BPC-157 and WADA: What Athletes Must Know Before Using Peptides

It is against sports regulations to use BPC-157 as prohibited by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). It falls under the S0 category (Non-Approved Substances) in the Prohibited List of WADA, implying that all pharmacological products which are not included in other categories of the list and are undisbursed by any regulatory health authority, are regarded as prohibited substances. Besides, WADA also names BPC-157 separately. The BPC-157 WADA prohibition applies both in and out of competition. Depending on what anti-doping association tests an athlete, he/she might bear consequences in case of a positive result.

Is BPC-157 Prohibited by WADA?

The S0 Category

S0 (section zero) of the WADA Prohibited List contains the term "Non-Approved Substances." The definition is very broad here. Any pharmacological substance that is not covered by the other sections of the list, and does not possess existing approval by a governmental regulatory authority for human therapeutic purposes, is automatically prohibited. So since BPC-157 does not have FDA,EMA, TGA, or any other country’s governmental authority approval, it falls under the category of section S0 effortlessly, even without being explicitly named in the list.

Explicit Naming Since 2022

WADA went further than the S0 catch-all. Starting with the 2022 Prohibited List, BPC-157 is explicitly named as a prohibited substance. This was part of a broader update that called out specific peptides and growth factors that had become popular among athletes. The explicit naming removes any ambiguity: there is no argument that BPC-157 somehow falls outside the scope of the list.

Which Athletes Are Affected?

Olympic and International Sport

The WADA Code governs all athletes taking part in the Olympic Movement. This applies to all sports under an International Federation that has signed the WADA Code. BPC-157 is an S0 substance meaning that it is banned at all times. An athlete does not have to fail a test during a competition in order to incur sanctions, even a positive urine sample coming from an out-of-competition test will yield the same consequences.

US Anti-Doping (USADA)

The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) follows the rules set out in the World Anti-Doping Agency code. USADA's Prohibited List is the same as that of WADA. Every athlete who consumes BPC-157 stands the chance of failing a drug test. The jurisdiction of USADA applies to both the Registered Testing Pool and those athletes who are tested outside competition.

Professional Leagues

Professional leagues in the US have their own anti-doping rules, which may not align with WADA’s. The NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL all have their respective lists of banned substances, which they come up with through collective bargaining. The lists may contain neither all nor the same items as the WADA Prohibited List. Professional athletes must check their leagues’ rules on the matter instead of relying on WADA.

NCAA

While the NCAA's banned substance list is similar to WADA's, it is not just like it. Our NCAA page gives more details regarding the rules that apply to athletes in college sports.

How Testing Works

Detection Methods

WADA-approved anti-doping labs use LC-MS/MS technology to identify peptide traces from samples of blood and urine. BPC-157 is a peptide with 15 amino-acids, and its molecular weight is 1419.5 Da. Advances in the detection of peptides have enabled scientists to detect not only BPC-157 but also its metabolite levels even at very low concentrations of peptide drugs. The detection window varies based on the dose, the route of administration, and the individual's metabolic traits.

Detection Windows

Research regarding the detection windows of BPC-157 is sparse. Unlike performance-enhancing drugs, whose detection times are well known, the detection of peptides is a newer concept. What is known is that small synthetic peptides can be detected in urine for days to weeks after use. Athletes should assume that if they have recently used BPC-157, they have a substantial risk of testing positive for this compound.

Sanctions for a Positive Test

Standard Sanction

According to the regulations established by WADA, a first violation of the anti-doping code in regard to any of the banned substances will lead to a penalty consisting of four-year suspension from participating in the competitions. The same principle holds true for the banned substances categorized under S0. In case the offender is able to show that he or she has committed the code infringement without intention to break the existing norms, the penalty may be decreased to two years. Any decrease of punishment below the two-year period is unlikely to take place as it is necessary to provide convincing evidence as proof of unintentionality of the offence.

Consequences Beyond the Ban

Winning a positive anti-doping test does not only result in a temporary ban from competition. All results occurring after the date of the positive test recollection can be annulled, which means losing medals, points, and prize money. An athlete’s name will be made publicly available on the website of the relevant anti-doping authority. All selections for teams, sponsorship agreements, and the entire career of the athlete will be undermined.

Therapeutic Use Exemptions

Can an Athlete Get a TUE for BPC-157?

A Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) means that an athlete may use a banned drug due to an authentic medical problem that he/she suffers from. The appropriate anti-doping authority initiates TUE applications and they need to have a written endorsement by the physician treating the athlete. However, TUE can be granted only for specific medications when there are no other authorized drugs available. Because BPC-157 is not approved to be used for any medical purpose, there is no way to get a TUE for it.

The "Research Use" Defense

It Does Not Work in Anti-Doping

Certain athletes might think that by acquiring BPC-157 marked "for research purposes only," they have a way out of being charged with anti-doping violations. This is not the case. Anti-doping regulations are based on strict liability: athletes must take responsibility for what they put in their bodies, regardless of how it was purchased, labeled, or otherwise procured.