Talk:BPC-157
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BPC-157 has 4 human studies done or registered
[edit]The article claims no human studies, but BPC-157 has at least 4 human studies done in the past and/or registered/ongoing. Data is bloody difficult to find however.
I found e.g. these:
Veljaca M, Pavic-Sladoljev D, Mildner B, et al. Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of PL 14736, a novel agent for treatment of ulcerative colitis, in healthy male volunteers. Gut 2003; 51: A309.
Ruenzi M, Stolte M, Veljaca M, Oreskovic K, Peterson J. A multicenter, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of PL 14736 enema in the treatment of mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2005; 128: A584. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bstard12 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- I deleted the "no human studies" part as it clearly has human studies, at least 2 of them published, one of them (IBS study) even mentioned in title of ref 2, and I want to stop the spread of this popular piece of misinformation. I or someone should later add a comment and ref to said studies (above).--Bstard12 (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
- Tried to look into these references, and I don’t think they’re published papers. I think the former is an abstract from a talk at a Croatian conference. The latter only appears as a citation from another paper, and I can’t find it listed in the purported journal. My guess would be that the latter reference is also supposed to be citing an abstract to a conference talk, maybe to the same conference in a later year since the conference name references gastroenterology. There doesn’t appear to be any information about how the studies went online, at least in English, which is kind of suspicious. Hopefully there have been citable clinical studies since then Pabnau (talk) 17:38, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- I deleted the "no human studies" part as it clearly has human studies, at least 2 of them published, one of them (IBS study) even mentioned in title of ref 2, and I want to stop the spread of this popular piece of misinformation. I or someone should later add a comment and ref to said studies (above).--Bstard12 (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
| The user below has a request that an edit be made to BPC-157. That user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest. The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 470 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies. |
Could an uninvolved editor please review this request? I am proposing that the following External links section be added near the bottom of the article, after References, if it is considered appropriate under WP:EL and WP:ELNO:
External links
[edit]- Peptides.io Pharmacokinetic Database – interactive pharmacokinetic half-life data for peptides, with entries sourced from PubMed-indexed literature
For transparency, I am connected to Peptides.io, so I am asking for review rather than adding the link myself, in line with WP:COI.
Andrei25luks (talk) 04:03, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Proposed external link: Peptides.io pharmacokinetic database
[edit]I would like to ask whether editors think it would be appropriate to add the Peptides.io Pharmacokinetic Database to an External links section for this article. My reason for asking first is that BPC-157 is a medical/biomedical topic, and I want to avoid adding anything that could be seen as promotional or not useful under WP:EL.
Suggested link:
- Peptides.io Pharmacokinetic Database – interactive pharmacokinetic half-life data for 20+ peptides, with entries sourced from PubMed-indexed literature
My view is that this should only be added if editors agree it provides neutral, article-relevant information that is not already covered by the article and does not primarily promote products or services. If editors feel it falls under WP:ELNO or is too commercial/promotional, I am fine with leaving it out.
Disclosure: For transparency, I am connected to Peptides.io, so I am proposing this here instead of adding it directly, per WP:COI. Andrei25luks (talk) 14:39, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Start-Class Molecular Biology articles
- Unknown-importance Molecular Biology articles
- Start-Class MCB articles
- Low-importance MCB articles
- WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology articles
- All WikiProject Molecular Biology pages
- Start-Class chemicals articles
- Low-importance chemicals articles
- Start-Class AfC articles
- AfC submissions by date/16 August 2017
- Accepted AfC submissions
- Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests

