Preprint Finds Sharp Rise in BPC-157 Use, With Users Delaying Disclosure to Doctors

BPC-157 is one half of the so-called Wolverine stack. The BPC stands for body protection compound. The substance was originally found in gastric juice in 1993 and is thought to promote injury recovery by creating new blood vessels, promoting cell growth, and repairing damaged tissues such as tendons, muscles, and ligaments. It is not approved by any regulatory body, has primarily been studied in animals, and has limited clinical evidence in humans. A 2025 systematic review found only 35 preclinical studies and a single clinical study of BPC-157 in humans, according to The Verge.

Despite the thin evidence base, online interest has grown quickly. The same systematic review found that in 2024 there were over 50 million views for BPC-157 videos on YouTube and TikTok. Google Trends data cited by The Verge showed a 1,600 percent increase in traditional web searches for BPC-157 in the United States over the last five years, and a jump of over 5,000 percent for YouTube searches. Reliable real-life usage numbers, however, have been impossible to find.

The preprint attempts to fill part of that gap. Venky Soundararajan, one of the study's authors and chief scientific officer of nference, an AI startup that uses LLMs to find insights from clinical records, told The Verge that BPC-157 use was 'kind of benign' during the pandemic but has 'skyrocketed over the last few quarters.' He said, 'Over the last three years, the use has increased significantly.' The method is imperfect because BPC-157 has no insurance code or uniform way for medical providers to indicate that a patient is using it.

The study found that about 33 percent of patients who used BPC-157 did not pursue any other therapies or drug use. Roughly half stacked it with other substances. The most common additions were testosterone, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and TB-500, the other half of the Wolverine stack, which also supports tissue repair. The majority of patients took BPC-157 orally, followed by injections.

Soundararajan said the average BPC-157 user showing up to a doctor is getting younger, with an average age in the upper 40s, and is very likely a Caucasian white patient. From the time the product is first used to the time a patient discusses it with a doctor, at least two months has elapsed, he said. BPC-157 use is most commonly reported to family practice and internal medicine, followed by gastroenterologists and orthopedic surgeons.

The researchers acknowledged flaws in the data. About 96 percent of patients who disclosed their usage were Caucasian, compared with 2 percent who were African American. That is a dramatic gap from what the researchers would have expected statistically based on the source data, which was 78 percent Caucasian and 17 percent African American. Soundararajan said this does not mean African Americans are not taking BPC-157; they may simply feel less confident talking about it with doctors. The Verge reported that interviews with peptide users found they do not want judgment.

Finding concrete data about gray-market peptides is a Sisyphean task, The Verge reported. Unlike bona fide clinical drug trials, there are no official numbers and little to no safety data. Some peptides have more anecdotal evidence than others, but a stranger on r/peptides is not an ideal information source. Most people partaking in a dubiously legal activity are not going to shout it from the rooftops, The Verge noted. What is known is that many people are taking unregulated, unapproved substances without supervision by medical professionals.

The preprint's findings, if confirmed, would underscore how quickly gray-market peptide use can grow outside the standard regulatory and clinical evidence process. They also point to a practical gap for doctors: patients may be using BPC-157 for weeks or months before a medical appointment, and they may not bring it up unless asked. The study's reliance on an LLM to detect mentions in clinical notes offers one way to track a substance that otherwise has no billing code or formal reporting channel, though its authors acknowledge the approach cannot capture every user.