Understand the source comparison
Peptides for Scar Healing Protocol Evidence Guide: Research vs Consumer Formulations
| Peptide | Mechanism | Evidence Level | Optimal Phase | Typical Research Concentration | Consumer Product Concentration | Professional Assessment ||—|—|—|—|—|—|| GHK-Cu | TGF-β1 downregulation, MMP-2 upregulation | Phase II clinical trials (n=127) | Early rem
No winner is assigned.
This page preserves a source comparison for education. It does not add a rating, recommendation or clinical judgment.
- | Peptide | Mechanism | Evidence Level | Optimal Phase | Typical Research Concentration | Consumer Product Concentration | Professional Assessment ||—|—|—|—|—|—|| GHK-Cu | TGF-β1 downregulation, MMP-2 upregulation | Phase II clinical trials (n=127) | Early remodeling (weeks 3–8) | 0.5–2% topical, 1–10 μM in vitro | 0.01–0.1% (often unstabilized copper) | Research concentrations 5–20× higher than retail products; copper stabilization chemistry differs significantly || BPC-157 | VEGF stabilization, angiogenesis promotion | Animal models, case series (no Phase III RCTs) | Proliferative (days 4–21) | 250–500 μg subcutaneous daily | Not available in consumer products (peptide sequence not approved for OTC) | Efficacy demonstrated in controlled settings; human dosing extrapolated from animal models || TB-500 | Actin-binding, cell migration facilitation | Preclinical models (equine, porcine, rodent) | Proliferative (days 4–21) | 2–10 mg subcutaneous weekly | Not available in consumer products