be made by specialty pharmacies that often custom mix formulations.

This approach may be coming to an end.

Kennedy pledged to end the “FDA’s war” on peptides and other alternative treatments that are being embraced by many in his Make America Healthy Again movement.

Some of Kennedy’s friends and associates are among the biggest supporters, including Gary Brecka, a self-described “biohacker” and “longevity expert” who sells injectable peptides, patches and nasal sprays on his website for $350 to $600 each.

During a May appearance on Brecka’s podcast, Kennedy again promised to “end the war at the FDA” against peptides, stem cells, psychedelics and other fringe therapies.

“Music to my ears,” Brecka replied.

Brecka declined to be interviewed for this story.

Peptides are essentially the building blocks of more complex proteins. Inside the human body, peptides trigger hormones necessary for growth, metabolism and healing.

The FDA has approved a number of peptides as medications, including insulin for diabetics who don’t produce it naturally and human growth hormone for children with developmental disorders caused by low levels of the hormone.

But many other peptides promoted online have never been approved, making them technically illegal to market as drugs. Under current FDA guidelines, these peptides are also not eligible for compounding – the process by which pharmacies mix medications to order for patients.

That hasn’t stopped celebrities and influencers from praising them.

Joe Rogan, for example, has repeatedly praised BPC-157, a peptide derived from acids found in the gut.

“I had tendinitis in my elbow, I started using BPC-157 and it went away in two weeks,” Rogan told his podcast audience last year.

He is among the celebrity clients listed on the website of Ways 2 Well, a Texas-based company that offers peptides, stem cells, vitamin infusions and other alternative treatments.

It’s all part of the “circus of unproven, expensive and potentially dangerous offerings” promoted by wellness and longevity clinics, said Topol, who has written about the industry.

For $99, Ways 2 Well offers a “peptide consultation” with a doctor, after which the company ships the peptide vials along with a “complete kit including dosage, instructions and syringes,” according to its website.

The company’s founder, Brigham Buhler, is a former pharmaceutical sales representative. He did not respond to requests for comment.

Andrea Steinbrenner, the council’s director, said she became intrigued by peptides after hearing about their benefits in terms of “longevity, repair, anti-aging and energy” from an acquaintance who runs a clinic outside San Diego.

Steinbrenner and her husband now receive monthly infusions at the clinic, in addition to daily supplements.

“I think peptides are popular right now because we are an aging generation and we are looking for alternatives to modern medicine,” she said. “I absolutely believe in modern Western medicine – it’s necessary. But there are many other things in the universe that the earth provides.”

Proponents of peptides often suggest that their products are safe because they are based on substances found in the body.

“Unlike synthetic pharmaceuticals, peptides are naturally recognized by your body,” Brecka told her more than 2 million Instagram followers in February.

Critics point out that the peptides sold are often imperfect synthetics and are taken in much higher doses than any peptide in the body, increasing the risk of allergic reactions and other harm.

Brecka sells more than a half-dozen peptides, including ipamorelin and CJC-1295, both of which have been flagged by the FDA as posing serious safety risks.

Like other peptides sold on Brecka’s website, vials of ipamorelin are labeled: “research use only.”

“Research use” language is ubiquitous in the peptide space, even in forums where users exchange tips for purchasing, dosing, and “stacking” different drug combinations.

One Facebook group tells members which words to avoid: “Instead of ‘take,’ you ‘look for’ peptides.” »

Lawyers who work in the field say this language is an attempt to circumvent FDA regulations. The agency does not oversee chemicals that are not intended for human use.

It is often unclear whether these peptides are produced in the United States by pharmacies and mislabeled for research, or whether they are purchased from chemical manufacturers, most of which are located in China and are not subject to FDA drug quality standards.

“Research-grade peptides are going to have junk in them,” said Paul Knoepfler, a cell biologist at the University of California, Davis. “They will use chemicals in the purification process and peptide fragments that you don’t want.”

On platforms like TikTok, companies in China and other countries are offering to ship dozens of varieties of peptides to the United States for as little as $5 a vial.

“What’s really in there?” » said Knoepfler. “If someone injects it under the skin, what do they get? »

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA has issued more than half a dozen warning letters to companies promoting peptides with “immune-boosting powers.”

Then, in 2023, the agency added nearly 20 peptides to a list of substances that should not be mixed due to safety risks. Pharmacies that violate this measure risk fines, prosecution or the potential loss of their state license.

This triggered reactions from wellness entrepreneurs and specialty pharmacies, including lawsuits.

One coalition, Save Peptides, warned its supporters: “Our basic human rights to access alternative medical care using regenerative peptides are being taken away by the FDA. »

A lawsuit filed by a major pharmaceutical company alleged that regulators ignored legally required steps when adding peptides to the FDA’s list of high-risk substances. The litigation forced the agency to backtrack, and the FDA agreed late last year to convene two public meetings of outside advisors to review several peptides flagged as posing safety risks.

In each case, experts agreed with the FDA, voting that the substances were too risky to mix.

Some in the industry disagree.

“Doctors should have every available arrow in the quiver to treat disease and, because of the FDA’s inaction, they don’t have it,” said Lee Rosebush, who contributed to the lawsuit against the FDA and represents a group of large compounding pharmacies.

The FDA, under Kennedy, recently removed a number of experts from the Compounds Advisory Committee.

This could pave the way for appointing more peptide-friendly experts who could vote in favor of certain drugs previously banned by the FDA. Alternatively, the FDA could simply publish a list of peptides and tell pharmacies and clinics that it will not impose a ban on them.

For now, doctors say they’re fielding more questions from patients excited about peptides and looking for prescriptions.

“Patients should really ask their healthcare professionals: Are these medications safe long term? says Dr. Anita Gupta of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, who served on the FDA’s preparation committee until earlier this year. “That’s the question I would ask if I were a patient.”

___

AP video journalist Javier Arciga contributed to this story from San Diego.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.