Regulatory

Undark-STAT Investigation Reveals Hidden History of BPC-157

A Pulitzer Center-backed investigation traces Predrag Sikiric's 50-year quest behind BPC-157, questioning its evidence base ahead of July's FDA review.

Last reviewed May 31, 2026

A major new investigative report co-published by Undark and STAT News and supported by the Pulitzer Center traces the improbable 50-year origin story of BPC-157 — from a Croatian medical student’s search for gastric juice in pig slaughterhouses to its current position at the center of the Make America Healthy Again movement’s effort to reform federal drug regulation.

The report, published May 29, is the first comprehensive English-language investigation into Predrag Sikiric, the 72-year-old University of Zagreb scientist who discovered and named the peptide, and who has spent the better part of five decades defending its therapeutic potential. It arrives as an FDA advisory committee prepares to decide in July whether BPC-157 and six other peptides should be added to the Section 503A Bulk Drug Substances List, a decision that would legalize their compounding by licensed pharmacies.

The Origin Story: God Help Croatia

In 1975, as a second-year medical student at the University of Zagreb, Sikiric became convinced that the stomach must produce a natural anti-stress substance — something that could protect the body from the damaging effects of stress. He called this hypothetical compound “Substancija Boze Pomozi,” or roughly, “substance God help me.”

Eight years later, during his PhD, Sikiric assembled a small team to search for the compound. They collected gastric juice from gastroenterology clinics and emergency rooms — waste fluid from medical procedures. A physician friend in Bosnia and Herzegovina sent near-daily shipments by bus. Team members visited pig slaughterhouses, where the GI tract is discarded. Sikiric told Undark that the juice sometimes contained rats that had been caught and eaten by pigs in their final hours.

In 1989, Sikiric said they found what they were looking for: a substance that appeared to promote healing across multiple tissue types. From it, they isolated a 15-amino-acid peptide they named BPC — an acronym that carried dual meanings: “Boze Pomozi Croatia” (“God Help Croatia”) and, in the scientific literature, “Body Protection Compound.” The number 157 was added because July 15, 1990, had been rumored (wrongly, Sikiric says) to be the date of Croatia’s independence declaration.

The PLIVA Years and a Clinical Trial That Never Finished

The peptide’s big break came in 1993, when PLIVA, the Zagreb-based pharmaceutical company that had developed azithromycin, signed a contract with Sikiric’s team. PLIVA was flush with cash and looking for its next blockbuster. The company began investigating BPC-157 alongside university researchers and Parke-Davis, an American pharmaceutical firm.

PLIVA launched two early-stage clinical trials testing BPC-157 as a treatment for ulcerative colitis. A short 2005 write-up reported that the second trial found a positive effect, but it did not reach statistical significance — meaning the results could have been due to chance.

What happened next is disputed. Sikiric told Undark that PLIVA scientists were ready to move to Phase 3 trials, but the company was acquired and restructured. PLIVA’s research institute was sold to GlaxoSmithKline in 2006, and the rest of the company was absorbed by Barr Pharmaceuticals, then Teva. GSK dropped the BPC-157 project. Sikiric believes the company abandoned a promising drug.

Michael Parnham, who was a senior scientific adviser at PLIVA at the time, told Undark he was skeptical of the project from the start. “When a big company takes over a little company, they pick out the bits that they think fit what they want, and leave the rest,” he said. Parnham’s team published two papers comparing BPC-157’s wound-healing ability to standard therapy in rats — finding some positive signals, but nothing that convinced him the peptide was a clear winner.

Does BPC-157 Exist in the Human Body?

A central question raised by the investigation is whether BPC-157 is actually produced by the human body. Sikiric’s team initially believed they had isolated BPC-157 from human gastric juice, then found it in other tissues, including the brain.

But Sandor Szabo, a longtime colleague and former Harvard professor who has collaborated with Sikiric for decades, told Undark he is skeptical. “I doubt BPC-157 is a physiological peptide present in the body,” Szabo said. That distinction matters: if BPC-157 is not naturally occurring, its safety profile cannot be inferred from the assumption that humans already produce it.

Other researchers have pointed out that Sikiric has never published the complete amino acid sequence and evidence that BPC-157 is endogenous — a gap that makes independent verification difficult.

The Evidence Base: Entirely From One Lab

The investigation highlights a deeper concern: nearly all published data on BPC-157 comes from Sikiric’s lab in Zagreb. Industry scientists and academic researchers interviewed by Undark described the evidence base as thin, with few independent replication studies and no large-scale human trials.

Jacob Sherkow, a professor of law and medicine at the University of Illinois, told Undark the FDA’s potential pivot on peptides represents a significant shift. For decades, injectable peptides like insulin have been treated as drugs requiring rigorous clinical evidence. “Now, with this potential pivot, the approach is more ‘You know, we’re going to allow some of these to go forward without any rigorous scientific evidence base,’” Sherkow said.

What’s at Stake in July

The July 23-24 Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee meeting will consider BPC-157, TB-500, KPV, MOTS-c, DSIP, Semax, and Epitalon for inclusion on the 503A Bulks List — a decision that would permit licensed compounding pharmacies to distribute them.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been the driving force behind the review. In an April post on X, Kennedy wrote that each peptide would undergo “full clinical, pharmacological, and safety evidence” review. The next day, he characterized the peptides as akin to supplements, suggesting they may not require clinical trials — a stance that Sherkow and other legal experts say represents a fundamental departure from the FDA’s traditional drug-approval framework.

The investigation also notes that Sikiric granted Undark extensive access to his lab in May, including interviews with more than 20 current and former PhD students. He often turned to PowerPoint presentations to explain the science, telling reporters on a Saturday afternoon in Zagreb, “You have to be sure that you get it.”

This article summarizes and contextualizes the investigation “A Peptide, a Secretive Scientist, and a Debate Over Evidence,” co-published by Undark and STAT News on May 29, 2026, with support from the Pulitzer Center. Read the full investigation for complete details.

PeptidesBeat is an independent editorial publication covering peptide policy, research, and industry developments. We do not sell peptides, recommend dosing, or provide medical advice. All content is informational. Peptides referenced may be subject to FDA restrictions; consult a licensed healthcare provider for any therapeutic question.