This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Epitalon does in the body
An unapproved four-part peptide marketed for anti-ageing.
Epitalon is four amino acids long: alanine, glutamate, aspartate, glycine. It was reverse-engineered from a cattle pineal gland extract that a Soviet-era research programme had been giving to elderly patients since the 1970s. The proposed mechanism is not a receptor. The peptide is small enough and charged in the right pattern to enter the nucleus and interact with DNA directly, and the claim is that this switches on the gene for telomerase, the enzyme that rebuilds the protective caps at the ends of chromosomes. In cell culture, treated human fibroblasts lengthened their telomeres and divided ten more times than untreated ones. Whether any of that happens in a living person has never been tested.
What happened in people
It lengthened chromosome end-caps in human cells in two laboratories, including in cancer cell lines.
✓ Reviewed first-read answer
Where this came from
A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.
A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Longer chromosome end-caps have not been shown to help people live longer or better.
Where it acts
Nuclear chromatin and the hTERT promoter in dividing somatic cells
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. It is a prescription or clinician-administered medicine where it is approved.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · O65P17785G · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C14H22N4O9, weighing 390.35.
PubChem record · 219042 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 138 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Expression of the telomerase catalytic subunit, telomerase enzymatic activity and telomere length
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Khavinson 2003 fibroblast telomerase study
How many people
0
Study design
In vitro, telomerase-negative human fetal fibroblast culture
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Induction of catalytic subunit expression, enzymatic activity and telomere elongation reported; the paper is a two-page report and no effect sizes or confidence intervals are given in the abstract
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Telomere length, hTERT mRNA expression, telomerase enzyme activity and alternative lengthening of telomeres activity
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Al-Dulaimi 2025 independent replication across normal and cancer lines
How many people
0
Study design
In vitro, normal epithelial and fibroblast cells with 21NT and BT474 cancer lines
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Dose-dependent telomere length extension in normal cells via hTERT and telomerase; significant extension in cancer cells via ALT, with only minor ALT activity in normal cells
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Telomere extension in malignant cell lines through the alternative lengthening pathway is a mechanistic signal that the anti-ageing framing does not address.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Cardiovascular, endocrine, immune and nervous system indices, disease incidence and mortality
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Khavinson and Morozov 2003 elderly cohort — Thymalin and Epithalamin extracts
How many people
266
Study design
Clinical observation over 6-8 years, preparations given for the first 2-3 years
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Mortality reduced 2.0-2.1-fold on Thymalin, 1.6-1.8-fold on Epithalamin, 2.5-fold on both, and 4.1-fold with six annual courses of both; acute respiratory disease incidence reduced 2.0-2.4-fold
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The studied preparations are bovine thymic and pineal gland peptide extracts, not the synthetic AEDG tetrapeptide. Randomisation, blinding and allocation are not described in the abstract, and the work has not been independently replicated outside the originating institutes.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Functional age, degree of cardiovascular ageing, exercise tolerance and long-term mortality
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Korkushko 2006 twelve-year study of Epithalamine in elderly coronary patients
How many people
0
Study design
Randomised clinical study over 12 years
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
28% fewer deaths at 12 years than control on the same basic therapy; cardiovascular mortality two-fold lower; incidence of cardiovascular failure and respiratory disease two-fold lower
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Again a pineal gland peptide extract rather than epitalon, from the same collaboration, published in the same journal family, and not independently replicated.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
RNAWiki holds 4 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
□A step measured inside a personNo evidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.No registered study measures this.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Mouse, Rat, Non-human primate. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Epitalon
What a person takes: Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules.
The measurement behind this step
A lyophilised tetrapeptide reconstituted for subcutaneous injection, typically in short courses of ten to twenty days. Oral capsules are also sold. No published human pharmacokinetic study exists for either route, so bioavailability, half-life and tissue distribution in a person are unknown. For an orally sold tetrapeptide with free termini, intestinal peptidase survival is a genuine open question rather than a formality.
Getting in
Injected or taken by mouth as four amino acids
It is one of the smallest peptides sold as a drug — four residues, smaller than many ordinary tablets.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
At 390 daltons with free termini, epitalon sits at the boundary between peptide and small molecule. It is sold as a lyophilised powder for subcutaneous injection and also in oral capsules. No published pharmacokinetic study in humans exists for either route, so absorption, distribution and half-life are unknown quantities rather than debated ones.
It is small enough to cross into the cell and into the nucleus, where the DNA is, without needing a transporter.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
No receptor has been identified. The mechanism proposed by the originating group is direct penetration to the nuclear compartment, where the peptide interacts with chromatin. The Khavinson group has published a series of studies proposing sequence-specific interaction of short peptides with promoter regions as a general epigenetic mechanism.
