STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Some wellness influencers are promoting peptides as a way to recover from injuries, grow muscles, improve metabolism and more. Their followers obtain peptides, despite federal restrictions and a lack of scientific evidence that they work. The Food and Drug Administration faces pressure to get rid of the limitations. NPR's Will Stone reports.
WILL STONE, BYLINE: Not a day goes by without some patients asking Dr. Alexander Weber about peptides. Usually, it's to see if it'll help them recover from an injury or after surgery.
ALEXANDER WEBER: So my stock answer is that we just don't have enough data to support their use.
STONE: Weber is an orthopedic surgeon and chief of sports medicine at the University of Southern California.
WEBER: The anecdotal evidence, even from patients that I see, is that they feel like these injectibles help them, but we just need to study it.
STONE: The craze over these peptide therapies recently led Weber and a team at USC to publish a review of the evidence, looking at some of the most popular ones, like BPC-157 and TB-500. He says none of them had convincing data from large, well-controlled studies done in humans. But you wouldn't necessarily know that, given the hype from influencers online and even some doctors who swear by them.
WEBER: Whenever I see these people on social media saying they're experts in this field and they've been doing it for a really long time, you can say those things, but show me the data.
STONE: To be clear, peptides are not some exotic substance. These are naturally occurring molecules. A string of amino acids smaller than a protein, they carry out all kinds of critical functions. The blockbuster GLP-1 weight loss drugs are examples of synthetic peptides, but those drugs were tested in large clinical trials and are approved by the Food and Drug Administration. These synthetic peptides, being touted for wellness and longevity, are not.
And in 2023, the Biden administration prohibited compounding pharmacies in the U.S. from making many of them. But Lee Rosebush, a pharmacist and attorney, says that backfired. People turned to sketchy suppliers overseas and are now injecting themselves with unvetted substances.
LEE ROSEBUSH: The FDA taking away access to these peptides via pharmacies who actually do testing associated with these, they opened up a gray and black market.
STONE: Rosebush represents peptide makers and sued the FDA over its decision. He says it's likely some of these peptides would never get approved because drug companies couldn't patent them, so they have no incentive to run the costly trials needed.
ROSEBUSH: This is not about recommending that anybody take a peptide. But for those that do want to have access to these products, we want to ensure they have the safest route available to them. And that's what this is about.
STONE: However, the FDA's own scientists, who ultimately work under health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his agency, have come out against lifting restrictions on any of the seven peptides under consideration this month. Their take on the evidence echoes what others have found, including the nonprofit Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Rita Jew, who leads that organization, says with any medication, you have to weigh the risks and benefits. The problem with these peptides is the benefits aren't clear yet.
RITA JEW: When you have not established effectiveness, then the only thing you have is risk.
STONE: Those risks could include dangerous immune reactions or even unintentionally promoting cancer growth. But there's now a lot of momentum behind loosening the Biden-era restrictions. Secretary Kennedy is a fan of peptides and has said he wants to let compounding pharmacies legally offer them again. The FDA committee that makes recommendations on whether that should happen for some of the peptides is meeting later this month.
Many of the members have ties to the peptide industry. Some work for clinics that provide them. Dr. Aaron Kesselheim is an expert on FDA law at Harvard Medical School.
AARON KESSELHEIM: I think what's going on here is the Advisory Committee may be stacked with people who are, you know, known to have certain viewpoints on a topic rather than who are coming at this in an unconflicted and unbiased way.
STONE: In a statement to NPR, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said all the committee members have undergone an ethics and vetting process, and the agency is committed to robust, transparent discussions about the products. Will Stone, NPR News. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.