[qgin]

> The most important column is the last one—there is no evidence from randomized trials in humans that any of these peptides provide the benefits that are advocated. As seen below, two of the peptides have been prohibited by the World Anti-Doping Agency.

Why would WADA ban things for which there is no evidence that they do anything?

[nateb2022]

To be added to the Prohibited List, a substance must meet any two of the following three conditions:

  1. It has the potential to enhance sport performance. (potential -> a theoretical mechanism, even if unproven)
  2. It represents an actual or potential health risk to the athlete.
  3. It violates the spirit of sport.

Most of these peptides haven't passed adequate human safety trials, and their long term side effect profile is unknown. Additionally, an attempt at using anything to gain an unfair advantage violates the spirit of sport, even if the effect is placebo or even negative.