Latest / Art of the Question / The Explosive Rise of Peptides - Dr. Matthew Dunn - #59

Transcript

The Explosive Rise of Peptides - Dr. Matthew Dunn - #59 · Art of the Question

• Julius Moorman: Matthew, thank you so much for for coming on the show. Discussion of today is peptides. ⁓ yeah, everyone who has been on the internet for the last two years, I suppose, ⁓ probably couldn't have missed it. It's it's very popular in in some circles, ⁓ but it's also yeah, so some some people aren't too happy about it and I feel like a lot of ⁓ the discussion happens outside of the realm of any any supervision. ⁓ a lot of influencers advise each other on this ⁓ health trend, if you will. So it is also a bit controversial. So for the topic of today's discussion is kind of ⁓ to kind of understand why people are using it, what some of the dangers ⁓ could be. Where this came from and yeah what how people should ⁓ go about this. ⁓ first of all, I've you've spent almost two decades ⁓ researching ⁓ performance and image enhancing drugs, but you also have a background in psychology. How does your background in psychology help you to currently understand a trend like peptides and and why people would use something like that? I think psychology is really useful for understanding the individual and why they do do things, why they don't do things. and society is made up of many individuals. That makes the public and and public health is what I primarily do. But it's it is useful seeing how individuals, but also people in communities, how they act, how they interact. And as you mentioned, the work that I've done is about how people Make decisions around using a substance or not using a substance, but also how people in those communities share information, ⁓ how they relay information about new substances, how to use substances, the benefits of them, the negative effects of them, and so forth. So just like psychology and health psychology can be really useful in understanding why a person has chosen to smoke. or why they can't give up smoking, or why they choose to drink alcohol or some of the other work that I do, why people take an illicit substance and why they take it to a service to get it tested to find out what's in that substance and whether they choose to use it or not. ⁓ all that information is really useful when we're trying to consider why people use various performance enhancing drugs and in this case peptides. Yeah, I can imagine. And that's such an interesting ⁓ combination. today's discussion will mainly focus ⁓ around peptides. Maybe we can into get some other ⁓ performance enhancing drugs as well. But for now I'd like to focus on on the peptides. For me, it kinda came out of nowhere. I I think a few years ago I saw some videos on Instagram where Predominantly fitness influencers were discussing the benefits of peptides and how peptides has helped them to prevent and and recover from injuries. And now with the whole GLP 1 revolution, there's things like Red Ad that entered ⁓ into the feed as well, the Instagram feeds. But before we get into the role of the internet and and some other ways how people get introduced to to peptides. What actually are peptides? Because I it is my understanding that it's quite a broad term, right? Yeah, I mean, in its biological sense or i it it the the biology of everything, peptides are short chains of amino acids that act as cellular signals, molecules in the body. So But I think when we use the word peptide, I think we are using it for now a number of substances. So ⁓ we are using it for injectables, ⁓ and they are injectable peptides for anti-aging or for tanning. ⁓ we're using it as ⁓ a catch all for those substances plus the GLP one receptor Agnes as well. So there's the What is an actual peptide? And then it's the term that we seem to now be using for all these drugs, which are peptides, but they are very different in terms of whether they act differently in the body or not. They are used for different things for different purposes in various groups in society. Right. Yeah. And and I I indeed mean ⁓ the the mostly in injectable ⁓ peptides that we now see marketed on the internet and by influencers and that are used for all sorts of things. ⁓ what are some of the categories that we can put these into? Because I I feel like there's some ⁓ that are supposed to I I have to be careful with my ⁓ wording because a lot of the ⁓ stories around peptides are anecdotal and we'll get into it, but that's I believe one of the major issues with peptides is that there hasn't been a lot of ⁓ research on the long-term effects of what they do. But the supposed benefits can fit into a few categories, which are muscle recovery promoting, cell recovery, ⁓ brain enhancements, ⁓ physical enhancement like skin. ⁓ hair, ⁓ nails, ⁓ tanning, ⁓ if if you will. Is that true or am I missing some of the the categories there? Yeah, I think it's useful to start off and look at there are various ways that you can slice and dice the different categories. So there is ⁓ the the legal ones or ones that have therapeutic uses that have been approved. So in that category you would think about, you know, one of the kind of earliest ones, which is insulin. ⁓ and now we've got the semaglutides as well. Then you've got the unapproved peptides. ⁓ so all the ones that lack some of the evidence that we might be looking for. Hang on, sorry, my doorbell and my phone is going off. Sorry in one moment. Two different couriers arrived at the same time delivering dog food. Well best to get it over with, right? Otherwise it's another way. Anyway, sorry. Sorry. No no no worries. No worries whatsoever. This is completely fine. ⁓ we are we are not light, luckily. ⁓ no, the the thing I was asking ⁓ was about the different categories. So we can put ⁓ into different categories as their supposed ⁓ mechanistic ⁓ effects, but there may be some other categories as well. So I was just curious to understand what some of those categories are and why we put them in those. So I'll I'll start back from the beginning, then I'll go go into that so you can cut it ⁓ bitter better, hopefully. So there's two ways we can look at it. We can look at it from the therapeutic use and and how things are approved or not approved, and this will differ from country to country. So we have the therapeutic ⁓ therapeutically approved peptides, which are the ones that are therapeutically used in medicine. The earliest one that we can think of is insulin, but we also have ⁓ the semiglutides. Then we have the unapproved peptides or ones that are used in various industries, perhaps not for the reason they are prescribed or how they were initially used or intended to be used in medicine. So that's ones that could be used in anti-aging, fat loss, cosmetic muscle recovery, muscle growth. So things like melanetan and redotrutide. But I think your Correct in thinking that the way that we can use them rather than approved and unapproved is the way that people are using them. So, yes, if we look at muscle growth, ⁓ recovery, anti-aging, and cosmetics, they are probably the categories that you would look at and try and start placing the individual peptides. But even that is probably not useful because those cross over. So just like we talk about. Steroids as you can use it for muscle growth, but that could also be useful in your job if you are in a blue-collar job where you have to physically use your your body. Or if you're an athlete, it helps you with your performance, but it can also help with recovery. I think the same can be used when we look at the peptides. So something could be used for anti-aging, but also has a cosmetic effect, or it can help with recovery from an injury, but you might get some sort of cosmetic effect from that as well. So I think those are the categories that that anti-aging, fat loss, cosmetic, muscle growth slash recovery, but those probably are fluid and cross