Share

It’s time to put anti-aging creams under the microscope — and what I’m about to tell you might save you a small fortune.

Let me start with a confession.

I’ve published 56 books on health and longevity. I’m enrolled in the Longevity Researcher Certificate program at Stanford Medicine. I’ve been tracking my own biomarkers since 1998.

And I still buy anti-aging creams. Well, sometimes. Not often — but it happens.

Not because I’m naive. Because I understand exactly what they do — and what they will never do. What I’m going to explain today will probably cost you less money and deliver better results.
And I’m going to share my own ultra-effective skincare routine. Brace yourself — I’m 100% certain you won’t guess what I actually put on my skin. And no, it’s not snail slime. Well, not only.

Read more

Share

It’s simple. Fast. And actually healthy.

For years, I did what everyone does.

I drank water. A lot of water.

And I thought that was enough.

Spoiler: it wasn’t.

⚠️ The problem no one explains

You’ve been told:

👉 “Stay hydrated.”
👉 “Drink 2 liters a day.”

But no one tells you this:

👉 Hydration is not just water.

It’s a balance between:

💧 Water
🧂 Sodium
🥑 Potassium
⚡ Magnesium

Without that?

👉 You dilute your minerals
👉 You stress your nervous system
👉 You reduce your performance

And sometimes…

👉 you actually dehydrate yourself by drinking too much water

Share

🧠 Why electrolytes matter (biohacker version)

Electrolytes are what allow your body to:

• transmit nerve signals

• contract muscles

• maintain energy

• regulate heart rhythm

• optimize recovery

👉 In short: without them, your system struggles.

And if you are:

• athletic

• low-carb / keto

• fasting

• stressed

• or simply active

👉 your needs increase dramatically

🚫 The problem with most electrolyte products

Most commercial formulas are:

• loaded with real sugar

• or sweetened with questionable alternatives (maltitol, xylitol, erythritol…)

• full of artificial flavors, preservatives, and dyes

👉 Which is why I make my own.

Share

💡 Final thought

Don’t fall for overpriced “sports” drinks.

They all rely on these same basic electrolytes—and often add marketing fluff to justify the price.

Share

Let me know in the comments what you think of this recipe—and if you want more like this.

Valérie Orsoni
Biohacker since 1998 | Longevity Expert
Instagram :

My fave brands + super promo codes here ==> ValerieOrsoni.com

My made-in-the-usa, clean, no fillers supplement line ==> ZellNova

Upcoming Talks
🎙 Life Summit— Berlin (29-30 mai 2026)
🎙 Corsica Biohacking — Corsica (6-13 juin 2026)
🎙 Biohackers World Conference — New York (juin 2026)
🎙 RAADFest— Sedona (4-6 septembre 2026)
🎙 HealthSpan Summit — Los Angeles (2–4 oct. 2026)
🎙 Reclaiming Health & Longevity Symposium — El Salvador (8–9 nov. 2026)

Disclaimer: This article reflects one individual’s personal experience, research, and interpretation of scientific information. It is not medical advice and should not be used as a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Health conditions—whether metabolic, hormonal, digestive, neurological, cardiovascular, immune-related, or otherwise—can vary widely in severity and may require urgent or specialized medical care. Always seek advice from qualified healthcare professionals before beginning, changing, or discontinuing any medication, supplement, lifestyle protocol, or therapeutic approach. Personal experiences described here, including mild or atypical presentations, are not representative of all clinical situations or of serious or acute medical conditions requiring immediate attention.

Share

Read more

Share

Today, this scenario is becoming a clinical reality — at least in part.

A new category of blood tests, known as MCED tests (Multi-Cancer Early Detection), promises to radically transform how we screen for cancer.

Here’s a breakdown of what exists, what works, and what you can concretely do right now.

Read more

Share

I inject it once a week.

Not because it’s trending in the biohacking world — but because the data, both scientific and from my own body, are compelling enough for me to consider MOTS-c one of the most fascinating peptides in my longevity toolkit.

Personally, with MOTS-c, at identical food intake, my blood sugar runs 20 points below my baseline without it. I’m honestly stunned that no endocrinologist is talking about this.

