Peptides For Brain Optimization, Composition & Longevity With Ryan Smith

Foreign, everybody. Welcome to the Muscle Intelligence podcast. Peptides have become a massive thing in the health community. Most of you, I hope, have heard of peptides at this point. Peptides are short-chain amino acids, anywhere typically from three up to 100 amino acids in sequence, and these different amino acids code for different things inside the body. And today's guest, Ryan Smith, is one of the top three experts in the entire world on peptides. He is the CEO of Tailor-Made Peptides, basically Kentucky, now actually gone worldwide. And this company is doing incredible things. And I'll tell you, Ryan is an absolute genius when it comes to understanding the biochemistry and the impact these peptides are going to have. And, and let me tell you, peptides are nothing short of remarkable. They're certainly the most, they seem to be the most tissue-specific treatment modality that exists. Meaning, a lot of things we do, like hormones or medications, are systemic. They can affect different tissues, whereas the peptide, you can really, really isolate particular tissues. As Ryan so eloquently explains in this podcast, you're going to want to listen to every moment of this podcast because we get into some really interesting ones. I'm sure some you've never heard of. I'm sure some that you maybe have, and some that you definitely want to hear about. You know, this podcast with Ryan Smith.

[Music]

Ryan Smith, thank you so much, man. You guys are doing amazing things. I had the pleasure of meeting you at the peptide conference this year and, uh, you know, been following ever since and following your company and really everything in the peptide space because it seems to be perhaps the most exciting or one of the most exciting areas of technological advancement when it comes to the human body. Talking about peptides, thank you for joining me. Appreciate your time.

Yeah, thanks so much for having me. Happy to, uh, spread the word on peptides.

Yeah, I was picking your brain a little bit before we got rolling here, and we got talking on the things that are most fascinating to me right now. And as you could maybe speculate by the name of the podcast, it's Muscle Intelligence. And the two things that I'm most fascinated in are muscle and intelligence. Starting off, talking about the brain stuff, because there's a lot of really interesting things that exist. And I think most of my listeners by this point are probably aware of what peptides are and how they work. And for the most part, I've had a number of other guests on that are in the peptide space. But, you know, diving into some of these, um, kind of best practices around brain health, you know, as we age, we know that our brain is slowing down. We know that we're, we've had less mitochondria. And many people have some, some traumatic brain injuries, whether concussions or whatever. I'd love to just talk about some of the things you guys have discovered and how they seem to be helping people, you know, almost turn back the clock when it comes to their brain.

Yeah, absolutely. You know, you mentioned two things there which I think are, are really, uh, important to separate out just because there are so many different topics. But mitochondria, in terms of mitochondrial function, there's so much that that has been done in the peptide world and the small molecule world to treat mitochondrial dysfunction and how that relates to, you know, a lot of different health deficiencies. But then the second one is the neurological approach. We have just a ton of peptide products which are used to, uh, to help with mental functioning or cognitive decline. I would say it's one of the really, really strong areas for peptides just because a lot of these things have blood-brain barrier transporters. A lot of them are small molecules that easily penetrate the brain and have some really effects.

Very cool, man. So, you know, peptides, to my, uh, recent surprise, have been around really since the 60s. And, and the gentleman out of Russia, Dr. Vladimir Kavinson, seems to be the one who kind of pioneered the use. And, you know, he's maybe got patents. I don't know if you can patent a peptide, but at least some, seemingly some patents on some of these, these peptides. And, you know, he's been applying it to people for effectively 50 years now and seen some really incredible long-term data. Can you just share some of that? And just because I think it provides credibility to the topic.

Yeah, absolutely. So peptides have been done, you know, uh, really since around 1901. They discovered secretin, which is the first, uh, you know, hormone in the human body that they sort of discovered as a peptide. Since then, you know, things like oxytocin, you know, all those are peptide molecules. And, you know, even the pharmaceutical program, which are peptide mimetics, have been used in clinical practice. And so, uh, the peptides, just as a, as a type of therapy, are, are have been used for a long time but are just now exploding. And the reason being is that, uh, usually the peptide weaknesses are really two things: half-life in the body, mechanism, the route of administration. You know, most of these things are injectables. And so pharmaceutical companies haven't thoroughly investigated them because they have short half-lives and they are injections. And so that's really hard to commercialize for a lot of these products. But, uh, as we've developed, and you have scientists, relatively new, I mean, they didn't even have a lot of these growth hormone secretagogues. They didn't have receptors for them. You know, they had the actual product, the new it was increasing growth hormone. And so, now the science is getting better. In the last 10 to 20 years, we've just seen an absolute explosion in peptide development. So right now, it's a leading area of just pharmaceutical product development in the U.S. As of 2016, only 8% of FDA-approved products were peptides. They anticipate that being around 40% over the next, uh, 10 to 15 years. And so just an absolute explosion. You know, Dr. Kavinson definitely led the way, especially with a lot of these neuro peptides. You, you obviously mentioned Epithalamine, that's probably the one that he's most well-known for. The Epithalamine goes by a couple of different names, but he's definitely done a lot of work and done a lot of extensive work in the world of peptides. You don't often see 15-year follow-up studies, but you definitely have some of those completed. You know, it's, uh, Russia's been a hotbed for a lot of the products, C-Max and C-Link as well. So Russia's been great, but the United States is quickly catching up with a lot of new development.

Super interesting. So one thing I'd like to clarify that I don't think anyone's ever really explained is, you know, peptides are almost an end product, right? So your body will initiate gene transcription to produce an enzyme or a peptide that that initiates some type of response in the body. So that's kind of the end product. And some peptides work that way. Is there any peptides that actually work at the gene level to initiate the gene to create more of the peptide itself, or is it usually one mechanism?

Yeah, definitely both mechanisms. You know, one of the ones that we use a lot with mitochondria, we have the MOTC. The MOTC is actually produced in the mitochondrial genome, but actually then is taken to the somatic genome to change expression. Yeah, there are a lot of different mechanisms for peptides in the body, but they're definitely intracellular communicators. It's definitely the best way to say it. And then obviously, the larger, larger peptides, the proteins with secondary and tertiary configurations, which have a lot more features in the body. Usually, these are, are anywhere from paracrine and endocrine type signalers, but you even have some autocrine type response with a couple of things as it relates to, you know, even senescence and so. So yeah, they're all used all over the body in a variety of features. One of their best features, though, is just their specificity. Well, these small molecules, you get a lot of different results all over the body, but with the peptides, you get very, very precise signaling. And you also get, uh, you don't have to worry much about drug-to-drug interactions because you don't have to worry much about liver or kidney metabolism as much. There are definitely some exceptions. So that is the sort of the benefit of peptides is that they, uh, they're, you're just mimicking your body's natural configurations to provide the closest, uh, thing to stimulation and manipulating certain pathways, uh, medically to sort of correct any type of deficiency.

