Epitalon versus Epithalamin: the substitution at the centre of the marketing
Every row cites its source. Where a cell reflects our own reading of the evidence rather than an external source, the row says so.
| Question | Epitalon (the synthetic tetrapeptide) | Epithalamin (the pineal extract) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| What it is | A synthetic four-amino-acid peptide, Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly, 390.35 Da | A complex of peptides extracted from the pineal gland | source |
| Indexed records | 167 (four-term query) | 73 | source |
| Records tagged Randomized Controlled Trial | 0 | 5 | source |
| Human mortality data | None. No study of epitalon has reported a mortality outcome | The 266-person 6 to 8 year assessment and the 15-year follow-up in 79 coronary patients | source |
| Human studies where it was given to people | One uncontrolled 2002 retinitis pigmentosa report with no stated patient count | Several, all from the same research network | source |
| Telomere mechanism work | Yes: human cell culture from 2003, independently replicated in 2025 | Not the subject of the telomerase experiments | source |
| Treated as the same substance by reference databases | PubChem CID 219042 lists Epithalamin and Epithalamine among its synonyms | The same entry | source |
| US status | Not approved; proposed for exclusion from 503A compounding in July 2026 | Not approved; not a US product at all | source |
Both census rows were produced by running one identical query design over each literature on the same day, because a comparison built from two different methods is not a comparison.