over each other. Right. Yeah. No, that makes that makes a lot of sense. And I I wanna Talk perhaps later about some of the similarities you see when it comes to performance enhancing drugs and and and some of the differences there as well. But first, I think it would be good to understand how they got so popular all of a sudden and and where they came from. Because ⁓ like I said in the beginning, it it feels For me, like they kinda got out of nowhere. But then also when you mentioned that insulin is a peptide as well, ⁓ it means that we have been creating s ⁓ synthetic peptides for for a long time and using them in a controlled medicinal way. So the the the technicality behind it mustn't be new. However, I think it does fit within a current trend that we're seeing. where n not only women pay a lot of attention to their looks nowadays, but we also have the whole looks maxing thing happening on the internet where influencers like clavicular teach yo teach young men how to look better, how to to to bone smashing, ⁓ but also use all sorts of chemicals to enhance their appearance and their ⁓ physique as well. So to me it's it It fits into the current time frame. And I'm very curious to hear your opinion on on how peptides ⁓ how how do we able to rise to fame so quickly, if you will. I think social media plus traditional media have really driven this. And I I separate those out because you have the peptides that came through the GLP ones. ⁓ like Ozempic. And they, ⁓ as someone that researches in this field, they really came out of nowhere for me. We, we have always focused on steroids in the performance and image enhancing drug category because they were the main ones. And the data does suggest that. When you interview people, what are they, what are you, what are you consuming? It would be steroids, then there would be your legal. supplement. So everyone is taking protein, everyone's taking creatine, BCAAs and a variety of other things. Very, very few in that group were doing we were consuming insulin or trying insulin. And insulin was always the one that people would say that is the one that is the difference between going into a coma or not. Like that is one that you do not mess with, ⁓ for very good reason, I should add. And so insulin was really the one that was there, but very, very niche. Then that started creeping up in the community a little bit. And there's been some research in into how people have used insulin. And there have been influences in the bodybuilding world that have developed a niche and an expertise in that community that if you want to use an insulin, you go to this particular people, to these people. But then suddenly GLP ones, like a Zempic was kind of everywhere. And it started with, I think, the the Hollywood set, the, you know, the elites, the the people at the top. And it filtered it its way down. Different countries will have different ways of how this came about as well. In Australia, you can't ⁓ advertise substances on television, anything that is prescribed. Whereas in North America it's very different. So for Australians that go to North America, for instance, it's you just like What is happening? Yeah, we we don't have that. But there are ways around it. So in Australia, their market is kind of a if you're overweight and you've tried everything else, there's a different way of of addressing overweight and obesity. So I think there was Hollywood, that that happened, and then social media, that happened. And I think those distinctions are di ⁓ important because you will have people not on social media. that are not seeing ⁓ looks maxes or anything to do with this topic, but were trying to get ⁓ Ozempic either prescribed or off label or however it works in in their particular country. So ⁓ and then you have people that are not using Ozempic or those other the other substances that would probably have sk have skipped those and going to straight to redotrutide, like the the new generation ones, because that's what's being pushed on on ⁓ their social media. And the two kind of combined, because I think when there was a shortage of Ozempic and those substances, when suddenly there was people couldn't get it, that became a talking point, both in the the traditional media and then social media as well. So it came out of kind of nowhere, as I say as someone that researches this, but it it it I think it has been Coming along, but I can't place my fingers on on when it when it blew up. But I think it has been regardless of the substance, we have reached a point in society where people are have access to information. They have access to the people that are using these substances, and they are bypassing all the ⁓ traditional ways of how you might find out these substances about these substances as well. And they're more accessible too. So I think it's that's how all that happened. But yeah, very much so that peptides were not on our radar. So if I can use an example, in Australia we have ⁓ data that comes out ⁓ almost every year from our border force that show detections of substances at the border coming into the country and we're an island nation. So ⁓ that's that people things are either coming in by plane or by vussy. And when you plot when they show performance in image enhancing drugs, steroids just go up and continue to go up. Peptides and other substances were always very low. There was a spike in I think 2011, 2012 because of ⁓ a scandal that happened in one of our sports here, Australian Football League, A AFL, that I think that that did. ⁓ there was a a team in one of the in one of our sports where they were caught using a banned substance and I think it was peptides, but no one really knows what it was. And that was in the media for several months. That you can see the corresponding increase in detections coming in, then it drops off. We don't have the most recent data and there already always is a lag in that data, but I wouldn't be surprised if peptides have gone up now, because I think peptides have become a little bit more socially acceptable because of the way the media has portrayed it and the way that you use them and the reasons that you use them compared to something like steroids. Yeah, I'm very glad you you brought that up, the social acceptability that seems to be happening around peptides, because if we compare it to something like steroids or trembolone or anivar, like these heavy steroids, I feel like t TRT as as some people like to call it, which is to be debated whether some of that that use is actually TRT. but how people call TRT Sometimes people will be open to it, but I feel like the other like heavier steroids, there's a big taboo around it. However, it almost seems like there has been some perfect storm, as you mentioned, with mainstream media discussing Ozempic all the time, entirety of Hollywood using it, every everybody was. at the at the Oscars was talking about body positivity, but then one year later everyone was super skinny once they could basically buy off their their problem, if you will. And then that this gave the these people are highly influential. So everyone wants to hop on hop on board and and start using this. But of course there's only a limited am amount. So people Probably also resort to these sketchier websites where people are offering it without any prescription and then get introduced to this whole variety of of peptides, all of these different categories that we just discussed, they're usually sold together. You don't have to go to five different websites. You can just go to one website. And then maybe while you are looking for your Ozempic or your Redatutrite, now you also see GHKCU and you see that it's good for the skin. And then you see BPC 157 and it's supposed to promote muscle recovery. And all of a sudden, you have created this scenario where you are not only socially accepting that people are using peptides like Ozempic and