That makes a ton of sense. And the reason I asked the question is it seems as though, you know, if I take testosterone as a hormone, we know it's going to shut down that system. And I'm curious if taking a peptide would also have the same effect. And then conversely, if there's people studying this idea of, well, instead of just taking the peptide directly, if we could take something that's almost the secretagogue, like you say, causing that gene to transcribe more of that peptide, would there be kind of a different, maybe a better long-term benefit or different long-term benefit?

Yeah, you look at, you know, growth hormone is a good example because if you were to dose exogenous growth hormone, multiple alarm, there's really no negative feedback with your body. It sort of loses control because it's sort of an overwhelming cascade. Growth hormone goes to your liver, produces IGF-1. IGF-1 creates bulletproof events. You know, the, uh, these secretagogues are a little bit different. By encouraging your pituitary, you still maintain a lot of those negative feedback loops. And so your body's sort of able to self-regulate. It's not coming in with a hammer, it's coming in with a scalpel, right? Definitely depends on the pathway. Whether you're trying to work with, talking about endogenous production, the testosterone, you'd obviously decrease your LH and FSH. But if you take something like HCG, for instance, you don't necessarily decrease your LH, even though it's mimicking that alpha subunit of LH, it's mimicking LH. And so, uh, it sort of allows your body to maintain a little bit more maintenance and control, which is the way to do it because our body operates in a very smart system. And, uh, you know, to optimize it, we just need a little bit of input, not a lot.

Man, you brought up a hot topic, so I got to go there. This year versus secretagogue stuff. So a lot of people in, in the fitness world, in the bodybuilding world, in the anti-aging world, are taking growth hormone, whether, whether, you know, prescribed or otherwise. And nobody that I know has ever really done a good job of going, hey, this is why they're different. This is why you should look at this one rather than this one. And you said, you know, GH is kind of a hammer, and the secretagogues are more the scalpel. And, and that is, uh, definitely a thought-provoking statement. I'd love to just have you kind of explain what mechanistically is happening when someone uses growth hormone that's this more broad-stroke approach first.

Yeah, I think that's a little more precise. Yeah. So growth hormone is undeniable that there are, uh, quality of life benefits with it. And in along with that, that usually is mediated via its effect directly in, in certain tissues, typically, you know, generally, it's just mostly fat, adipose tissue, and muscle tissue. So, you know, body composition is one of the major things you see. But you also get a lot of other benefits, reduction of carotid intima-media thickness, and C-reactive protein and triglycerides. And so it's having an effect on the whole system. It's a very, very, you know, broad pleiotropic product. There are also abuses of growth hormone, you know, if you overdose it, you get acromegaly symptoms, you get fluid retention, carpal tunnel, all these different things. And, and you also have sort of an unproliferated or, uh, really an unchecked system as it turns to increasing IGF-1. And so, you know, anyone who's been in the fitness industry has seen, you know, people with, uh, what they call the steroid gut, right? With, um, you know, that sort of distended abdomen where these people have, uh, they also call it Columboism, right? After, uh, Palumbo the bodybuilder. But, uh, they, uh, they see they have, they have six packs, but their six packs are are distended. And so, you and the real reason for that is because you're proliferating on IGF-1 receptors in the intestines, which cause this, this organ growth. And obviously, you can overdo it. And so what we really can do with the peptide products is we hit it at a higher level. So we mimic these hypothalamic hormones like GHRH, and we are able to sort of just give the pituitary a little bit of stimulus to release these products. You know, one of the biggest things that happens as we age, you know, even around 25, our ability to secrete growth hormone drops precipitously. And so usually that's because, not our production of somatotropic growth hormone and our somatotropes, but their release. And so if we can encourage that release, we can, uh, still get, you know, optimal levels of growth hormone, but we don't have to worry about going too high or, or these other negative side effects. It's just really a maintenance dose to maintain optimal function as you were whenever you're in your earliest one.

Okay, so, you know, most listeners by this point, or maybe some of them will be aware of what those may be. And we said, we've got the ipamorelin, the Ipamorelin, and CJC, uh, and the list goes on and on and on. Um, sir, would you mind starting to maybe describe which ones are most common, which ones are most efficacious, which ones have the best data behind them?

So, uh, they, I really, um, in the clinical world right now, due to some certain regulatory restrictions, there are three different courses of therapy, really. There's an oral product, which is a small molecule, not a peptide, called MK677, or Ibutamoren. The second one would be the combination of the release of CJC-1295, also called, or the one that most people refer to as CJC, is MOD GRF 1-29. And then that is usually paired with Ipamorelin. And then lastly, there's the Tesamorelin, which is, uh, probably the most significant and powerful, uh, and, uh, sort of what are used clinically. I would say the most common ones, um, are due to some some heavy usage in the past or things like the GHRP-2, GHRP-6, and some of the morelin. Those have since been a little bit regulated out by, yeah, yeah. And so they're less available clinically, but you might still see them a lot, you know, in the black market or the web. But I would say the MK677, the combination of the CJC and Ipamorelin are really the three they're used most often correctly.

So as far as the GHRP-2 and RP-6 being removed, was that because of misuse or maybe not being as efficacious as the ones that are current, like how would you compare them?

Yeah, so, um, the GHRP-2 and GHRP-6, you know, unfortunately, I can't tell you the reason they were removed. It's a little bit of, uh, lack of transparency as it relates to the FDA. But I can tell you that they are not nearly as specific as the Ipamorelin. And so there are two receptors on the pituitary which cause growth hormone release. There's the growth hormone releasing hormone receptor, and then there's the, the ghrelin receptor, which is also called the growth hormone secretagogue receptor. And the GHRP-2, GHRP-6, Ipamorelin, and Hexarelin, and the MK677 all work on that, that growth hormone secretagogue receptor, which is usually endogenously a receptor for ghrelin, the hunger hormone. And so the GHRP-2 and GHRP-6 are, are actually pretty powerful. These are actually the first products that they found to secrete growth hormone. Bowers found these things to release growth hormone around 1996 through 1999. Um, and actually found that these things secreted growth hormone before they even knew where they were working. Um, and so that's why I sort of referenced earlier, they are actually pretty powerful releasing growth hormone. And as a result, people have traditionally really, really liked them. The problem is they often come with other unwanted side effects, things like, you know, significant hunger. Probably, anyways, you use the GHRP-6, you can say that it had, you know, a voracious appetite. The other things though, they're less notable, they're less noticeable, are increasing prolactin, increasing cortisol, increasing acetylcholine. So it's just not as specific as we want it to be. Uh, the Ipamorelin, on the other hand, is that first specific growth hormone secretagogue. And really, it's the reason why she's most clinically now because it definitely has an effect without the unwanted side effects.

So one of the protocols that I hear most often prescribed is different in the morning and Tesamorelin at night, then maybe alluding to the fact that those things work synergistically or differently. Is that the reality? And if we could talk about that.

