Peptide Bioregulators

The FDA hates peptides. You can rabbit hole on reasons for that if you would like, but at the end of the day, the pharmaceutical industry is in the market of producing medications for profit. Peptides aren’t medications and the ones they dislike cannot be patented. They are simple to synthesize and come with few if any potential side effects or contraindications. Nevertheless, the FDA made good on its promise to effectively ban signaling peptides in the fall of 2023. They moved the most used peptides to the ‘category 2’ list, which is their designation for ‘potential harm’ – although they did not state any harms data. You know, like when they pulled Vioxx from the market for causing strokes. They basically said these aren’t studied, they don’t work, they might cause harm, so don’t use them. 

Peptides are still readily available on the so-called black market because anyone with a science degree and a synthesizer can make them. That of course calls into question safe manufacturing practices, potency, and sterility concerns. I am still a huge supporter of peptides, but accessing safe products requires knowing the right people behind their production – and an understanding of how our regulatory agencies feel about them in general. 

Peptide bioregulators are different than signaling peptides. First, the FDA considers them dietary supplements and not ‘biologics’ like injectable peptides. So, they’re not standing in the way of product availability. Second, peptide bioregulators are extremely small – two or three amino acids in length. They play a crucial role in regulating various physiological processes all throughout the body. Dr. Vladimir Khavinson, a renowned scientist in the field of bioregulation, has extensively researched and developed these peptides, demonstrating their potential in promoting health and longevity. Let’s take a look at how bioregulators work and how they differ from more conventional signaling peptides.