The thing is, we have evidence that these "unproven" peptides are potentially very effective in certain cases. We just don't really know if they're safe universally. The FDA needs to make sure it's both safe and effective.
One reason to support this move: by regulating the peptide markets, the FDA could make it significantly less risky. Otherwise, people are going to hear the studies and buy BCP-157 from god-knows-where. There is a ton of junk on the market and it's a public safety concern. The FDA taking an active role in approving (or not) would be most welcome. Letting an semi-legal grey market thrive without any input from the government is a complete failure of the FDA.
The thing is, we have evidence that these "unproven" peptides are potentially very effective in certain cases. We just don't really know if they're safe universally. The FDA needs to make sure it's both safe and effective.
One reason to support this move: by regulating the peptide markets, the FDA could make it significantly less risky. Otherwise, people are going to hear the studies and buy BCP-157 from god-knows-where. There is a ton of junk on the market and it's a public safety concern. The FDA taking an active role in approving (or not) would be most welcome. Letting an semi-legal grey market thrive without any input from the government is a complete failure of the FDA.
Sweet, Tractor Supply can put them on the shelf right next to the Ivermectin and the tallow.
I see a tiny orange thumb on that scale.