I think peptides are popular because they give people a feeling of power and control.
One feels helpless when they can't sleep, stop scrolling, eat well or exercise consistently.
A few injections wrestles back a feeling of control. Evidence shows that injections amplify perceived agency (the ritual potency of administration).
This creates a dangerous situation where powerful compounds are being used less for biomarker improvement and more for psychological wellbeing.
This is what you want: closed loop.
> intervention (peptide)
> biological change
> measured biomarker
> adjustment
How most people are using peptides: open-loop.
> intervention (peptide)
> subjective feeling
> more intervention
The open-loop compounds over time. Without biomarker feedback, dose escalation is driven by subjective feelings which creates increased risk of doses with no clinical precedent.
I am pro peptide and pro experimentation. Some peptides such as GLP-1s and similar are among the most effective in the world.
Peptides (without clinical data) are among the most promising therapies available. They also need more clinical work so that we can characterize their effects, both good and bad.
Nothing is free in biology.