Yeah, definitely. There's a great, uh, study by Anderson which shows the ability to secrete growth hormone whenever you do GHRP-2, GHRP-2, GHRP-6, um, and then you combine that with some Ipamorelin. And what you see is a five to ten times, uh, increase of growth hormone whenever you use the combination product. And so what you see is that it's actually the growth hormone secretagogues are permissive to the effects of the growth hormone releasing hormones. And so that's almost always why people will pair something like the CJC and the Ipamorelin is to get that maximum benefit. I know a lot of people like the Ipamorelin and Tesamorelin combination, but, you know, it's probably often a little bit overkill. I think the Tesamorelin is just so secretory by itself that the effects that you get are pretty significant. And usually, I would say it's a cost-efficacy benefit with adding the Ipamorelin. You might see some additional benefit, but probably not enough to really justify the cost.

Now, there's obviously a great deal of concern sometimes expressed around the growth hormone IGF pathway with respect to cancers. Could you speak to that a little bit?

Yeah, and you know, it's hard to speak on because, you know, a lot of data doesn't exist. You know, one of the best places to look for data is, uh, in the children who have had post-radiation therapy and treated with growth hormone as a result of childhood cancer. And so a lot of those, those large-scale studies actually show reduced incidence of cancer with growth hormone therapy as a child. So that's obviously positive. But there's also a really tight correlation between IGF-1 levels, um, and certain types of cancer, in particular, you know, prostate, colon, and breast. And so, you know, anytime we're thinking about growth hormone therapy or IGF-1 therapy, that is, uh, definitely something we have to consider. And so it's definitely something to be on the lookout for. One of the things about the secretagogues is that they also raise IGF binding protein 3, which is inversely correlated to all those same types of cancer. And so it's another reason to maybe consider the secretagogues over, you know, exogenous IGF-1 and growth hormone therapy.

Super interesting. So one peptide that I'd love to speak about is, you know, at the peptide conference, there's a lot of talk around Thymosin Alpha 1 and its benefits, almost like as a master reset type of them all. Would that sound accurate? I'd love to understand how that, uh, works and how that makes sense.

Yeah, it's my favorite of all the peptides. You know, it, it looks to have all positive effects and almost no negative effects. I always say that, you know, it, in some studies, has, you know, less side effects than placebo. And so it's really, really low risk. In 2013, it got FDA orphan drug approval for malignant melanoma, hepatitis C, and hepatitis B. And so ultimately, right away, we know it's great for viral illnesses and cancer. And so, uh, it works by essentially stimulating the innate immune system, increasing, you know, natural killer cells, you know, T cells, helping the immune system fight anything abnormal in the body. And so it can also reduce inflammation and sort of shift the immune response from a Th2 to a Th1 immune response, which can reduce inflammation. So it makes it applicable in things like autoimmune diseases. It makes it applicable, you know, when you have a cold or sickness. It also makes it applicable in helping fight, uh, the, I should say, the senescent cell, secretory phenotype, I'm clearing the burden of some of these senescent cells which can contribute to aging. And so it's an amazing product. I think almost everyone should be on it. But, uh, it's risks in cancer treatment and any type of viral illness make it a sort of a no-brainer.

And what's a recommended dosing schedule with that? As far as amount and frequency? And we say everyone should be on it, like all the time, or just like a sickness coming on, or what do you think?

I mean, yeah, you know, the biggest part of it is, I think everyone should be on it if there wasn't, you know, you know, what didn't cost me money, right? That's the one downside. And so, so I, you know, I would say that if you definitely keep them on hand in case you, you think you're coming down with a cold or going to do anything like that, it's, uh, it's amazing. It's even trying to make vaccine over 35% more efficacious. And so if you're doing it, something, something like that, it can help mitigate some of those, uh, those issues. But, um, you know, I think that the typical dosing schedule for for generally cancers around 1.6 milligrams, just as two subcutaneous injections a week. Um, and it's, uh, again, it's no risk. That's a typical protocol. If you're doing something like autoimmune, I think most of our practitioners won't prescribe it a little bit more frequently on a, on a daily basis.

Very cool. So one thing we talked about just prior to the podcast was Epithalamine. We talked about it a little bit around the podcast, but I'd like to talk about mechanistically what we think is happening, and then again, dosing schedules as well, because it seems to be, it's kind of thrown all over the place. Some people are saying you need a milligram a day, and you can do it every six months, some people say every three months. And I'd just love to hear kind of from the horse's mouth what, uh, yeah, what the reality is.

Yeah, definitely. So mechanistically, it's mimicking a pineal gland, uh, uh, endogenously produced peptide that's often referenced as Epithalamine. You know, the dosing schedule is buried substantially depending on what you're trying to do. I mean, uh, usually we try and mimic the data, the study with the best data, and that tends to be that 15-year follow-up study, which looks at, you know, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. It's your significant reduction. And so that dosing schedule is typically 10 milligrams, uh, every other day, or generally a total of five injections, or 50 milligrams, um, in that good to your follow-up study. That was performed essentially twice yearly, total of 100 milligrams a year, 10 injections a year. And then they only did that for three years for 15 years of benefit. So that is usually the dose of scheduling most of our conditions would use due to its effect on the pineal gland and regulating melatonin and cortisol. One of the other, in the circadian rhythm of those. One of the other big things that typically happens is a relatively low dosing schedule, usually 200, 300 micrograms daily at night in order to help with that circadian rhythm to make it so that you wake up and you sleep better. Um, and, and that is a little bit less proven chemically and in the, in the, the data, but it's still a probably frequently used.

And time of day is important to acknowledge because sometimes people, just with the growth hormone secretagogues, it's not always clear when to take them. So I'd love to maybe start with the Epithalamine, and is it always at night, or is that just if I'm looking for a specific sleep benefit?

Yeah, you know, it's, um, there are definitely some that were done in studies that were done in the morning. And so it's clinically, I would say we see that better results for sleep at night. That's just the feedback we've gotten from our patients and positions. But, you know, the growth hormone secretagogues, especially, it's most typically prescribed at night to mimic that natural growth hormone pulse. If you're really trying to, I would say, optimize, a lot of people do it for fasted cardio in the morning. And, and that's also a good strategy. You actually still keep the growth hormone pulse at night, so you're actually getting two growth hormone peaks instead of one, which generally might have a quicker result.

Very cool. So I think a lot of the demographic, um, maybe listening to my podcast does a lot, or maybe in the past has experimented with testosterone replacement therapy. And it's a lot of people that seemingly now are enjoying that. And there's a lot of people now that are seemingly trying to get off and wondering what they can do to kind of kick start the, the natural production of, uh, growth hormone or sort of testosterone perpetually. And, you know, we brought up HCG and HMG, and those things are great. But is there any actual, like peptides that you know, you know, that are maybe new that haven't been on the market for a while?

