Peptides: What They Are, Why They're in the News, and My Perspective as a Provider
A provider's perspective on one of medicine's most talked-about—and contested—topics.
This month, the FDA convened a two-day advisory committee meeting to review evidence on seven of the most popular peptides.
Key Takeaways
Peptides are naturally occurring compounds your body already makes. GLP-1 drugs and insulin are both examples of peptides that you’re probably already familiar with.
The science is promising but still early: most evidence comes from animal studies, with very little rigorous human clinical data.
When used carefully—from reputable sources, with lab monitoring—peptides can be a reasonable option for some patients in my view.
If you're curious about peptides, bring the conversation to your provider rather than sourcing them on your own.
Do you live in Washington state and want to talk more? Schedule a visit now.
by Caylin Cheney, Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner
I'll be honest with you: I've been a little hesitant to wade into the peptide conversation online. It's controversial. The science is genuinely incomplete. And the wellness industry has a way of taking things that are nuanced and complicated and flattening them into either miracle cures or moral panics.
But peptides are in the news in a significant way right now, and some of my patients have been asking me about them (or are already using them). So let me share what I know, what I think, and how I approach this in my practice.
First: What even are peptides?
You might be more familiar with peptides than you realize.
Peptides are short strings of amino acids—the building blocks of the protein chains we’re made of—that act as signaling molecules throughout the body, helping regulate everything from metabolism to immune function to tissue repair. Some of them, like insulin, occur naturally in our bodies. Others are modified versions of naturally occurring compounds. GLP-1 weight loss drugs are also peptides, so if you've heard of Ozempic or Wegovy, you've heard of peptide therapy, even if no one called it that.
Insulin and GLP-1s are all examples of FDA-approved peptides. You might also have heard of collagen, an over the counter supplement, which is also a peptide.
The peptides generating the most conversation right now are not currently FDA approved. They have names that sound like muscle cars or rocket ships: BPC-157, TB-500, and MOTs-C. These are synthetic compounds promoted in wellness spaces for injury recovery, inflammation, muscle health, metabolism, cognitive function, and more.BPC-157, for example, is based on a peptide found in the stomach, while TB-500 imitates a molecule called thymosin beta-4, which is in many types of cells throughout the body.
Why are peptides in the news right now?
This month, the FDA convened a two-day advisory committee meeting to review evidence on seven of the most popular peptides and make recommendations about whether compounding pharmacies should be permitted to produce them. The committee considered specific conditions including migraines, ulcerative colitis, opioid withdrawal, and wound healing.
The committee recommended six peptide therapies to move forward. If the FDA takes the recommendation and ultimately reclassifies these peptides, clinicians would have discretion to write prescriptions beyond those narrow indications.
Here's the core tension: none of the peptides under review have undergone the kind of large-scale trials required for FDA drug approval. The FDA's own career scientists have recommended against giving compounding pharmacies the green light, noting that the available data comes primarily from preclinical animal studies and is quite limited for humans. For TB-500, for instance, no human clinical studies were identified at all.
At the same time, proponents point to something worth taking seriously: when peptides were restricted from regulated compounding pharmacies, demand didn't go away—it moved into a gray market of overseas suppliers, raising its own serious safety concerns as Americans inject themselves with unvetted substances.
That's a real harm reduction problem, and it's one I think about in my own practice.
What Exactly Is Direct Primary Care?
If you’re tired of rushed, impersonal appointments you have to wait months for, direct primary care could be a great alternative for you.
What the research does and doesn't tell us
The evidence for many peptides is promising but not yet fully proven. Animal studies and smaller human case series suggest potential, particularly around inflammation, tissue healing, and neurological function.
For BPC-157, one of the most studied and widely used peptides, here’s what researchers said: “In one human study, 7 out of 12 people with chronic knee pain felt relief for over six months after receiving one BPC-157 knee injection. Animal studies showed no harmful effects, but there is no clinical safety data in humans. Overall, BPC-157 could help heal musculoskeletal injuries, but there are potential risks due to unregulated production and lack of clinical safety data.”
Overall, the honest read from the academic literature is that these compounds show real promise in the lab, but "promise" and "clinically proven" are not the same thing.
What I can say is that the absence of large trials is partly a function of how research gets funded. Compounds that can't be patented don't attract pharmaceutical investment. That doesn't make them safe or effective, but it does mean the evidence gap isn't the whole story either.
I hold that uncertainty carefully, and it's why close monitoring and sourcing from reputable pharmacies matters so much when I work with patients who choose to explore these therapies.
Why I prescribe them in some cases and how
This practice is rooted in a simple belief: you deserve to be seen, heard, and supported in your health journey. And that means I take seriously what my patients tell me about their own bodies.
I have patients managing lupus-like symptoms, chronic inflammation, and ADHD who report meaningful improvements in things like concentration and systemic inflammation when using certain peptides. I trust my patients to know their bodies. I also trust and respect the FDA, while acknowledging that regulatory processes are slow by design, and that the system has real limitations.
So my approach is one of harm reduction, honesty about what the science says, and close partnership. When a patient and I decide together that a peptide is worth exploring, here's what that looks like in practice:
We source exclusively from reputable, licensed compounding pharmacies—not the gray market, not overseas suppliers. We monitor labs. We talk honestly about what we know and don't know. We pair any peptide use with healthy lifestyle fundamentals: sleep, nutrition, movement, stress management. And we keep the conversation going.
I also emphasize with my patients that peptides are also not a replacement for treatment plans that are FDA-approved and suggested by professional guidelines, especially for conditions like Lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer, etc.
I want to be clear: This is not a "take this and see you in a year" situation. It's an ongoing, collaborative process, the same as any other therapeutic decision we make together.
My bottom line
Peptides are not magic. They are also not inherently snake oil. They are a genuinely complex area of emerging medicine, sitting at the intersection of real potential, limited clinical evidence, a profit-driven wellness industry, and an evolving regulatory landscape.
My job is to hold all of that honestly, stay current on the science, and help you navigate it in a way that honors your autonomy and keeps you safe.
If you have questions about peptides, bring them to your visit. There are no wrong questions and the conversation is always worth having.
Recent Blogs
