Skip to content
Peptide Evidence Registry

Named stacks & aliases

Nicknames, sorted by how much they actually tell you

Wolverine, Superman, Deadpool, GLOW, KLOW: these are names people use, not substances that have been defined or studied. This directory records what each name is used to mean, who decides that meaning, and — where nothing reliable exists — says so instead of inventing a formula.

A nickname is not a chemical identity, and a chemical identity is not proof of safety or effectiveness. Those are three separate questions, and a name answers none of them.

A named stack is a nickname, not a molecule and not a medicine. Whoever is selling or posting about it decides what the name means, so two things sold under one nickname can contain different ingredients in different amounts. Nothing on these pages is a formula, a dose or a protocol. Every entry here links to the individual compound or blend records that hold the actual evidence positions. Nothing on this page includes amounts, ratios, preparation steps or sources of supply.

A marketing observation can tell you that a name is circulating. It can never tell you that something works, is safe, or contains what the label says.

6 names in the curated alias record

Seller-defined combination or blend

A name for several substances used together. Whoever sells it decides what goes in, so composition varies and the mixture has not been studied as a mixture.

Wolverine

Seller-defined combinationSold both waysEntrenched but informalCommon stack name

Online, usually BPC-157 together with TB-500 — but some media and research coverage uses 'Wolverine peptide' for BPC-157 on its own.

What the name is used to mean

  • In research-market listings and forum posts, 'Wolverine' or 'Wolverine stack' almost always means BPC-157 plus TB-500 in one vial or taken together.
  • Separately, media headlines and some research write-ups call BPC-157 by itself the 'Wolverine peptide'. The Registry does not treat those two meanings as the same thing, because one is a single compound and the other is a mixture.
  • The reading is entrenched enough to be predictable, but it is still informal: no standards body, pharmacopoeia or regulator defines it, and nothing about the name tells you what material was used or how much of each is present.
  • TB-500 adds a second layer of ambiguity. Material sold under that name may be a thymosin beta-4 fragment rather than full-length thymosin beta-4, and studies of one do not automatically apply to the other.

Documented readings of the name

  • BPC-157 + TB-500 (the usual online reading)

    The most commonly described reading in research-market listings and community discussion. Recorded as what the name is used to mean, not as a validated formulation.

    • BPC-157
    • TB-500Naming and material are themselves ambiguous — a fragment and full-length thymosin beta-4 are not interchangeable.

  • BPC-157 alone ('Wolverine peptide' in media coverage)

    Seen in headlines and general coverage. This is a single compound with its own profile, not a mixture.

Combination evidence: No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record. The curated marketed-mixture record sits at evidence level 0 despite a 2026 exploratory rat combination study; that study does not establish human efficacy or safety, and the evidence positions of BPC-157 and TB-500 as individual compounds do not transfer to the mixture.

Read this first: Check which meaning is being used before reading anything into a claim about 'Wolverine'. Evidence about BPC-157 on its own is not evidence about a two-ingredient vial, and the reverse is also true.

Full blend record for Wolverine →bpc-157 profile →tb-500 profile →
Sources and review date

Last reviewed 2026-09-22

Read the full Wolverine entry →

Superman

Seller-defined combinationNot establishedNon-standardised formulaVendor term

A seller-defined nickname currently reported as BPC-157 with KPV. The name is not standardised, so this is a reported reading rather than a canonical formula.

What the name is used to mean

  • 'Superman' circulates as a seller and community nickname for a mixture, in the same comic-book naming family as 'Wolverine' and 'Deadpool'.
  • The Registry now records BPC-157 plus KPV as a reported current reading of the name. That improves usefulness without pretending the nickname is a specification.
  • No standards body, pharmacopoeia or regulator defines 'Superman', and no independent analytical study in the curated record establishes that every product sold under the name contains those two ingredients.
  • Evidence for BPC-157 and KPV must still be read separately. Combining two compounds creates a new mixture; evidence for either ingredient does not automatically become evidence for the blend.

Documented readings of the name

  • BPC-157 + KPV — reported current reading

    Recorded as a reported seller/community formulation, not as a standard. Verify the actual ingredient list of any product carrying the nickname.

Combination evidence: No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record. Ingredient-level evidence does not establish efficacy, safety or quality of a BPC-157 + KPV mixture.

Read this first: 'Superman' is not a standard formulation. Treat BPC-157 + KPV as a reported reading of the nickname, not proof of what is inside a particular vial.

bpc-157 profile →kpv profile →
Sources and review date

Last reviewed 2026-10-06

  • No authoritative standard or independent analytical study establishing a universal Superman formulation identified — BPC-157 + KPV retained as a reported seller/community reading.
Read the full Superman entry →

GLOW

Seller-defined combinationSame-vial blendEntrenched but informalCommunity alias

An informal blend name, usually read as GHK-Cu with BPC-157 and TB-500. The Registry keeps a full curated blend record for it.