Yeah, definitely. Um, so there, there are two peptides that we typically use to, uh, to sort of help stimulate the pituitary or the gonadotropin releasing hormones to provide, you know, molecular stimulating hormone, um, and FSH and LH. And so those are going to be the DSIP and Kisspeptin. One of the other things I always like to mention is that, um, we also do, you know, a very Clomid, which is pretty popular in guys who are trying to transition out of testosterone. Um, it's an estrogen blocker to sort of tell the body to increase the production of LH, FSH. We have, what's that called? Spira. So it's called usually called Clomid, but we actually have one of those isomers. So Clomid actually has two constituents of form of being in it. Um, and it's Z-clomiphene and S-clomiphene. I'm sorry, Z-clomiphene and E-clomiphene. And we actually use the E-clomiphene as a way to be more specific with less side effects. So that's definitely something that people are more familiar with. But, but if anyone has an issue or has had an issue with Clomid, clomiphene is probably something to consider. Going back to the work of the peptides, you know, HCG is actually now going to be unavailable from compounding pharmacies because compounding pharmacies are unable to compound it. As of March 23rd, at the biologic, and so what's going to happen is the price is definitely going to increase based on HCG for anyone who's experiencing it. And so one of the things to consider is, you know, those alternatives. The DSIP and Kisspeptin definitely present some of those alternatives. We've been using it in athletes for years who want to have just a little bit more LH and therefore testosterone increase. The DSIP has been shown, particularly in mice, to increase luteinizing hormone. It doesn't have a ton of data, but we've seen some, some really good examples clinically of how to increase LH. The Kisspeptin definitely has a lot more clinical data. It's been used in children to sort of help start their pituitary axis to get them into puberty. Um, and what it does is it works on the gonadotropin releasing hormones in, in the hypothalamus. So it actually, it goes really as far up in the pathway. And then by activating the kisspeptin, gonadotropin releasing hormones, you know, it will release an adequate stimulating hormone, which goes to the pituitary to increase LH and FSH, which then allows, you know, your body to sort of restart that production. It's also been used for fertility for the same reasons, they're both men and women. And so that one would probably be the one that's most applicable to those individuals who are looking to get off.

What type of results have you experienced with DSIP? And in what populations is it something that seems to work ubiquitously, or does it tend to be very, very focused?

So most people don't really look at LH. So, you know, I would say the majority of our, uh, patients who are using the DSIP are usually attending it for sleep and not as much. That's right. That's actually my question. Are you getting a, I guess we should clarify that that is that is my question with respect to sleep, because are you getting good clinical, uh, results?

Yeah, wait, uh, yes and no. I would say that, uh, maybe even a majority of people are unresponsive for sleep. And it doesn't seem to help that much. One of the things we have seen help are changing it to morning dosing, not even dosing as, as most people would think. And it actually comes as a 10 to one, uh, with glycine as well. And that's actually a combination called Valteran. And we've gotten better clinical results to sleep with that combination. But again, it's, it's relatively hit or miss. You know, I would say, yeah, a lot of people will see nothing, and a lot of people will have, you know, really good sleep. This is one of those things we actually have relatively good data on because a lot of markets back to the population uses sleep trackers like Oura Rings. And so, again, it's hit or miss. You either have a result or you don't. But, uh, those people who, I would say 40, 45, they might get some effect on sleep, especially if they use the Valteran and in the morning.

Very cool. I like to switch gears a little bit to the mitochondrial peptides. You brought up there, so the MOTC and the Humanin, two ones that are very, very, um, interesting to me. Yeah, very. I'd just love to hear your thoughts on what the clinical data looks like.

So, uh, we don't do Humanin. And so it's one of those that we don't have any clinical experience with. I've obviously read a lot of the clinical literature, and it looks great. Um, but, you know, knowing what your variant to do, and which one to use clinically is a little bit difficult. The HGN is is really the variant of Humanin, and I would say that has the most clinical promise. We just haven't started it yet. One of the, the mitochondrial peptides we do at the moment are the MOTC and the SS-31. That's a very exciting one as well. And then we do a small molecule which also can sort of help our mitochondrial functioning, which is called the 5-amino-1-MQ. And so starting with the MOTC, that is one that's been relatively new to us clinically, but has some really interesting data as it relates to, uh, increasing mitochondrial biogenesis, and also its interplay with longevity. You know, usually people start the narrative around MOTC with the narrative that the Japanese centenarian population actually expresses this at higher levels, it's a polymorphism. And as a result, you know, a lot of people think the reason they're living past 100. And so there's definitely some longevity benefits associated with it. But but also just the increasing mitochondrial biogenesis is good for energy levels, it's good for metabolic health, which is one of the big reasons people use it.

Is that something that's seen across the board, like most people are getting the mitochondrial biogenesis?

Yeah, definitely. What it does is it increases de novo purine synthesis, which increases AICAR, which increases AMPK, which increases mitochondrial biogenesis. So you're going through that sort of pathway. And a lot of people, uh, experience good results, particularly before any type of, um, you know, physical activity. As a dosing, it beforehand. I will say though, that, you know, clinically, it's a little bit of a question mark as to the dose and dosing protocol. And, and it can slightly be a little bit irritating to, to the skin upon injection, just because of how you have to formulate it for stability. But there are developments being made to make a version that's a small molecule, that can be taken by mouth. And I would say that that will probably be available within the next couple of years.

When people hear mitochondrial biogenesis, I'm going to presume everyone's ears perk up and go, "Hey, fat loss." Right? Does that sound like?

Yeah, so then going down the path of fat loss, I know you guys have a number of things that have been shown to have pretty interesting data around accelerating fat loss. You know, with the growth hormone secretagogues aside, uncovered, maybe maybe there's one that we missed, the 3176. Love to discuss that, and then anything else that comes up in the fat loss space.

Yeah, so the fat loss space is, is, I would say a typical one, just because there's so many different mechanisms you can use to address, uh, energy expenditure, right? Particularly in the fat. You know, I, the, the one products I would say that are the two most popular products for us, specifically for fat loss, are going to be a product called Tesofensine. Tesofensine is actually not a peptide, it's a small molecule drug, but it's an oral serotonin and dopamine reuptake inhibitor. And it's one of the best weight loss drugs ever studied. Originally studied for Parkinson's and Alzheimer's for some of those neurochemical effects. And what they found is that all the patients started losing a ton of weight. They actually had to stop the investigation of Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and instead they sort of moved over to a fat loss drug. And the average weight loss over six months tends to be around 26 pounds. Wow. I mean, that's with only, you know, the 10 with the only change is the caloric restriction around 300 calories a day. You know, it's always difficult to judge how well the patients are doing that. But when our results, we've seen just phenomenal results. Usually it's mechanism of action is generally appetite suppression, but it also has sort of a little bit of a thermogenic benefit as well. And so that one is very, very popular for us. As we talk about, you know, specifically fat loss, another one that's been really popular, especially for people who are relatively optimized already, this is what we call our fat loss cream. You know, and I think that's probably a misnomer, it's really more body sculpting cream. It's a combination of aminophylline and glycyrrhetinic acid, which is an extract from licorice root. I mean, what we're able to do with that is upregulate hormone-sensitive lipase, we're able to upregulate cAMP, to make sure that if your body starts to go through and burn these fat cells for energy, then we can burn them in certain locations first by reducing the lipolytic threshold. And we've had great results with that. You know, in the some of the clinical trials, they showed 11 centimeters just within monotherapy, not even lipolytic acid, they showed 11 centimeters of, uh, fat loss around the waist in 12 weeks. So you get a couple inches of, uh, yeah, waist. We just, one of the ingredients. And so that's a good, big popular press as well. And again, it works better with people who are already relatively optimized because you're able to shred that fat a little bit quicker and see a difference a little bit faster.

