What is inside
“GLOW” is a name sellers made up. It is not a science or legal name. Sellers use it for one vial with three lab-made peptides (short chains of amino acids): BPC-157, TB-500 and GHK-Cu. None of the three is an approved medicine anywhere.
There is no official recipe. Each seller picks how much of each peptide goes in. Each seller also picks the mix ratio and the chemical form. No official body sets what “GLOW” must contain. So the label is the only guide to what is inside. On its own, GHK-Cu is blue because it carries copper. Each ingredient has its own page on this site. The next three sections sum them up.
The product is a physical mixture of three unrelated synthetic peptides: BPC-157 (linear pentadecapeptide, C62H98N16O22, 1419.5 g/mol), TB-500 (Ac-LKKTETQ, the N-acetylated 17–23 fragment of thymosin β4, C38H68N10O14, 889.0 g/mol) and GHK-Cu (the 1:1 copper(II) complex of glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine, C14H22CuN6O4, about 401.9 g/mol). Per-vial amounts and ratios are set by each seller and are not standardised. The TB-500 name is also used loosely: FDA identifies it as the LKKTETQ fragment, but a 2026 rat study describes TB-500 as synthetic thymosin β4, so the identity of that component cannot be assumed either.
Combining the three raises formulation questions that no published study has addressed. GHK binds copper(II) with high affinity (log K about 16), but whether any copper redistributes to the other peptides, promotes oxidation, or changes the stability of the mixture in powder or solution has not been reported. No compatibility, degradation or impurity data for the mixture were found, and no reference standard exists. Human pharmacokinetics are unpublished for each of the three components individually and unknown for the combination.
Ingredient: BPC-157
BPC-157 is a chain of 15 amino acids. A research group at the University of Zagreb, Croatia, first described it in 1993. They said it was a piece of a protein found in stomach juice. Almost all we know comes from rat and mouse studies. In those studies, it seemed to speed healing of tendons, muscles and ligaments. It also seemed to protect the stomach lining. Most of this work comes from the same group. Few other teams have repeated it.
No controlled human trial has been published in full. In a 2026 review, the FDA found only a short 2005 conference summary. It was a small enema study in people with ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease). It compared BPC-157 with a dummy treatment (placebo). The FDA said this study was not good enough. A 2015 safety study of BPC-157 by mouth never shared results. A small trial listed in Arkansas in 2026 had not started taking patients when this was written. A second 2026 listing comes from a sponsor that also posted a record it called fictional. Its effects and side effects in people are unknown.
No receptor for BPC-157 has been identified. Mechanisms proposed from animal and cell studies include VEGFR2 up-regulation with activation of the VEGFR2–Akt–eNOS pathway, modulation of nitric-oxide signalling, and increased growth-hormone-receptor and EGR-1 expression in fibroblasts (reviewed by Seiwerth et al., 2018). These are untested in humans. Rodent regimens were typically 10 µg/kg or 10 ng/kg intraperitoneally or in drinking water.
The only controlled human data are a 2005 meeting abstract (Ruenzi et al.) of an 80 mg daily enema versus placebo for two weeks in 53 people with ulcerative colitis, judged inadequate by FDA in 2026. Registered studies are NCT02637284 (Phase 1, oral, 2015, no results), NCT07437547 (Phase 2, subcutaneous once daily for 14 days in hamstring strain, listed as recruiting since 2026; same sponsor as the self-described fictional TB-500 record described below, so not counted as a confirmed trial) and NCT07803250 (Phase 1, subcutaneous daily for 90 days after rotator-cuff repair, not yet recruiting). No pharmacokinetic data exist after oral or subcutaneous dosing. FDA’s 2023 Category 2 assessment cited immunogenicity risk, peptide-related impurities and a lack of human safety information.
Ingredient: TB-500
TB-500 is a lab-made copy of seven amino acids from a larger protein called thymosin β4. Thymosin β4 is found in almost every cell. It holds on to actin, a building block of the cell’s inner frame.
TB-500 is not the same as thymosin β4, and this matters. The human trials often quoted for TB-500 used the full protein, which has 43 amino acids. Most of those trials used eye drops for dry eye or for a nerve problem of the front of the eye. Results were mixed. No real human study of the seven-amino-acid piece was found. The one 2026 trial listing naming TB-500 calls itself a fictional example. Nothing is known about its effects or side effects in people.
TB-500 (Ac-LKKTETQ) reproduces the LKKTET actin-binding motif (residues 17–22) of thymosin β4. Full-length Tβ4 is reported in preclinical models to promote keratinocyte and endothelial migration, angiogenesis and cardiomyocyte survival and to reduce inflammatory cytokine release (Goldstein et al., 2005); whether the fragment alone reproduces these effects is unsettled.
Full-length Tβ4 as RGN-259 eye drops did not meet primary endpoints in ARISE-2 (n=601) or ARISE-3 (n=700) in dry eye; SEER-1 (n=18) in neurotrophic keratopathy reported complete healing in 6 of 10 versus 1 of 8 on placebo at day 29 (p=0.0656). For the fragment, no genuine trial was found: the only ClinicalTrials.gov record naming it, NCT07487363 (posted March 2026), states in its summary that it is “a fictional study” and an example record, and it gives no doses. FDA stated in 2023 that it had not identified any human exposure data for the fragment, and no pharmacokinetic data have been published.
Ingredient: GHK-Cu
GHK-Cu is a chain of three amino acids that carries a copper atom. It is found naturally in human blood, saliva and urine. Blood levels drop with age. Loren Pickart found it in 1973. For decades it has been used in small amounts in skin creams and hair products. In those products it is controlled as a cosmetic.