What the name is used to mean

  • GLOW is a nickname for a marketed mixture, not a molecule and not a standardised product.
  • The curated blend record holds the Registry's full position on what the name usually refers to, what is unknown about the formulation and why ingredient evidence is not mixture evidence.
  • One specific trap sits inside this name: much of the GHK-Cu research is topical cosmetic work. That does not transfer to an injected mixture.

Documented readings of the name

  • See the curated GLOW blend record

    The commonly described reading is recorded on the blend profile, which is the authoritative Registry entry for this name.

Combination evidence: No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record. The blend record carries the detail.

Read this first: A marketed blend name is not a standard formulation. Two vials labelled GLOW can differ in ingredients, proportions and purity.

Full blend record for GLOW →
Sources and review date

Last reviewed 2026-09-22

  • Curated Registry blend record for GLOW.
Read the full GLOW entry →

KLOW

Seller-defined combinationSame-vial blendEntrenched but informalCommunity alias

An informal blend name, usually read as KPV with GHK-Cu, BPC-157 and TB-500. The Registry keeps a full curated blend record for it.

What the name is used to mean

  • KLOW is a nickname for a marketed mixture. The letters are commonly read as its ingredients, but no standards body defines the name.
  • The curated blend record is the authoritative Registry entry: it sets out the usual reading, the formulation unknowns and the regulatory position.
  • Four ingredients do not add up to four evidence bases. No direct four-component study was identified in accessible sources reviewed as of 13 October 2026; comprehensive database screening remains pending.

Documented readings of the name

  • See the curated KLOW blend record

    The commonly described reading is recorded on the blend profile, which is the authoritative Registry entry for this name.

Combination evidence: No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record. The blend record carries the detail.

Read this first: A marketed blend name is not a standard formulation, and nothing about the letters tells you what is inside a particular vial.

Full blend record for KLOW →
Sources and review date

Last reviewed 2026-09-22

  • Curated Registry blend record for KLOW.
Read the full KLOW entry →

CJC-1295 + ipamorelin

Seller-defined combinationSold both waysEntrenched but informalCommon stack name

The most descriptive of the common nicknames: it names its two ingredients. That still does not make it a standard product, and 'CJC-1295' itself is ambiguous.

What the name is used to mean

  • Unlike GLOW or Wolverine, this name states what is in it, which removes one layer of guesswork.
  • It does not remove the others. 'CJC-1295' is used for both the DAC-modified long-acting version and the unmodified peptide, and those are not the same material.
  • Whether the two are pre-mixed in one vial or used as two separate products varies, so the name does not tell you which you are looking at.
  • The curated blend record is the authoritative Registry entry for this pairing.

Documented readings of the name

  • See the curated CJC-1295 + ipamorelin blend record

    The commonly described reading is recorded on the blend profile, which is the authoritative Registry entry for this name.

Combination evidence: No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record. The blend record carries the detail.

Read this first: Check whether 'CJC-1295' means the DAC version or not, and whether the two ingredients are pre-mixed. Neither is implied by the nickname.

Full blend record for CJC-1295 + ipamorelin →
Sources and review date

Last reviewed 2026-09-22

  • Curated Registry blend record for CJC-1295 + ipamorelin.
Read the full CJC-1295 + ipamorelin entry →

Unverified or ambiguous nickname sighting

The name is in circulation, but the curated record contains no independent documentation of a repeatable composition. Identity is pending — the Registry records the sighting and deliberately publishes no formula.

Deadpool

Unverified sightingNot establishedNon-standardised formulaVendor term

A newer seller and community nickname, commonly described as a Wolverine-style BPC-157 and TB-500 base with Cartalax (AED) added — but the formulation is not standardised.

What the name is used to mean

  • 'Deadpool' is an emerging nickname rather than a compound. It is most often described online as the Wolverine pairing with Cartalax (AED) added, following the same comic-book naming habit as 'Wolverine'.
  • That description is what people say the name means. It is not a specification: the Registry has identified no standard, no consistent ingredient list and no independent analysis establishing what products sold under this name contain.
  • Do not assume that two things labelled 'Deadpool' contain the same ingredients, or the same number of ingredients.
  • Cartalax is a short peptide whose published record is cell-culture work. Adding it to a mixture does not bring human evidence with it, because there is no human efficacy evidence to bring.

Documented readings of the name

  • BPC-157 + TB-500 + Cartalax (AED) — the commonly described reading

    The description most often repeated online. Recorded as a reported reading only; the Registry does not state that any particular product matches it.