Man, fascinating stuff. So one thing that's come to mind that I don't know if you guys are still in that space, but SR9009 as far as being a mitochondria upregulator.

Yeah, definitely. It's, it's an interesting product and, and we don't have any, uh, experience with that here clinically. But I do know, because you're coming from Kentucky, I've seen it used in horses quite a bit with phenomenal results. And so, yeah, in terms of, uh, in endurance, and, you know, how long these horses can sprint for, it's been, you know, definitely exciting. But we haven't used it at all in human medicine.

Okay, interesting. I thought you had. I thought there had been a little bit of, um, human data. How about something like Cardarine? Is that something you guys are experimenting with, or is that outside of the realm as well?

Yeah, so the Cardarine, or the GW51516, um, is a PPAR delta agonist, which, uh, we have stayed away from typically in human medicine, just because some of the initial cancer research and that initial cancer research might have been overblown. I think that most people would agree that it is, just because the dose was over 200 times what, uh, the human equivalent blood dose would be. Um, but still, it's kept it, you know, it's kept the initial manufacturers away from developing it further, and it's kept us from using it clinically. I will say again that it's used a lot in the horse racing industry. And the second variant as well, the GW, I think 0642, is, it's sort of that second-generation PPAR delta agonist, which also has a lot of effects. You're really the only product we have that works on those levels is a product called Tetradecylthioacetic Acid. And it's more of a PPAR alpha and delta agonist, but we see some additional fat loss benefits for that one as well, and without the negative potential cancer side effect. Absolutely. It's, uh, the Tetradecylthioacetic Acid is a supplement. It's able to be done even over the counter. So we combine it with another product called Wemlexonox, which has been shown, it's an FDA-approved drug for ulcers, but it's also been shown to help with type 2 diabetes and metabolic sensitivities. And so we usually combine those for some of our pre-diabetic patients with relatively good results. It only bamlexonox works in 50% of patients, like the DSIP, it's a little bit hit or miss. But again, we still give good results to a lot of patients.

Very cool. So to the ones that I think maybe are most commonly known, I'd love to touch on are are BPC-157. And we'll start there. And I think the audience may know that it's applicable orally or injectably. It'll just maybe kind of talk about what you see with those.

Yeah, so the BPC-157, you know, looks almost too good to be true. One of the things I always like to tell people, if they look for it, they won't find any human clinical research published, but it does exist up to basically clinical trials for ulcerative colitis. That product has, you know, repair recovery effects all over the body through a variety of mechanisms of action. But, you know, our results with it from a healing standpoint have been absolutely phenomenal. I don't know that there's anybody who has an injury that's not benefited, I have a good time span or pain or or whatever it might be. For the product, typically, if you're using it for repair recovery, we always suggest the subcutaneous injections. And usually, I would say most of our positions, and they're prescribing it for more than GI related events, leaky gut, ulcerative colitis, or Crohn's, they'll do the oral.

Very cool. So now is that something that you suggest, let's say, you know, pro athlete or someone who trained really hard could use on a consistent basis, almost daily, to accelerate recovery?

Yeah, there doesn't look to be any, I would say issues with consistent long-term dosing. You know, in the studies, I didn't find any toxic dose, so it doesn't look like it would be a problem doing it on a consistent level. But again, you know, you'd want to see some of those published human trials before you would say that with certainty. And, uh, yeah, it's, uh, it is something I should say that it's not currently banned, um, by, in specificity, by these professional athletes or anyone who's tested. There is a, there is a mechanism to test it in both blood and urine, which came out in late 2017. Um, and it is, uh, technically, you know, a lot of the banned things in my classes. For instance, they've been anything that would be considered a fibroblast growth factor, and we do know that BPC can activate fibroblasts. You know, it might be banned by class, but I don't know right now anybody who's testing for it.

Very, very interesting. And dosage-wise, if, you know, I think a lot of people, and you may agree with this, is many people, if not most, have some GI disturbances. So dosage as far as oral administration isn't something they should just consult with their physician, or is it something you could recommend based on data?

So I, again, I would recommend that they definitely consult their physician. But with that being said, I would say most of our prescribing physicians will go around 500 micrograms orally. One important thing to note about that is that the salt form of the peptide does matter. Usually, all peptides are complexed to a salt form. Usually, you know, even like most just commercial products are are done that way too, for instance, like sildenafil citrate. But the, the BPC actually has much, much better bioavailability when it's the arginine salt and not the acetate salt. And I always want to make that clear because it definitely affects efficacy and allows you to go with that 500 microgram dose for better effects.

Very, very cool. So moving along to, you know, one, one that I'm most interested in for myself is brain optimization. And we talked about a few of these, uh, you know, kind of pre-pre-podcasting as we've begun. I'd love to just like, which one is most exciting to you right now to help?

It's difficult to say. I would say it's either the FGL or the Diaset. Both of those products are relatively new, but also seem to be very, very powerful. They have a, I would say a degree of effects that is previously unseen with a lot of these therapies. And, you know, when people like, uh, are abandoning their research into Alzheimer's and some of these neurogenic diseases, these have definitely shown out. And so I would say those are by far the most exciting.

So mechanistically, what are we looking at there with the FGL?

Yeah, so the FGL mimics neural cell adhesion molecule. And so neural adhesion molecules are glycoproteins which are found on the outside of all of your, your neurological cells. And, and by activating these, you can essentially spur these neuronal cells for, uh, outgrowth or neurite outgrowth and development. And so the FGL has been studied, particularly the biggest areas are memory and Alzheimer's because what it can do is it can increase neurite outgrowth and increase it in a way that sort of creates mushroom outgrowth, which is great for long-term memory. Can also make sure that cells survive. So it's also been studied, and that's the reason it's been studying Alzheimer's. It's an interesting mechanism and it's an interesting product with a lot of diverse application applications. But the thing I like about it most is it's not just good in people who are having neurodegenerative diseases. You know, it's great for that. You know, we know it's, we know it's used to treat Alzheimer's. It's got great phase one and, and starting that phase two clinical trials for Alzheimer's. But the other thing we know is that it's good for just everyone for increased mental functioning and memory. This is one that I probably have one of the most positive experiences with personally, in terms of, you know, memory. I don't say that I would necessarily have a memory problem, but when I take it, I definitely feel sharper and remembering a little bit more obscure things. I think that it definitely has an effect, and most people would be able to tell it.

So are most people able to access this? Like, what would I go to my doctor and tell him? If so, yeah.