and RETATutrite. But now you're also introducing them because of the scarcity to a whole new variety of these peptides. Is is would you say that is an an accurate description of what is probably happening? I I agree. I think how you enter the the peptide world probably depends on your personal circumstance and the the communities that you sit in. I think what is What has been interesting if we start with something like Ozempic, and there would ⁓ there seems to have been a a lack of a taboo around using that for weight loss, particularly amongst people that are overweight and obese, which I think is a good thing. We as a society have decided that if you are overweight or obese, that's because of some sort of moral or character failure. But we've also decided that if you have if you go to the gym and you have shoulders bigger than my head, that you have done that because of some personal attribute that you are dedicated, that you are, you know, you're monitoring macros, you're doing all the things that you do to look like that, which you have to, like you don't have shoulders as big as my head by just, you know, getting up and and doing whatever you want to do. There is a dedication there. But we've assigned personality traits To an extent to those different ⁓ to those different people, if we just put people in those two categories. And if you were overweight and you said, I'm going to do lap band surgery, for instance, there would be some taboo around that. ⁓ but with OZMPIC, there wasn't. And it has possibly been related to the marketing of it. You know, there is a different way to lose weight. But also when you talk to people that have that have used it, they talk about. how it's reduced the food noise. It's reduced the the stuff that happens in the brain that is making them always think about food and the the world and how that fits into their world. And when it takes away all those thoughts, it's allowed them to they start losing weight and they can then do the things that they want to do. I had a friend that took ⁓ Ozempic because they wanted to lose weight so they could get back into exercise. And just starting off doing low impact exercise that they could then ramp it up. And they said that has just changed their life. ⁓ and we've decided that that's good because now they've lost weight and and that's ⁓ they're doing the things that we as society want people to do or expect people to do for good health. But if you're in the bodybuilding world, we We've seen it a l we don't talk about it as much and there is still sigma, I think, around using substances. Y people don't admit that they're using steroids. They don't admit that they're using peptides, most likely, although that I think has a more social acceptability. But it's how you come into the peptide world, I think, is dictating how people think about it and how people use it. And I think you're right. If you're coming into the the world through the Ozempic weight loss, or I just want to lose a few kilos for my wedding or whatever the case may be, maybe it ends there, but maybe you get on social media, the algorithm says, hey, and you're looking at Ozempic, here's some other things. And and people going to down that route. Whereas if you're already in the bodybuilding world, you're probably, you know, it it's feeding you dad all the time. I think coupled with all that is we have We've lost some of our scientific literacy or our our knowledge in society. And we've given that over to influencers, ⁓ or people in our community that are we've attributed to have knowledge for a particular reason. And so, you know, we've seen that with because I work in public health, we've seen that with vaccinations. If someone says do not get vaccinated, people are like, well. I've done my research and so I'm not getting vaccinated. That's happening now with peptides where people are saying, Well, I'm doing the research and I think I'm gonna buy this peptide off this website ⁓ and I'm gonna inject myself with it. ⁓ They're all very different worlds, but they're they're kind of converging. So it it is interesting at the moment, particularly as more peptides are coming out and people are swearing by them. And and all it takes is to know someone that says, I took this substance and it worked for me. If they are a trusted person in your life, people are are are placing value on that on that opinion. Yeah, and and do you see a lot of similarities, like perhaps not with the people who got introduced ⁓ to peptides through mainstream media and and Hollywood per se, but on the fitness angle, do you see a lot of similarities with ⁓ the the rise in steroid use and and other ⁓ performance enhancing drugs or or is this a different beast? I think there are some similarities in terms of how people engage with the communities that use these substances. In in the steroid community, there has always been the trusted person, you know, the trusted knowledge in that community. In the past, it was the person at the gym who you probably bought them from, but who told you how to use them and how to use them in a safer way. I think that's still h that's happening in the peptide. world, ⁓ that there are the the people that you will go to and will tell you what to use and how to use them and how to use them safer. But I think, and there are similarities with how we how you can purchase them as well. what is happening though is that with steroids, there are what, maybe eight steroids that people are using. That is kind of fixed. There's not really new ones coming on the market that someone is using, but with peptides there are. So there are just trying to keep up with them is is a little bit challenging. And we saw this with the the novel psychoactive substances and those substances like the synthetic cannabis and all those. When those substances came on the market, they would they were told we were told that they mimicked existing, so it's synthetic cannabis mimicked natural cannabis, which it doesn't. ⁓ then we had all these substances coming on that were meant to be legal synthetic versions of other substances. Then you just tweaked it a little bit, you tweaked it a little bit, usually to get around legislation. ⁓ And I see that happening and I'm worried a little bit about that with peptides, that new ones are just going to keep coming on the market. ⁓ that is a slight tweak on something else. We kind of don't really know what's in these peptides anyway, and the the research doesn't really exist. ⁓ but I see a a a parallel with that that phenomenon with all these substances came onto the market. And that's what I think is happening with peptides. It is going to be different to the steroid market where You have the established drugs and a good probably 40 years of research behind most of them. ⁓ and by research I mean people actually using them in a gym environment for these purposes, whereas the peptides are quite new, and as new ones come on board, I think that we are entering a new, a new world. Yeah, and I think that's very interesting, right? Because if we Take Ozempic, for example, it used to be primarily used as a drug to treat diabetes, and then we saw that it had all these other effects and properties as well, that it kills our hunger, and now it's even being used to treat some forms of addiction. But we've already had like years of data of regularly injecting. Ozempic or or or the the the working substance inside Ozempic into their bodies, which again we have to treat it with caution, but there is a lot more data on this particular peptide. But because and that's my feeling, I don't know what you think about that, but because people don't really seem to make a distinction between Different peptides when it comes to health concerns. It's just like this broader category. ⁓ he or she is using peptides. It kind of feels like, ⁓ because Ozempic is relatively safe to use, then probably this BPC 157, this