AOD-9604 Peptide: Benefits, Dosage, Side Effects & Protocol

Here’s the thing about AOD-9604 that nobody in the peptide space wants to say out loud. A pharmaceutical company spent over $50 million developing it, ran six clinical trials on nearly a thousand people, and then walked away.

And somehow, it’s more popular now than it ever was during those trials.

That disconnect is worth understanding. Because the real story of AOD-9604 isn’t as simple as “miracle fat burner” or “failed drug.” The truth sits somewhere in between, and it’s actually more interesting than either extreme.

This guide breaks down everything. The science, the trials, what went wrong, what the research shows, what people are actually experiencing, and how it stacks up against every alternative on the market. No fluff, no sales pitch. Just the full picture so you can make your own call.

What Is AOD-9604?

AOD stands for Anti-Obesity Drug. The “9604” is just a lab designation.

AOD-9604 is a small peptide. Sixteen amino acids long, snipped from the tail end of human growth hormone. It corresponds to amino acids 176 through 191 of HGH, with one important tweak: the first amino acid (phenylalanine) was swapped out for tyrosine. That single change adds one extra oxygen atom on an aromatic ring, and it turns out to matter a lot for stability and biological activity.

The peptide was invented by Professor Frank Ng at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. Ng had spent decades studying human growth hormone and noticed something that caught his attention: the C-terminal fragment of HGH seemed to drive fat metabolism independently of the receptor that triggers all the other growth hormone effects.

Think about that for a second. Full HGH does a ton of things. Burns fat, builds muscle, retains water, spikes IGF-1, messes with blood sugar, grows bones. AOD-9604 was designed to isolate just the fat-burning piece. No IGF-1 spike. No insulin resistance. No water retention. No acromegaly risk.

The commercial development was picked up by Metabolic Pharmaceuticals Limited, an ASX-listed biotech company out of Melbourne, and they poured serious money into bringing it to market through the late 1990s and 2000s.

Quick Specs

The molecular weight comes in at 1,815.10 g/mol with a CAS number of 221231-10-3. Its amino acid sequence is H-Tyr-Leu-Arg-Ile-Val-Gln-Cys-Arg-Ser-Val-Glu-Gly-Ser-Cys-Gly-Phe-OH, and the molecule contains a disulfide bridge between Cys-7 and Cys-14 that gives it a cyclic shape. Half-life in the blood is roughly 4 minutes (yes, really, it works fast and clears fast). It’s manufactured through solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS), then purified via HPLC.

AOD-9604 vs. HGH Fragment 176-191: They’re Not the Same Thing

This is probably the single biggest misconception floating around the peptide community, and it drives researchers crazy.

AOD-9604 and HGH Fragment 176-191 are different molecules. They get used interchangeably on forums, vendor sites, and even some clinic websites. But they shouldn’t be.

The natural fragment (HGH Frag 176-191) starts with phenylalanine. AOD-9604 starts with tyrosine. One amino acid difference, one extra hydroxyl group. It sounds trivial until you realize that every single human clinical trial, all six of them, was conducted on AOD-9604 specifically. HGH Fragment 176-191, as noted on its own Wikipedia page, “has not been studied in humans.”

So when you see someone cite clinical safety data for “HGH Frag 176-191,” they’re actually referencing AOD-9604 data. The distinction matters because AOD-9604 has a specific modification designed for enhanced stability, the tyrosine substitution may affect receptor interactions, and only AOD-9604 carries the clinical trial safety record. If you’re going to use one, at least know which one you’re getting.

How AOD-9604 Works: The Mechanism (Simplified)

The mechanism behind AOD-9604 is clever, even if not fully mapped out at every level. The researchers who developed it were upfront about this. A 2014 paper by Moré and Kenley in the Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism acknowledged that the exact receptor-level mechanism isn’t completely understood. But here’s what the research has established:

It Turns on Fat Burning

AOD-9604 ramps up the expression of beta-3 adrenergic receptors (β₃-AR) in fat tissue. These receptors are basically the “burn fat now” switches on your fat cells. In obese mice, β₃-AR levels were suppressed. AOD-9604 restored them to near-normal levels.

A landmark 2001 study published in Endocrinology by Heffernan et al. showed this beautifully. Obese mice treated with AOD-9604 saw a 216% increase in fat oxidation rates. When they repeated the experiment in mice genetically engineered without β₃-AR receptors, the chronic weight loss effect disappeared, confirming the receptor’s role. (PubMed)

It Blocks New Fat Creation

On the flip side, AOD-9604 inhibits an enzyme called acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC), a key player in de novo lipogenesis (your body creating new fat from non-fat sources like carbs). In human fat tissue samples tested in vitro, this effect reduced glucose-to-lipid conversion by about 50%.