The proposal is that the peptide sits on DNA near the gene for telomerase and helps switch it on.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
The claimed interaction is with the hTERT promoter region and with histone-associated chromatin, producing transcriptional derepression. This is the least directly measured step in the chain: what has been measured downstream is hTERT mRNA and telomerase activity, not the binding event itself.
The enzyme that rebuilds chromosome caps becomes active, and the caps get longer.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Dose-dependent telomere length extension through hTERT and telomerase upregulation in normal human epithelial and fibroblast cells, independently confirmed in 2025. In cancer cell lines the same treatment produced significant telomere extension through alternative lengthening of telomeres rather than telomerase, with only minor ALT activity in normal cells.
Cells divide past their limit; people have never been studied
Treated fibroblasts made ten more divisions than untreated ones. Beyond the culture dish, there is nothing.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Fibroblasts that had stopped dividing at passage 34 continued to passage 44 after treatment, which the authors describe as overcoming the Hayflick limit. No human study of epitalon has ever been registered or reported. The human mortality figures in circulation belong to Epithalamin, a bovine pineal extract, in studies from the same institutes.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Nobody in a registered trial. Outside them, people injecting it in short courses for anti-ageing, usually on the strength of the telomerase claim and of mortality figures that were obtained with a different preparation.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
No sponsor has ever registered a human trial of the AEDG tetrapeptide in more than two decades of commercial availability
The original telomerase findings sat unreplicated by any independent laboratory from 2003 until 2025
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Still being tested
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. It is a prescription or clinician-administered medicine where it is approved.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
The identity record classes it as investigational; no register records an approval.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
A lyophilised tetrapeptide reconstituted for subcutaneous injection, typically in short courses of ten to twenty days. Oral capsules are also sold. No published human pharmacokinetic study exists for either route, so bioavailability, half-life and tissue distribution in a person are unknown. For an orally sold tetrapeptide with free termini, intestinal peptidase survival is a genuine open question rather than a formality.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
No human safety dataset exists, because no human study of epitalon has been registered or published. The preclinical literature reports no toxicity signal. The one safety-relevant mechanistic finding comes from the independent replication: significant telomere extension in two breast cancer cell lines through the alternative lengthening of telomeres pathway, a route associated with tumour immortalisation. That is an in vitro observation in cancer lines and not a demonstrated clinical harm; it is also exactly the kind of observation a compound sold for longevity should be required to address.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; also sold in oral capsules
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Oral capsules are also sold. No published human pharmacokinetic study exists for either route, so bioavailability, half-life and tissue distribution in a person are unknown. For an orally sold tetrapeptide with free termini, intestinal peptidase survival is a genuine open question rather than a formality.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
9 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 9 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 71052-518 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as powder.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 71052-518 · read 2026-08-29
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine, investigational agent. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Epitalon studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the Epithalamin mortality reductions in elderly cohorts are results for epitalon — the studied preparation is a bovine pineal extract
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That telomere elongation extends human lifespan or healthspan, a step no study has attempted for this compound
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a large and consistent preclinical literature in oocytes, retinal cells and immune lines substitutes for a single human trial
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a compound with no published human pharmacokinetics has a known dose, route or duration of action in a person
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Epitalon are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
Telomerase switched on in telomerase-negative human fibroblasts
In plain words
Adding epitalon to human fetal fibroblasts that make no telomerase caused them to express the enzyme and lengthen their telomeres.
What was measured
hTERT expression, telomerase enzymatic activity, telomere length and population doublings in human fetal fibroblast culture
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Khavinson, Bondarev and Butyugov added Epithalon peptide to telomerase-negative human fetal fibroblast culture and reported induction of expression of the catalytic subunit, enzymatic telomerase activity, and telomere elongation. They interpreted this as reactivation of the telomerase gene in somatic cells. A follow-up from the same group reported that primary pulmonary fibroblasts from a 24-week fetus lost proliferative potential at passage 34 with shortened telomeres; adding Epithalon elongated telomeres to lengths comparable with passage 10, and the treated cells made ten extra divisions, reaching passage 44 and continuing to divide. These are single-laboratory reports in a Russian journal from 2003 and 2004, and for two decades they were the whole basis of the claim.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
An independent laboratory reproduced it in 2025 — and found ALT in cancer cells
In plain words
A separate group treated normal and cancer human cell lines with epitalon. Normal cells lengthened telomeres through telomerase. Cancer cells lengthened them through a different pathway entirely.