TB500, this GHKCU falls into the same category in their heads, and therefore people feel ⁓ safer using them. Where it's just such a broad category. It's like saying medicine or or food, right? They're there the the one peptide isn't same as the other, ⁓ which opens the door and and makes it feel less sketchy for for many people to start using these other ones as well. Yeah, I think the term peptides has become a catch all for anything that people are are using with ⁓ I think people are making the distinction for why they're using a particular peptide for a reason, but ⁓ I my hunch is that the vast majority don't really know the difference or they're just being told you need to use TB five hundred or BPC one five seven or something. That that's the one that you need to use. ⁓ even with the the GLP ones, I I do wonder how many people realize that there are differences or new generation ones. ⁓ have we just used the term Ozempic or peptide as a catch-all, just like we've used, you know, Google as a catch-all for looking up something online. that's the concern. And and the concern about that is that each substance is unique and has different effects and side effects. And if you just start to put them all under a a a banner and use one term for it, ⁓ you start missing out on that. And I think that's that's the risk that we run in doing that. And w maybe we've already we're already behind. Maybe that's ⁓ maybe the the horse is already bolted on that respect. Yeah. Wha what do you think the role of COVID has been in the popularity and and the rise of peptides? ⁓ currently in the US the the Fauci hearings are are going on And ⁓ many people kind of lost their trust in what the government ⁓ recommended, not necessarily because the COVID vaccine was a scam, but at least is my understanding, there was a lot of pivoting going around. First it was if you take the vaccine then you can't get infected anymore, and then it was yeah, you can still get infected, but you get less sick. And then the story just kept Shifting and and they kept kind of pivoting of what it was actually supposed to do. And I think the net benefit of I'm I'm not an expert by any means, but it it probably saved a lot of lives by by getting COVID vaccines on the market. However, the fact that the story kept changing did instill a lot of distrust in in many people. And may have also resulted in people resorting to influencers and other health experts in quotation marks much easier. Do you do you do you see that happening in in Australia as well, or is that difficult to ⁓ to say? Yeah, I think it it was already before COVID. So I think I think trust in information has particularly around substances has fallen off, yes, dramatically probably in the last five years, but it's always happened. So, you know, the the example, two examples come to mind. The first is about psychedelics. When, you know, Richard Nixon banned them ⁓ and they were the reason was meant to be for health reasons, but it was actually political reasons. And his chief of staff came out probably five years or or so or ago and admitted that it was political reasons. ⁓ so we see a morality placed there that this the people that were using these drugs were the people they didn't want to you know, they were it was happening on college campuses and there was the anti war movement and so forth. Another ⁓ example that's just come come to mind also is the difference between powdered and cra cocaine and how that's treated in in particular in the N North America and the United States. ⁓ because one Particulation has traditionally used crack cocaine. One population has used ⁓ powdered cocaine and they're they're essentially the same drug. So but one carries significantly more penalties because it's used by a group that people want to ⁓ to lock up. But if you know, if you're African American and you're taking crack cocaine, you you get decades in prison. But if you're a white person that's taking powdered cocaine, that's that's a slap on the wrist. But the other one is is steroids. The the medical establishment in the I think it was the eighties came out and said, I think it was the American Medical Association said, These substances have no effect. They will not do the thing that you think that they will do. But guys in the gym had already been using them. You know, we had unfortunately, for instance. And so when you tell someone that what they're seeing does not exist, they do not trust what you tell them. I think vaccinations are slightly different and COVID is slightly different. It was a once in a hundred year thing that we were trying to figure out as we as we went along, but we already had the undercurrent of the the research that had been ⁓ published and then discredited around the MR MMA vaccin vaccination, ⁓ MMR vaccination and autism, which has been discredited. ⁓ but there was already an undercurrent of that. Coming out to peptides, I think, as the medical establishment is the one that's saying this is something that works and we can give you to help you be the best you. ⁓ people and and it's not a drug that it's, you know, you're not inj injecting it intravenously, you're not injecting it intramuscularly. It is a, you know, an insulin needle that you just jab in and you barely feel it, and this this can change your life. People are more willing to accept it. Because it's coming from the medical community. ⁓ This is the another thing that I've been grappling with recently is the role of evidence and and how we how the community gets evidence and puts that evidence out into the world. To get a drug from if you're a pharmaceutical company and you want to develop a new drug and get it on the market, there's a lot of legislative hoops. And I've seen various estimates of 200 million to $2 billion to get a drug onto the market. People are no longer willing to wait for that long. People are no longer willing to wait for the double blind, randomized control trial that takes 10 years. But in the meantime, if you're rich and you've got access to someone to get it off label, you can get that before everyone else. People are no longer willing to accept that in society if they know that there is something that could possibly work for their their purpose. And I think, and I don't know how we do this, but I think we have to it's it's the medical community, the pharmaceutical community, the public health community, the broader scientific community, we need to start looking at what we have decided is the best evidence and how we use that evidence. To either allow drug to market or not. Because once drugs have been created, people will find a way, even if they don't get to market in a formal way, they will find a way to get it out there now. I I'm just convinced that that this idea, and we see it with all the synthetic drugs and we we've seen it with all these substances, that if there's a formula for it, someone will find it and someone will put it out there. So these peptides that are coming out. Have, you know, they went through trials, the trials stopped, but now they're coming back onto the market because someone has decided that that original evidence wasn't correct, wasn't right, or that maybe some people have decided that the the risks are okay for them, that they are willing to go have the side effects that come with it. ⁓ as long as they get the the positive consequences. So this is the thing I'm grappling with because There is the what we can classify as evidence, but then there is the evidence that comes from people that take it. And just like you're going back to your COVID example, that was the largest trial in the world of a vaccine. You know, that that that really was just a a naturalistic trial. We're also seeing that with these peptides, that you can go into any gym or a some sort of community. And if people are taking them, you can do some research on it and figure out. ⁓ what what's