    • BPC-157
    • TB-500May be a thymosin beta-4 fragment rather than the full-length peptide.
    • Cartalax (AED, Ala-Glu-Asp)A short peptide bioregulator whose published evidence is cell-culture work, with no controlled human efficacy evidence.

Combination evidence: No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record. None of the components has controlled human efficacy evidence for the uses claimed for this nickname, and combining them creates a new, untested product rather than pooling three evidence bases.

Read this first: Read the actual ingredient list, not the nickname. 'Deadpool' does not identify a formulation, and no analysis in the curated record establishes what any given product sold under this name contains.

bpc-157 profile →tb-500 profile →cartalax profile →
Sources and review date

Last reviewed 2026-09-22

  • No controlled human trial of this combination, as a combination, was identified in the curated record.
  • No independent analytical study of products marketed under this nickname identified — source curation pending.
Read the full Deadpool entry →

Standardised single molecular entity

One defined molecule with a published sequence or structure. The name identifies what the substance is — though it still says nothing about whether a particular vial contains it, or whether it works.

These are not nicknames at all — they are defined molecules with their own profiles. They are listed here for contrast: this is the only category where the name itself fixes what the substance is.

BPC-157 →Tirzepatide →Retatrutide →Cartalax (AED) →

Even here, a defined molecule is not a guarantee about a product: identity, purity and labelled quantity are separate questions, and so is whether it works.

Recently spotted

Dated observations that a name is in circulation, with the identity status at the time. A sighting is a record that people are using a word — never a finding about effect or safety.

  • Seen 2026-10-06

    Superman

    Current seller/community usage reported to the Registry and checked against academic evidence for the named ingredients.

    Identity status: A BPC-157 + KPV reading is now documented as a reported formulation. The nickname remains non-standardised: no regulator, pharmacopoeia or independent analytical source defines every product sold as 'Superman' this way.

  • Seen 2026-09-22

    Wolverine

    Research-market product listings and community discussion threads.

    Identity status: Two competing readings documented: BPC-157 with TB-500, and BPC-157 on its own in media coverage. Composition of any specific product is not established.

  • Seen 2026-09-22

    Deadpool

    Seller listings and community naming threads following the comic-book nickname pattern.

    Identity status: Unverified. A Wolverine-style base with Cartalax added is the description most often repeated, but no independent documentation of a repeatable composition was identified.

  • Seen 2026-09-22

    GLOW

    Widely listed as a pre-mixed vial in research-market catalogues.

    Identity status: Commonly read as GHK-Cu with BPC-157 and TB-500; supplier-defined, so proportions and contents vary. Curated blend record holds the detail.

  • Seen 2026-09-22

    KLOW

    Widely listed as a pre-mixed vial in research-market catalogues.

    Identity status: Commonly read as KPV with GHK-Cu, BPC-157 and TB-500; supplier-defined, so proportions and contents vary. Curated blend record holds the detail.

  • Seen 2026-09-22

    CJC-1295 + ipamorelin

    Long-standing shorthand in community discussion, and listed both pre-mixed and as two separate vials.

    Identity status: Ingredient names are specific, but the pairing itself is not a standardised medicine and 'CJC-1295' is used for two different materials (with and without DAC). Curated blend record holds the detail.

Emerging watch & editorial queue

How something gets onto this site, and why a name circulating widely is not enough on its own.

The Registry tracks four kinds of newcomer: new peptides, peptide-adjacent small molecules, new trial combinations, and new community nicknames. Nothing is published as fact because it is popular, and no entry is created automatically.

What earns a full profile

  • A chemical identity that can be checked against a primary source — a published sequence, structure or regulatory document.
  • At least one primary study, trial registration or regulatory record we can cite and link.
  • A clear statement of what stage the evidence is at: cell culture, animal, Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 or approved.
  • Enough substance to justify its own page. A thin page repeating one sentence is worse than an entry in this directory.

What stays in the queue

  • Nicknames with no independently documented composition — recorded here as unverified sightings, with no formula published.
  • Compounds whose current trial phase or sponsor cannot be confirmed from a primary source.
  • Sponsor announcements with no published data behind them, which are labelled sponsor-reported if used at all.
  • Claims that only exist on marketing pages. Those can establish that a name is being used, and nothing further.
Send a name or claim to the queue →Research Desk: emerging & adjacent molecules →How we grade evidence →

Blend or stack?

A blend is pre-mixed in one vial: the ingredients cannot be separated, so purity, sterility or a mislabelled quantity affects everything in it at once. A stack is separate products used together, each keeping its own identity and its own evidence position. Many nicknames are sold both ways, which is exactly why the name alone is not enough to know what someone has.

Curated blend records →Browse individual compounds →Check a claim about a nickname →