The published AOD 9604 dosage record is larger than almost anything else in this library — six human trials, roughly 900 participants. Nearly all of it was swallowed, not injected.
The short version
Six human trials ran. Two gave AOD-9604 into a vein, at 25 to 400 µg/kg. Four gave it by mouth, from 54 mg down to 0.25 mg a day. We found no published trial of an injection under the skin. The largest study ran 502 people for 24 weeks.
AOD-9604 is the last 16 residues of human growth hormone, the fragment that carries the fat-metabolism signal without the growth-promoting part. It was developed as an oral anti-obesity drug by an Australian company, and it got further through clinical development than most compounds here ever will.
What the AOD-9604 trials administered
| Study | Species | Dose | Route | Duration | n |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| METAOD001 — Phase I | Human (healthy men, BMI 24–30) | 25 to 400 µg/kg | Intravenous | Single doses | 15 |
| METAOD002 — Phase IIa | Human (obese men, BMI 35+) | 25, 50 and 100 µg/kg | Intravenous | Single doses | 23 |
| METAOD003 | Human (obese men) | 9, 27 and 54 mg | Oral capsules | Single doses | 17 |
| METAOD004 | Human (obese men) | 9, 27 or 54 mg daily | Oral capsules | 7 days | 36 |
| METAOD005 | Human (obese adults) | 1, 5, 10, 20 or 30 mg daily | Oral capsules | 12 weeks | 300 |
| METAOD006 | Human (obese adults) | 0.25, 0.5 or 1 mg | Oral tablets | 24 weeks | 502 |
| Ng et al., 2000 | Obese Zucker rat | 500 µg/kg daily | Oral | 19 days | — |
A dash means we have no sourced figure for that cell and have not estimated one.
All six human rows come from one safety review that reports the program as a whole. Read the route column and the shape of the problem is immediate.
The route nobody in the market uses
Four of the six human trials, and every long one, used capsules or tablets. The two injected studies were intravenous safety work in 15 and 23 men.
We found no published trial in which AOD-9604 was injected under the skin into a person. That is the route the entire research market assumes, and it has no human trial behind it.
The oral figures cannot be carried across. An oral milligram and an injected milligram are different quantities of drug arriving in the blood, and the gap for a peptide is usually enormous. A chart that takes 20 mg from an oral trial and prints it beside a vial has silently assumed the two are equivalent. Nothing in this program supports that.
Research compounds with lot-matched testing
Third-party tested research compounds, each shipped with a batch-matched certificate of analysis showing HPLC purity and mass-spec identity — the documentation this site argues you should hold any supplier to.
The dose ladder went down, not up
Normally a development program escalates. This one did the opposite. The single-dose study went to 54 mg. The 12-week study topped out at 30 mg. The final 24-week study in 502 people ran 0.25 to 1 mg.
A fifty-fold reduction between the top of one trial and the top of the next is a decision, and it is the kind of decision a company makes when the low doses looked as good as the high ones. We are inferring that, and we flag it as inference.
What the trials found
This is where the record thins out. Neither of the two large trials has a peer-reviewed efficacy publication. Searching for one returns nothing.
Effects of AOD9604 on weight loss were seen in initial trials but were not seen in the last study in which an intensive diet and exercise regime was incorporated.
Moré & Kenley, Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 2014That sentence is from a review written by people connected to the ingredient, which makes it a conservative source for a negative finding. The 502-patient trial is the one it refers to.
- The animal signal was strong. 500 µg/kg orally for 19 days cut weight gain in obese Zucker rats by more than half, with no adverse effect on insulin sensitivity.
- The human signal was not. The largest and longest trial did not separate from placebo once diet and exercise were controlled.
- The gap is the story. This is what a compound looks like when the preclinical work was real and the clinical work did not follow it.
Approval and prohibited status
AOD-9604 has no therapeutic approval in any country. It does hold a conditional generally-recognized-as-safe status for use in food and supplements, which is a food designation and not a drug approval.
AOD-9604 is a substance still under pre-clinical and clinical development and has not been approved for therapeutic use by any government health authority in the world.
World Anti-Doping Agency statement, 2013On that basis WADA placed it in category S0, non-approved substances, prohibited at all times in sport.
- No drug approval anywhere, on WADA's own reading in 2013.
- A food designation, conditional, which governs use as an ingredient rather than as a medicine.
- Banned in sport at all times, under the non-approved-substance category rather than as a growth hormone agent.
What if you already have a number?
The human AOD-9604 figures are milligrams by mouth, and vial arithmetic assumes an injection.