So you get a two-pronged attack: existing fat gets broken down faster, and new fat gets created slower.

What It Doesn’t Do (And This Is Key)

Here’s where AOD-9604 separates itself from full HGH in a really meaningful way. The full 191-amino-acid human growth hormone molecule needs to bind two receptor sites simultaneously to activate the GH receptor. AOD-9604 only contains a partial overlap with one of those binding sites and completely lacks the other. It physically cannot activate the GH receptor.

That means no IGF-1 elevation (confirmed across all six human trials), no blood sugar disruption (tested via oral glucose tolerance tests), no water retention, no cell proliferation concerns, and no appetite changes like you’d see with GLP-1 drugs. It’s working through an entirely separate, non-GH-receptor pathway.

The current theory is that HGH functions as something like a pro-hormone, a parent molecule whose fragments can have their own distinct biological effects. AOD-9604 exploits one of those fragment-specific pathways.

The Clinical Trials: What $50 Million in Research Actually Found

This is the part most AOD-9604 articles either skip entirely or cherry-pick from. Let’s not do that. Here’s every trial, laid out.

Animal Studies: Where It All Looked Incredibly Promising

The preclinical work was exciting. And that’s not hype.

Obese Zucker rats given oral AOD-9604 at 500 µg/kg/day for 19 days showed a greater than 50% reduction in body weight gain compared to controls (15.8g vs 35.6g). No negative effects on insulin sensitivity. Published in Hormone Research by Ng et al. in 2000. (PubMed)

In ob/ob mice (a genetic obesity model), AOD-9604 delivered fat oxidation increases of over 200%. And importantly, it didn’t cause hyperglycemia or reduce insulin secretion, both of which full HGH tends to do. (PubMed)

Fat cell studies across mice, rats, pigs, dogs, and even human tissue samples showed something interesting: AOD-9604 preferentially released fat from obese fat cells but didn’t have much effect on lean ones. That selectivity is rare and potentially significant.

Human Trials: Six Studies, Nearly 1,000 People

Metabolic Pharmaceuticals ran six randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials between 2001 and 2007:

METAOD001 (Phase I) – 15 healthy males, single IV doses from 25 to 400 µg/kg. Result: safe, well-tolerated, no issues.

METAOD002 (Phase IIa) – 23 obese males, single IV doses. Result: no effect on IGF-1 levels, safe.

METAOD003 (Phase IIa) – 17 obese males, single oral doses up to 54 mg. Result: safe orally.

METAOD004 (Phase IIa) – 36 obese males, 7 days of oral dosing up to 54 mg/day. Result: safe.

METAOD005 (Phase IIb, 12 weeks) – Around 300 obese adults, oral doses from 1 to 30 mg/day. Result: the 1 mg/day group lost 2.6 kg vs. 0.8 kg for placebo, a statistically significant difference of about 1.8 kg (4 lbs) over three months.

METAOD006 (Phase IIb, 24 weeks, “OPTIONS” trial) – 536 obese adults, oral doses of 0.25, 0.5, and 1 mg/day for 24 weeks. Result: no statistically significant weight loss at any dose compared to placebo.

The safety data across all six trials was reviewed and published by Stier, Vos, and Kenley in the Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism (2013). Their conclusion was that AOD-9604’s safety profile was “indistinguishable from placebo.” No serious adverse events, no anti-drug antibodies, no metabolic disruptions. (Full Text)

So… Did It Work or Not?

The honest answer: the 12-week trial showed a modest but real signal. The 24-week confirmatory trial couldn’t replicate it. Development was terminated in March 2007.

But the story doesn’t end there, and this is where context matters.

Why the Trials Failed (And Why That Might Not Be the Whole Story)

Four factors converged to sink AOD-9604’s clinical program, and understanding each one is important if you’re trying to evaluate whether the peptide has legitimate potential.

1. The Lifestyle Intervention Problem

The OPTIONS trial (METAOD006) required all participants, including the placebo group, to follow a structured diet and exercise program. This is standard in obesity drug trials, but it creates a problem. If your placebo group is already losing weight from lifestyle changes, there’s less room for the drug to show a measurable additional effect. This design choice has historically masked small-to-moderate drug effects.