Alright, I’ll tell you everything: how it reduces visceral fat, lowers blood sugar, and does something even more surprising…

Read more

Share

SCIENCE · EPIGENETICS & CELLULAR REPROGRAMMING Restoring Vision — From Mouse to Human: Sinclair Reaches the Clinical Stage

Research published by Dr. David Sinclair’s lab (Harvard Medical School) in Nature (2020) demonstrated that partial epigenetic reprogramming could restore visual function in aged mice. The study targeted retinal ganglion cells — non-regenerative neurons — across two models: induced glaucoma and natural aging.

The central hypothesis: aging is not an irreversible corruption of DNA, but a loss of epigenetic information — potentially recoverable. And for the first time, this hypothesis is being tested in humans.

Share

SCIENCE · BRAIN-MACHINE INTERFACE · CHINA, MARCH 2026 Neuracle NeuCyber-I: First Invasive BCI Approved Outside the United States

In March 2026, China’s NMPA (National Medical Products Administration) granted market authorization to Neuracle Medical Technology for its NeuCyber-I system — the first invasive brain-computer interface (BCI) commercially approved outside the United States.

The clinical indication targets patients with partial paralysis of spinal cord origin.

Compared to Neuralink’s N1 (intracortical electrodes, single-neuron resolution, launched by Elon Musk), Neuracle’s ECoG approach offers lower invasiveness and better chronic tolerability — at the cost of lower spatial resolution. Both paradigms now coexist as two distinct points on the invasiveness/performance trade-off curve.

• Voluntary grasping of objects in partially tetraplegic patients

• Signal-to-action latency under 200ms in routine use

• Signal stability maintained over 12 months in trials

We are no longer optimizing the human body. We are entering its reprogramming.

Share

JOURNAL · N=1 EXPERIMENT My 72-Hour Fast: Discipline, Hypoglycemia, and the Reality of the Body

I am someone who is always hungry, and who deeply loves eating. This fast was not about weight loss or mental clarity. It had a specific reason: attempting to improve a SIBO that has followed me since childhood, after exhausting antibiotics, herbs (berberine, ginger, Iberogast), supplements, and advanced protocols — without lasting results.

0 → 18H Simple phase. Body in transition mode, no notable difficulty.

18 → 24H Real difficulties: insomnia, waking in the night with hunger, feeling cold, blood sugar dropping to around 60 mg/dL. Nothing clinically alarming — but a very concrete physical reality.

24 → 26H I’m hungry. I understand that for some people this is easier, but honestly — I’m seeing chickens everywhere!

26H → 36H Sleep was very hard to come by because I was hungry despite meditating — it was rough. Woke up at 2am starving. This is normal for me as I deal with nocturnal hypoglycemia that I usually manage with chromium at night, but I hadn’t taken any supplements.

36H → 48H Multiple very low glucose alerts, down to 50 mg/dL. My physician friends were telling me it was impossible to continue, especially since I was about to leave on a long transatlantic trip with all its temptations and physical stress. I was a bit lethargic and above all, freezing cold. Really cold. I turned the heat on. I really hope this torture produces results. I ran out of cortisol strips but it must be through the roof. They’re arriving in a few hours so I can continue tracking. Urine analysis: significant ketones in urine (logical).

48H → 60H On the plane, I slept — he who sleeps, dines :) Woke up to the smell of pastries and other temptations… Resist, prove that you exist!

60H → 72H… 80H Racing through airports to make my connection, arriving in Paris at midnight… I’ll eat tomorrow morning… so the fast ended up lasting longer than planned.

VERDICT No immediate response. I didn’t get the so-called mental clarity everyone talks about. It was actually worse — I made crazy mistakes like forgetting all my electronics when leaving for a 3-month trip, giving the wrong address to Uber, etc.

Well… I’m lying… because… yes, one immediate result: ALMOST NO SYMPTOMS. But a fundamental reminder: the body doesn’t always respond the way you expect, and simple solutions are rarely sufficient on their own.

I’m thinking of repeating 36-hour fasts, as those felt less cortisol-damaging. You have to listen to your body — push yourself, yes, but not to the point where cortisol explodes. My cortisol strips were unambiguous: prolonged fasting is not for me.

