Peptides & Performance: What’s Real, What’s Risky, and What’s Next

Written By Kevin Cooke

Peptides—short chains of amino acids that act like ultra-specific messengers—are having a moment. Some are FDA-approved drugs (e.g., GLP-1s for diabetes/weight loss; tesamorelin for HIV-associated lipodystrophy). Others are investigational or gray-market compounds circulating in wellness circles. If you’re interested in longevity, cognition, and performance, the right question isn’t “Which peptide should I take?” but rather: Which targets are credible, what outcomes do they actually move, and how do we minimize downside?

Below is a clinician’s framework: categories, evidence tiers, sample use-cases, and red-flags.

The peptide landscape (at a glance)

1) Metabolic hormones (high evidence in specific indications)

2) Growth-hormone axis (moderate evidence for physiology; narrow clinical approvals)

  • Tesamorelin (a GHRH analog) is FDA-approved for HIV-associated lipodystrophy and reduces visceral and liver fat in that population; small RCTs show NAFLD improvements in people with HIV. Extrapolation to general longevity is unproven. PMC+1

  • CJC-1295 (GHRH analog) and ipamorelin (GHS) can raise GH/IGF-1 in healthy adults; data are mainly short-term physiology studies, not outcomes. Safety and long-term benefit for healthy aging remain uncertain. PubMed

3) Mitochondrial-derived peptides (promising preclinical; early human signals)

  • MOTS-c and humanin are endogenous peptides linked to metabolic resilience and mitochondrial signaling. Animal and cell data are robust; human evidence is emerging (associations and very early studies). Not yet standard-of-care. Nature+2PMC+2

4) “Tissue repair” peptides (low human evidence)

  • BPC-157 and TB-500 (thymosin-β4 analog) are widely marketed for musculoskeletal repair. Evidence is predominantly animal data; human trials are sparse, small, or methodologically limited. Proceed cautiously. Ortho and Wellness+3PMC+3MDPI+3

What the strongest evidence supports—right now

1) Metabolic leverage: GLP-1s (semaglutide, tirzepatide)

If you carry excess visceral fat, insulin resistance, or T2D, metabolic correction is one of the highest-ROI moves for brain, heart, and lifespan. FDA-approved GLP-1s are effective for weight loss and glycemic control within labeled indications. The caution: avoid unapproved or “research-use” versions (variable potency, contamination risk, wrong salt forms). The FDA also clarified compounding policies as shortages resolve. Bottom line: if GLP-1 therapy is appropriate for you, use the approved products via legitimate channels and couple them with nutrition, resistance training, and sleep. U.S. Food and Drug Administration+2U.S. Food and Drug Administration+2

2) Visceral/liver fat in HIV-associated lipodystrophy: tesamorelin

High-quality trials show tesamorelin reduces visceral adiposity and lowers hepatic fat in people with HIV; it’s FDA-approved for that indication. We don’t have outcome trials showing better cardiovascular events or mortality, and we can’t assume the same benefit in otherwise healthy midlife athletes. Use it for the approved use; be skeptical of off-label “recomp” promises. PMC

3) GH secretagogues in healthy aging: CJC-1295, ipamorelin

Raising GH/IGF-1 can increase lean mass and fluid shifts, but it doesn’t automatically equal longer, healthier life. A classic study showed sustained GH/IGF-1 elevations after CJC-1295 dosing in healthy adults, but we lack robust, long-term safety/benefit data in general populations. Until we have outcomes, view these as physiology-modifiers with unknown net benefit. PubMed

4) Mitochondrial peptides (MOTS-c/humanin): intriguing, not ready for primetime

2024–2025 data suggest MOTS-c influences skeletal muscle metabolism and may reduce cellular senescence in preclinical models. Observational human data link circulating levels to metabolic states. Compelling biology; clinical efficacy and dosing in humans remain to be proven. Cell+2Nature+2

5) BPC-157 and friends: promising animal data, thin human evidence

You’ll see dramatic anecdotes for tendon or gut healing; the literature is dominated by rodent studies and narrative reviews. A 2024–2025 set of reviews highlight limited human clinical evidence (a few small or low-quality trials), with safety and quality-control unknowns outside regulated settings. If you use it, you’re operating in a low-evidence, higher-uncertainty zone. PMC+2MDPI+2

A practical, safety-first framework

1) Start with the problem, not the peptide

  • Metabolic disease/obesity? Prioritize nutrition periodization, resistance training, sleep. If medication is warranted, consider approved GLP-1s through standard channels. U.S. Food and Drug Administration

  • HIV lipodystrophy with fatty liver? Tesamorelin is on-label and supported by RCTs. PMC

  • General longevity/performance in healthy adults? Be cautious with GH secretagogues and “repair” peptides; test hypotheses within a physician-supervised protocol.