working, what's not, what are the side effects? Probably better than if you were doing a some sort of randomized controlled trial double blind. I I just think people are no longer willing to wait if there is something available to them. No, I I agree. And I want to talk about some of the dangers involved when taking these drugs that haven't with stood these these controlled trials. and and had their research done because I believe you also did a study on redotutrite and the dose that it was supposed to be and then what came out of the test. Can you can you maybe elaborate on on that research? I've done research not on redotretite, I've done it on Trembolone. No Trembolone. ⁓ apologies. I thought it was redotrite. Yeah, no, we we've we did some research specifically looking at at Trembolone, but it was amongst people that are are using steroids. And Trembolone was the one that has f for a while now been the anecdotal one that don't mess with it. If you've got some aggressive tendencies or so forth, just like maybe don't don't use that one. ⁓ and some work we had done. But it has it has its limitations, but there is certain levels where people are saying that above that is when you're either not going to get much more effect of it, but it's probably more side effects. It it's not a randomized control trial. It's people that have been taking various substances for various lengths of time, but it gives that sort of research. And if we did it with peptides as well, it gives people in the community something to go off. Because people want to people have their own experience. ⁓ they, you know, I'm if I'm taking this particular peptide, maybe I've had this side effect or maybe I haven't, I've had this positive effect. When you publish this sort of research, people are, ⁓ okay, that maybe confirms what I've experienced or what others have told me. It's not perfect research, but it's giving people something. And that's that's what we find that people, even experienced, you know, bodybuilders, ⁓ appreciate. They don't always agree with, but they appreciate the research, however flawed it is, to give them something to go off. So then you might have a person saying, okay, if I'm going to take trembolone, then I'll I'll only do it up to a certain level because this piece of research suggests that above that I might have more side effects than not. ⁓ it's as I said, it's not perfect research that we do, but it's giving people something short of being able to get a group of people, a group of men who have never taken steroid and then giving them all tremblone at different levels for a different length of time. it's it's the best research that we've got. And I think that's happening in in the peptide world. People are just relying on their own research. They're wanting more information. They'll take what they can get. And I think us in the research community need to be better at putting out what we have and acknowledging the limitations. ⁓ putting it out there because it's not just the people that are using a substance, it's also the people that are thinking about it and then make a choice not to. And so going back to what I said right at the beginning with with drug checking, when people take a tablet they believe is MDMA to a service and you analyze it and you say, this is what is in it. And sometimes it's something that we don't know what's in it. We don't know what's in this powder because it's not coming up in our library of of substances. We would advise you not to take it. the experience that we've got at the service that I'm available, ⁓ that I work with, people do throw it away. ⁓ but when you say this is this is high this is high purity MDMA, we would recommend taking a quarter, seeing how you go then and taking more. Afterwards, if you so choose, they often will will make that choice. But all our first message always is if you don't want harm, don't take the substance. But if you're going to continue to use it, here's how we would recommend to reduce the harm. People make good choices or better choices when you give them an array of options and I think they have some ownership of what they choose to do. So if I say to people, the safest thing to do if you're presented with a peptide is to that isn't prescribed by a doctor that you bought online or bought from someone, the safest thing to do is probably not take it. But if you're going to take it, know what the effects are know possibly how you should be doing it. You know, don't go straight to five units ⁓ of it. You know, start small and and and and go up to see how your body adjusts to it. I think people are are receptive to that. Yeah and is there currently ⁓ any research being done on the more popular peptides such as BPP BPC157, TB500, GHKCU? Because I believe that's one of the greater dangers of some of these peptides is that there are some studies that have been performed on rats, for example, which then proves the theoretical working in humans, because this is just a random example. But we we did a few studies on on rats and then in rats we indeed saw that ⁓ their their cells ⁓ healed faster, for example. But so far there there haven't been any human trials, but for many people it's like, okay, ⁓ at least the mechanism seems to work and they combine it with all the anecdotal evidence that is out there that fitness influencers ⁓ put out there, that some of ⁓ big podcasters ⁓ put out there. ⁓ but i is is that changing? Is there currently ⁓ work being being done or or not really? I don't know because I don't know how that work would get up at a university through an e university ⁓ or a or a hospital ethics committee. And I think that's some of the problem. ⁓ look, I I understand why we have ethics committees, I understand why we are so cautious with this with this stuff. But again, in the absence of the research being done in good environments, it's being done elsewhere, it it's then not being published and research doesn't have to published for it to be good research. But that's how we then see a fallback of research on people already taking something. And I think you're always going to have early adopters that are always going to, as you said, read the animal studies and say, well, if I extrapolate that from that rat study to this, we can and w we do it all the time in science. ⁓ we say, Yeah, okay, I I'm willing to do it. Other people are going to be wait for the first trench of people and the second and the third. But I I don't know how you do some of this research in the current environment that we have that puts safeguards around research that are there for a reason. But not that I think we should bend to herd mentality and just get rid of those safeguards because people are already using them. But I I I do think, and this is the thing that I'm still that I'm grappling with alongside evidence, is how do you do these substances when people or how do you do research with these substances when People are already using them. And we can say, well, you shouldn't use them because we don't have the evidence. Well, as researchers, we always say that. We don't have the one year evidence. We don't have the five year evidence. We don't have the 10, the 20, the 30. you're never gonna conduct the perfect study that's gonna give you the perfect evidence. I think we've we've got to find some other ground where we can do this research to give people. The evidence so they can make better choices because the binary use it or or don't use it isn't how people think about these substances. Right. And and is there a comparison to be made with ⁓ hard drugs, for example? Because I I'm not sure. That probably wouldn't go ⁓ through an ethics commission as well. We say, hey, we want to study the effects of heroin. So we are going to do a trial where we give one group ⁓ real heroin for a period of five years and then the other group gets ⁓ placebo heroin and then the other group gets gets no