Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Peptides: where to begin?

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 431 posts

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#51

Post by fragmede »

Bender wrote: post #6
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> given I eat peptides every day from my food This is briefly addressed in the article, but basically it's one thing to eat a peptide and quite another thing to inject it. Your digestive system is extremely adroit at taking peptides and proteins and breaking them down into individual amino acids, which are then absorbed via "transporters" in the gut. (e.g. SLC6A14 for glutamate and cysteine.) If you eat insulin, abso…

I agree with some of this. There are most certainly orally active peptides such as BPC-157 and its replacement PDA penta deca arginate that can repair the gut and still circulate throughout the body especially in those with leaky gut. People with leaky gut should be able to buy a clean source of BPC-157 or PDA without a prescription and without visiting dark alleys. It is very safe and tolerable. GLP's are all the ra…

Injected BPC-157 to a wound is a magic healing potion as far as I'm concerned. That it's not more broadly available is a crime, imo. If I had a billion dollars, I'd push so many things through the FDA.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#52

Post by hombre_fatal »

kube-system wrote: post #43
hombre_fatal wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think access is a good thing. The issue isn't with telemedicine but the fact that there's a prescription wall for helpful meds like GLP-1 in a country where we've failed people by creating one of the worst food environments. Also, most doctor's visits aren't any different from getting it if you want it except it's gated on the mood/attitude of the doctor, maybe your ability to sell some sob story. And then you book…

GLP-1 prescriptions are easy to get in the US. It's filling the prescription that is the problem, because insurance rarely covers it and it is beyond the disposable income of most Americans. The prescription hurdle is absolutely necessary -- these are not drugs that anyone can safely take without guidance. It's the price that needs to be fixed.

I know a lot of people on GLP-1 meds and even took a dose myself out of curiosity.

You take a dose every two weeks. And if you accidentally double dose because you misread 1U to mean 1 dose, it just gives you some nausea.

Are we going to pretend it's hard to take this drug now too? Or that the doctor has some magical insight into your getting-on? Remember to eat. That's it. I guess a few people might need the doctor to go "you're eating, right?" but I don't believe in infantilizing everyone over that.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#53

Post by dc396 »

diath wrote: post #15

> My patient is refusing a drug studied in 170,000 people because of side effects that a 124,000-person analysis just confirmed do not exist — while injecting a compound studied in 14 humans, from unregulated sources, based on the recommendation of someone who profits from selling it. She’s probably not the only one. And those using it believe they are “doing their own research.” Ok, and? At worst you waste a couple…

> Ok, and?

According to our new AI overlords, a short synopsis of potential risks of BPC 157 based on mechanistic and animal work to date (don't know human risks because there haven't been sufficient clinical studies):

* Possible pathologic angiogenesis (abnormal blood‑vessel growth), which theoretically could support tumor growth or inflammatory and autoimmune processes. * Modulation of nitric‑oxide pathways that, at high levels, might contribute to anemia, altered drug metabolism (CYP enzyme activity), and possibly neurodegenerative processes in theory. * Concerns that its pro‑healing, pro‑growth signalling (e.g., FAK–paxillin) could encourage cancer spread if malignant cells are already present; this remains theoretical, with no proof in humans. * Possible liver and kidney toxicity suggested in some commentary and extrapolated from preclinical work, but not well characterized in people. * Immune reactions or allergic responses, including fevers, rash, hives, muscle aches, or systemic inflammatory responses

These do not appear to be results that would appear overnight. It would be "nice" if the folks injecting random shit into their bodies also disclaimed any subsequent medical intervention as a result of said shit, but that I suspect that's unlikely.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#54

Post by phil21 »

kube-system wrote: post #43
hombre_fatal wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think access is a good thing. The issue isn't with telemedicine but the fact that there's a prescription wall for helpful meds like GLP-1 in a country where we've failed people by creating one of the worst food environments. Also, most doctor's visits aren't any different from getting it if you want it except it's gated on the mood/attitude of the doctor, maybe your ability to sell some sob story. And then you book…

GLP-1 prescriptions are easy to get in the US. It's filling the prescription that is the problem, because insurance rarely covers it and it is beyond the disposable income of most Americans. The prescription hurdle is absolutely necessary -- these are not drugs that anyone can safely take without guidance. It's the price that needs to be fixed.

