Reference table
How did the advisory committee vote on each peptide, and what does a vote do?
The answer
The committee recommended six peptides for the section 503A list and rejected one; the votes are advisory, FDA rulemaking must finish before any of the six may be compounded, and as of the dates below none may.
On July 23 and 24, 2026, the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee reviewed seven of the twelve peptides the FDA had removed from Category 2 three months earlier. It recommended six and refused one. The margins were narrow throughout, and no vote was unanimous.
Where these numbers come from matters, because it is not where a reader would expect. The FDA has published no minutes, no transcript and no vote summary for this meeting. Its meeting page, current as of August 6, 2026 and re-read in September 2026, carries the briefing documents, the final agenda, the final meeting roster and the FDA presentations, and nothing recording how anyone voted. The tallies below are therefore secondary throughout, taken from two named accounts that agree substance by substance: McDermott Will & Schulte's meeting report of July 27, 2026 and LumaLex Law's of July 25, 2026, each of which prints all seven votes as a table. For comparison, the committee's December 4, 2024 votes on this site are cited to FDA's own Final Summary Minutes, which state each result in the form "Vote Result: Yes: 4 No: 17 Abstain: 0". Nothing of that kind exists for July 2026 yet, and this page will be recited to the primary document when it does.
The distinction the table exists to hold open is procedural rather than scientific. A committee recommendation is advice to the agency; it changes no pharmacy's authority on the day it is cast, and the agency is not obliged to take it.
Denominator
The rows below are the molecules this index tracks whose July 2026 ledger entry states a tally, and every tally in them is a reported figure rather than one FDA has published. Where this index's record does not state the abstentions, the cell says so rather than printing a zero.
Rows are read from MOLECULES[].record[] entries dated July 2026, MOLECULES[].status — the same dated ledger the molecule index renders. No cell on this page is typed by hand.
| Molecule | Vote | Abstentions | Committee outcome | Status in this index today |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BPC-157 | 8–6 | 1 | Recommended for listing | PCAC-recommended · pending. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; PCAC recommended 503A listing in July 2026 on a reported tally; no FDA final rule. |
| KPV | 8–6 | 1 | Recommended for listing | PCAC-recommended · pending. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; PCAC recommended 503A listing in July 2026 on a reported tally; no FDA final rule. |
| Semax | 8–5 | 1 | Recommended for listing | PCAC-recommended · pending. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; PCAC recommended 503A listing in July 2026 on a reported tally; no FDA final rule. |
| TB-500 | 8–6 | 1 | Recommended for listing | PCAC-recommended · pending. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; PCAC recommended 503A listing in July 2026 on a reported tally; no FDA final rule. |
| Epitalon | 7–4 | 1 | Recommended for listing | PCAC-recommended · pending. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; PCAC recommended 503A listing in July 2026 on a reported tally; no FDA final rule. |
| MOTS-c | 7–5 | 2 | Recommended for listing | PCAC-recommended · pending. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; PCAC recommended 503A listing in July 2026 on a reported tally; no FDA final rule. |
| DSIP | 6–7 | 1 | Not recommended | No lawful route. Removed from Category 2 in April 2026; the only peptide PCAC declined to recommend at the July 2026 meeting; no lawful route. |
Six recommendations and one rejection is a meeting that read each dossier separately, and the clearest illustration is the pair filed here as neuropeptides: Semax recommended, DSIP refused, on the same days by the same panel. That outcome is examined in the committee's only rejection. The pending page states what the six recommendations do not yet permit.
Other tables
Evidence reviews