PepsAOD-9604 vs HGH Fragment 176-191: evidence, safety and FDA status
The short answer
Both are pieces of growth hormone marketed for fat loss, and neither is FDA-approved. AOD-9604 is a modified fragment that went through a human obesity program; in its main study (OPTIONS, 502 people randomized), oral AOD-9604 did not beat placebo on weight loss. “HGH Fragment 176-191” is a seller label with no published human studies.
Key differences
- AOD-9604’s human results come mainly from the developer’s unpublished oral trials, as summarized by FDA, and the obesity program was unsuccessful.
- FDA could not rule out a safety signal for AOD-9604: serious events in oral studies included chest tightness and cancers, with cause unclear.
- HGH Fragment 176-191 has no human safety studies; the key paper behind it studied the related 177–191 fragment in animal tissue.
- Research-market products under both names are mostly injectable vials, a different form from the oral AOD-9604 tested in people; FDA found no human data for injected forms.
Side by side
| Fact | AOD-9604 | HGH Fragment 176-191 |
|---|---|---|
| FDA status | Not FDA-approved | Not FDA-approved |
| What it is | AOD-9604 is a modified fragment of growth hormone investigated for metabolic effects. Animal experiments and the later human obesity program tell different parts of its story. | HGH Fragment 176-191 is a label for a growth-hormone C-terminal fragment. The selected primary paper studied the related 177-191 fragment, so it is background evidence rather than confirmation of the exact 176-191 product. |
| Human evidence | No human studies in our sources; animal and lab studies only | No human studies in our sources; animal and lab studies only |
| Human safety data | Very limited. AOD-9604 is an unapproved growth-hormone fragment. Oral trials exist, but FDA found too little safety data, noted serious events of unclear cause, and flagged risks for injected products. | None. HGH Fragment 176-191 has no published human safety studies. Its evidence comes from lab studies of related growth-hormone fragments. |
| Boxed warning | No FDA label to carry one | No FDA label to carry one |
| Serious risks |
| None listed |
| Conditions flagged | Cancer, now or in the past, Liver problems | None flagged, because there is too little human safety data to assess |
| Claim check | No claim check yet | No claim check yet |
Each row comes from the AOD-9604 and HGH Fragment 176-191 profiles, where every fact links to its source. “Conditions flagged” lists the health conditions each profile’s Risks & interactions section mentions.
The human studies
AOD-9604
No human studies in our sources. See the AOD-9604 profile for the animal and lab research.
HGH Fragment 176-191
No human studies in our sources. See the HGH Fragment 176-191 profile for the animal and lab research.
Results from different trials are not a head-to-head comparison: the people, preparations, durations and measures differ.
Bottom line
The fat-loss claims for both rest on animal and lab work; the one large human trial, of oral AOD-9604, did not show weight loss beyond placebo.
PepsRadar does not give doses or usage instructions, and this page is not medical advice. For a prescription medicine, talk to your prescriber or pharmacist.
Read more
- AOD-9604: full profile, studies and risks
- HGH Fragment 176-191: full profile, studies and risks
- Compare any two peptides’ study cards
Other comparisons: BPC-157 vs TB-500 · Semaglutide vs Tirzepatide · Tirzepatide vs Retatrutide · CJC-1295 vs Ipamorelin · Sermorelin vs Tesamorelin · Selank vs Semax · MOTS-c vs Elamipretide · Ipamorelin vs MK-677 · Thymosin alpha-1 vs Thymosin beta-4 · Tesamorelin vs CJC-1295 · GHK-Cu vs AHK-Cu · Epitalon vs Pinealon
See something wrong on this page? Report a mistake · Corrections