2. Oral Delivery of a Peptide Is Rough

Think about what you’re asking a 16-amino-acid chain to do when you swallow it as a pill. It has to survive stomach acid, survive digestive enzymes, get absorbed through the gut lining, and make it into systemic circulation. All while having a serum half-life of about 4 minutes.

Every clinical trial used oral delivery. That’s worth letting sink in.

The subcutaneous injection route, which is how virtually every clinic and researcher uses AOD-9604 today, bypasses all those oral bioavailability issues. It puts the peptide directly into systemic circulation. And here’s the kicker: subcutaneous injection was never tested for efficacy in any human trial.

This is the single biggest piece of context missing from most discussions about AOD-9604. The route that failed (oral) isn’t the route people are using. The route people are using (injectable) was never tested for fat loss.

3. Species Differences in Fat Metabolism

β₃-adrenergic receptors, the key target of AOD-9604’s mechanism, play a much larger role in rodent fat metabolism than in human fat metabolism. This is a well-documented species difference that has torpedoed other anti-obesity drug candidates before. Rodent brown adipose tissue is rich in β₃-AR. Adult human fat tissue? Not so much.

4. The Dose-Response Curve Made No Sense

In the 12-week trial, only the 1 mg/day dose showed results. Higher doses (5, 10, 20, 30 mg/day) did not produce greater weight loss. That’s an inverted dose-response relationship, which is biologically unusual and raises questions about whether the 1 mg result was a statistical fluke.

Benefits: What’s Backed by Research vs. What’s Anecdotal

Let’s sort the claims into tiers based on actual evidence.

Fat Loss: The Main Event

Evidence tier: Moderate in animals, weak-to-moderate in humans

The animal data is solid. Consistent fat oxidation increases, weight reduction, preferential action on obese fat cells. The human data is mixed: one positive 12-week trial, one failed 24-week trial. The injectable route (which most people use) has zero efficacy data.

That said, anecdotal reports from the community are split about 50/50 between people who swear by it and people who saw nothing. More on that in the community section below.

Joint and Cartilage Repair

Evidence tier: Promising but very early (animal only)

A 2015 study by Kwon and Park in Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science injected AOD-9604 combined with hyaluronic acid directly into the joints of rabbits with osteoarthritis. The combination showed enhanced cartilage regeneration compared to either treatment alone. (PubMed)

It’s a single study in 32 rabbits. No human data exists for joint repair. But it’s interesting enough that several clinics now offer AOD-9604 + BPC-157 stacks specifically targeting joint recovery.

Muscle Preservation

Evidence tier: Theoretical

AOD-9604 doesn’t interact with the GH receptor, so it doesn’t trigger catabolism (muscle breakdown) or anabolism (muscle building). In theory, this means fat loss without muscle loss. But nobody has actually measured lean body mass changes in a controlled setting with AOD-9604. It’s a reasonable inference, not proven data.

Anti-Aging

Evidence tier: Anecdotal only

No studies. People extrapolate from the growth hormone connection, but since AOD-9604 literally cannot activate the GH receptor, there’s no mechanistic basis for traditional “anti-aging” HGH effects.

Dosing Protocols

Important note: What follows reflects doses used in clinical research settings and those commonly referenced in published literature and community forums. This is informational context, not a recommendation.

What Clinical Trials Used

All trials administered AOD-9604 orally. Doses ranged from 0.25 mg to 54 mg/day. The only dose that showed a signal in the 12-week trial was 1 mg/day oral.

What the Research Community Typically References

The injectable protocols that dominate current use have no clinical trial backing but are widely discussed in research forums. Most protocols call for 200-300 mcg/day subcutaneous as a starting range, with 300-500 mcg/day being standard. Weight-based guidance usually breaks down to 300 mcg for under 160 lbs, 400 mcg for 160-200 lbs, and 500 mcg for over 200 lbs.

Timing is morning on an empty stomach. The rationale is that elevated insulin from eating may blunt lipolytic signaling, so most protocols suggest waiting 30-60 minutes before eating. Cycle length is typically 8-12 weeks on, 4 weeks off. Most clinic literature suggests expecting 4-6 weeks for early changes and 8-12 weeks for more noticeable results.

Reconstitution (For Lyophilized Powder)

A typical 5 mg vial reconstituted with 2.0 mL of bacteriostatic water yields a concentration of 2,500 mcg/mL. At that concentration, 300 mcg equals 0.12 mL (12 units on a standard insulin syringe) and 500 mcg equals 0.20 mL (20 units).