And for those who say “yes, but you need to do it in a calm setting, away from everything”… honestly, that’s just not my thing :) — I don’t have many disconnected moments, and when I do, I’d rather be scuba diving in Bora Bora than on a farm somewhere not eating, lol. Besides, doing this long fast while traveling actually helped — it kept my mind occupied. Staying home would have made it much harder.

Share

The Real Question Is No Longer “How to Live Longer”

Between scientific breakthroughs and personal experiments, one thing becomes clear: longevity is entering a new phase. More technological. More complex. And potentially more disorienting.

The real question is no longer simply: How do we live longer? But: How do we navigate intelligently what is coming?

And you — are you ready for this transformation?

What do you think of these advances? Are we collectively ready for this kind of mutation of life itself? Have you ever fasted more than 24 hours? If so, how long — and what were the effects? What do you think of Professor Sinclair’s discoveries and the first brain “prosthetic”?

Let’s keep going! Forza!

Valérie Orsoni

Biohacker since 1998 | Longevity Expert

Instagram : @valerieorsoni

My fave brands + super promo codes here ==> ValerieOrsoni.com

My made-in-the-usa, clean, no fillers supplement line ==> ZellNova

🎙 Life Summit— Berlin (29-30 mai 2026)
🎙 Corsica Biohacking — Corsica (6-13 juin 2026)
🎙 Biohackers World Conference — New York (juin 2026)
🎙 RAADFest— Sedona (4-6 septembre 2026)
🎙 HealthSpan Summit — Los Angeles (2–4 oct. 2026)
🎙 Reclaiming Health & Longevity Symposium — El Salvador (8–9 nov. 2026)

Disclaimer: This article reflects one individual’s personal experience, research, and interpretation of scientific information. It is not medical advice and should not be used as a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Health conditions—whether metabolic, hormonal, digestive, neurological, cardiovascular, immune-related, or otherwise—can vary widely in severity and may require urgent or specialized medical care. Always seek advice from qualified healthcare professionals before beginning, changing, or discontinuing any medication, supplement, lifestyle protocol, or therapeutic approach. Personal experiences described here, including mild or atypical presentations, are not representative of all clinical situations or of serious or acute medical conditions requiring immediate attention.

Share

Scroll down to see my own Vit D lab results.

Read more

Share

When data contradicts intuition

This week, I did what I do every three to four months: I wore a continuous glucose monitor (like the Dexcom G7), simply to make sure my choices are still aligned with my goals.

A ritual that has become almost routine.

And yet.

While testing an elemental diet protocol—particularly inspired by the work of Dr. Michael Ruscio—my blood glucose spiked to 216 mg/dL.

A number that surprises. Even unsettles.

At first, you question it. Then you analyze.

The formulation of these preparations relies on rapidly absorbed carbohydrates—often around 30 grams per serving, typically in the form of maltodextrin or something similar. So the spike isn’t abnormal. It’s actually entirely predictable.

This is not a mistake.

It’s a choice.

And that’s exactly where things get interesting.

Because at the same time, this protocol clearly improves digestive comfort.

What you gain on one side, you seem to lose on the other.

This is no longer about optimization.

It’s about trade-offs.

Between glycemic stability and gut relief, the answer isn’t obvious.

It never is.

Share

The illusion of the perfect protocol

Biohacking sometimes sells a very appealing idea:

a solution that improves everything, all at once.

In reality, the body doesn’t work that way.

Every intervention affects multiple systems.

Improving one may destabilize another.

What this experience reminds us is that no protocol—no matter how well designed—is universal.

And more importantly, none are neutral.

Plasma: two worlds that never meet

In a completely different area, I wanted to explore a more accessible version of a practice often discussed in longevity circles: plasmapheresis.

It has its critics—I’ll address that another time.

I’ve already experienced it in a therapeutic setting a few months ago.

In that context, the cost can reach $10,000 to $12,000.

Hardly accessible.

So I turned to a more “real-world” alternative.

From the very first attempt, reality hits.

As an O− blood type—highly sought after—I was offered (almost pressured into) a full donation: red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets.

I declined.

Why?

Because I’m traveling in a few days and need my immune system (white blood cells).

I’m also training for my next mountain expedition, so I need my red blood cells.

As for platelets, they’re often requested, but since I’m borderline, they usually end up not taking them anyway.

