AOD-9604: the version of the fragment that was actually tested in people
This is the one compound in this family with a completed human trial programme. It did not work on its primary endpoint, which is a more useful piece of information than most of what is written about the class.
Regulatory status. Phase IIb clinical trials completed. Not FDA approved. Regulatory gray area in most jurisdictions. That is the app’s own field, reproduced here rather than summarised. It means no regulator has reviewed a manufacturer’s evidence for identity, purity, potency or safety in people for this compound, so nothing below is a marketing claim about a product you can buy.
Purity, identity and concentration are therefore unverified by anyone but whoever made the vial. The storage rule in the fact box below is general practice for this formulation rather than a specification for a particular product: General handling practice for this formulation. Your supplier’s own insert or COA overrides anything here.
This page names no vendor, no clinic and no testing service, and there is no discount code anywhere on this site — the moment a page like this recommends where to buy, it stops being information.
- Also known as
- Anti-Obesity Drug 9604, HGH Frag 177-191, HGH Fragment 176-191
- Class
- Peptide
- Regulatory status
- Phase IIb clinical trials completed. Not FDA approved. Regulatory gray area in most jurisdictions.
- Modelled half-life
- 30 min — estimated half-life, limited human PK data
- Time to peak
- 15 min
- Formulation
- Aqueous (reconstituted powder)
- Before mixing
- Sealed powder tolerates room temperature in transit, but keep it refrigerated at 2–8 °C (36–46 °F) for anything beyond a few weeks, or frozen for months. Keep it dark — the carton it shipped in is doing a job.
- After mixing
- Once reconstituted with bacteriostatic water: refrigerate at 2–8 °C and use within about 28 days. The benzyl alcohol in bacteriostatic water is what buys that window — plain sterile water has no preservative, so a vial mixed with it should be treated as one sitting only. Kits are usually ten vials: only the one you mixed is on that 28-day clock — the sealed ones keep their own, much longer shelf life, so store them as powder, not as solution.
- What ruins it
- Do not freeze a reconstituted vial. Repeated freeze–thaw is one of the more reliable ways to degrade a peptide.
- Handling caveat
- General handling practice for this formulation. Your supplier’s own insert or COA overrides anything here.
What it is, and what it is not
Established clinical use AOD-9604 is a modified analogue of the C-terminal region of human growth hormone, developed specifically as an anti-obesity drug. The design goal was to keep the lipolytic activity attributed to that region while avoiding the growth hormone receptor entirely — so no IGF-1 elevation, no effect on insulin sensitivity, and none of the growth-promoting effects that make whole growth hormone unsuitable for long-term metabolic use.
It is closely related to but not identical with HGH fragment 176-191, and the two are routinely sold under each other’s names — the app’s own aliases field for this entry lists the other compound’s name, which is a fair reflection of how confused the market is. If the distinction matters to you, and it should, no vendor label resolves it.
The trial result, which is the whole point of this page
Established clinical use AOD-9604 was taken into human trials for obesity and completed phase IIb. The primary weight-loss endpoint was not met: the compound did not separate from placebo. Development for that indication did not continue, and the molecule was subsequently repositioned toward other applications, including cartilage and joint indications, which is where the app’s second dosing row comes from.
That is an unusual and valuable thing to be able to say about a research peptide. Most of the compounds on this site have no human trial in either direction — their evidence is animal work and their status is unknown rather than negative. This one was tested at scale in the intended population and did not deliver. Nothing published since has overturned it.
Animal-only or theoretical The safety picture is the other side of that coin, and it is the genuinely favourable part: a completed phase II programme produced a tolerability database that no research peptide has, and the compound was well tolerated. It is a compound with good evidence of being safe and good evidence of not working for the thing it was designed for, which is a combination worth naming precisely.
Why it is still sold, and what that means
Off-label or community practice The peptide market did not stop at the trial result. It is widely available and widely marketed on the mechanism — lipolysis without IGF-1 elevation — which is true as far as it goes and has not translated into measurable weight loss in the population that was studied. Marketing that quotes the mechanism and omits the endpoint is the pattern to watch for.
