Site Injections. True or false? [Quick answers]

At least one email a day I will receive on the topic of site injections. Most of these emails are to do with injecting the peptides BPC-157, TB-500 and IGF-1 LR3. The idea of site injections came about due to the potential of certain medications exhibiting local activity after subcutaneous or intramuscular administration, or the endogenous version of that medication exhibiting local activity in a biochemical setting. The theory was that if an injury had occured, that it would be beneficial to inject one or all of these peptides into the area of the injury, thus increasing the speed of the healing process. Moreover, the rate of healing with these peptides is hypothesised to be significantly greater with local administration when compared to conventional administration through a subcutaenous or intramuscular route in other common sites, such as the abdomen, deltoids or glutes.

To sit here and try to explain the pharmacokinetics of each of these 3 common choices would take pages; and also not be of much applicable value for 99% of readers, so here is the answer in short. Which of these peptides may exhibit local activity after site injection and therefore, potentially be useful to site inject?

BPC-157: Yes
IGF-1 LR3: Yes
TB-500: No

Now, let’s talk about the difference between the statistical signficance vs the clinical significance in this context. Statistically, from a biocehmical standpoint, yes, it would make sense to use BPC-157 and IGF-1 LR3 at the site of an injury as these two can exhibit local activity after administration. Clinically, the actual real life difference between conventional administration and site injection would be marginal. On top of the only marginal benefit of site injections will be accompanied by a significantly increased chance of adverse effects from a site injection. The potential of these adverse effects would depend on the site and the individual. I believe some sites just are not meant to be pinned. Clipping nerves, passing major vascular tissue, increased risk of infection or just general site pain are all substantially higher risks when you administer medications into sites that are not commonly approved. In short, do I believe site injections are worth it? No. However, do not get me twisted. I am all for self-experimentation, so if you are willing to find out what holds true for you, go for it. I regularly consult with strongmen and popular bodybuilders who swear by their BPC-157 site injections. Comment below if you have had an experience with site injections. Anecdotal data is important to have in this space of the unknown, so do not be shy. Cheers, Dave.