The Guardian view on peptides: Robert F Kennedy Jr would leave public health policy to the hucksters | Editorial

A.Robert F Kennedy Jr, the US Secretary of Health, is a chaotic person, but his Make America Healthy Again (Maha) agenda tends to follow a predictable logic. Large-scale mandatory public health interventions – such as mandating child vaccinations – are generally viewed with suspicion and undermined. Personal choice – drinking raw milk, for example – must be free and free from the burden of regulation. In theory, Maha promises freedom and autonomy; in practice, it tends to replace the precautionary principle with exhortations to individuals to “do their own research” and sets aside scientific expertise for the benefit of peddlers and “welfare” profiteers.

This is particularly evident in Mr. Kennedy’s recent claims that he would open up the sale of “about 14” injectable peptide drugs to the public. Peptides are molecules often used by our body to send signals. So there are many types of peptides, and the safety and effectiveness of each is a separate issue. Widely used “weight loss” drugs are peptides, as are the toxic compounds in snake venom that dissolve living cells. Mr. Kennedy is likely referring to a subset of 17 peptides restricted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2023 due to “significant potential safety risks.” None have been shown to be safe or effective for human use, so there is no clear argument to reverse the decision.

But peptides fit very well into the broader Maha logic. Some show promise in treating diseases, but most are promoted for their biological enhancement: there are suggestions that certain peptides may increase muscle mass or have cognitive benefits. Evidence of these effects in humans is thin, but reports of people self-administering peptide therapies – usually purchased in China “for research purposes only” – are widespread. This is especially true in Silicon Valley, which is at the forefront of a kind of self-directed medical speculation, betting that risky, poorly researched treatments might pay off and give individuals a social or intellectual advantage. Given the contemporary obsession with wellness and optimization, it’s likely that this will soon enter the wider culture. The number of retailers selling ‘research’ peptides in the UK and Europe suggests that their gray market use is common.

The Maha project wants to make the gray market the only market. Mr. Kennedy doesn’t need full FDA approval for his favorite questionable products so much as a lack of bans. Peptides are clearly drugs and their widespread use should not be permitted without rigorous clinical trials. Opening sales loopholes would effectively sanction mass public use, as some U.S.-based pharmacies and even the group behind the controversial sports competition Enhanced Games are pushing to sell them.

It can be frustrating that promising therapies often don’t receive the attention and funding needed to guide them through to approval, but the precautionary principle has successfully guided public health policy for generations, and it should not be abandoned or circumvented so easily. It’s also worth noting that we simply don’t know that peptides work without doing scientific research. The anecdote is not proof. Other governments are unlikely to be as cavalier as Mr. Kennedy about peptides. But people everywhere will continue to demand more personal choices and more bodily autonomy, and these conversations are important. They are also one more reason to advocate for safety, evidence and regulation.