By Rachel Tompa

Stacking, research-grade, Wolverine — Stanford Medicine experts break down what we need to know about peptides, the latest internet wellness trend

Here’s a situation scientist Katrin Svensson, PhD, never expected to find herself in: Molecules she discovered in the lab and tested (so far, only in mice) have shown up on internet-based company websites for anyone to purchase and use to inject themselves.

These molecules are naturally occurring peptides and they’re the latest wellness craze among certain sectors of the population.

But the craze is getting far ahead of the science in many ways, said Svensson, a Stanford Medicine associate professor of pathology. The peptides she’s discovered (including a new anti-obesity peptide, BRP) have not been tested in humans, a key first step between lab research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval and clinical use, let alone been manufactured in a regulated, safe process for humans. And while her discoveries aren’t yet the subject of viral social media reels, many other research-grade — i.e., not for-human-use-grade — peptides are.

In the name of looksmaxxing, muscle building, weight loss or just general wellness, many people trade tips and tricks on social media and inject themselves with unapproved peptides sourced from a variety of online companies through what is known as a gray market for peptides. Is this a good idea? Definitely not, said Svensson and Jonathan Long, PhD, an associate professor of pathology who also conducts peptide research.

“First of all, there could be all sorts of contaminants in that solution that you’re injecting into yourself. Second, there’s no data about whether these peptides actually do anything or their toxicity,” Long said. “You just don’t know what you’re putting in your body.”

Katrin Svensson

Katrin Svensson

With an FDA advisory panel recently voting to recommend loosening restrictions for compounding pharmacies on six peptides that are far from FDA approval, the picture is even murkier. Should the FDA take the panel’s recommendation, loosened restrictions would allow patients to get certain peptides from compounding pharmacies that haven’t been through rigorous clinical testing for safety and efficacy. Long and Svensson worry that members of the public will get the wrong idea about the safety of using these peptides.

But there’s good news for people who are interested in the potential of peptides but are not into injecting untested and unregulated compounds: Several peptide-based drugs are FDA-approved and many more are making their way through clinical testing. The success of FDA-approved GLP-1-based weight loss drugs, which are probably the most commonly known peptide medications, have opened a door to a burgeoning new therapeutic field.

We asked Long and Svensson to break down peptide science: what these molecules are, what they do in the body, and why they might fuel the next great frontier for new and better therapies — once they are fully tested, that is.

What, exactly, are peptides?

Peptides are molecules that our body uses to send signals from cell to cell and from tissue to tissue. They’re short strings of amino acids, the same building blocks that make up proteins. Peptides are generally shorter than proteins, ranging from just three amino acids long to around 100 on the longer side. Proteins tend to be a few hundred to over 1,000 amino acids long.

Most peptides are made of proteins — the body dices up proteins into smaller chunks that are peptides — though scientists have also found some peptides that are coded directly by genes, as proteins are. Scientists have cataloged around 7,000 peptides in the human body, but it’s possible there are many more as yet undiscovered.
They act as lightning-fast messengers in our bodies, conveying signals from one organ to another such as, “just ate pasta, blood sugar incoming,” “time to sleep,” or, “let’s kill this cancer cell.” For example, the GLP-1 peptide is produced in the gut when we eat a meal and travels to the brain and to the pancreas, telling these organs we’ve had enough to eat and to start releasing insulin into the bloodstream, respectively.

“Peptides can act very fast, and they can be very potent in changing our behavior,” Svensson said.

Which peptides are actually medicine?
While GLP1 medications get all the headlines today, the first peptide-based medicine, insulin, was developed more than 100 years ago. It was discovered and isolated from a dog’s pancreas in 1921. In 1982, it also became the first commercially available synthetically manufactured peptide.

