Oral BPC-157 Bioavailability: What the Science Actually Shows
No human pharmacokinetic study has ever measured oral BPC-157 blood levels. Here's what that means for the $150 capsules in your cabinet.
The Claim You’ll See Everywhere
Search for “oral BPC-157” and you’ll find dozens of vendor pages making essentially the same claim: oral BPC-157 capsules are an effective, convenient alternative to injections. Some go further, citing “90% oral bioavailability” for Pentadeca Arginate formulations.
We went looking for the source data behind these claims. What we found — or rather, didn’t find — should concern anyone spending $150/month on oral peptide capsules.
As of February 2026, zero published human studies have measured BPC-157 blood concentration levels after oral administration. Every bioavailability claim you’ve seen is either extrapolated from animal data, theoretical, or simply fabricated.
The Rybelsus Precedent: Why This Matters
To understand why oral peptide bioavailability is such a hard problem, look at the one company that actually solved it — and what their solution tells us.
Novo Nordisk spent over a decade and likely billions of dollars developing Rybelsus, an oral semaglutide tablet. Their breakthrough: SNAC (sodium N-[8-(2-hydroxybenzoyl) amino] caprylate), an absorption enhancer that protects the peptide from stomach acid and facilitates transport across the gastric lining.
The result? After all that pharmaceutical engineering, Rybelsus achieves 0.4% to 1% oral bioavailability. Not 90%. Not 50%. Less than one percent.
This isn’t a failure — it’s a pharmaceutical triumph. Getting any measurable systemic absorption of an oral peptide is extraordinarily difficult because peptides are proteins, and your digestive system is specifically designed to break proteins into amino acids.
What About SNAC in BPC-157 Capsules?
Several vendors, notably Infiniwell, now include SNAC in their oral BPC-157 formulations. The logic seems reasonable: if SNAC helps semaglutide survive oral delivery, shouldn’t it help BPC-157?
Here’s the problem: nobody has tested this. SNAC’s effectiveness is peptide-specific. The molecular weight, charge distribution, folding characteristics, and stability profile of BPC-157 are completely different from semaglutide. Assuming SNAC works identically across different peptides is like assuming a key that opens one lock opens all locks.
Even if SNAC does provide some absorption enhancement for BPC-157, the relevant question is: how much? If the answer mirrors semaglutide’s experience, we’re talking about sub-1% bioavailability — meaning your 500mcg capsule is delivering roughly 2-5mcg systemically.
The “90% Bioavailability” Claim
The most aggressive bioavailability claim comes from Pentadeca Arginate (PDA) marketing materials. We traced this figure through multiple vendor sites and marketing documents, looking for a source study.
There isn’t one.
No published, peer-reviewed study has measured PDA oral bioavailability in humans. The 90% figure appears to originate from marketing materials, not clinical data. When we contacted vendors citing this number, none could provide a source publication.
What the Animal Data Actually Shows
BPC-157 does have animal research showing effects after oral administration. Sikiric’s research group in Zagreb has published numerous rat studies demonstrating biological effects of orally-administered BPC-157.
The critical distinction: demonstrating a biological effect is not the same as measuring bioavailability. A peptide could work locally in the gut (topical effect on GI tissue) without ever reaching meaningful systemic blood levels. For gut-specific applications — healing leaky gut, reducing GI inflammation — this might actually be sufficient. The peptide doesn’t need to reach your bloodstream if it’s working on the tissue it contacts directly.
But vendors aren’t selling “gut-targeted” peptides. They’re selling systemic healing, joint repair, tendon recovery, and cognitive benefits — all of which require the peptide to survive digestion, cross the intestinal barrier, enter the bloodstream, and reach target tissues at therapeutic concentrations.
That’s the claim nobody has proven.
What This Means Practically
We’re not saying oral BPC-157 doesn’t work. We’re saying nobody actually knows, and the confidence with which vendors make bioavailability claims is inversely proportional to the evidence supporting them.
If you’re using oral BPC-157 capsules:
The strongest rationale is for gut-specific applications (GI healing, intestinal permeability) where local contact with gut tissue may be sufficient, and animal models do show effects.
The weakest rationale is for systemic applications (joint healing, tendon repair, neuroprotection) where the peptide needs to reach the bloodstream at therapeutic concentrations — something no human study has demonstrated via oral route.
The honest answer about capsule bioavailability is “we don’t know,” and anyone telling you otherwise is selling something.
We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov for human pharmacokinetic studies of oral BPC-157 and Pentadeca Arginate through February 2026. We contacted three vendors citing specific bioavailability percentages requesting source data. We reviewed all published Sikiric group studies on oral BPC-157 administration. Full methodology available on our methodology page.
This article will be updated as new research becomes available. Last reviewed: February 18, 2026.