CNCCurrency
GLP-1 Specialist
Well that definitely puts you in the minority on this forum.
RFK announces rescheduling of various peptides
- Thread starter mybodyisasewer
- Start date
ltjltj
GLP-1 Apprentice
Which I'm 100% fine with! I'm actually not sure that's true, it's quite a leap to go from a well-studied drug to very poorly studied drugs just because they have similar chemical structures, but either way it seems pretty irrelevant. Are you saying that makes me not welcome or something?
Being critical of pharma is fair, but it’s not a reason to disregard science or evidence based practice.
In that tone.... the name of health” doesn’t mean evidence based or safe. And this isn’t just “a guy trying to help,” it’s someone with a pattern of promoting claims that conflict with established evidence, especially around public health.
That’s a credibility issue in a space where being wrong can actually harm people.
And peptides aren’t benign supplements, some have significant systemic effects and require real knowledge to use responsibly.
Because yes, some of these absolutely require a real understanding of:
dosing and half-life
downstream hormonal effects
interactions (especially anything touching GH/IGF-1, insulin sensitivity, immune modulation)
contraindications (kidney, liver, cancer risk, etc.)
Expanding access without that context isn’t automatically a good thing.
And just because I personally use peptides doesn’t mean I’m going to overlook someone’s lack of credibility or call them “good” because we loosely align on one idea.
When I originally joined this forum I was only comfortable injecting Tirzepatide because it was FDA approved as Zepbound and Mounjaro.
My comfort level has expanded to include Survo because it is far along in the process of approval.
I have more recently changed my views on some drugs that have undergone approval in Russia (Semanx, Selanx) because they have some clinical studies to back them up as well as ghk-cu and BPC. I have included the later two because obtaining FDA approval would require a financial incentive to undergo the required clinical trials. This will not occur if the peptide is not patentable and thus marketable so that Pharma can recuperate the investment and risk. This is just the way it is.
My comfort level has expanded to include Survo because it is far along in the process of approval.
I have more recently changed my views on some drugs that have undergone approval in Russia (Semanx, Selanx) because they have some clinical studies to back them up as well as ghk-cu and BPC. I have included the later two because obtaining FDA approval would require a financial incentive to undergo the required clinical trials. This will not occur if the peptide is not patentable and thus marketable so that Pharma can recuperate the investment and risk. This is just the way it is.
It sounds simple, but it ignores how risk actually works. “Not FDA approved” doesn’t tell people whether something is low risk or potentially harmful, it just lumps everything together. Most people don’t have the background to evaluate that difference.
And the consequences don’t stay individual. Complications, hospitalizations, and LONG term effects impact the healthcare system as a whole. That’s why public health doesn’t work as “label it and hope people figure it out.”
That’s a false equivalence.
Compounded GLP1s aren’t “FDAapproved products,” but the active drugs themselves are extensively studied and approved with well established safety profiles.
So it deosnt work to say....
“So they’re basically the same as unapproved, poorly studied peptides”
Big difference
Being an individual that does his/her/their own research and decides what's best for them?
Thats the forum I belong to I thought 🤔👎
CNCCurrency
GLP-1 Specialist
What? if its not name brand then they are not FDA approved. All compounded versions are made different and there for are not FDA approved.
A compounded drug might be appropriate if a patient’s medical need cannot be met by an FDA-approved drug, or the FDA-approved drug is not commercially available. However, compounded drugs are not FDA approved. This means the agency does not review compounded drugs for safety, effectiveness or quality before they are marketed.
The agency has identified some areas of concern for compounded GLP-1 drugs. FDA is working with its state regulatory partners and will continue to communicate with compounders regarding these concerns.
Last edited:
You are arguing regulatory technicality.
I am arguing scientific reality…and those are not the same conversation.
You’re right that compounded drugs aren’t FDA approved as products. But that’s not the same as saying they aren’t based on well studied, FDA approved medications.
GLP1s have extensive clinical data and well established safety profiles.
Compounding usually changes different dose or concentration, different delivery form (liquid, sublingual, injection, cream), or removes or changes inactive ingredients (preservatives, fillers).
It does not change the active ingredient or the underlying evidence behind the drug itself.
That’s very different from peptides that don’t have that level of data at all.
And BTW.... the issue they're finding is mixing GLP1S w vitamin B12, which is another active compound. They've found it creates an entirely new molecule. They don't know if that's good or bad... Just that it's not the same. Compounding pharmacies use this to say "reduces nausea" in order to get around patents. So a game essentially so they can make these GLP1s.
Calm Logic
GLP-1 Specialist
Exactly. And most of us who have GLPs in our freezers for 5-10+ years from now don't hoard the non-GLPs in the same way, if at all.
Hambocommando
GLP-1 Apprentice
So reading between the lines, there's now good old fashioned American money to be made from the peptide industry and much like the legalized hemp/pot/supplement industry, supply and distribution will be cornered by those with the money to grease the political wheels with said money. Case in point. In most states, you can't just start a pot farm and produce either medical or recreational marijuana. Most of the licenses go to "Big Pot". Companies and venture capital firms that have financial influence (ie. Lobbying). Yes, more human trials and clinical evidence either for or against would be spectacular, but watch the patents start flying shortly thereafter. It would be interesting to track investments into the American peptide industry after this goes live.