Jonathan Long

Jonathan Long
Insulin is a peptide and a hormone and is released by the pancreas to regulate blood sugar, helping shuttle glucose from the blood into cells that convert it to energy. People with type 1 diabetes are prescribed insulin because their bodies can’t make it, or make very little of it. Some people with type 2 diabetes also need insulin to keep their blood sugar steady as their bodies no longer respond correctly to their naturally produced insulin. The discovery of injectable insulin was lifesaving for diabetic patients.
Since injectable insulin came on the scene, the FDA has approved about 100 different peptide therapeutics for conditions ranging from diabetes to multiple sclerosis to septic shock.

Because peptides are broken down by the digestive system into their amino acid components, peptide drugs are nearly always injected (a few exceptions, including the recently approved oral semaglutide, a GLP-1 medication, contain very high levels of the peptide and extra engineering because so much is lost to digestion).

Until recently, people in the pharmaceutical industry assumed that patients would not want to inject themselves regularly unless it was a dire situation such as uncontrolled diabetes or growth hormone deficiency, a childhood condition that leads to stunted growth if untreated, Long said.
“Injectables were thought to be for narrow patient populations. The industry thought that you couldn’t get millions of Americans to start injecting themselves,” he said. “The fact that GLP-1s have been so successful fundamentally upends that concept.”
Over the years, scientists have discovered many peptides that serve other purposes.
“The realization that people don’t mind injecting themselves opened up the space to 100 years of chemical and scientific history related to peptides,” Long said.

 



By Adam Hadhazy

The FDA finally gave the green light to bemotrizinol. We consulted three Stanford Medicine experts about why this is considered a massive leap forward for skin health in the U.S.

Contrary to the old adage, there is something new under the sun after all — at least here in the United States. For the first time in 27 years, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved a new active sunscreen ingredient for over-the-counter use.

It’s a chemical called bemotrizinol (“beh-moh-TRIZ-in-ol”), also referred to as BEMT, and it offers major advantages over presently available U.S. sunscreens, according to three Stanford Medicine dermatologists.
Here’s what these experts on skin protection and ultraviolet radiation had to say about this new product, due to hit shelves in September.
What, exactly, is bemotrizinol?
Bemotrizinol was developed by Swiss chemists seeking better sunscreens in the 1990s. (Formula C38H49N3O5 for the chemistry geeks out there.).
It’s oil-soluble, meaning bemotrizinol would absorb into our oil-rich skin except for the fact that it is a big molecule. Instead, bemotrizinol is minimally absorbed through the skin and adheres well to our bodies, forming a layer that absorbs ultraviolet light from the sun and converts it to harmless heat.
Zakia Rahman, Susan Swetter and Joyce Teng

Zakia Rahman, Susan Swetter and Joyce Teng

What makes bemotrizinol different from sunscreens already available?

From the pure standpoint of protecting our skin from the sun, bemotrizinol is a “gamechanger,” said Susan Swetter, MD, the Mosbacher Professor in Dermatology co-director of the Melanoma and Cutaneous Oncology Programs at Stanford Medicine and the Stanford Cancer Institute. “It’s the best broad spectrum ultraviolet radiation filter available.”
Most sunscreens claim to offer broad spectrum coverage, meaning they absorb both kinds of ultraviolet light — dubbed UVA and UVB — that reach ground level and damage our skin. But available U.S. sunscreen filters do not cover the full spectrum of UVA, meaning a portion of this skin-penetrating light goes unchecked. “We have not had a good UVA filter on the U.S. market to date,” said Joyce Teng, MD, PhD, a professor of dermatology and director of Pediatric Dermatology at Stanford Children’s Health.
To be more specific:
  • Ultraviolet A (UVA) has a wavelength of 315-400 nanometers (billionths of a meter). About 95% of the ultraviolet radiation at the Earth’s surface is UVA. A lower-energy form of ultraviolet light, UVA more easily penetrates the skin and primarily causes photoaging, meaning wrinkles and sagging. Rahman notes it’s important to remember UVA is also a cause of skin cancer, as demonstrated since the late 1980s when people had higher rates of skin cancer on the driving side of their face due to UVA penetration.
  • Ultraviolet B (UVB) has a wavelength of 280-315 nanometers and comprises the remaining 5% of ground-level ultraviolet. Being more energetic than UVA, UVB wrecks greater amounts of havoc through the top layer of skin, primarily causing sunburn and directly damaging DNA, significantly increasing cancer risk.
Sunscreens historically available in the U.S. have provided UVA coverage only out to about 370 nanometers. Bemotrizinol covers the whole UVA spectrum, out to 400 nanometers. “Bemotrizinol is a huge step forward compared to so many other things we’ve had,” said Zakia Rahman, MD, a clinical professor of dermatology and director of the resident laser and aesthetic clinic at Stanford Medicine.