2) Evidence tiers & expectations

  • Tier A (approved/indicated): GLP-1s for T2D/obesity; tesamorelin for HIV-associated lipodystrophy.

  • Tier B (mechanistic/physiology, limited outcomes): CJC-1295/ipamorelin.

  • Tier C (preclinical/early human): MOTS-c/humanin.

  • Tier D (mostly anecdotes/animals): BPC-157/TB-500.

3) Quality, legality, and sourcing

  • Use FDA-approved products where they exist; be wary of websites selling “for research only” vials with dosing instructions. The FDA has issued multiple warnings and clarified that compounded GLP-1s are not appropriate once shortages resolve. Counterfeit and substandard products are documented. U.S. Food and Drug Administration+2U.S. Food and Drug Administration+2

4) Monitoring & risk management

  • Baseline labs (CBC, CMP, fasting lipids, A1c/insulin), body comp, BP, and—when relevant—IGF-1, thyroid, and liver enzymes.

  • Track outcomes that matter (visceral fat via DEXA/MRI, hepatic fat by MRI-PDFF when indicated, performance metrics, sleep).

  • Set stop rules (e.g., adverse effects, lack of benefit by 8–12 weeks, lab derangements).

  • Document every product’s lot, source, and chain of custody.

5) Stack design (if you proceed)

  • Change one lever at a time for 8–12 weeks with objective metrics.

  • Combine with lifestyle signals that potentiate peptides: protein-forward diet, resistance training, circadian regularity.

  • Don’t stack stimulatory agents (e.g., GH secretagogues + high-dose androgens) without a clear plan and supervision.

Sample protocols (illustrative—not medical advice)

A) Metabolic reset for insulin resistance or obesity (eligible patient)

  • First line: Nutrition coaching, resistance training 3–4×/wk, sleep optimization.

  • Medication: If criteria met, consider semaglutide or tirzepatide via legitimate prescription; titrate slowly to GI tolerance; monitor A1c, weight, BP, lipids, lean mass retention. Avoid unapproved compounded or “research” formulations. U.S. Food and Drug Administration+1

B) HIV-associated visceral adiposity/NAFLD

  • Tesamorelin per labeling; track visceral adipose tissue and liver fat at baseline and 6–12 months; continue lifestyle measures. PMC

C) Healthy midlife athlete seeking “performance”

  • Emphasize training periodization, protein timing, creatine, and sleep.

  • CJC-1295/ipamorelin: consider only in a monitored trial with explicit goals (e.g., lean mass preservation during a cut), frequent IGF-1 checks, BP, edema screening—and a plan to stop if benefits don’t outweigh side-effects. Evidence for longevity benefit is absent. PubMed

D) Curiosity about mitochondrial peptides

  • Consider clinical trials participation over private purchase. Outside trials, focus on lifestyle levers that up-regulate mitochondrial biogenesis (zone-2 cardio + intervals, resistance training, sleep). Cell+1

E) Musculoskeletal pain/injury asking for BPC-157

  • Discuss the low quality of human evidence, legal/regulatory status, and unknown purity when sourced online. Start with evidence-based rehab, load management, sleep, nutrition. If still interested, consider enrolling in a formal study rather than DIY. PMC+1

Red flags & myths

  • “It’s just a peptide, so it’s safe.” False. Potency, off-target effects, and contamination matter. Regulators have flagged counterfeit and misbranded peptide products. U.S. Food and Drug Administration+1

  • “Compounded GLP-1s are the same as brand.” Not necessarily. With shortages resolved, FDA scrutiny has increased; adverse events from non-approved copies are reported. U.S. Food and Drug Administration+1

  • “BPC-157 is clinically proven in humans.” Not yet. Animal data are encouraging; human trials are limited and low-quality. PMC+1

Bottom line

Peptides can be powerful levers—but your use-case and evidence bar should dictate the tool:

  • If the goal is metabolic health and you’re eligible: approved GLP-1s, inside a comprehensive lifestyle program, are legitimate medicine. Avoid gray-market vials. U.S. Food and Drug Administration+1

  • If you’re managing HIV-associated visceral adiposity/NAFLD: tesamorelin is on-label with RCT support. PMC

  • For general longevity/performance in healthy people: mitochondrial peptides and “repair” peptides are interesting science, not settled therapy. Caution, supervision, and humility are warranted.

Kevin Cooke
Previous

Optimizing Brain Health: From Plasticity to Protection
Next

The Most Popular Peptides: BPC-157, Sermorelin, Tesamorelin, Ipamorelin