@grant.feltz's peptide claims checked against the science

What did @grant.feltz actually say?

Grant Feltz ranked ten compounds for "business owners over 35," with testosterone topping the list despite admitting it isn't a peptide. His top five included NAD+, Semax (called "Forest and Length" in the transcript, likely Selank or a mispronunciation), Selank, Retatrutide, and TRT. He called Semax "better than Adderall plus there's no crash," described Retatrutide as making fat "literally melt off," and told viewers that testosterone under 500 ng/dL means low T and that 1,000 to 1,200 ng/dL is the target range. He dismissed MOTS-c as not doing much and called the BPC-157 plus TB-500 combo a "Wolverine stack" that fixes shoulder and knee issues.

The list mixes genuinely researched compounds with poorly studied ones, and lumps supplements, peptides, and prescription hormones together as if they're equivalent consumer choices.

Does the science back this up?

Some of it, partially. The rest ranges from overstated to outright wrong. NAD+ precursor research is real but the "10 years younger" framing is marketing. Retatrutide data is promising but it's phase 2, not a finished drug. The testosterone threshold claims are not how clinical guidelines work.

NAD+ precursors like NMN and NR have shown metabolic benefits in animal models and early human trials (Yoshino et al., 2021, Science), but the effects in healthy adults are modest and age-dependent. Calling it a straightforwardly "legit" energy molecule oversells the current evidence.

Retatrutide is a triple GIP/GLP-1/glucagon receptor agonist showing strong fat loss in a phase 2 trial (Jastreboff et al., 2023, New England Journal of Medicine), but it is not approved, not available through standard channels, and comparing it favorably to semaglutide as if it's a consumer option is premature. Selank has some anxiolytic data from Russian preclinical and small clinical studies, but calling it better than Adderall for focus is an unsupported leap. BPC-157 and TB-500 have animal-model healing data, but no completed human RCTs confirm the joint repair claims.

What did they get wrong (or right)?

He got one thing broadly right: stacking five random compounds before fixing lifestyle and hormonal basics is genuinely bad advice that circulates in peptide communities. That framing has merit. The testosterone testing recommendation is also reasonable as general health awareness. Everything else needs scrutiny.

The testosterone range claim is where things go sideways. Saying anyone under 500 ng/dL "has low T" misrepresents how hypogonadism is diagnosed. The Endocrine Society guidelines (Bhasin et al., 2018, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism) define symptomatic hypogonadism below 300 ng/dL in most cases, and diagnosis requires symptoms plus confirmed lab values, not a single number. Recommending every man push to "1,000 to 1,200" ng/dL is not standard clinical guidance and carries real cardiovascular and hematological risks at higher doses.

Calling Selank "better than Adderall" is irresponsible. Adderall is an FDA-approved treatment for a diagnosed condition. Selank has no comparable clinical trial base. That comparison doesn't hold up and shouldn't be made.

MOTS-c dismissal is arguably fair given the thin human evidence. The CJC-1295 plus ipamorelin endorsement is underqualified: these are compounded growth hormone secretagogues with real regulatory restrictions and side effect profiles that go unmentioned.

What should you actually know?

Most of the compounds here are either unregulated research chemicals, compounded drugs requiring a prescription, or supplements with incomplete clinical data. The way this list is presented implies they're products you can simply add to your routine, and that framing is the actual problem.

BPC-157 and TB-500 are not FDA-approved for human use. CJC-1295 and ipamorelin are compounded peptides that fall under FDA oversight when prescribed. Retatrutide does not exist as a legal consumer product in the United States as of 2024. Selank and Semax are unscheduled in the US but are classified as research chemicals, not therapeutic drugs.

If you are interested in any of these compounds, the starting point is a physician who can run proper labs, review your symptoms, and assess whether a prescription-path compound is appropriate for you. A TikTok ranking is not a clinical protocol. The most honest thing in this video is the implicit acknowledgment that most guys are throwing money at things without a foundation. That part is true. The rest of the list should be read with considerably more skepticism than the creator applied to it.