Small studies, mostly run by companies, reported that creams made aged skin look better. Gels seemed to help wounds close. Lab studies link it to making collagen. There is no controlled human study of GHK-Cu shots. There is also no published data on how much copper a shot puts into the body. A trial of a gel on small skin wounds was listed in China in 2026. It has not reported results. Its sponsor also posted the fictional TB-500 listing mentioned above.
GHK (glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine, C14H24N6O4, 340.4 g/mol) binds copper(II) through the glycine α-amino nitrogen, the histidine imidazole and a deprotonated amide nitrogen, forming the 1:1 complex GHK-Cu. Plasma GHK is about 200 ng/mL in young adults, falling to roughly 80 ng/mL by age 60 (Pickart’s figures), and is thought to be released by proteolysis of extracellular-matrix proteins at injury sites.
In vitro, GHK-Cu increases fibroblast synthesis of collagen, elastin, decorin and glycosaminoglycans, modulates matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors, and attracts immune and endothelial cells; in rodent and porcine wound models, topical application increased granulation tissue and angiogenesis. Pickart and Margolina (2018) compile gene-expression data suggesting broad transcriptional effects. Human evidence is limited to small topical studies, mostly unregistered, plus NCT07437586, a Phase 2 split-wound trial of 0.1% w/w gel once daily for 14 days listed as recruiting by Hudson Biotech, the sponsor of the self-described fictional TB-500 record NCT07487363. Pharmacokinetics after injection are unpublished.
Why researchers might study these together
The idea behind this mix is a guess built from separate animal and lab studies. BPC-157 has mostly been linked to growing new blood vessels. Thymosin β4 (the parent protein of TB-500) has been linked to cells moving into a wound. GHK-Cu has been linked to making collagen. Collagen is the protein that makes skin and scars strong. The idea is that three peptides working at different healing stages might add up.
No study in animals or people has tested all three together. Only one controlled study has tested part of the mix. It was a 2026 rat study of BPC-157 with TB-500. The pair did no better than either peptide alone. No clinical trial has tested the mix.
Wound repair is usually described in overlapping phases: haemostasis and inflammation, proliferation (angiogenesis, granulation tissue, re-epithelialisation) and remodelling of the collagen matrix. The hypothesis behind this blend assigns each component to a phase using preclinical data on that peptide alone: VEGFR2–Akt–eNOS and nitric-oxide signalling for BPC-157 (angiogenesis), actin-linked keratinocyte and endothelial migration for thymosin β4 (proliferation and re-epithelialisation), and fibroblast collagen and decorin synthesis with MMP modulation for GHK-Cu (remodelling). Overlap is as plausible as complementarity: all three are reported to promote angiogenesis, which could mean redundancy rather than addition. None of these mechanisms has been confirmed in humans.
A PubMed search found no preclinical or clinical study of the three peptides together, and none pairing GHK-Cu with either of the others. The only controlled study of any subset is Biçer et al. (2026), in which intraperitoneal BPC-157 plus TB-500 in rats after Achilles tendon repair did not outperform either peptide alone. No trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov has tested the combination.
Regulatory picture
Approval: none of the three peptides is an approved drug anywhere. No regulator has reviewed the mix. FDA decisions cover each peptide on its own.
Compounding (pharmacies mixing their own versions): in September 2023, the FDA reviewed each peptide separately. It put BPC-157, TB-500 and injected GHK-Cu into Category 2. That is the group the FDA said raises serious safety risks. By April 2026, all three were listed as withdrawn from that group by the people who had put them forward. In July 2026, an FDA expert panel voted narrowly in favour of BPC-157 and TB-500. GHK-Cu was not reviewed, and blends were not discussed. The FDA says it plans to bring GHK-Cu to the same panel by the end of February 2027. No final FDA decision had come out when this was written. In October 2026 the US health department (HHS) published a draft policy easing enforcement for single-ingredient BPC-157 and TB-500 products under set conditions. It does not cover GHK-Cu or any blend, and it is not FDA approval. GHK-Cu is also sold in skin creams as a cosmetic. That is a separate matter from injected products.
Approval: none. No IND-stage programme for the combination, or for any of its components, could be verified.
Compounding: under section 503A(b)(1)(A)(i) of the FD&C Act, each bulk drug substance in a compounded product must independently comply with a USP or NF monograph, be a component of an FDA-approved drug, or appear on the 503A bulks list (21 CFR 216.23). A blend has no status of its own; it inherits the status of each ingredient. None of the three is on the bulks list or a component of an approved drug. All three entered Category 2 of the interim policy on 2023-09-29 (GHK-Cu for injectable routes) and are listed as withdrawn by the nominators on FDA’s page updated 2026-04-22. On 2026-07-23 the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee voted narrowly in favour of BPC-157 and TB-500; GHK-Cu was not reviewed. FDA’s 503A categories list, updated 2026-05-14, returned non-injectable GHK-Cu to Category 1 and states that FDA intends to consult the committee on GHK-Cu before the end of February 2027, so even a favourable final rule on the other two would leave it unresolved. HHS’s draft enforcement-discretion policy of 2026-10-30 covers single-active-ingredient BPC-157 and TB-500 (among six peptides), not GHK-Cu and not blends. This article records compounding status as unknown, the status all three currently share.
Anti-doping: the 2026 WADA Prohibited List names TB-500 under S2.3 and BPC-157 under S0, so any product containing them is prohibited in sport at all times.