Why did it take so long for bemotrizinol to be approved in the U.S.?

Chalk it up to different regulatory structures. Unlike most of the world, which treats sunscreen as an over-the-counter cosmetic, the U.S. has historically classified sunscreen as an over-the-counter drug. Accordingly, to be sold in American stores, sunscreens must go through strict regulatory approval for safety — including human testing — as well as efficacy and clear labeling. This is so consumers can easily understand how to safely administer the product themselves.

Those extra regulatory steps, plus bureaucratic rigamarole, held up ingredient approval for more than two decades. This involved legislation such as the Sunscreen Innovation Act from 2014 to create an official regulatory pathway for bemotrizinol review, and eventually the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act of 2020 to modernize the over-the-counter drugs regulatory framework.

“I don’t want to say ‘battle,’ but it’s certainly been a greater-than-20-year effort to get superior ultraviolet filters incorporated into our sunscreens,” Swetter said.

Should I be concerned that the FDA took so long to approve bemotrizinol?

No, quite the opposite, the Stanford Medicine experts said. “We have waited a really long time to have a new sunscreen option that’s better at UVA protection. On the plus side, there’s been added protection for consumers because of the testing process,” said Rahman, building on the safety history of bemotrizinol since its introduction in other countries circa 2000.
As part of its review, the FDA considered animal studies that showed no evidence for increased cancer risk or endocrine disruption, which is when substances interfere with natural hormonal systems, often manifesting as reproductive changes in parents or developmental issues in offspring.
Human testing of the 6% bemotrizinol concentration approved in the U.S. also found no signs of concerning skin irritation. Skin absorption, especially in pregnant women and children, was another significant concern, but testing ruled that out as well. “Since the bemotrizinol molecule is large, it does not cross the skin barrier easily, so that minimizes risk of systemic absorption,” Teng said.
Overall, the FDA approved the chemical not only for sunscreens for adults but also children as young as six months. That could prove critical for bringing down skin cancer rates in subsequent generations.
“Bemotrizinol is tried and true and its FDA approval is great news for consumers,” Swetter said.


August 13, 2026 — The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today released a report Wolves in White Coats: How Doctors and Hospitals Pushed and Profited from the Fraud of “Gender Medicine,” a commissioned report examining insurance coding practices, perverse financial incentives, and the provision of sex-rejecting procedures for minors. Drawing on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Guidance, Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations, peer-reviewed scientific literature, hospital records, whistleblower testimony, nationwide insurance claims analyses, and interviews with patients and parents, the report presents HHS’ findings and recommendations about the industry pushing and profiting off so-called “gender medicine.” A shortform documentary illustrating the report’s findings and highlighting the stories of victims of predatory gender medical practices was also released in conjunction with the report.

According to the report, more than 225 hospitals and health systems established pediatric gender programs nationwide. The report also analyzes nationwide claims data from 2015 through 2025 and identifies approximately $50 million in insurance claims for puberty blockers billed using endocrine disorder diagnostic code E34.9 (Endocrine Disorder, Unspecified). It further reports that nearly $11 million in claims for patients ages 13–17 were billed using a diagnosis code for precocious puberty E301 — findings the report says warrant additional review of insurance coding practices.

Pursuant to that recommendation, today Vice President JD Vance, as Chairman of the White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, and Secretary Kennedy referred hospitals and clinics identified by the report to the Department of Justice and the HHS Office of Inspector General [PDF, 316 KB], respectively, for possible violations of federal law.

