# BPC-157 TB-500 dosage in the research literature (animal models, not guidance) > BPC-157 TB-500 dosage as reported in the research literature: animal-model doses per body weight, BPC-157's sub-30-minute animal half-life, routes studied, and why no validated human dose exists for either constituent or the blend. Animal-model figures and route context only. There is no validated human dose for either constituent, and none for the blend. ## BPC-157 TB-500 dosage as reported in the research literature There is no validated dose for the BPC-157 TB-500 blend, and nothing on this page is dosing guidance. The figures below are research-context only — what was administered, to which species, by which route, in published studies. Commercial "Wolverine" labeling commonly pairs the two peptides at fixed combined masses per vial (a `10 mg + 10 mg` pairing, or a single 20 mg combined vial), but no peer-reviewed combination dose-finding study exists [9]. For the BPC-157 component, rodent studies commonly express dose per body weight — frequently `10 microg/kg` and `10 ng/kg`, with gastric-ulcer cytoprotection studied at `400-800 ng/kg` in rats [1]. For the TB-500 / Thymosin Beta-4 component, the studied range is wide: `2-18 mg/kg` intraperitoneal in a rat embolic-stroke dose-response study (with an optimal modeled near `3.75 mg/kg`, and `18 mg/kg` giving no benefit — higher was not better), and `150 microg` twice weekly intraperitoneally for six months in the mdx muscular-dystrophy study [4]. These are per-body-weight animal figures; they do not translate to a human dose. ## Half-life and what the pharmacokinetic record shows The pharmacokinetic record is thin and animal-anchored. BPC-157's elimination half-life was reported as under 30 minutes (`t1/2 <30 min`) in an animal PK study [9]. No validated human pharmacokinetic half-life exists for either constituent at research-use doses, and none for the blend; human intravenous data for full-length Thymosin Beta-4 showed dose-proportional PK with half-life increasing at higher doses, but no specific half-life is established for the TB-500 heptapeptide [4]. This matters for the reconstitution question that recurs in community discussion. Both constituents are supplied as lyophilized powders, reconstituted in bacteriostatic or sterile water and refrigerated for research handling [9]. In unregulated "Wolverine" material, product identity, purity, and the actual BPC-157:TB-500 ratio are not guaranteed — a gap that compounds the existing identity caveat around the TB-500 fragment versus full-length Thymosin Beta-4 [9]. See [half-life and reconstitution of the blend](/dosage) for the consolidated context. ## Wolverine injection: administration routes studied for the blend constituents Subcutaneous and intramuscular administration are the predominant research-community routes for the blend, but that practice does not rest on controlled human efficacy trials [9]. The underlying rodent efficacy studies for both peptides predominantly used the intraperitoneal route [1][4]. Intravenous administration appears in the human Phase 1 work on full-length Thymosin Beta-4 and in a BPC-157 IV safety pilot, and local or intra-lesional and topical routes appear in individual-compound wound and tendon models [4][9]. A "wolverine injection" in community usage refers to one of these parenteral routes applied to the pairing. The route may be borrowed from the single-compound literature, but the combined product administered that way has no controlled-trial efficacy basis [9]. ## BPC 157 TB 500 oral versus injected administration On the oral question, the record is split by constituent. BPC-157 is studied as a "stable gastric" peptide, consistent with its origin in a gastric-juice protein, and appears in peroral as well as parenteral models [1]. Blend oral products are marketed, but they lack validated pharmacokinetics for the pairing — there is no established oral bioavailability figure for a combined BPC-157 TB-500 product [9]. For the TB-500 heptapeptide specifically, an intracellular actin-binding mechanism gives no reason to assume oral activity, and none is established [3][9]. ## Pairing BPC-157 with TB-500 in research models When a study pairs BPC-157 with TB-500, it is not from a controlled combination protocol — because none exists. No peer-reviewed study defines a co-administration dose, ratio, or endpoint for the two [4]. The "loading then maintenance" framing that circulates in the community, and the fixed-ratio vials (`10 mg + 10 mg`), have no basis in controlled human trials and should not be read as validated dosing [9]. The honest pairing statement is that two single-compound dose literatures exist, and the combined regimen is a community construct layered on top of them. ## BPC-157 TB-500 reddit protocols: why community cycling has no controlled basis The cycling, loading, and maintenance schedules discussed in research-community threads — including the BPC-157 TB-500 discussion on forums — describe practice, not evidence. No validated cycling protocol exists for the blend [9]. The non-monotonic stroke result is the clearest caution against "more is better" loading logic: in the rat embolic-stroke study, `18 mg/kg` thymosin beta-4 gave no benefit while a far lower dose was optimal [4]. Fixed-ratio vials and loading schedules are community conventions without a controlled-trial foundation, and this page does not endorse or instruct any of them. --- Two constituent channels read off one console — BPC-157 traced to its studies and TB-500 to its own, the repair-signal node where they converge left dark because no combination trial exists, and the FDA 503A and WADA marks posted before anything else; no clinic behind the readout and nothing here dispensed.