So you definitely, your doctor would, as far as I know, there's not a lot of people producing it. If your doctor needs any information, I would always refer them to us because we definitely have a lot of that clinical information, all the clinical studies, and some data within our community as well. And so we'd always be happy to communicate that. But, but it's relatively not well-known product. It got over $60 million dollars, uh, in grants funding in 2016, just because of how promising it was. So you'll definitely see a lot of development and education about here in the future, but it's still relatively new.

Okay, so if I go to my doctor and I say, hey, I just want my brain to get better, get in touch with with Taylor Made. Like, so there's not really, there's not really a prescription model yet?

Well, so yeah, these are definitely done by prescription on a patient-specific basis. But, you know, right now, it's just about the knowledge, it's about the education to the physician. There are a lot of places that are doing.

Education on these topics, um, a lot of, a lot of different educational physician groups. But right now, it's still, like I said, lesser known. And so, while it's growing, uh, you might sort of have to take a little step to educate your own physician. Very cool. And this, as far as the Dihexa goes, mechanistically, is it similar or completely different? Uh, completely different. Um, what it does is it, uh, it was developed based off the ability of angiotensin 4 to have specific neurological effects. Um, angiotensin 4 caused, you know, survival of cells, it caused, uh, neurotropic, uh, you know, outgrowth. So you have neuron surviving, proliferating, growing. Um, it, it, uh, one of the, you know, the statistics that always sort of wows people is it has around 10 million times the potency of BDNF, or brain-derived neurotrophic factor, which is a strategy a lot of different people used to treat some of these conditions that they'll try and increase. Now, um, so with its potency, uh, and it is sort of out of this world, but what it's doing is it's mimicking, uh, angiotensin 4, or hepatocyte growth factor, um, and activating c-Met, which is a receptor which has a lot of downstream consequences to just increase, uh, neurogenesis. Um, and Dr. Harding from the University of Washington has been sort of in charge of this from researching angiotensin 4, uh, throughout his career. And even he says it's been just to sort of help with most models of cognitive dysfunction. They've been able to stimulate, stimulate the lab. I always, uh, if anyone is on, uh, you know, wanting to learn more about this product, I always recommend a video that you did. If you search on Vimeo, Joseph Harding, um, and you'll, you'll see a video he just did, which has an awesome link of showing what the mice who were had essentially Alzheimer's or Parkinson's, uh, induced Parkinson's through a chemical model and then treated with Dihexa. They do what they call a hanging rat test, which they just essentially put the rat on a rope, like it's doing a pull-up, and then they see how long it can hang on. And then they did essentially three mice. One was the normal mice with no intervention. The second mice was Parkinson's, uh, mice with no treatment. And the third mouse was, uh, I should say rat, um, was a Parkinson's treated rat, a rat was treated with Dihexa. And what we saw is that the, the rat that was actually treated with Dihexa, who had had that damage of Parkinson's, was able to hold on twice over, twice as long as the normal rat, which is just, you know, whenever you see something like that, it's just absolutely phenomenal. I mean, you can see sort of the power that it has to help some of these neurogenic diseases. And so, uh, the tower of that one, um, and the application across different diseases, uh, makes it one that's very exciting as well. Is that topical? Yeah, so that's, uh, it's an interesting question. It was designed by Dr. Harding to be an oral available product. So, you know, a lot of these peptides aren't stable through the GI. This one, it is. Um, so we know it's an effective orally. However, in our honestly, you know, Dr. Harding, after we've used this clinically as a transdermal, we've actually seen really good results. And so, you know, the, the pharma connect data has not been done as a transdermal, but we have seen clinical results. Um, and the speculation is we actually see better clinical results as a transdermal because, uh, they're able to bypass that hepatic metabolism. It's another one that, uh, you know, I would say that can even reduce the doses that's transdermal versus, you know, relatively high and extensive doses done as an orally available. What makes you decide whether something's going to be topical or injectable? So, we didn't ask about the FGL. I'd be very curious to hear if the FGL is injectable or topical. It's, uh, the FGL is injectable at the moment, but actually in its phase one clinical trials, they did it as a nasal product. The biggest issue with that is that the nasal dose is 200 micrograms, and honestly would be over, you know, a thousand dollars per dose. And so it's almost impossible to do at those levels. So as a result, we converted to a subcutaneous dose. Usually, why, what, what allows us to sort of test these and know how to compound it is prior literature. We almost do nothing here ourselves that hasn't been vetted by, you know, a third party, uh, who's done the development in these products. Um, occasionally we will try, you know, other mechanisms of action, for instance, the Dihexa transdermal because we know it's relatively small, um, and and theoretically permeable. So we do often try, uh, occasionally, uh, based on the theoretic literature of how large the molecule is, how hydrophobic or hydrophilic it is, um, you know, what kinds of carriers we can use to cross the barrier. Um, and so, uh, but we always do, I would say, subsequent testing on that, um, whether it be blood levels or whatever, or clinical results. In terms of, uh, you know, any other subsequent blood levels, um, and so, uh, for instance, you know, doing any of the growth hormones, critical if there's a sublingual or, you know, transdermal has or an oral hasn't really ever worked. And that's how we know because it doesn't increase circulating IGF-1. So, um, so those are, we do a lot of due diligence. So I'm making that too, right? And as far as Cerebrolysin, I said we'll have to talk about that. And it seems like very interesting. I'd love to hear what the data looks like and and what the applications are, maybe mechanisms as well. Yeah, so this is one that has, uh, purified from 14 brain matter. So it is, uh, just a collection of nerve growth factors and small peptides. Uh, it's not just one product, it's a collection of a lot of different products. And so mechanism of action, it's difficult to speculate on, um, you know, uh, but what we do know is that the clinical results are undeniable, um, particularly there's a, a ton of evidence as it relates to TBI and stroke, um, within the windows of three and six months. Um, so yeah, anyone is considering Cerebrolysin, I would definitely consider it in those areas. But beyond that, it has data and, uh, neuropathy, it has data and multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's, um, you know, Alzheimer's. And so it's application and the amount of literature on this is overwhelming. Um, however, you know, it's, uh, right now, it's not an FDA grouped product in the U.S. Grouped in over 70 countries now, but not here. And then that is, uh, unfortunate. It's going to become a lot less available in the United States on March 23rd for the same reason that HCG will. But, but the data on this one is, is absolutely phenomenal, um, for a variety of, uh, neurogenic conditions, conditions or nerve conditions. It's definitely one that a lot of our practitioners use. The typical dosing in most of the clinical trials, it's, it's difficult to replicate in, in, you know, outside of a hospital setting. They were doing large, uh, milliliter IV infusions over the course of really 14 days. That's difficult to replicate. So most of our ISA positions are now prescribing as a daily subcutaneous injection. Very cool. Is there anything else in the area of brain optimization that comes to mind that we haven't talked about? Yeah, there's a couple. You know, the two I would say that are, are also very, very common for us are the Selank and the Semax, right? Um, both, yeah, both of those are Russian peptides, which are nasally bioavailable, actually better nasally than subcutaneous. Um, and, uh, they, the Selank mimics, uh, an immune molecule called tuftsin, um, and, uh, has been shown to have antiviral