Newsroom
What we've published and what's moving in the FDA peptide review. For the deadline-day version, the timeline shows exactly where things stand.
A 2025 pilot study, the first formal human safety report on intravenous BPC-157, is circulating again. Two adults tolerated a clinically prepared infusion with no adverse effects on standard labs. It's a real first, but a tiny one (n=2, both prior users, two days), and it used a measured, known dose, not a grey-market vial. We added a caveated summary to the BPC-157 guide.
Ahead of the deadline for comments to reach the advisory committee, Peppies filed a comment to docket FDA-2025-N-6895 - urging the panel to weigh the safety cost of the unregulated status quo, and to pair any access with rigorous identity, potency and sterility standards. Read the comment →
Peppies commissioned Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy to field a national survey on legal pharmacy access, the grey market, and trust in the FDA. The questionnaire is finalized; topline results and crosstabs are forthcoming. About the poll →
Two new press resources: a filterable, fully cited Quote Hub of what officials, scientists and public figures are saying about peptides, and a neutral source guide to the people shaping the debate.
Two more reporter resources: By the Numbers, the key cited stats on demand, contamination and enforcement (copy-ready), and Where Things Stand, a sourced step-by-step of the review and what actually happens next.
A profile of every member of the FDA advisory committee reviewing the seven peptides - with backgrounds, roles, and public affiliations, each linked to a source. See the panel →
Short, plain-English explainer videos on each peptide in the review - what it is, what the research does and doesn't show, and where it stands with regulators. Available on the individual peptide library pages.