heroin. We we track their health like probably not going to happen because we know the the the horrible effects of heroin because ⁓ many people have been addicted to heroin for a long period of time. So we have a lot of data From ⁓ rehab centers, for example, and and when people actually kicked off these drugs, that we can see the devastating effects that it has done to their bodies. Now, some of these peptides are presumably ness less nefarious than heroin, but it would also be kind of a shame, if you will, if we just let it ride and then just collect data ten years after the fact while a lot of people keep using it. So i it's it's it's different there. But is that indeed how we come to the conclusion that certain drugs are are ha harmful? How how do we know when it comes to hard drugs? Yeah, I think I mean there's different ways of of doing it and you're correct. You wouldn't start off with a group of people that have never used heroin and and give them see how how it goes. ⁓ But using that as an example, we for people that are dependent on opioids, we do have treatments that we give to people to see which is the best treatment. So already do that with work with people. ⁓ and I know, you know, for people that have had ⁓ you know, so there's there's different treatments for opioid dependence, methadone, buprenolphine, et cetera, et cetera. ⁓ and they they've tried with stimulants. Stimulus doesn't have that substitution. treatment. So they've tried using dexamphetamine and and the the lower lower analogues to see if they can move people off, you know, methamphetamine dependence on to to something lower and and the evidence is not not there. But I do wonder it's because we just don't have the ⁓ the strength of it. and you know in they've done trials with certain forms of opioids for people on heroin to move them over to a more stable you know, a ⁓ a medical grade and medical s medically supplied ⁓ herem, but that's for people already on a substance. You're right. How do you do it with people that have never used something? And that's, you know, my perfect study would be giving finding a group of men who are very similar and giving them steroids for a period of time to see how they go. As a researcher I'm a and someone that's interested in ⁓ Testosterone for lifestyle, better lifestyle, ⁓ that would be a really good study to do. But what at what point do you decide to cancel the study because there's been a side effect? And what's the side effect that you decide is not is is the one that you decide that the study is no longer going forward. So with, you know, a Zempic, for instance, ⁓ Where people talk about having ⁓ diarrhea and a a lot of not great side effects, but they're willing to keep going. ⁓ and and people that have taken hereditary tides say that they don't get as many side effects. If people are already willing to continue using something that is causing them harm, and we do it with alcohol and tobacco, so don't know why peptides is any different. But what is the harm that we we decide, okay, we'll keep going in the study to see to get the evidence. So that's kind of why we rely on people already using something, ⁓ whether it's prescribed or not, to try and get that get that understanding. But that's the subjective experience. If you are an endocrinologist, you'd probably want to or a a molecular biologist, you'd probably be wanting to look under, you know, within the person or within the the cell to say what's this actually doing. But again, I I have an argument with my friend who is an endocrinologist about this. People are already doing it and they're willing to continue using these substances, even in experiencing side effects, to achieve their goal. And the problem with these substances is once you stop using them, particularly if you're if we use the the weight loss example, you put the weight back on. ⁓ so just like steroids, people are not willing to come off steroids because you lose the gains that you've made. So I I I don't know if people are already making a decision to continue using something in the face of harm. How do we in the in the research community and the health community deal with that? Right. And w what also came to mind is that, and this is not for for every peptide, of course, but ⁓ many of the peptides like BPC 157, TB500, ⁓ GHKCU, that I see in my Instagram feed are predominantly used by people who are heavy gym goers. They ⁓ eat very healthy. They do a lot of cardio. They do a lot of ⁓ weight training. They they generally live very healthy lives to to look good and and to feel good. Those are somewhat ironically also a lot of the people experimenting with peptides right now But I can also imagine that when you start using these substances while you are otherwise in pristine health, ⁓ not all of the risks may surface because their bodies are well trained to s to handle some of these side effects. And whereas I I would say like normal people or people that have worse health start using it, maybe some of the side effects are there, but we just didn't really see them in the anecdotal evidence because most of the anecdotal evidence comes from people who are already extremely healthy and that's why not all of them ⁓ may materialize. Would you would you agree? We'll go back to the conversation in just a second, but first I have an important announcement to make. If you've made it this far, I'm going to assume that you're enjoying the show. If you want to support the show, you can do so by leaving a like or a comment if you're watching on YouTube, or by rating the episode if you're listening on Spotify or Apple Podcasts. However, the single biggest thing you can do to support the show is by sharing it with someone you think might enjoy this episode. This could be a friend, it could be a family member, it could be a colleague. It doesn't really matter. If everyone who's currently listening to this episode would share it with just one person, the show would blow up in no time. Which also means that I could go full time. That means more episodes, it means better episodes, and it also means a happy host. So Please consider sharing the episode. It really helps me a lot. And I thank you. Now let's get back to talking. Yeah, I think there's two really interesting points to that. The first is what what's actually in it? So, yes, people are getting these from medical professionals, and so you can guarantee that probably what you're getting is actually what it is. But if you're buying it off of Instagram or someone at the gym or a trusted person in your life, We know for some research that's been conducted here in Australia that it is you don't know what's in what you are injecting. And that's the true of any illicit drug and that's the problem with illicit markets, that the MDMA that you take on a weekend may have nothing in it at all, or it may be high purity. ⁓ same with the peptides, it may have nothing in it at all, it might have lead in it, it might we just don't know. So that's that's also the problem. The other problem is that, and this is why when I think about drug regulation and and prohibition and decriminalization and so forth, humans are not great at self-restraint. So if you are taking something that is working, people then tend to say, well, if I take more, it'll work better. And that's not how these drugs necessarily work. And so that's the other thing that we are relying on humans who are not fantastic at making their own health choices. ⁓ to say that yes, the thing that I have been taking that has been been working really well, but also possibly causing harm is A, what it's meant to be, and B, I've been taking it the way I'm meant to be taking it. So that is a bit of a problem. And that's why with these substances, I the medical profession hates when I say this, but I think we've got to be a little bit less gatekeepy because I would prefer someone getting a substance from trained