Skip to content
Peptide Evidence Registry

Growth hormone axis

GHRP-6

The older sibling of GHRP-2, with historical human pharmacology but no approved indication and a notable appetite-stimulating effect.

L2Animal / lab studiesResearch / unapproved supplyUnclear
How settled this rating is:
very-low confidence in the current evidence rating
Routes studied:
Not established · Subcutaneous injection (marketed but never approved)
Also known as:
growth hormone releasing peptide-6
Last reviewed:
2026-08-23
Jump to section

Evidence passport

GHRP-6

A one-screen evidence identity for this compound. These fields describe research maturity, confidence and legal status. They are not a safety guarantee, efficacy percentage or recommendation.

Reviewed 2026-08-23
Evidence level
L2Animal / lab studies
Confidence
Very low confidence in rating
Regulatory status
Research / unapproved supply
Development status
Unclear

Evidence strength

Human efficacy evidence20 of 100 evidence strength

Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.

Human safety evidence10 of 100 evidence strength

Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.

The 0-100 values rate the strength and maturity of evidence, not how effective or safe the compound is.

Evidence base
Mostly animal and laboratory research
Furthest established stage
Not established
Human research maturity
Historical human pharmacology only
Source curation
Sources partially curated

Routes recorded

SC injection· unapproved

Most of this evidence comes from animals and cells

The supporting research for GHRP-6 is predominantly preclinical (Level 1–2). That is a legitimate starting point for science and a poor basis for personal decisions. Human results are not simply a scaled-up version of mouse results.

Overview

Human efficacy evidence strength20 of 100 evidence strength

Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.

Preclinical (animal / lab) evidence strength45 of 100 evidence strength

Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.

Human safety evidence strength10 of 100 evidence strength

Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.

How to read these scores

Every number here rates the evidence, not the compound. They are editorial 0-100 strength ratings, not percentages, and not a rating out of five stars.

  • Human efficacy evidence strength — Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
  • Preclinical evidence strength — Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
  • Human safety evidence strength — Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number. A score of 80 does not mean “80% safe”.
  • Evidence level (L0-L5) — the strongest type of study behind the compound, from anecdote (L0) to large replicated human trials (L5). It is a description of the study evidence, not a quality, safety or recommendation rating.
  • Confidence — how likely we think it is that this rating changes as new research lands. Low confidence means the picture is unsettled, not that the compound is bad.

None of these ratings is medical advice, a safety guarantee, or a recommendation to use anything. How we grade evidence.

How far human research has progressed: Historical human pharmacology only

Routes & formulations

Marketed / research routes — never approved

SC injection· unapproved

Research-market products are injectable and unapproved; no studied therapeutic route is established in the curated record.

Route availability is not evidence of efficacy, and evidence from one route does not transfer to another. The Registry never provides dosing or sourcing information.

Peptide lifecycle

  1. Discovery

  2. Preclinical

  3. Phase I

  4. Phase II

  5. Phase III

  6. Approved

UnclearFurthest stage not established in our curated record

No established development programme in the curated record.

What it is

A synthetic hexapeptide GH secretagogue from the same research era as GHRP-2, distinguished by stronger appetite stimulation via ghrelin-receptor activity.

What people claim

  • Builds muscle and reduces fat via growth hormone
  • Anti-ageing benefit

What the evidence actually says

Human studies from the 1990s confirmed GH release; everything marketed beyond that is extrapolation. No controlled trials support body-composition or performance claims.

Related evidence

Useful next reads based on this compound — not recommendations.

Human evidence

  • Early human pharmacology studies confirming GH and appetite effects.
  • No controlled trials for any marketed claim.

Preclinical evidence

  • Ghrelin-receptor pharmacology and animal GH-axis studies.

Animal and cell findings are Level 1–2 evidence.

Mechanism and pathways

  • GHSR-1a agonism drives GH pulses; the same receptor mediates hunger, which is why appetite increases.

Safety and unknowns

  • No long-term human safety dataset for chronic use as actually sold.
  • Appetite stimulation is often the opposite of what buyers intend.

Cancer relevance

This section covers questions raised by how the compound works in the body, plus anything regulators and trial teams keep an eye on. It is not a statement that this compound causes cancer — for most compounds here, no human data exist in either direction.

Theoretical / mechanistic concern only

Indirect IGF-1 elevation carries the same theoretical proliferation concern as the rest of the GH axis. No human cancer outcome data exist.

Regulatory status

Regulatory decisions apply to specific jurisdictions, products, formulations and indications. An approval elsewhere is not automatically an approval in your country.

Check the regulatory note and linked primary sources for jurisdiction-specific details.

Not an approved medicine in any major region; sold in the research market for physique and anti-ageing claims that have never been trialled.

Evidence grade

L2Animal / lab studiesVery low confidence in rating

Documented compound-specific animal or laboratory outcome findings, without qualifying human evidence for the assessed benefit.

What would change our rating?

  • Controlled trials with body-composition or functional endpoints.
  • Modern safety data for chronic administration.

References and sources

Source transparency

A provenance snapshot of this profile. Counts show what kinds of sources are cited, not how much scientific weight each source deserves.

Sources partially curated
Last editorial review
2026-08-23
Recently reviewed · 54 days ago
Linked curated sources
1
Sources still pending
1
External specialist reviews
0
None recorded for this profile
Peer-reviewed: 1To be curated: 1

Review provenance

Registry editorial review: Colin Jackson-White, creator and editor, who is not a doctor or clinician. External specialist review is credited only when a named reviewer has completed a review of this exact profile.

Literature-discovery and AI tools may help locate or challenge candidate evidence, but they are not counted as evidence sources here. Registry judgements are tied to the underlying papers, trial records, regulator documents and official study records.

Source hierarchy: regulatory documents and trial registries first, peer-reviewed work next, sponsor material flagged as non-independent. We never use supplier or clinic marketing as evidence, and where a verified source has not yet been curated we say so rather than inventing one.

Evidence change history

These entries record changes to our assessment of the published evidence — not changes to the compound itself.

No recorded changes yet. Baseline position set on 2026-08-23.