capabilities as well as significant anxiolytic capabilities. So, uh, for anyone who's anxious, that might be something to consider. The Semax is more of the one that's used for nootropic, uh, function for that learning and memory benefit, and that's mimicking, uh, ACTH, and was designed to be a mimic of based TH, which was, uh, stable on the plot. And so, uh, those are both sprays for, you know, relatively short, uh, you know, I would say durations of action, usually between two to four hours, um, but you could, you know, learning the memory benefits, you know, the Semax has been studied in ADHD, uh, in the series, but they both have a lot of data, a lot of clinical data in a variety of functions and a variety of mechanism actions. So if you were in an ideal world and you had access to a doctor who's willing to prescribe this stuff and you want to optimize your brain, what would you recommend as a stack? Like to just make the most of your brain, maybe on an ongoing basis? Yeah, so I think that the FGL, definitely just from personal experience, has been, um, uh, something that I really enjoy. The Selank and the Semax, I would say are very easy, cheap, and so I think the combination of those two is a great combination, uh, for someone like me who's an APOE 3-4 and, you know, cognizant of reducing their risk of Alzheimer's. I think the Cerebrolysin was also a great addition. I'll do two courses a year as a preventative measure for, uh, for that genetic abnormality, as it's been studied with APOE 4-4 variants. Very interesting. So no Dihexa there? Um, you know, the Dihexa is, uh, yeah, I would say at the moment is, uh, just questionable for anything outside of these really serious neurodegenerative diseases. Yeah, I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing, but, uh, I also don't know how effective it is on a day-to-day basis to increase mental functioning. Um, you know, we hadn't really treated a lot of those patients, um, and so it's a little bit difficult for me to speculate. I actually know you guys don't dive into the realm of SARMs anymore, right? Since the FDA has made those changes? Or are those still available? Uh, we do one SARM, we do the LGD-4033 due to its amount of clinical data and, uh, and so we do, we do, well, I would say quite a bit of that, um, and, uh, and generally it's very, very popular. One thing, you know, in the realm of brain optimization is the Pinelon that I hear thrown around from time to time. I don't hear too much data in that space. Any, uh, feedback or any, any insight? It's one that we don't do. And one of the reasons we don't do it is because we, most of the, I would say, the studies on it don't have precise, you know, outcomes. It's just generally, hey, do this for optimal function, but we don't have anything to measure. And so, um, we relatively stay away from what, uh, it's really the only cognitive peptide we typically do is that Talon. Very interesting. Um, what are you most excited about in this space right now? There's got to be so many new developments almost on a day-to-day basis, and you guys are doing the research and the manipulation of the molecules to try to optimize and drive studies? Definitely. We've, uh, worked to do over four IRBs, you know, in terms of, uh, gathering some of that clinical data. We, we have an EMR platform where we try and collect de-identified data on some of these interventions as well. Um, so we definitely are interested in making this, you know, a sustainable long-term, uh, you know, type of medicine. And, and, uh, you know, the thing that excites me most right now is just the focus on preventative medicine as it relates to almost, so the overlapping with the anti-aging. I think that word gets a, a very, very, you know, bad connotation, but, um, as we look at things like senescence, um, and sirtuin activation and telomere length, all of these things are great preventative medicine techniques. Um, and, uh, there's now an objective measurement that's coming out called, uh, you know, the phenotypic age testing, which looks at methylation markers under your DNA as a measure of your risk for death and disease. And so one of the biggest things I would like to say is if you reduce your incidence of aging by seven years, you essentially cut the spending and the incidence of disease in half all over the world. And so, um, you know, these focuses on intervention tied to a very specific and objective marker, which is just math, um, it's a really, really exciting thing because we can really change how healthcare is, is, uh, looked at in the United States and make it way more preventative rather than reactionary, where they come in and get a pill to treat the condition that they have, but are left, uh, you know, untreated for the preventative thing for the next time. Are there any peptides that we haven't mentioned that you think the audience may be interested in and worth mentioning? Um, yeah, you know, I think, uh, you know, I think we've definitely covered a lot of the ones that really excite me. I, I do want to just go back to some of the, the mitochondrial products. The SS-31 is one that's really, really exciting. It, it goes into the inner mitochondrial membrane of the mitochondria to stabilize it. And so what happens is it maximizes ATP production, it reduces apoptosis in certain types of disease. It also helps in aging, helps restore muscle mass. It, uh, it helps with, you know, a variety of diseases like Alzheimer's, it helps with, um, you know, metabolic deficiencies, it helps reduce, you know, uh, the foam cell accumulation in your Elo system. It's an amazing product with diverse applications, which, uh, I think you're going to hear a lot more about in the coming years. Is there any human data in that, or is it mostly animal data? It's got phase two human data. Um, generally the, the applications are just so diverse. It's going to be interesting to see what they approve for, but a lot of mouse studies, a lot of dog studies, and then also, uh, some a good amount of human data as well. So something's going through this phase one, phase two, phase three, FDA approval processes. How does that fit into your, your business model? Like, do things have to have FDA approval for you guys to sell them, or you just sell them? I don't exactly understand how that works. Yeah, it doesn't, um, but the, the way that we do it is it has to be a patient-specific prescription, um, from a physician. So we're still able to compound it even though it doesn't have FDA approval, um, but, uh, there are definitely some regulatory steps you have to take before that. Um, and so those things are, you know, obviously it's something that we look at before we decide to do a product, is the body of clinical evidence. When something becomes phase one, phase two approved, how does that change a physician's ability to prescribe it? It doesn't necessarily change the physician's ability to prescribe it, but it changes, uh, ability for us to produce it. Got it. Very cool. Um, so one thing we haven't talked about that I'd love to finish on is, um, there's never a lot of mention of potential negative implications of peptides, and I think for a good reason, but I'd love for you to kind of take us into that realm of, you know, what, what are some negatives that could exist, and what should people watch out for? And there's one other question I'll follow that up with. Yeah, so, um, you know, the side effects are usually very, very low with most of these products. As I mentioned before, they don't have a lot of, uh, hepatic or kidney metabolism, which means you don't have to worry about, you know, as much drug-drug interaction. You know, their half-lives are relatively short, so, you know, if there is some type of negative effect, it's usually very, very short-lasting on the scale of minutes. Um, um, and so generally there aren't a lot of side effects. The one that is sort of ubiquitous across all the peptides, it's a risk for, uh, allergic reaction or antibody response, right? Because of the similarity to a lot of the body's natural molecules, a lot of times the immune system might pick up on these being foreign objects and then mount an immune response. Um, and, and that is rare, but definitely, uh, still, I would say something that is a disadvantage for the molecule as a whole. And a lot of times this doesn't even affect clinical function. I mentioned the transdermal, a lot over 60% of people will experience, uh, you know, antibody responses to the transdermal, but it doesn't affect clinical efficacy. And so, so it, you know, really depends on the product. But, you know, those types of reactions are usually less than 0.005%. Very cool. Yeah, I could be using the incorrect term, but LPS is something