Any updates on SLU-PP-915? I saw a video by bodybuilder/biohacker Youtuber Vigorous Steve stating he felt 915 to be approximately 5x as effective as 332. He was fairly adamant that 332 did have an effect despite knowing that the science states it is not orally bioavailable.
We have demonstrated that an ERR pan-agonist (SLU-PP-915) with a distinct chemical scaffold from that of SLU-PP-332 displays similar exercise mimetic activity. Importantly, both of these compounds also induce a key gene that is a driver of the acute aerobic exercise transcriptional program, Ddit4 . SLU-PP-915 dose-dependently increases maximal exercise capacity, which is also correlated with the level of Ddit4 induction. Finally, SLU-PP-915 is the first ERR agonist shown to have oral bioavailability and demonstrated efficacy when administered orally. Such compounds may have wide utility in the treatment of a range of diseases where physical exercise improves the pathology. Source:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022356525403000
SLU-PP (whether 332 or 915) are not peptides but rather small molecule experimental drugs. Discussing them in the “peptides” thread only serves to perpetuate this misunderstanding.
I appreciate you bringing it up.
Even though SLU-PP-332 is NOT a peptide, it is commonly categorized as such and almost 99% of people that would dabble in ERR would be peptide users.
Thus, I believe it to be a valuable addition to this thread I started way back when.
Please continue to share any research you are doing with SLU-PP-332 etc and any results, affects etc.
It’s interesting that they are suing companies that apparently no one has heard of. Not sure what their strategy is, but it may in part depend on vendors who are careless in advertising and careless in their dealings with customers (providing email evidence for instance that they know customers are self-injecting the product, giving them customer support helping them do this, etc).
From its responses, perplexity seems to be assuming your question is directed at nerve injury from trauma rather than aging. I’d consider re-asking the question and specify nerve degeneration from the aging process.