profess healthcare professional who knows what these substances are, who knows what the side effects are, that can have an honest conversation with someone to say, based on your health profile, because we've done your blood work and we've done medical history, I don't think you should take this because of this reason. And most people I think would probably say, Yep, okay, I'm willing to accept that. We we see that with steroids and you see it on the research that I've done looking at ⁓ YouTube videos, for instance. There are comments from people that have said, I trust what you have told me. You have told me the benefits of it, but you've told me the side effects of it. I've thought about it and I've made a choice not to not to use this. So there are people out there that do make a choice not to use something. but also if you are going to take something, let's start you on this dose and up you and let's see how things go. And I I think that is the better model than saying, don't take it, it's bad for you. And it sends people through to the Instagram. influence a route where who knows what people are doing and and what information they're getting, but also what substance they're getting. So I think that's why I'm I'm not a fan of saying let's let's make these legal and anyone can get them anywhere because humans are not great at at at the self restraint when it comes to these things. Yeah. No, I agree. And I'm I'm curious about the si situation in Australia. w we talk a lot about Chinese peptides. Are are are all of these peptides indeed coming from China? I think they're coming. I mean, the embarkation points vary and and the data, we don't have recent data from it, but looking at performance and image enhancing drugs in general, ⁓ that includes steroids, they they there are various embarkation points. We think that most of them are probably coming from originating from China and then coming into other countries and and so forth. What is interesting is I think there's probably more domestic production of these substances than we've previously thought. ⁓ and I think that is just because supply and demand and profit ⁓ go hand in hand. So here in Australia, where t 15, 20 years ago, steroids were not ⁓ peptides weren't a part of ⁓ someone who was selling drugs as repertoire. Steroids might have been, depending on the group that they come into contact with, but they primarily sold illicit drugs, so heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine. But as the demand for something goes up, well, why would you import it if you can make it domestically? And you then started seeing a shift in drug markets where people are primarily becoming steroid suppliers and dealers with an illicit drug on the side. ⁓ I think probably where we might see that with peptides. But and it's all just speculation because we don't have the data. I do wonder whether peptides becomes its own market. Like if you were selling heroin or if you were selling methamphetamine or cocaine, why would you include peptides in that? But I can see people saying I'm going to bring in peptides and then I'm going to become a peptide person. And I I certainly think You know, there's been some reporting in Australia that that's the case, that people are importing it, ⁓ and then selling it ⁓ under the guise of, you know, anti-aging and and all that sort of thing. So, ⁓ but it goes back to the conversation we had earlier that there is a different societal view of these substances and probably a different type of stigma or lack thereof. So it's probably people don't view selling Peptides to people as bad a thing as if you were selling cocaine. And certainly when you we've spoken to people that sell ⁓ steroids, there is a very much an element of I don't sell it, seed as dealing. And there's there's international research that backs this up as well. It's helping people out. It's a bodybuilder who wants to compete in a competition, so needs to be spending more time in a gym. That needs to become their full-time focus. So to afford their own steroids plus their lifestyle, ⁓ they will sell steroids to a trusted group of people. But that's not seen as as dealing, it's seen as helping people out. And if I know that what I'm taking is is pure and is good ⁓ and and doesn't contain impurities and so forth, then I'll sell it to other people because they will I I trust they trust me and We're all helping each other out. It's it's I think we're probably going to see that in the peptide market as well. Yeah. ⁓ something that is very interesting to me is that in the Netherlands we had all of these web stores selling designer drugs. So basically MDMA, but they tweak like one tiny element of it. So it's not on the opium list anymore. And therefore it could be sold legally. ⁓ but then now they have banned it also because there's currently a a huge lawsuit going on of two guys that were running such a web store and many people died because of one substance they were selling there. I believe s something like they have evidence of like twenty people dying from from their website, which is horrible of course. But they have now made it illegal to even sell like spin-offs like MDMA. I don't know how they technically ⁓ did that, but it it seems to kind of work. I'm not I'm not sure. But you also see all of these peptides websites ⁓ popping up now, which is like ⁓ r they're sold as research chemicals. So ⁓ they say it's not for human consumption, but then when you order it. You do get the bacterial water included and they even send you needles as well, which is kind of crazy to me that just by putting on your website not for human consumption, but it obviously it there's even calculators on their websites, right? So there's like ⁓ the exact amount you need to put to reconstitute certain peptides to to a certain dosage, and then they'll they'll give you a bunch of needles. But just putting the label not for human consumption. I don't know if any of these people actually ⁓ went to court for it yet or or whether ⁓ a judge has ruled about this, but at least at the moment that we are recording this, ⁓ there's many, many web stores available in Europe that just have ⁓ them on their listed on their website as research chemicals and and not for human human consumption. Is is that similar in in Australia or I expect it's similar worldwide. And we've always had this caveat. ⁓ when I first started in the drug and alcohol space, we had a class of drugs that we called research chemicals. So two C B and two CI, I think, were the main ones at the time that were synthetic psychedelics. ⁓ and they were it was a class of just a class of research chemicals. ⁓ and that not for human consumption. And that's just carried through as a As a catch-all, I don't know how well that stands up in in legal circ circles around the world. ⁓ but it certainly is, you know, we see this all the time that it's a we tell people not to take it for human consumption, but if you were going to, here's how you could do it. So ⁓ I I just don't think that's I'm not a lawyer, but I don't see how that stands up in ⁓ in a court of law. No, me neither. ⁓ w where do you think this is going? ⁓ I f I feel like we haven't seen ⁓ the end of this ⁓ yet. Is is do you feel like peptide use is still on the rise or or have d do you see ⁓ a plateau already? I it's hard to say, but it what is curious about this compared to other substances is that It feels like society is ahead of the pharmaceutical companies when it comes to this. You know, they're they're finding these peptides that were developed quite some time ago that didn't get put to market and they're they're now trying to put them out to market. If I'm a far pharmaceutical company, you know, profits are the main thing. ⁓ and That's where I just think it's really interesting that society seems to be ahead of everyone else. And so I I wonder In the pursuit of profits, do we see some