Inject the water slowly down the inside wall of the vial. Swirl gently, don’t shake. Peptides are fragile.

If you’re sourcing AOD-9604 for research, purity matters more than price. We’ve had consistently good results with Paramount Peptides’ 6mg AOD-9604 vials. Third-party tested, US-made, ships fast. Use code BRAINFLOW to save 10%.

Storage

Before reconstitution, refrigerate or freeze. The powder is stable for 1-3 years frozen and up to 2 years refrigerated. After reconstitution, keep it in the fridge at 2-8°C and use it within 28 days. Don’t freeze the reconstituted solution, and keep it away from light and temperature swings.

Side Effects and Safety Profile

If there’s one area where AOD-9604 shines, it’s safety. Across six clinical trials involving roughly 925 participants, the safety profile was described as “indistinguishable from placebo.” There were zero withdrawals or serious adverse events attributed to the peptide, no anti-AOD-9604 antibodies detected at any time point up to 24 weeks, and no changes in IGF-1, blood glucose, or insulin sensitivity. A complete battery of genotoxicity tests came back clean (Ames test, chromosomal aberration, micronucleus assay), and chronic toxicology studies ran clean through 6 months in rats and 9 months in monkeys.

(Source: Moré & Kenley, J Endocrinol Metab, 2014)

What Users Commonly Report

Forum and community feedback on side effects is dead consistent. Most people report next to nothing. The most common report is mild injection site reactions like redness or slight itching. Some people get occasional mild headaches in the first week, and there are rare reports of mild fatigue or lightheadedness early on. These tend to resolve within a few days.

What It Definitively Does NOT Cause

No GH suppression (it can’t interact with the GH axis), no thyroid effects, no insulin resistance (clinically tested and confirmed), no water retention, no appetite suppression or increase, and no mood changes.

The Long-Term Gap

The longest human trial ran 24 weeks. That’s it. There is no multi-year safety data. This is a legitimate limitation worth acknowledging, even given the excellent short-term profile.

Regulatory Status: Where Things Stand in 2026

FDA Status

AOD-9604 is not FDA approved for any use. It never has been.

In December 2024, the FDA’s Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee (PCAC) reviewed AOD-9604 and voted against including it on the 503A Bulks List. The committee cited concerns about immunogenicity risk, peptide-related impurities, and limited long-term safety data. (PCAC Meeting Documents)

Here’s the wild part: Dr. Edwin Lee, an endocrinologist who appeared in support of AOD-9604 at this meeting, explicitly stated that “AOD9604 was ineffective for weight loss” and “should not be considered as a weight loss peptide.” His argument was for its safety profile and potential cartilage/bone applications instead.

The GRAS Myth

You’ll see some websites claim AOD-9604 is “FDA approved.” This is misleading at best.

What happened was a privately convened expert panel (not the FDA itself) determined AOD-9604 to be “Generally Recognized As Safe” (GRAS) for use in foods at doses up to 1 mg/day. This is a food-additive classification. It does not constitute drug approval. It doesn’t apply to injectable medications. And the FDA’s own actions, placing it on a safety concerns list and then having their advisory committee vote against compounding, directly contradict any notion of broad regulatory endorsement.

Worldwide Status

• Australia (TGA): Schedule 4 (Prescription Only) since June 2015
• Europe (EMA): No marketing authorization
• UK (MHRA): Unapproved
• Canada: Unapproved
• WADA: Explicitly prohibited under S2 (Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors). Athletes, take note

The WADA ban has been in effect since around 2013 and was central to the Essendon Football Club scandal in Australia, where a sports scientist administered AOD-9604 to 34 AFL players.

How AOD-9604 Compares to Everything Else

One of the most useful things you can understand about AOD-9604 is where it sits relative to other options. Here’s the full breakdown.

AOD-9604 vs. Full HGH

The tradeoff is clear. Full HGH is more effective but comes with a laundry list of side effects, costs 5-15x more, and requires a prescription. AOD-9604 is far gentler and cheaper but has a much weaker evidence base.

AOD-9604 vs. Semaglutide (Wegovy) and Tirzepatide (Zepbound)

This is the comparison everyone wants right now, and it’s not close in terms of raw efficacy.

GLP-1 drugs blow AOD-9604 out of the water for pure weight loss numbers. But they also come with nausea that can last weeks, potential muscle loss that worries a lot of people, and in many cases weight regain when you stop. AOD-9604’s advantages are tolerability, muscle preservation (theoretical), cost, and accessibility.

