Peptides are having a moment. People injecting them at home are chasing everything from weight loss and muscle recovery to sharper thinking and better sex drive. But according to UConn pharmacist and clinical pharmacologist C. Michael White, the bigger danger isn’t just what’s in the vial. It’s what happens when untrained people try to draw up and inject these products themselves.

White has been researching the gray markets for peptides, where companies sidestep FDA oversight by selling products labeled “for research purposes only.” Because that labeling is a legal workaround, the companies can’t legally tell buyers how to actually use what they’re selling.

“This means consumers must purchase any supplies they need and figure out the proper technique on their own,” White writes.

So he decided to test just how well people manage on their own. In a new study published in Public Health Reports, White and his colleagues recruited 20 people, 10 college students and 10 adults in their 60s, and asked each to reconstitute a semaglutide peptide product, draw it into a syringe, and inject a mannequin. They were allowed to research the process online or with AI beforehand.

The results were rough. On average, both age groups got fewer than half the steps right. Some picked expired or cloudy dissolving liquid. Many miscalculated doses, couldn’t clear air bubbles from the syringe, or injected into muscle instead of fat. Roughly half didn’t know how to safely engage the needle’s safety mechanism or dispose of it afterward.

“These errors were serious and could increase the risk of infection, bleeding, over- or under-dosing, and needle sticks,” White notes.

What stood out most: Confidence didn’t track with competence. After doing their homework, most participants in both groups felt “somewhat confident” they could do the injection correctly. Younger participants stayed confident even after fumbling through the process. Older adults, by contrast, adjusted their confidence downward once they saw how it actually went, which tracks with prior research showing older adults tend to be more accurate judges of their own ability on complex tasks.

White’s piece also digs into a potential fix on the table: In late July 2026, an FDA advisory panel recommended adding six widely used peptides, including BPC-157, TB-500, and Semax, to the list of substances compounding pharmacies can legally prepare. The panel’s argument is that compounded versions would be safer than gray-market ones, since compounding pharmacies follow rules on sourcing and sterile production that the gray market doesn’t.

White isn’t fully sold. Even if the FDA adopts the recommendation, he points out it would only apply to a handful of products, and it wouldn’t change the fact that none of them have actually been tested for safety or effectiveness as finished drugs. The bulk of the gray-market risk stays exactly where it is.

For more on the peptide boom and what the FDA is weighing, NBC News broke down the basics here: What are peptides and why is the FDA considering easing limits?

Read the full article:

Dr. White is Head and Distinguished Professor of the Department of Pharmacy Practice at the University of Connecticut, and co-director of the university’s Health Outcomes, Policy, and Evidence Synthesis (HOPES) research group. His research focuses on drug, dietary supplement, and illicit drug safety, quality, and cost, with a specific throughline into adverse events tied to drugs, devices, herbal products, and substances of abuse.

View complete profile

He’s a recurring voice on drug and supplement safety specifically, most recently quoted in Health magazine’s “4 Major Risks of Unregulated Peptides” (Aug. 18, 2026) and on KCBS Los Angeles radio discussing GLP-1 drugs and youth mental health (Aug. 10, 2026).

Dr. White is available for interviews on peptide safety, the gray-market supplement industry, GLP-1 and weight-loss drug trends, and drug/dietary supplement safety more broadly. Media can reach out by clicking this profile icon below.