that comes up a lot in, um, in this space. That's just to do with the kind of the purity, if I'm not mistaken, is like when you go to a company like yourself, you're going to get, um, you know, what I would presume to be the highest level gradient of of product, and then there's kind of these sub levels. And I think people need to be aware of this. When you buy something off the internet, it isn't going to be at the same level. And I think, I just, for love for you to kind of quantify that and let people understand what's actually happening and why they are different, if they are. Yeah, I've done my very, very deep dive. So LPS, or lipopolysaccharides, are a byproduct of, um, a method of production that it's called recombinant production. So they essentially will express, use the bacteria, uh, they'll insert a gene into bacteria that will express the protein, and then they express that, that bacteria to grow and proliferate so that it produces just a lot of this protein. And then at that point, they'll purify the protein, um, or peptide. Um, the problem with that, though, is that you also have some of these lipopolysaccharides as some contaminants, which can cause some really disastrous things from a health benefit. We don't do that. We don't do any recombinant. Since this, all these are chemically synthesized, which makes them a lot easier to control what ingredients are. What you see behind me is preparative HPLC and then the peptide synthesizer. So you can see sort of what we do in-house. We have our HPLC mass spec, a little bit over there. And so what we're able to do is to purify these things above 99 percentile, making sure they don't, don't have any product which looks, you know, very, very similar, which you might have a negative reaction. Um, and so with all of these things, there's just a high level of control. You know, we are FDA regulated. We have the FDA in here often. We have, uh, regulations by over 47 different pharmacy boards. Um, and so we're definitely heavily regulated to make sure that we're giving the best product and that we're giving a product sterile, endotoxin-free, and all of those things are important when you consider using it in yourself. Is that the only, um, difference in consideration of people buying things, and again, I don't want to say black market necessarily, because I know these aren't necessarily, uh, negative drugs when it comes to the FDA, they're just kind of unregulated. A lot of them. So when someone buys something off the internet, and I won't throw a site out there, but how does that stand against quality that what you guys are doing? Yeah, so most of those products are produced in China and have essentially no regulatory control. Um, you know, uh, we have tested a lot of those products, and, you know, I wouldn't expect anyone to believe our data, but I would point them to a New York Times article. It's called "The Vast Heart of a Doping Conspiracy" by Michael Powell. And in it, they reference it, 80% of those products not online are fraudulent or take. Which, you know, obviously the majority and beyond that, you just don't know what you're getting. I think, uh, and it's not the only consideration. You know, endotoxin, like I said, sterility are obviously big considerations. Purity and potency are big considerations. Identity of the product are big considerations. Um, and, and honestly, there are some, there have been some legal prosecutions for those things as well in terms of distribution. So, uh, overall, it is, it is not something I would ever recommend. And everyone thinks I think they have a great source, but you can never be, uh, sure. Um, and so an HPLC mass spec at it is not, no, that's the other thing I would say. Um, it is, uh, it is definitely not enough. You're not, you don't know, for instance, with HPLC mass spec, you dissolve it in a solvent which allows you not to gauge what type of salt it is. In the process of doing these chemically, a lot of times you have to use a really strong acid called trifluoroacetic acid to, uh, in the process. And a lot of times people who manufacture these things in order to save money will leave it there. But the TFA salt can be really liver toxic and can cause some negative side effects within the body. So again, HPLC mass spec is not enough. So you really need something that's regulated and it has third-party testing. And so obviously, I don't even have to talk about sterility, which can be, uh, you know, one of the most important things. Right. Ryan, does TaylorMade distribute just in America, or is it North America and Europe as well, or where you guys are licensed? Yeah, so, uh, TaylorMade in the U.S. only distributes to, I think 47 different states right now, but we also have a facility in the Middle East as well as in this facility, uh, in Australia. And so those typically been are the areas of distribution, but that's always changing. Um, then we're, uh, continue to add different areas of the world. Good for you, man. You know what, I think you've answered all the questions. I'm sure there's about a thousand more I could throw out you, but I know your time is precious, and, and I'm so grateful. Where if there's doctors out there that want to reach out to TaylorMade and get in contact, get educated, maybe what's the best course of action for them? Yeah, so I always recommend them to to just look us up online and call us to that number where they can even email me directly at RS@taylormadecompounding.com. I will say for pretty patients out there, legally I'm not allowed to, I have a lot of patient direct patient interaction. Um, and so I usually just suggest that they find a physician they can work with, or we often do referrals as well. Um, but I am a little bit limited to those patients who might reach out to me. Very cool. Ryan, thank you so much for your time. Incredibly grateful, and, uh, keep doing what you do, man. I'm definitely a fan of following what you're doing. Yeah, thanks so much for having me. Appreciate it. [Music] And that is a wrap, ladies and gentlemen. I told you that guy's absolutely brilliant. Not a hesitation, not a pause. His understanding and expertise in the area of peptides is tremendous. Now, I've experimented with quite a few peptides as I may or may not have mentioned in this podcast. Um, these things are incredible. Now, sourcing is a completely different thing. Please go through your doctor. Try to find a doctor who has an open mind, maybe a doctor who's a little more advanced in their knowledge base. They do exist. Um, there's many of them around the country in the U.S., Canada, and certainly Europe, even the Middle East. I know that are certainly experienced and dabbling in the realms of peptides. It seems these peptides offer tremendous benefit, and as long as you understand what you're doing. So there's some great resources that you may want to start exploring. Vladimir Kavelson is the guy I mentioned on the podcast who's the Godfather of peptides. He's, um, believe's website is Kavelson.info, and it's so much research on that on that site to give you guys a little more insights. And I'm not going to recommend any particular peptides or peptide sources, but definitely explore with your doc. And my always suggestion is, if you are going to experiment with these things, do not get them off random internet sites that you're not familiar with, because there's a lot of implications. As Ryan did mention, these things are not tightly regulated yet by the FDA. So pay attention. Take care of your body. Take care of yourself. Have an amazing day, and don't forget to breathe, to walk, and ideally spend at least 10 to 15 minutes each morning meditating to create your mind, because an amazing life awaits you on the other side of that chatter that exists in your mind. I promise. Have an amazing day, guys. Love it. Cheers. [Music] Tuning into Muscle Intelligence. [Music] Start with at least one person you know. Make sure you're subscribed so you never miss an episode. This podcast is for informational purposes only. Statements and views on this podcast are not medical advice. This podcast, including its producers, disclaim responsibility for any possible adverse effects from the use of information contained herein. Opinions of guests are their own, and this podcast does not endorse or accept responsibility for statements made by guests. This podcast does not make any representations or warranties about guest qualifications or credibility. This podcast may contain paid endorsements or advertisements for products or services. Individuals on this podcast may have a direct or indirect financial interest in products or services referred to herein. If you think you have a medical problem, consult a licensed physician.