Some clinics are now combining AOD-9604 with low-dose GLP-1 agonists, targeting both appetite suppression and direct fat metabolism simultaneously. There’s no published data on this combination, but it’s becoming a talked-about protocol.

AOD-9604 vs. CJC-1295 + Ipamorelin

CJC-1295/Ipamorelin is considered the “gold standard” peptide stack for body recomposition because it raises actual growth hormone output, which benefits multiple systems. AOD-9604 is more targeted, fat metabolism only, which is either a feature or a limitation depending on your goals.

AOD-9604 vs. Tesamorelin

Tesamorelin is the one peptide in this space with actual FDA approval (for HIV-associated lipodystrophy). It’s a GHRH analog that stimulates pituitary GH release and has Phase III clinical trial data showing real visceral fat reduction. AOD-9604 has a milder mechanism, no approval, and weaker efficacy data. But it also costs less and has fewer systemic hormonal effects.

AOD-9604 vs. 5-Amino-1MQ

5-Amino-1MQ is a small molecule NNMT inhibitor with a completely different mechanism (NAD+/SIRT1 pathway). It comes in oral capsules, which is a major convenience advantage. But it has zero human clinical trial data. AOD-9604 has more clinical evidence, even if that evidence is mixed. Both sit in roughly the same monthly price range.

What Real Users Actually Experience

Reading through Reddit threads, peptide forums, and clinic reviews paints a picture that’s more nuanced than either the promotional material or the skeptics suggest.

The Positive Camp

Roughly half of reports are positive. People describe fat loss accelerating beyond what diet and exercise alone were producing, with results becoming particularly noticeable in “stubborn” areas like the lower belly and love handles after 6-8 weeks. Side effects are reported as nearly zero across the board. Best results came when AOD was stacked with clean eating and consistent training, and some users report improved body composition even without major scale changes.

One recurring pattern: people who were already lean and trying to drop the last few percentage points of body fat seemed to report the most satisfaction. The “going from 12% to 10%” crowd tends to be happier than the “going from 25% to 20%” crowd.

The Skeptical Camp

The other half is less enthusiastic. “Ran it for 2 months, didn’t notice much of anything” is a common refrain. “The 50/50 shot” has become a community saying, basically flip a coin whether it works for you. Several users pointed out that their results could easily be attributed to the diet changes they made at the same time. A few experienced users were blunt: “AOD is one of those peptides to go from 7% to 6%, not 18% to 17%.” Price-to-effect ratio came up frequently as a concern.

The Honest Synthesis

The community views AOD-9604 as a “maybe.” A relatively cheap, extremely safe peptide that might give you an extra edge if your diet and training are already dialed in. It’s not going to transform anyone’s physique on its own. Think of it as a potential accelerator, not a replacement for the fundamentals.

The people who seem happiest with it tend to already be in decent shape and targeting the last stubborn fat, using it as part of a broader stack (often with CJC/Ipa or a GLP-1), patient enough to run 8-12 week cycles, and realistic about expectations going in.

Common Stacks Referenced in the Community

No clinical data exists for any of these combinations. But for informational context, these are the most frequently discussed protocols in research forums:

AOD-9604 + CJC-1295/Ipamorelin – The most popular combo for body recomp. AOD in the morning fasted, CJC/Ipa at bedtime. The idea is hitting fat metabolism directly (AOD) while also boosting natural GH output (CJC/Ipa) during sleep.

AOD-9604 + BPC-157 – Popular among athletes dealing with injuries. BPC-157 for tissue healing, AOD for fat management. Both administered morning.

AOD-9604 + Semaglutide or Tirzepatide – An emerging combination. GLP-1 for appetite control and major weight loss, AOD for potential additional fat metabolism support. Some clinics are actively offering this protocol.

If you’re running AOD-9604 as part of a stack, sourcing from the same vendor keeps things simple. Paramount Peptides carries AOD-9604 alongside most of the popular compounds mentioned above, and the code BRAINFLOW works sitewide for 10% off.

Is AOD-9604 Worth It? The Honest Assessment

Let’s cut to it.

The evidence says: AOD-9604 has an outstanding safety profile validated across nearly 1,000 human participants and multiple animal studies. Its fat-loss mechanism is scientifically plausible and well-documented in rodent models. But the definitive human weight-loss trial failed. And the injectable route everyone uses today was never tested for fat-loss efficacy.