“Doctors and hospitals must put children’s health ahead of ideology and financial gain,” said HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. “This report identifies troubling billing practices that demand scrutiny. HHS will follow the evidence, protect taxpayers, and hold accountable anyone who broke the law or violated the trust of patients and families. Under President Trump’s leadership, we are restoring transparency and integrity to American medicine.”

The report recommends that federal and state agencies review coding and billing practices, strengthen oversight of claims submitted to public health programs, and refers suspicious billing activity for appropriate investigation when warranted.

“CMS has a duty to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent lawfully and honestly,” said CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz. “When billing practices obscure what care was actually provided, especially when children are involved, we have an obligation to follow the facts. We will protect the integrity of our programs, demand accountability, and make sure the American people are not footing the bill for sex rejecting procedures that inflict potentially irreversible harm on young patients.”

The report’s claims analysis draws on nationwide insurance billing data and reviews federal medical coding guidance to examine billing patterns associated with puberty blockers prescribed to minors. The report recommends continued oversight of insurance coding practices and appropriate review of billing activity that may warrant further investigation under applicable federal and state authorities.

“Our responsibility as healthcare professionals, first and foremost, is to do no harm. As HHS’ commissioned report Wolves in White Coats details, the medical establishment created what the report describes as ‘captive patients,’ placing vulnerable children on a path toward potentially lifelong medical interventions. Under the Trump Administration, HHS is committed to protecting children from irreversible sex-rejecting procedures, following the evidence, and restoring trust in American medicine,” said Assistant Secretary for Health Admiral Brian Christine.

The report recommends strengthening oversight of insurance coding practices, enhancing program integrity, and ensuring appropriate review of potentially improper billing practices. It also encourages continued evaluation of clinical practices and policies related to pediatric “gender medicine” and outlines recommendations intended to improve accountability across the healthcare system.

The full report, Wolves in White Coats: How Doctors and Hospitals Pushed and Profited from the Fraud of “Gender Medicine,” is available here [PDF, 3.70 MB].

The Executive Summary of the report is available here [PDF, 943 KB].



AUGUST 14, 2026 — The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today announced that health systems represented by the past, current, and incoming chair of the American Hospital Association (AHA) have joined the Make Hospital Food Healthier Pledge, strengthening a nationwide effort to improve the quality of food served in America’s hospitals and reinforce the role of nutrition in patient care. Corewell Health in Michigan, Houston Methodist in Texas, and Sanford Health in South Dakota all signed onto the pledge.

“Hospitals cannot promote healing while serving food that contributes to chronic disease,” said HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. “By joining this pledge, these health systems are putting nutrition where it belongs — at the center of patient care. We are working with hospitals across America to serve healthier food, improve patient health, and Make America Healthy Again.”

“The AHA supports the Administration’s continued focus on meeting patients’ nutritional needs that promotes healing, recovery and patient health,” said AHA President and CEO Rick Pollack. “Hospitals across the country work closely with registered dieticians and clinical staff to provide patients with high quality, nutritious meals that embrace the notion that ‘food is medicine.’ We are committed to helping hospitals — as clinically appropriate and feasible — ensure that patients have access to nourishing meals, including by sharing this voluntary pledge with the hospital field and encouraging them to review it and give it serious consideration.”

The voluntary Make Hospital Food Healthier Pledge, launched by HHS through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), encourages hospitals to reduce highly processed foods, prioritize nutrient-dense meals, and align patient nutrition with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

“Nutrition is a cornerstone of good health and better patient outcomes,” said CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz. “The commitments made today by the American Hospital Association’s leadership will help accelerate adoption of healthier food practices across the country and reduce the burden on our healthcare system by promoting long-term wellness.”

The Make Hospital Food Healthier Pledge calls on participating hospitals to:

  • Limit highly processed foods and sugar-sweetened beverages
  • Use baked, broiled, roasted, stir-fried, or grilled cooking methods instead of deep frying
  • Limit processed meats and foods high in added sugars, sodium, and artificial additives
  • Emphasize whole grains over refined grains
  • Prioritize minimally processed proteins, including plant-based options

The pledge builds on existing Medicare requirements that hospitals meet each patient’s individual nutritional needs and aligns with the Trump Administration’s broader efforts to place nutrition and prevention at the center of American healthcare.

