Available Peptides

Weight and metabolic findings are mainly from animal research. Human weight-loss effectiveness and long-term safety are not established.

The approved prescription formulation treats certain people with osteoporosis at high fracture risk. This catalog vial is not equivalent to the approved medicine.

Reliable human evidence for this exact formulation was not identified. Semax research cannot establish the benefits or safety of Adamax.

A study of human hair follicles and cells outside the body found growth-related effects. It does not establish hair regrowth in people or injectable use.

A small randomized pilot in sarcoidosis-associated neuropathy reported symptom improvements. This is not established treatment or evidence for general injury recovery.

Evidence is mainly from animal studies; human benefits remain unproven.

Organ-tissue culture research is not proof of better breathing or treatment of lung disease in people.

Human obesity trials support weight loss with the studied investigational formulation. They do not verify the quality or equivalence of this catalog product.

Reported effects in rat heart tissue cultures do not establish cardiac benefit or safety in people.

Mechanistic research on the AED peptide is not proof of joint repair or pain relief in people. Clinical benefit for this catalog formulation is not established.

The supplier labels this a 30 mg product without a certificate of analysis. Its identity and equivalence to clinical Cerebrolysin preparations are not established here; clinical findings cannot be assumed to apply.

CJC no DAC is distinct from the longer-acting CJC-1295 with DAC studied in people. Broader fitness benefits are not established for the catalog formulation.

These broader benefits remain unproven for the combination. CJC with DAC is a different formulation.

Small human studies measured hormone increases. Those results do not establish muscle growth, recovery, anti-aging benefits, or long-term safety.

Benefits of this three-ingredient blend have not been established in controlled human trials. Ingredient research does not validate the mixture. Amounts are listed in name order.

Gene-expression and animal research do not establish improved cognition, nerve repair, or safety in people.

Human sleep evidence is limited and inconsistent.

Cell and animal findings do not establish longer life or better sleep in people. Human safety and effectiveness data remain limited.

Much of the evidence is from laboratory and animal studies; findings depend on formulation.

Cosmetic-grade material is distinct from the other GHK-Cu listings and is not for injection.

The blend has not established these benefits in controlled human trials.

A small oral study found pigmentation changes at some measured sites. Oral or topical findings do not establish benefits or safety of injectable use.

This modified IGF-1 has shown growth-related effects in animals. The cited diabetic-rat experiment is not evidence of safe or effective fitness use in people.

Broader fitness and sleep claims are not established by strong human trials. Human safety data are limited and depend on route and formulation.

Small human trials have studied particular forms, including kisspeptin-54. This listing does not specify the form, so those results cannot be assumed to apply.

The blend has not established these benefits in controlled human trials.

Proposed treatment benefits are primarily preclinical. FDA reports insufficient human exposure information to determine safety.

This amino-acid derivative is not a peptide. Supplement evidence varies by population, formulation, and route; a role in energy metabolism does not establish fat loss from injections.

A topical venous-ulcer trial did not improve the primary healing outcome overall. A subgroup signal does not establish general healing or injectable benefits.

Clinical use of afamelanotide involves a regulated implant for a specific light-sensitivity disorder. It does not validate a research vial for cosmetic tanning.

Small human studies show pigmentation changes; long-term safety is not established.

Proposed treatment benefits are mainly supported by animal research.

Reliable clinical evidence for this modified formulation was not identified. Parent epithalon research cannot establish the benefits or safety of this analog.

Human findings for unmodified Selank do not establish benefit or safety for this modified formulation.

Research on unmodified Semax does not establish benefit or safety for this modified formulation.

A small infusion study measured NAD metabolism, not meaningful improvements in energy, aging, or lifespan. Those broader benefits remain unproven.

Research on the EDL peptide is largely mechanistic or preclinical. Organ-support claims do not establish treatment of liver or kidney disease in people.

Experimental social effects vary by person and setting and are not reliably beneficial. Intranasal research cannot establish effects of a different formulation or route.

P021 research has reported cognitive effects in mouse models. It does not establish human benefit or verify the identity of the catalog product labeled P-21.

Research on shortened spadin analogs involves cells and animal behavior. These results do not establish treatment of depression in people.

Cell and rat studies suggest neuroprotective effects. They do not demonstrate improved memory or prevention of neurological disease in people.

The cited study concerns cancer-cell killing in laboratory models. PNC-27 is not an established cancer treatment and must not replace medical cancer care.

Organ-tissue culture findings do not establish relief of urinary symptoms or treatment of prostate disease in people.

The prescription formulation is approved for a specific low-desire disorder in premenopausal women, not general sexual performance. It can raise blood pressure; this catalog vial is not equivalent to that medicine.

Weight loss has human trial support; inflammatory-marker findings vary by study.

Small human studies exist; the clinical evidence remains limited.

Approved prescription formulations have strong human evidence for specific indications. Research catalog products are not interchangeable with those medicines.

Strong human evidence for these uses is limited.

Human studies of GHRH(1–29) show growth-hormone release. A hormone increase alone does not establish anti-aging, fat-loss, or muscle-growth benefits.

The cited topical cosmetic data come from the ingredient manufacturer. They are not independent evidence for injectable use or an effect equivalent to botulinum toxin.

Forzinity received accelerated FDA approval in 2025 for muscle strength in a narrowly defined Barth syndrome population. This does not establish general energy or anti-aging benefits, or equivalence of this catalog vial.

Disease-specific trials do not establish routine immune boosting in healthy people. A large 2025 sepsis trial did not reduce 28-day mortality.

The supplier labels this TB500/TB4. Findings for thymosin beta-4 depend on the formulation and route and do not establish general injury-recovery benefits from this vial.

This short fragment is distinct from full-length thymosin beta-4. FDA reports no identified human exposure data for the fragment; full-length peptide studies do not establish its benefits.

The approved prescription formulation is not indicated for general weight loss. Research products are not equivalent to that medicine.

The combination has not established these benefits in controlled human trials. Approval of a prescription tesamorelin formulation does not extend to this blend.

Mechanistic reports for the KEDG peptide do not establish a reliable testosterone increase, improved fertility, or clinical benefit from this vial.

Limited human research in specific clinical settings does not establish routine immune benefits in otherwise healthy people.

Much of the therapeutic research is in animal models. Results in experimental autoimmune disease do not establish routine immune benefits in people.

Approved prescription formulations have strong human evidence for specific indications. Research catalog products are not interchangeable with those medicines.

Trials of aviptadil in critical lung illness have produced mixed findings; a larger trial did not establish clinical benefit. General wellness benefits are unproven.

Benefits of this blend have not been established in controlled human trials. Mostly preclinical ingredient research does not demonstrate that the combination works in people.