The joint and cartilage direction is more interesting and much earlier: preclinical and early work rather than anything conclusive, and the app records a dosing row for it. Treat that as a hypothesis under investigation, not a second indication.
There is no approved product anywhere, so identity and purity rest with whoever made the vial — and given how routinely this compound and the unmodified fragment are sold under each other’s names, that uncertainty is larger here than usual. This site names no vendor and no testing service. Anything experienced while using it belongs with a clinician who knows the full picture.
How long one dose lasts
pkCurve function.
The vertical axis is relative: the shape carries across people, the absolute
concentration does not. This compound’s half-life is flagged as an estimate in the app, so read the curve as the right shape rather than the right numbers.Try other intervals on the half-life and steady-state calculator, which runs the same function against whatever cadence you type.
The dosing rows the app records
Animal-only or theoretical Reproduced from the app’s reference so you can see what it holds, not as a recommendation. Which row applies to a particular person, if any, is a clinical decision this page does not make — and rows describing supraphysiological or post-cycle use are filtered out before this table is built, so what you see here is a subset.
| Label | Amount | Route and frequency | Duration recorded |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fat loss and Metabolic | 300-500mcg | SubQ once daily fasted AM | 3-6 months |
| Joint and Cartilage | 500mcg | SubQ daily or near affected joint | 8-12 weeks |
| Fat Loss | 250–500mcg/day | SubQ injection, fasted AM | 3–6 months |
| Recomposition | 500mcg/day | Split AM/PM, fasted | 3–6 months |
What the app monitors alongside it
The panel below is the app’s own monitoring note for AOD-9604, verbatim. The analytes in it that have a page here are linked; those pages cover what each one measures, which assay produced it and how to read a trend.
- Monitoring panel
- Body composition tracking, waist circumference. No specific bloodwork required. Fasting glucose baseline recommended.
Drawbacks and risks the app records
From the app’s own entry. Note that the first item — less potent for fat loss than growth hormone — is putting mildly what the phase IIb result showed directly.
- Less potent for fat loss than full HGH
- Not FDA approved despite advanced trials
- Injection only for systemic effects
- Results modest without diet and exercise
- Sourcing quality critical
- Long-term safety beyond trial periods not established
- Limited human clinical data
- Subcutaneous injection required
- Not FDA approved
- Results modest without diet optimization
- Short half-life requires precise timing
Questions people actually ask
Did it work?
Not on its primary endpoint in phase IIb for obesity, where it did not separate from placebo. That is a clearer answer than exists for almost anything else in this reference, and it is a negative one.
Is it the same as HGH fragment 176-191?
No. It is a modified analogue of the same region, and the two are frequently sold under each other’s names — including in the app’s own aliases field. The distinction is real and no label reliably settles it.
Does it affect IGF-1 or blood sugar?
By design, no — it does not bind the growth hormone receptor. That is the property the trials confirmed, and it is also why an IGF-1 that does move on this compound suggests the vial contains something else.
Why is it in the app at all if the trial failed?
Because the app’s reference documents what people use, so a log stays accurate for someone already using it. That is a different job from recommending it, which is why this page reports the endpoint rather than the mechanism.
Where the load-bearing numbers come from
Named rather than linked. Publisher URLs move, and a citation that resolves to a 404 two years from now is worse than one you can search for by name — every entry below is findable from the title and year alone.
- Phase IIb obesity programme and the primary endpoint
- The AOD-9604 clinical development programme, completed and not continued for the obesity indication
- Design goal of avoiding the growth hormone receptor
- The molecule’s published pharmacology
- Regulatory status
- The approval string in the fact box is app.html’s own field, reproduced verbatim
- Estimated half-life
- app.html’s TL_PK entry, flagged est: limited or absent human pharmacokinetic data
The most useful thing about a compound with a negative trial is knowing it. TherapyLog keeps the record if you use it anyway.
Save this dose to your log