Why your Yorkie and German Shepherd shouldn’t share the same “oral BPC-157 dose”

Picture this: a 3-kg Yorkie and a 35-kg German Shepherd get the same fixed oral amount of BPC-157 because “it’s just a peptide” and “mg/kg is close enough.”

That’s where things get sloppy—because with peptide drugs, exposure over time matters more than the label math.

A recent rat + beagle dog pharmacokinetics (PK) paper is the first real “ADME map” (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion) for BPC-157, and it quietly explains why one-size dosing is a trap. (PMC)

The PK reality: peptides don’t behave like vitamins

In the PK study, BPC-157 behaves like many peptide drugs:

• Fast rise, fast fall. In beagle dogs, peak times after IM dosing were on the order of minutes, and elimination half-life was under 30 minutes (the paper’s IV half-life estimate is very short). (PMC)

• Linear PK across a big range. Dogs received 6, 30, and 150 µg/kg IM (single doses) and 30 µg/kg IM daily for 7 days—and plasma exposure scaled predictably with dose (linear relationships for AUC and Cmax). (PMC)

• IM bioavailability in dogs was ~45–51%. That’s helpful as a reference point—because oral bioavailability wasn’t established in that paper. (PMC)

• Distribution/excretion skew matters. In rats, tissue radioactivity was highest in kidney, and excretion pathways included urine and bile—classic peptide clearance behavior. (PMC)

• Metabolism is “break it down and recycle.” The paper shows BPC-157 is metabolized into smaller fragments and ultimately amino acids entering normal metabolic pathways. (PMC)

Translation: BPC-157 exposure is a moving target, and body size (and physiology) changes the shape of that exposure curve.

Why “mg/kg” isn’t the whole story (AUC beats arithmetic)

When people debate dose, they usually argue milligrams per kilogram. But the PK driver that predicts effect is typically AUC (Area Under the Curve)—the total systemic exposure over time.

Here’s the key: clearance per kg and body surface area don’t scale perfectly across sizes, which is why pharmacology commonly uses allometric / body-surface-area (BSA) scaling instead of pure mg/kg. A widely cited dose-conversion guide puts it bluntly: mg/kg alone is not the right approach when translating doses across species. (PMC)

So even if two dogs get the “same” mg/kg oral dose, they can still end up with different AUCs—meaning different biological exposure and potentially different effects.

Anchor point: what the BPC-157 PK paper actually did

This is the part most people skip—and it’s the most useful.

The authors picked a proposed human clinical dose of 200 µg/person/day and converted it (BSA-based) to:

• 20 µg/kg in rats

• 6 µg/kg in beagle dogs (PMC)

Then they stress-tested IM dosing in dogs: 6, 30, 150 µg/kg (single doses) plus 30 µg/kg daily for 7 days, with linear PK and no visible toxicity noted. (PMC)

Important nuance: this establishes IM/IV PK and tolerability in beagles—it does not define an oral therapeutic dose for pet dogs (and it doesn’t give you breed-specific oral PK). (PMC)

Yorkie vs Shiba vs German Shepherd: the conceptual problem with flat dosing

Let’s do “newsletter math” (illustration only, not a recommendation):

If three dogs each get a fixed 75 µg oral amount:

• Yorkie (~3 kg): 75 µg ÷ 3 kg ≈ 25 µg/kg

• Shiba Inu (~10 kg): 75 µg ÷ 10 kg = 7.5 µg/kg

• German Shepherd (~35 kg): 75 µg ÷ 35 kg ≈ 2.1 µg/kg

Now compare that conceptually to the IM dog PK window that was actually studied (6–150 µg/kg IM, including 30 µg/kg repeated). (PMC)

Even before we account for unknown (likely lower) oral bioavailability vs IM, the Yorkie is automatically pushed closer to “studied” systemic exposure ranges—while the German Shepherd is likely nowhere near it.

This is why people see wildly different outcomes with the same “dose” story: they aren’t matching exposure—they’re matching a number.

How to position this (cleanly) in your decision-making

If you want to be PK-literate (and not play internet doctor), anchor your thinking here:

1. Stop treating flat doses as “safe” just because they’re small. Small dogs can be functionally over-exposed relative to big dogs at the same fixed amount. (PMC)

2. Be honest about the oral gap. The paper is IV/IM focused; oral PK/PD in pet dogs isn’t defined here. (PMC)

3. Remember regulation + risk. FDA has flagged compounded drugs containing BPC-157 as potentially presenting significant safety risks in compounding contexts. (U.S. Food and Drug Administration)

4. If you’re doing anything beyond education, loop in a veterinarian. Especially for small breeds, older dogs, dogs with kidney/liver disease, or dogs on meds.

Sources (for readers who want the receipts):

• BPC-157 rat + beagle PK/ADME paper (PMCID: PMC9794587) (PMC)

• Dose conversion / allometric scaling guide (PMCID: PMC4804402) (PMC)

• FDA compounding safety-risk list (mentions BPC-157) (U.S. Food and Drug Administration)

Educational content only. Not veterinary advice, diagnosis, or treatment guidance.

From Project Biohacking Insights Blog

Coaching Packages Updated

Project Biohacking Resources

Quick links to Vetted Sources & Discount Codes

👇🏻15% off Peptide Sites Using PROBIO15 Coupon Code 👇🏻

Biolongevity Labs | Limitless Biotech | Rejuvatide Peptides | CanLabs Intl  

👇🏻Oral Bioregulators Discount Codes | PROBIO10 for 10% off👇🏻

Vita Stream  

👇🏻Supplements Affiliates👇🏻

 Clive de Carle | BIOpimizers

👇🏻Lab Affiliatess👇🏻

TruDiagnostics | Lab Corp | HealthLabs

 Guides

Peptide Reconstitution Guide

From Around The Web

🔚 Outro & Final Thoughts

If there’s one takeaway, it’s this: dose isn’t the goal—exposure is. BPC-157 moves fast (minutes, not hours), and size changes clearance and AUC, so a “one-size” oral amount can push a small dog toward much higher relative exposure while barely moving the needle for a large dog.

The beagle PK paper gives us a real anchor, linear PK and clean tolerability across studied IM ranges but it doesn’t give us an oral, breed-specific therapeutic dose. So the honest move is to think in ranges and exposure logic, not internet certainty.

Until next time, stay ahead of your age!
– Jeff
Founder, Project Biohacking