Turning a figure into a syringe volume is arithmetic, and the peptide calculator does it from the vial strength and the volume of diluent. That part always works.
Which is the trap. A calculator converts an unsourced number as cleanly as a sourced one. The output looks equally precise either way. Those are not the same quantity even when the milligram number matches.
What is checkable
Identity and purity, and for AOD-9604 identity carries extra weight. It is a fragment of growth hormone, and mass spec distinguishes the 16-residue fragment from anything longer in one number.
How to read a COA, the complete guide and where to buy AOD-9604 cover sourcing. The peptide dosage chart puts it beside the rest of the library.
Research compounds with lot-matched testing
Third-party tested research compounds, each shipped with a batch-matched certificate of analysis showing HPLC purity and mass-spec identity — the documentation this site argues you should hold any supplier to.
What to know now
- Six human trials ran, and four of them were oral. Roughly 900 participants in total.
- The injected human doses were intravenous: 25 to 400 µg/kg in 15 men, then 25, 50 and 100 µg/kg in 23.
- No published trial gave AOD-9604 subcutaneously to a person.
- The dose ladder fell from 54 mg single doses to 0.25–1 mg daily in the final trial.
- The rat study used 500 µg/kg orally for 19 days and cut weight gain by more than half.
- Neither large human trial has a peer-reviewed efficacy publication.
What we're watching
Publication of METAOD005 and METAOD006 would be the single most useful event here. Two trials totalling 802 people sit unpublished, and the only numbers in circulation from them came from a company press release.
A subcutaneous human study would be the other. Right now the route the market sells is the route nobody studied.
Frequently asked questions
What doses of AOD-9604 were used in human trials?
Six trials. Two gave it intravenously at 25 to 400 µg/kg. Four gave it by mouth — single doses of 9, 27 and 54 mg, then daily doses of 1 to 30 mg for 12 weeks, then 0.25 to 1 mg for 24 weeks.
Has AOD-9604 ever been injected into humans in a trial?
Intravenously, yes, in two small safety studies of 15 and 23 men. We found no published trial of subcutaneous AOD-9604 in humans, which is the route the research market is built around.
Did AOD-9604 work in the trials?
The published position is that early trials showed weight effects and the final one did not, once an intensive diet and exercise program was added. Neither large trial has a peer-reviewed efficacy publication.
What dose did the animal studies use?
500 µg/kg by mouth, daily for 19 days, in obese Zucker rats. That cut body weight gain by more than half against controls.
Is AOD-9604 approved or banned?
It has no therapeutic approval anywhere. WADA classified it in 2013 as a non-approved substance, prohibited at all times in sport. It separately holds a conditional generally-recognized-as-safe status as a food ingredient.
References
- Stier, H., Vos, E., & Kenley, D. (2013). Safety and tolerability of the hexadecapeptide AOD9604 in humans. Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 3(1–2), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.4021/jem157w
- Moré, M. I., & Kenley, D. (2014). Safety and metabolism of AOD9604, a novel nutraceutical ingredient for improved metabolic health. Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 4(3), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.14740/jem213w
- Ng, F. M., Sun, J., Sharma, L., Libinaka, R., Jiang, W. J., & Gianello, R. (2000). Metabolic studies of a synthetic lipolytic domain (AOD9604) of human growth hormone. Hormone Research, 53(6), 274–278. https://doi.org/10.1159/000053183
- Heffernan, M., Summers, R. J., Thorburn, A., Ogru, E., Gianello, R., Jiang, W. J., & Ng, F. M. (2001). The effect of human GH and its lipolytic fragment (AOD9604) on lipid metabolism following chronic treatment in obese mice and β3-AR knock-out mice. Endocrinology, 142(12), 5182–5189. https://doi.org/10.1210/endo.142.12.8522
- World Anti-Doping Agency. (2013, April 22). WADA statement on the substance AOD-9604. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/news/wada-statement-substance-aod-9604
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS). https://www.fda.gov/food/food-ingredients-packaging/generally-recognized-safe-gras
- Richelsen, B., Pedersen, S. B., & Rasmussen, L. M. (2008). Absence of lipolytic activity from purified human growth hormone in cultured 3T3-L1 adipocytes. Hormone Research, 70(2), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1159/000179698
- Mendias, C. L., & Awan, T. M. (2026). Safety and efficacy of approved and unapproved peptide therapies for musculoskeletal injuries and athletic performance. Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-026-02437-0
The six trial identifiers and their doses are reported together in the 2013 safety review, which is the only published account of the programme as a whole.