What was measured
Telomere length, hTERT mRNA, telomerase activity and ALT activity in normal epithelial and fibroblast cells against 21NT and BT474 cancer lines
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Al-Dulaimi et al. treated the breast cancer lines 21NT and BT474 alongside normal epithelial and fibroblast cells with epitalon, then extracted DNA, RNA and protein. qPCR and immunofluorescence showed dose-dependent telomere length extension in normal cells through hTERT and telomerase upregulation. In the cancer cells, significant telomere extension also occurred, but through activation of the alternative lengthening of telomeres pathway; only a minor increase in ALT activity was seen in normal cells, which the authors describe as cancer-cell-specific. This is the first independent quantitative replication of the core claim, it broadly supports the 2003 finding in normal cells, and it adds a result nobody was looking for: a telomere-lengthening effect in malignant cells through a pathway associated with tumour immortalisation.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The mortality figures belong to a cattle pineal extract, not to this peptide
In plain words
The famous claim that this compound cut death rates in elderly people comes from studies of Epithalamin, an extract of cow pineal glands. Epitalon is a synthetic four-amino-acid peptide derived from it.
What was measured
That the Epithalamin mortality results are results for epitalon, when the studied preparation was a bovine pineal gland extract and not the synthetic tetrapeptide
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Khavinson and Morozov reported a 6-8 year clinical assessment of the thymic extract Thymalin and the pineal extract Epithalamin in 266 elderly people, with the preparations given for the first 2-3 years. They reported a 2.0-2.4-fold decrease in acute respiratory disease incidence and reduced incidence of ischaemic heart disease, hypertension, osteoarthrosis and osteoporosis, with mortality reduced 2.0-2.1-fold on Thymalin, 1.6-1.8-fold on Epithalamin, 2.5-fold on both, and 4.1-fold in a group given both annually for six years. Korkushko et al. reported a 12-year randomised study of Epithalamine in elderly patients with coronary disease, with 28% fewer deaths and two-fold lower cardiovascular mortality than control. Both are studies of a peptide extract of bovine pineal gland. Epitalon is the synthetic AEDG tetrapeptide identified from that extract. Attributing these mortality results to the tetrapeptide is the central substitution on which the compound is marketed.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Zero registered clinical trials, anywhere, ever
In plain words
A search of the international trials registry for epitalon or epithalon returns nothing at all.
What was measured
Registered human clinical trials of the AEDG tetrapeptide: zero
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
A query of ClinicalTrials.gov for "epitalon" returns a total count of zero studies, and "epithalon" likewise returns zero. There is no registered interventional or observational study of the AEDG tetrapeptide in humans, in any country, at any phase, for any indication. That is a stronger statement than "the trials were small" or "the trials were not replicated". For a compound that has been commercially available for over two decades and is sold specifically as a longevity intervention, the number of registered human studies is nought.
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov API queries for "epitalon" and for "epithalon", August 2026: totalCount 0 in both cases
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The animal and cell literature is broad, recent, and entirely preclinical
In plain words
Work on epitalon continues in oocytes, retinal cells, stem cells and immune cell lines. All of it is in dishes and animals.
What was measured
Preclinical endpoints in mouse and bovine oocytes, retinal cell models, monocyte lines and neuronal differentiation
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Recent published work includes protection of mouse oocytes against post-ovulatory ageing damage in vitro, enhancement of bovine oocyte maturation and post-thaw embryo development through telomerase activation, enhanced wound healing in an in vitro model of diabetic retinopathy, effects on proliferative and inflammatory pathways in the THP-1 monocyte line, and stimulation of gene expression and protein synthesis during neurogenesis with a proposed epigenetic mechanism. The volume is substantial and the direction is consistent. None of it is a human clinical outcome, and this page does not treat a coherent preclinical literature as a substitute for one.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Lengthening telomeres is not the same as extending life
In plain words
Telomere length is a marker of ageing, not a proven cause of it. Making telomeres longer has never been shown to make a person live longer or better.
What was measured
That telomere elongation by epitalon extends human healthspan or lifespan, a step no study has attempted
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The chain of reasoning that sells this compound runs: telomeres shorten with age, short telomeres associate with age-related disease, epitalon lengthens telomeres, therefore epitalon slows ageing. The first two steps are well documented associations. The third is now supported in cell culture by two independent laboratories. The fourth does not follow from the first three, and no study of any kind has tested it. The independent replication adds a specific reason for caution: telomere maintenance is a hallmark of malignancy, and the same treatment extended telomeres in two breast cancer lines through the alternative lengthening pathway. That is a finding to be examined, not a demonstrated harm, and it is not a finding that a longevity claim can simply step around.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
6 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A synthetic tetrapeptide whose telomere-lengthening effect in human cells was reported by one Russian group in 2003 and independently reproduced in 2025 — including telomere extension in cancer cell lines through the alternative lengthening pathway — while the human mortality data it is sold on were generated with a bovine pineal extract, not with this peptide.
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence
✗ required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 2 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.