Choose any two compounds below to see them side by side. Each comparison page lines up the level of evidence behind each one, the registered clinical trials, and where each stands with regulators, so the differences are easy to see in one place.
This is a side-by-side of what is documented, not a ranking. Different compounds are studied for different things, in different people, at different amounts. A row that looks stronger for one compound does not make it the better choice for anyone.
| Epithalon | Humanin | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest evidence tier on the page | E3 Early human evidence Small, open-label, uncontrolled, case series, or a registered trial with no published results. | E4 Preclinical only Animal or in vitro work. Not demonstrated in humans. |
| Regulatory status | Not approved for human use in the US or EU; no ClinicalTrials.gov registration under any spelling; Russian/other regulatory status not independently confirmed | Not approved for any medical use anywhere; sold only as an unregulated research chemical, with no active disclosed human clinical trial program as of 2026. |
| Research area | Longevity and mitochondrial | Longevity and mitochondrial |
| Regulator-approved dose on file | No approved dose | No approved dose |
| Molecular formula | Not reliably established | C119H204N34O32S2 (24-residue peptide, as listed on PubChem) |
| Molar mass | Not reliably established | Approximately 2,687 g/mol for the 24-residue peptide (calculated from the listed molecular formula; not independently confirmed against a certificate of analysis). |
| CAS number | Not reliably established | Not reliably established. No consistent CAS Registry Number for the native Humanin peptide was found across authoritative chemical databases at the time of this review. |
| Registered trials on this site | None linked yet | None linked yet |
| Published trials covered on its page | 4 | Not stated |
| Amounts studied in those trials | Korkushko 2006: Epithalamin (pineal polypeptide extract, not the synthetic AEDG tetrapeptide) administered in periodic courses; no per-course milligram dose stated for 12-year observational follow-up Korkushko 2011: Epithalamin added to basic therapy across six courses over three years; no per-course milligram dose stated for 3-year treatment period, 15-year mortality follow-up Korkushko 2004: Epithalamin administered as a single course; no milligram dose stated for pre/post measurement around one treatment course As reported on the compound page. Amounts are not comparable between compounds. | Not stated |
| What is not known | Whether the human "geroprotector" findings reported by the Khavinson/Korkushko research network would hold up under independent, blinded, placebo-controlled replication has never been tested by any outside group. Whether Epithalon/Epitalon activates telomerase inside a living human being has never been measured; every telomerase and telomere-length finding... | Humanin has not been tested in a registered human clinical trial, so its human pharmacokinetics, effective dose, and long-term safety profile in people are unknown. Whether raising circulating Humanin levels (through the natural peptide, an analog such as HNG, or another delivery method) would produce... |
Full pages: Epithalon and Humanin. See also the clinical trial tracker and how we grade evidence.
Educational reference, not medical advice. Trial data from ClinicalTrials.gov. Everything else is drawn from the compound pages on this site, each of which cites its sources.
Most requested comparisons
These are the pairings readers look for most often. Each opens a full side-by-side page.
Weight management compounds
- Retatrutide vs Tirzepatide
- Semaglutide vs Tirzepatide
- Retatrutide vs Semaglutide
- Retatrutide vs Survodutide
- Cagrilintide vs Semaglutide
- Orforglipron vs Semaglutide
- Mazdutide vs Tirzepatide
- Cagrilintide vs Eloralintide
- LY4086940 vs Retatrutide
- LY4086940 vs Orforglipron
Growth hormone related peptides
- Ipamorelin vs Sermorelin
- Sermorelin vs Tesamorelin
- CJC-1295 (no DAC) vs Ipamorelin
- CJC-1295 with DAC vs Ipamorelin
Repair and recovery
Longevity, mitochondria and brain
How to read a comparison
A side-by-side table can make two compounds look equally proven when they are not. Keep these points in mind as you read.
- Evidence level matters more than the headline. Every compound is placed on the same six-tier scale, from published human clinical trials down to community reports. A compound with large human trials and one with only animal studies are not comparable, even when both appear in the same table.
- Registered trials show what is being tested. A trial listed on ClinicalTrials.gov tells you a question is being studied, not that the answer is known. Check the status and phase. You can browse every tracked study on the clinical trial tracker and see recent registry updates in the trial changes feed.
- Regulatory status is specific to a formulation and a country. Approval of one product does not mean every version of that compound is approved.
- Different populations and doses limit direct comparison. Results from separate trials, run in different people over different periods, cannot be lined up as if they came from a head-to-head study unless a comparison page says a head-to-head study exists.
Frequently asked questions
Which compound is better?
These pages do not rank compounds or tell anyone what to use. They show what the published and registered evidence says about each one so you can see where the evidence is strong and where it is thin.
Why are some comparisons mostly empty on one side?
Many popular peptides have little or no human trial data. When that is the case, the comparison says so plainly rather than filling the gap with community claims.
Can I compare doses here?
Reported amounts are documented on each individual peptide page, with the source and evidence tier for every figure. If you need to work out concentrations, the reconstitution calculator is a math tool only and does not suggest an amount.
Where can I see every compound?
The full peptide library lists every entry,.
PeptideBlog is an educational reference compiled from public sources. It is not medical advice, and nothing here is a recommendation for or against any compound.
