Safety and Efficacy of Approved and Unapproved Peptide Therapies for Musculoskeletal Injuries and Athletic Performance
Mendias CL, Awan TM. Sports Med. 2026; 56(8):1921–1935.
PubMed 41966639 · doi:10.1007/s40279-026-02437-0
Summarises other people's work. Generates no new data.
- Who or what was studied
- Narrative review of approved and unapproved peptides marketed directly to patients
- Design
- Narrative review
What it found
Reviews the mechanisms, safety and regulatory status of peptides sold for injury recovery and performance, including BPC-157, CJC-1295, GHK-Cu, ipamorelin, MOTS-c, sermorelin, tesamorelin and TB-500. Many unapproved peptides show favourable tissue-repair or metabolic results in animals, but rigorous human safety data are scarce and serious harm is possible. The authors also discuss how the placebo effect and social media amplify perceived benefit.
What it doesn't show
A narrative review: it summarises and interprets published work rather than pooling it, and it generates no new data.
Funding and conflicts of interest
One author receives consulting fees from Arthrex on unrelated topics; the other reports no relevant conflicts.
Summary written from the study's abstract and checked against PubMed on November 9, 2026. How we check studies. Educational information, not medical advice.
Related studies
- Peptide Supplements and Their Therapeutic Applications in Sports Medicine (Tewari et al., 2026)
- Intra-Articular Injection of BPC 157 for Multiple Types of Knee Pain (Lee et al., 2021)
- Emerging Use of BPC-157 in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: A Systematic Review (Vasireddi et al., 2025)
- Regeneration or Risk? A Narrative Review of BPC-157 for Musculoskeletal Healing (McGuire et al., 2025)