Hospitals interested in joining the Make Hospital Food Healthier Pledge can learn more and sign the pledge here.



National survey suggests that use of alcohol, cigarettes, and other substances remains low.

August 12, 2026 – In 2025, adults in the United States reported using cannabis at or near record-high levels, continuing a long-term trend of increasing use. Nicotine vaping also remained high among young adults. These findings are based on the latest report from the Monitoring the Future (MTF) Longitudinal Panel Study, an annual examination of self-reported drug use in the U.S. among adults ages 19 to 65 supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) since its inception in 1976.

The panel study, conducted by investigators at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, showed that increased levels of cannabis and nicotine vaping and pouch use coincided with historically low rates of cigarette smoking and a decline in alcohol consumption, continuing patterns seen in recent years. Some results bucked trends, however, such as a slight increase in self-reported heroin use among young adults aged 19 to 30, marking the first significant uptick and highest level in about 10 years.

“It is reassuring to continue to see relatively low smoking rates and a continuing decline in alcohol use among adults. At the same time, rising rates of cannabis, nicotine, and certain other drug use warrant attention. Continued monitoring is vital for understanding the changing drug landscape so that we can develop effective interventions to support public health,” said Nora D. Volkow, M.D., director of NIH’s National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

The panel asked adults about their use of more than two dozen substances over different time periods, including the past 12 months and the past 30 days.

Among all adults, daily, past 30-day, and past 12-month cannabis use and cannabis vaping remained at or near all-time highs. Adults in early midlife (35 to 50 years old) reported significantly higher rates of daily cannabis use than last year, increasing from 6.6% in 2024 to 8.5% in 2025.

Nicotine vaping remained at or near all-time highs. Among young adults, past 30-day nicotine vaping tripled, and past 12-month nicotine vaping nearly doubled since 2017. Reported use of nicotine pouches over the past 12 months among all adults more than doubled since 2023 when the panel first included questions about these products.

The prevalence of cigarette smoking among all adults remained relatively low. Rates of cigarette smoking over the past 30 days ranged from 8.3% of young adults to 10.6% of adults in late midlife (55 to 65 years old). Among young adults, nearly all measures of drinking reached low levels, with past 12-month, past 30-day, and high-intensity drinking (defined as drinking 10 or more drinks in a row) all holding steady.

The report identified a small but significant increase in the prevalence of heroin use over the past year in young adults, rising from 0.2% in 2024 to 0.6% in 2025, which is under the all-time high of 0.7% in 2013. Likewise, nonmedical use of sleeping medications in the past 12 months for the same age group significantly increased from 2.0% in 2024 to 3.0% the following year.

Another significant change, also among young adults, was a decrease in psychedelics use over the past year, from 8.9% in 2024 to 7.2% in 2025. This decline follows what has been an increasing trend over the last decade.

“An advantage of studies like MTF is the ability to identify subtle shifts and trends over time, noting areas where additional resources are needed to help us head off potential escalations in drug use down the road,” said Megan Patrick, Ph.D., principal investigator of the MTF Longitudinal Panel Study at the University of Michigan.

To estimate drug prevalence levels among a nationally representative sample of U.S. high school graduates over the past 50 years, the MTF Longitudinal Panel Study has obtained data from more than 120,000 individuals who originally participated in the larger cross-sectional MTF survey as 12th graders. The panel surveys young adult participants every two years and midlife adult participants every five years.

The 2025 panel results are available online from the University of Michigan.

About the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA): NIDA is a component of the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIDA supports most of the world’s research on the health aspects of drug use and addiction. The Institute carries out a large variety of programs to inform policy, improve practice, and advance addiction science. For more information about NIDA and its programs, visit www.nida.nih.gov.

About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation’s medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.