GHK-Cu — Wolverine Health

How it works

A copper-binding tripeptide first isolated from human plasma in the 1970s. At physiological concentrations it modulates wound healing, collagen synthesis, and antioxidant enzyme activity. Found naturally in plasma, saliva, and urine — levels decline with age. In vitro and animal evidence for skin remodelling and wound repair is solid; the dermatology literature on topical application is more developed than the systemic injection data. Nobody's done the RCT on subcutaneous injection in humans.

FDA status: No FDA approval. Present in FDA-registered cosmetic products (topical). Systemic injection use is not approved.
WADA status: Permitted in sport
Route: topical; subcutaneous injection (systemic use)

Key studies

Isolation of a serum factor stimulating cell growth from plasma — Pickart et al. (1973)

GHK-Cu (glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine copper complex) was first isolated from human plasma and identified as a growth-modulating tripeptide that stimulates tissue remodelling and wound contraction.

Wolverine Health is building physician-supervised peptide protocols. Get early access.

Join the waitlist

Research on GHK-Cu

Peptide access by US state: why the regulatory patchwork right now is real

The federal compounding framework applies the same way in every state. The state pharmacy boards do not. The result is a real state-by-state patchwork that decides whether a telehealth prescription for a compounded peptide is actually fillable where you live.

What RFK Jr.'s February 2026 announcement actually said about peptides

The "announcement" was a Joe Rogan appearance, not a Federal Register notice. The wellness scene heard one thing. The actual signal was narrower, and the rulemaking that turns it into access is still more than a year away.

The PCAC review is July 23–24, 2026. Here is what that means for peptide access.

Two days at FDA's White Oak campus decide which of seven peptides US compounding pharmacies will be allowed to dispense by prescription. The vote is not an approval, the docket is not all the peptides, and the framing the forums use is mostly wrong.

Anti-inflammatory peptides: mechanism, evidence, and what the human data is missing

WADA

Three peptides under FDA review have animal-model anti-inflammatory evidence: KPV, BPC-157, GHK-Cu. Each engages the inflammatory cascade at a different point. None has a controlled human trial in an inflammatory indication. Here is where the three files diverge.

How peptides influence collagen synthesis: the mechanism behind the claims

WADA

Three peptides under FDA review have animal-model evidence touching collagen biology — BPC-157, GHK-Cu, and TB-500. The mechanism story varies per peptide. The human evidence does not. Here is what collagen is and where the prescribing files diverge.

Copper peptides: why GHK-Cu is not just a skincare trend

Of every peptide on the longevity menu, GHK-Cu is the only one sold under a name that names its metal cofactor. The copper does the work. Here is what a copper peptide actually is, what the human evidence shows for topical use, and where the injectable form sits in the FDA's second-wave review.

GHK-Cu: Copper Peptide Research in Skin, Wound Healing, and Tissue Repair

Science-journalism overview of GHK-Cu — the copper-binding tripeptide studied for wound healing and skin biology, what the preclinical and clinical literature shows, and its regulatory position in 2026.

GHK-Cu and the skin-ageing question: copper peptides under the microscope

GHK-Cu shows up in every premium anti-ageing serum and on every injectable peptide menu. The foundational science is real, mostly from one researcher across forty years, and the one randomised human trial of GHK-Cu skincare found no objective benefit. Here is what the evidence actually says.

BPC-157 vs GHK-Cu for tissue repair: different pathways, overlapping results

WADA

BPC-157 and GHK-Cu both get sold as tissue-repair peptides. They share almost nothing else — different parent molecules, different anatomical evidence, and only one of them is on the FDA's July 2026 review docket. Here is what the published data actually separates them on.