What is it?
Glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine copper complex (INCI: Copper Tripeptide-1). A naturally occurring three-amino-acid peptide bound to copper
Topical GHK-Cu has modest human evidence. The injected version biohacker TikTok pushes for "healing" and "longevity" has no administered human trial PepCurrent could find. Those are two different evidence records wearing the same ingredient name.
Four answers first. The source record follows.
Glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine copper complex (INCI: Copper Tripeptide-1). A naturally occurring three-amino-acid peptide bound to copper
Topical: several small studies and one recruiting trial. Injected/systemic: no administered human trial found.
Topical: legal cosmetic ingredient. Injectable: withdrawn compounding nomination; FDA announced PCAC consideration before the end of February 2027
Decades of cosmetic use have not produced a notable adverse-event signal, but there is no large formal safety-trial dataset.
This reports the dated federal and sport record. It does not determine whether a particular product or transaction complies with state or federal law, and it is not legal advice.
GHK is a three-amino-acid peptide—glycine, histidine, lysine—that occurs naturally in human plasma. Bind it to a copper ion and you get GHK-Cu. Loren Pickart first isolated it in 1973, and much of the foundational research still comes from Pickart and colleagues. (Pickart & Margolina, 2018, IJMS)
The "restore your youthful levels" pitch leans on one repeated figure: plasma GHK is "about 200 ng/mL" at age 20 and "declines to 80 ng/mL" by age 60. The seam matters. That number traces to Pickart's own reviews, not an independent large-population study. (Pickart & Margolina, 2018 — verbatim source of the figure)
In cells, GHK-Cu carries copper and affects collagen synthesis, certain matrix enzymes, and a large swath of gene expression. Route is not a footnote here. A topical cosmetic record cannot be pasted onto an injected product.
Path A — Topical / cosmetic (the version with actual human data):
Path B — Injected / systemic (the version with no human data):
The "resets 4,000 genes" claim: Yes, GHK changed gene activity—in a database of cultured cells. The 2014 analysis reported changes greater than 50% in 32.1% of the genes tested, roughly 4,000+ of 13,424. That is a cell-culture expression signature, not a younger human body. (Pickart et al., 2014, BioMed Research International)
The current FDA pages establish the withdrawn-nomination record and the announced advisory process. PepCurrent does not convert either into a final FDA list action or approval conclusion.
We do not link to vendors, telehealth prescribers, or supplement sellers.
Added the source-verified Claim Check to the structured claim/source/change registry.
A well-controlled human study tied to the exact product, population, route, and claimed outcome could change the answer. Mechanism, anecdotes, or a different product cannot substitute for that evidence.
Educational content only; not medical, legal, or financial advice. Every factual claim is traced to a primary source above. Corrections are published, not silently edited — write to corrections@pepcurrent.com.
Editor's note on sourcing: The precise cosmetic effect sizes and the exact DNA-repair gene split are widely quoted in secondary sources but not fully verifiable in the primary literature; they're described qualitatively here rather than repeated as hard numbers. Verification pass (July 2026): the "67% wrinkle reduction" / N=71 figures were traced to their origin — an industry-sponsored AAD 2002 conference poster (Leyden, Stephens, Finkey, Barkovic), never published as a peer-reviewed paper and not independently retrievable. We name the provenance rather than repeat the number as fact.
Last reviewed: July 31, 2026 · Next scheduled review: September 1, 2026