What the evidence doesn’t capture: The failed trials used oral delivery. The injectable route bypasses the biggest limitation of oral peptide delivery. It’s entirely plausible, and plenty of researchers think likely, that subcutaneous AOD-9604 performs differently than oral. We just don’t have the controlled trial to prove it.

The real-world picture suggests: About half of users report meaningful fat-loss benefits beyond diet and exercise alone. The other half doesn’t. Side effects are close to nonexistent either way. At $100-200/month, the financial risk is relatively low.

Where it fits: AOD-9604 is not a standalone fat-loss solution. It’s not even close to what GLP-1 drugs can deliver. But for someone who’s already putting in the work, training hard, eating right, managing their sleep, it represents a low-risk option that might provide an extra push. Particularly for stubborn fat. The safety margin is wide enough that the downside of “it didn’t do much for me” is basically the cost.

FAQ

What does AOD-9604 stand for?
Anti-Obesity Drug 9604. It was the 9,604th compound in its research designation series, developed as a potential pharmaceutical treatment for obesity.

Is AOD-9604 FDA approved?
No. It has never been FDA approved for any medical use. It received GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status as a food additive at doses up to 1 mg/day, but this is a food classification, not a drug approval.

What’s the difference between AOD-9604 and HGH Fragment 176-191?
They’re different molecules. AOD-9604 has a tyrosine substitution at the N-terminus that HGH Fragment 176-191 lacks. Only AOD-9604 has been studied in human clinical trials.

Does AOD-9604 affect blood sugar or insulin?
Clinical trials specifically tested this and found no effect on glucose metabolism or insulin sensitivity at any dose tested, up to 24 weeks of use.

Does AOD-9604 increase IGF-1?
No. This was confirmed across all six human trials. AOD-9604 cannot activate the GH receptor and does not stimulate IGF-1 production.

Is AOD-9604 banned in sports?
Yes. WADA has explicitly prohibited AOD-9604 under Section S2 (Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors, Related Substances) since approximately 2013.

How long does AOD-9604 take to show results?
Community reports typically reference 4-6 weeks for early changes and 8-12 weeks for more noticeable results. Clinical trial data from the 12-week study showed measurable differences emerging over the first 3 months.

Should AOD-9604 be taken on an empty stomach?
Most protocols call for morning administration in a fasted state, with 30-60 minutes before eating. The rationale is that lower insulin levels may optimize the lipolytic signaling pathway.

Can you take AOD-9604 with other peptides?
Many community protocols involve stacking AOD-9604 with other compounds. No clinical data exists on combinations. Anyone considering multi-peptide protocols should work with a knowledgeable healthcare provider.

How does AOD-9604 compare to semaglutide for weight loss?
In terms of raw efficacy, semaglutide produces dramatically more weight loss (~15% vs ~2-3%). AOD-9604’s advantages are better tolerability, no appetite-related side effects, no muscle loss concern, lower cost, and easier access.

This article is for educational and informational purposes only. AOD-9604 is a research peptide that is not approved by the FDA for any medical use. Nothing in this article should be taken as medical advice. Always consult with a qualified healthcare professional before making any decisions related to your health.

Sources

1. Heffernan M, Summers RJ, et al. “The effects of human GH and its lipolytic fragment (AOD9604) on lipid metabolism following chronic treatment in obese mice and β₃-AR knock-out mice.” Endocrinology, 2001. PubMed
2. Heffernan MA, Thorburn AW, et al. “Increase of fat oxidation and weight loss in obese mice caused by chronic treatment with human growth hormone or a modified C-terminal fragment.” Int J Obes, 2001. PubMed
3. Ng FM, Sun J, et al. “Metabolic studies of a synthetic lipolytic domain (AOD9604) of human growth hormone.” Hormone Research, 2000. PubMed
4. Stier H, Vos E, Kenley D. “Safety and Tolerability of the Hexadecapeptide AOD9604 in Humans.” J Endocrinol Metab, 2013. Full Text
5. Moré MI, Kenley D. “Safety and Metabolism of AOD9604, a Novel Nutraceutical Ingredient for Improved Metabolic Health.” J Endocrinol Metab, 2014. Full Text
6. Kwon DR, Park GY. “Effect of Intra-articular Injection of AOD9604 with or without Hyaluronic Acid in Rabbit Osteoarthritis Model.” Ann Clin Lab Sci, 2015. PubMed
7. Wikipedia. “HGH Fragment 176-191.” Link
8. FDA PCAC Meeting Documents. FDA-2024-N-4777-0009. December 4, 2024. Regulations.gov