of these drugs come back to market so that pharmaceutical companies can be the controller of of these substances and and get the profits that come with it? we saw this with with the synthetic drugs when they just kept coming and coming and coming. And then all of a sudden we just stopped talking about them for whatever reason. And And we did it with with, you know, there was fentanyl and carfentanyl and we got all the different versions of those substances. And I ⁓ that's not being flippant and saying that these aren't a problem. They they are in in parts of the world they are causing societal damage. ⁓ but we stopped talking about them. We stopped focusing on them. That's not to say that people stopped using them and there aren't new analogs coming on board ⁓ that people are using, but we we We just stop talking about them. And I wonder whether with peptides, how the market will go, because I do think it's a different group of people. It's a more widespread group of of people using peptides. And they're not drugs that you just take once and stop using. They are ones that continue so that to continue to get the effects you continue to use. So I do s I do wonder whether. Maybe we don't see new peptides, but we see more people using them and more people staying on them for for much longer. that would be very different to illicit drugs where people, you know, most people who use an illicit drug in their life will never continue to use it past a certain stage. It's a very small group of people that ⁓ have ongoing dependent ⁓ dependence and issues that come with that. steroids is the same thing where you used to do cycles, you'd go on it for 12 weeks, off for 12 weeks. And then once you've achieved your goal, you probably came off off them to the best of your ability. But then we saw a blast and cruise pattern of use where you use a high dose for a period and then you drop down to a maintenance dose. With peptides, I wonder whether we see people going onto it and then continuing to go on it for for quite some time. So it may be the case, and I may very well be wrong with this. And so it's It's I don't have a crystal ball, but I do wonder whether it's less that we get a lot more peptides coming on board. We just get more people using the ones that are already out there or the ones that are that are kind of the the niche ones coming onto the market. But the establishment tries to find a way that we can allow people to use those ones so there's more oversight and and more more control. That's That's how I'm thinking of it. Because I just think there's now enough people using various ones that are espousing the benefits of them. You know, we we have this in the United States as well. You know, the the Secretary of Health and the Secretary of Defense slash war are both talking about testosterone and peptides very differently to how you would see a normal government minister speak about speak about these substances. So I just see that ⁓ There is I don't think they're going away. And I think society is going to try and make room for these substances to come in to to be used. ⁓ whether that then opens the the box for new ones to be developed, I don't know. But there's always going to be people that are going to try and develop the next one. We saw that with synthetic substances. ⁓ Where people wanted to make the next one either to circumvent legislation or because they wanted a better drug. ⁓ and and we kind of just seen this with, you know, as MD and Radotrecite, we see it in the GLP one space. So ⁓ yeah, that's that's my prediction that could very well be wrong. No, I think I think you're right. I think finally if people are curious about taking peptides or or learning more about them. Is there a way that someone could navigate this space in a relatively safe way or is the advice just always don't do it? But if you have to do it, consult your doctor or or there's no such ⁓ official guidance? I don't think there's official guidance for it. I think, you know, I would always say the safe if you don't want side effects from something, don't take it. You know, that's why I've personally never taken steroids, because I have a family history that steroids just wouldn't work with. ⁓ and I don't trust my own ability to not use too much and for for longer than what I anticipated. So that's why I've I've I've not taken steroids. ⁓ I would say to people, if you are thinking about about it. Use a variety of sources of evidence to kind of gather the information to whether it's right for you. So it doesn't have you know, the influencer that telling you is that is telling you that these are the best things ever and you will have no problem with them is probably not the best source of information, nor is the person that's saying that these are the worst things and you will have so many side effects you would wish you were dead. I think there's a middle ground for it. And I think you have to people have to find that middle ground. And I've seen that with ⁓ with peers in different spaces, whether it's sexual health or or drug and alcohol, and both spaces which I've been involved with in both research and doing ⁓ outreach work, you you've got to find the person that you trust because the information sounds right to you that If you choose to do if you're don't want to ha side effects, don't take it. But if you're going to, here's what we think based on the evidence is going to be best for you. And I think the person that says, take this peptide and five units three times a week or, you know, ten units twice a week, if it if it sounds not right, it's probably not right. So I would just find the person that you s that is is telling you the information that feels like it's straight. Strike talk. ⁓ because that's that seems to be from the research that we do with steroids and and YouTube. People appreciate that and people say, Yes, I I I trust that person. Now it could be you trust them because they look fantastic and and that's what you know, we have a halo effect in society for that reason. ⁓ but I I think you've got to do a mix of what the person on online is saying plus what some of the scientific research is saying and what your own health background is. And I think you've got to find some middle ground. But, you know, it would be remiss for me to say that if if you don't want side effects, don't take it. But if you're if you think it's for you, you've got to spend more time than usual trying to make that decision. Yeah. No, that ⁓ that makes a lot of sense. Is there is there anything ⁓ we haven't touched on that is still important to mention while we're on the topic? ⁓ no, I think that's it. I've said all I wanna Wednesday. Perfect. Well, Matthews, ⁓ thank you so much for for coming on the show. This was incredibly ⁓ interesting. I've I've learned a lot today and yeah, I I really appreciate it. Where where can people go if they wanna keep up with ⁓ future research or or maybe ⁓ your your published ⁓ work somewhere? So if you just search for my name and Deakin University, which is where I work, ⁓ you'll find all my output. And I'm the co editor in chief of the journal Performance Enhancement and Health. And we've been publishing ⁓ a lot of work on GLP ones. ⁓ there's some great research coming out of both Australia and the United Kingdom ⁓ on this topic. So ⁓ that research is mostly open access, so anyone can find it. So By all means go and go and read up on the the research and and I would say as a researcher, don't hesitate to reach out to us. We we are knowledge creators, but we are knowledge disseminators as well. And I think any academic that doesn't respond to genuine requests from people, ⁓ apart from asking where you can buy these drugs, ⁓ is not a good academic. So yeah, my my profile on my website or my journal journals ⁓ website, you'll find great information about this. Perfect. Well, thank you so much, ⁓ Matthew, and bye everybody.