When discussing recovery and performance enhancement, Dr. Gillette identified BPC-157 as the standout option in recent interview, noting
“So many people have used BPC-157, including myself.”
He explains this peptide increases angiogenesis and proves particularly effective for poorly vascularized areas.
“If it’s a tendon or a ligament, I think it’s a great option.”
He cautioned about its presence on the WADA prohibited list.
BJJ champ Patrick Gaudio and former UFC champion Luke Rockhold recently separately boasted about peptide benefits. Joe Rogan is also a noted fan of the ‘wolverine stack’ meaning BPC-157, TB-500 combo.
Beyond BPC-157, Dr. Gillette highlighted TB-500 and GHK copper peptide as valuable growth agonists that assist with tissue regrowth. For athletes with lower growth hormone or IGF-1 levels, he recommended growth hormone releasing peptides like tesamorelin or ipamorelin, noting
“Great efficacy with a side effect profile somewhat similar to HGH.”
However, Dr. Gillette emphasized that peptides serve primarily for treating acute injuries rather than ongoing recovery enhancement.
“Usually treatment of acute injury.”
He added this applies unless someone shows deficiency in growth hormone or IGF-1.
The physician warned against common mistakes in peptide use, particularly the assumption that peptides carry no downsides.
“The medical system is not like gatekeeping peptides from us.”
He dispelled conspiracy theories while stressing the importance of regular lab monitoring. He cited concerning cases where users developed diabetic glucose levels or experienced accelerated cancer growth due to unmonitored peptide use.
For proper peptide implementation, Dr. Gillette offered specific guidance:
“A one to two-month course of BPC-157 can be reasonable.”
He suggested adding TB-500 or GHK copper peptide when expedited healing becomes necessary and recommended raising IGF-1 levels to the mid-to-upper 200s with growth hormone releasing peptides when baseline levels sit around 100.
Comparing peptides to traditional performance enhancing methods, Dr. Gillette noted their relative weakness for muscle building but acknowledged their competitive advantage in recovery applications.
“For recovery, they’re at least as good if not better if done correctly.”
He admitted limited medical evidence exists for direct comparison.parison.
