The Ordinary hair serum and GHK-Cu: what the evidence shows

What did @elouizacustodio actually say?

Honestly, this one is tricky to fact-check because the video's audio is a pop song, not a voiceover about hair care. The actual claims live in the caption, not the transcript. So let's work with what we have: the creator says they moved to Canada, noticed hair thinning and loss, bought The Ordinary Multi-Peptide Serum for Hair Density for $24, and saw "really noticeable growth after 2 months," "thicker hair," and "less fallout."

Those are three distinct claims. Hair regrowth, increased shaft thickness, and reduced shedding are not the same biological process, and they don't necessarily respond to the same interventions. The creator is stacking all three onto one product, which is worth examining.

No dosage claims. No disease cure claims. No prescription advice. From a compliance standpoint, this caption is relatively clean. But "really noticeable growth" after just two months is a bold statement that deserves scrutiny.

Does the science back this up?

Partially, yes. The Ordinary's hair serum contains GHK-Cu (copper tripeptide-1), a peptide with a legitimate body of research behind it. The evidence for GHK-Cu on hair is real but not overwhelming.

A study by Pickart and Margolina (2018, Biomedicines) reviewed GHK-Cu's role in tissue remodeling and found it stimulates hair follicle enlargement and activates hair growth genes including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Earlier work by Uno et al. (1987) in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology showed copper peptides promoted hair growth in animal models. Human trial data is thinner.

The serum also contains Redensyl, Procapil, and VEGF-stimulating peptides like biotinoyl tripeptide-1. Redensyl was studied in a small industry-funded trial (Mondon et al., 2014) showing a 17% increase in hair growth rate over 84 days compared to placebo. Small sample, industry funding, limited replication. Useful but not definitive.

Two months is actually within the plausible window for early shedding reduction and minor density improvements, given that a typical hair growth cycle runs roughly 90 days. So the timeline isn't implausible.

What did they get wrong (or right)?

The creator got the timeline roughly right. Two months aligns with when you'd expect to see early changes in the telogen (shedding) phase if a topical is working. That part checks out.

What's missing from this video is context about WHY the hair was thinning in the first place. Moving to Canada and experiencing hair loss is a real phenomenon, but the cause matters enormously for whether a peptide serum is the right tool.

• Telogen effluvium triggered by stress, climate change, or dietary shifts (very common in immigrants) often resolves on its own within 3 to 6 months regardless of treatment.
• Iron deficiency, vitamin D deficiency, and thyroid dysfunction are all common causes of hair loss in young women and are entirely unaddressed by a topical serum.
• Androgenetic alopecia requires a different intervention entirely.

The creator may well be seeing real results from the serum. But they may also be recovering from telogen effluvium that was going to resolve anyway. Without a control condition, you cannot separate those two explanations. That's not a criticism of the creator. It's just what anecdotal before-and-after evidence can and cannot tell you.

What should you actually know?

GHK-Cu is one of the better-studied cosmetic peptides for hair, but "better-studied" in skincare is a low bar. The mechanistic rationale is solid. Large, independent randomized controlled trials in humans are still lacking.

If you're experiencing hair thinning after a major life change like immigration, the first step is a blood panel, not a serum. Check ferritin (not just hemoglobin), vitamin D, TSH, and free T4. Many dermatologists will also evaluate for scalp conditions. A $24 topical is unlikely to harm you, but it can give you false confidence that you're addressing a systemic deficiency you're actually ignoring.

For GHK-Cu specifically, topical delivery to the follicle is also a real limitation. The scalp is a barrier, and whether peptides in a leave-on serum penetrate deeply enough to reach follicle bulbs at meaningful concentrations is genuinely unclear from existing literature. The Ordinary's formulation includes some delivery-optimized ingredients, but no peer-reviewed pharmacokinetic data on this specific product exists publicly.

Bottom line: this is a low-risk, plausibly-useful product for certain types of hair thinning. The creator's results are believable but not provable from a single anecdote.