> The prescription hurdle is absolutely necessary

You're totally missing the point thought. The prescription hurdle effectively does not exist. It's just a paywall.

You pay your $100, get a 3 minute call with a NP/PA/whomever, and basically the robot writes you a prescription for whatever you want. The point is you pay and you get the prescription. Patient safety has nothing to do with anything.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#55

Post by secabeen »

Simulacra wrote: post #23
cwmoore wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When medicine ignores nutrition entirely, and nutrient supplements are still complete unknowns, you have to wonder who the FDA is working for.

But there's a core problem with this, in many states doctors are legally forbidden to give nutrition advice. The academy of nutrition and dietetics has worked very hard to make it so that only dietitians can provide nutrition advice. Take Ohio for example, a medical doctor in Ohio is legally forbidden and actually in jeopardy of losing their license and going to jail if they were to provide nutrition advice without a…

Mmmm, regulatory capture and rent seeking. Will it ever end?

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#56

Post by rootusrootus »

I take a small issue with the claim that we don't test peptides. Some of us test them extensively before injecting. Granted, probably the same people who also understand how little science there is backing up most of the popular peptides today. I enjoy being able to buy my own GLP1s, however, at least those which have made it through phase III trials succesfully. As tempting as the claims are about things like BPC-157 and such ... no thanks, that is past my comfort level a good bit.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#57

Post by olalonde »

tbojanin wrote: post #21

I tried retatrutide for 10 weeks, here are my results: Before: 5'7, ~182lb Bench 1rm: 315 Squat: 5x10 225 Deadlift: 5x5 315 After: same height lol, 154lb Bench 1rm: 285 Squat: 5x10 205 Deadlift: 5x5 275 Suffered some anhedonia towards the end but that went away ~1wk after stopping. Overall pretty good, not any side effects. Definitely fixed my food craving problem. I didn't have a high intake of protein during the 10…

You lost muscle because you lost around 1.54% of body weight per week, which is way too aggressive. The maximum recommended amount for losing weight while retaining muscle is around 1%. You will also most likely experience a weight rebound.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#58

Post by cgh »

orf wrote: post #17
diath wrote: post #15

> My patient is refusing a drug studied in 170,000 people because of side effects that a 124,000-person analysis just confirmed do not exist — while injecting a compound studied in 14 humans, from unregulated sources, based on the recommendation of someone who profits from selling it. She’s probably not the only one. And those using it believe they are “doing their own research.” Ok, and? At worst you waste a couple…

You know dozens of people from a single place that have chronic tendon/joint issues?

You should hang out at a climbing gym sometime. There is nothing that unites climbers more than injury talk.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#59

Post by cm2012 »

Bender wrote: post #14
jmye wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drugs risks do not enter into the picture given the fact I can buy ammonia and bleach along with a myriad of other dangerous compounds. This is a deeply weird take. You think anyone ought to be able to buy, for instance, warfarin and freely take it without a doctor’s involvement? We should let parents self-diagnose diabetes and administer insulin without a prescription or discussion? We should just hope that patien…

You think anyone ought to be able to buy, for instance, warfarin and freely take it without a doctor’s involvement? Yes.

Triple yes! Most of the people buying it have been buying it and using it for years.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#60

Post by rootusrootus »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #48
olalonde wrote: post #36

The author is missing a massive segment of that gray market: people who buy FDA-approved weight loss drugs (e.g., semaglutide or tirzepatide) at 2–5% of the brand-name price. This route carries some risk, but there are ways to mitigate it, such as performing third-party testing. I assume most people who do this couldn't realistically afford the brand-name drug anyway, making this their only viable treatment.

I imagine it's legally risky to buy a large quantity, test it, and then resell smaller quantities. That's a shame because the alternative is probably that some folks settle for products of dubious quality and end up getting hurt.

It probably is, but that does not stop people from effectively doing it. There are a number of groups that specialize in conducting group buys, doing a bunch of testing on randomized samples, and then shipping out the product to individuals.

Also, if you plan to be on it a good long time, you can buy a bunch of kits yourself (a kit is 10 vials), run a bunch of tests, and then just have a nice stockpile that will last you years. The testing will likely cost as much or more than the product itself, but given how inexpensive the product is, you still come out way ahead financially.

Post reply on HN