A few days later, I went to a specialized center, [name withdrawn to avoid issues with the center] intending to donate only plasma.

And then—another contrast.

The location?

A “rough” neighborhood. Let’s call it what it is: a ghetto.

The waiting room was full of people who looked completely drained—not in the sense of illness, but in the sense of survival.

Some stood in groups around a leader. It felt like a scene out of a drug trade movie.

The organization was raw.

Even with an appointment, you wait in line like everyone else.

And then it became clear why the room was full of exhausted, low-energy people.

Let’s say it simply: people who are very poor.

Talking to them, I quickly understood that the vast majority were being paid. I say “majority” politely—99% would be more accurate.

For context, you can earn up to $750 per month.

There is even, apparently, a form of plasma trafficking, where some individuals are forced to give up 50% of what they earn to someone controlling the system.

Yes—extortion.

This isn’t what shocked me.

Given the setting, I wasn’t expecting a luxury clinic experience.

No.

What struck me was the gap.

On one side: precision medicine, expensive, exclusive, reserved for the wealthy.

On the other: a body economy, where plasma becomes a resource—and where you are allowed to donate every few days. Yes, every few days!!!

Between these two realities, there is almost nothing.

And that may be the real issue.

Where does ethics fit into all of this?

Share

What these experiences really say

These two situations—very different on the surface—tell the same story.

Biohacking is not a discipline of certainty.

It’s a practice of observation.

Measure. Test. Adjust.

And accept that some answers are neither simple nor immediate.

A protocol can be relevant without being optimal.

A strategy can be effective while remaining imperfect.

What matters, in the end, is not the method.

It’s the understanding you gain from it.

Adjusting without overreacting

For now, my decisions are simple:

Limit liquid carbohydrates that are rapidly absorbed—even when labeled “therapeutic.”

Continue exploring slower, more stable digestive alternatives.

And above all, avoid drawing conclusions from a single data point.

The body cannot be reduced to one number.

Share

An open question

If you were faced with this kind of dilemma—improving one parameter at the expense of another—how would you decide?

Would you prioritize short-term relief or long-term balance?

Immediate effectiveness or long-term stability?

I’d genuinely love to hear your thoughts.

To conclude

There is a temptation in biohacking to want to optimize everything.

But true mastery may begin elsewhere.

In the ability to observe without rushing.

To understand without oversimplifying.

And to accept that some answers take time.

One last note

And if you’re wondering what I did about the plasma…

I left.

The moment I heard comments like “did you see her car?” and “she looks wealthy,” I thought: let’s not push my luck. And no, I was not dressed in Chanel. I was dressed being simple : old jeans, ruined sneakers, no make up…nada….

After all, Oakland is considered one of the murder capitals of the U.S., and I was in one of the roughest neighborhoods—where people have been killed for less than $200.

So no, I did not donate my plasma. Would you have done it?

Valérie Orsoni
Biohacker since 1998 | Longevity Expert

Instagram : @valerieorsoni

My fave brands + super promo codes here ==> ValerieOrsoni.com

My made-in-the-usa, clean, no fillers supplement line ==> ZellNova

🎙 Life Summit— Berlin (29-30 mai 2026)
🎙 Corsica Biohacking — Corsica (6-13 juin 2026)
🎙 Biohackers World Conference — New York (juin 2026)
🎙 RAADFest— Sedona (4-6 septembre 2026)
🎙 HealthSpan Summit — Los Angeles (2–4 oct. 2026)
🎙 Reclaiming Health & Longevity Symposium — El Salvador (8–9 nov. 2026)

Disclaimer: This article reflects one individual’s personal experience, research, and interpretation of scientific information. It is not medical advice and should not be used as a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Health conditions—whether metabolic, hormonal, digestive, neurological, cardiovascular, immune-related, or otherwise—can vary widely in severity and may require urgent or specialized medical care. Always seek advice from qualified healthcare professionals before beginning, changing, or discontinuing any medication, supplement, lifestyle protocol, or therapeutic approach. Personal experiences described here, including mild or atypical presentations, are not representative of all clinical situations or of serious or acute medical conditions requiring immediate attention.

Reassessing your supplement protocol is a biological necessity — not a whim

Share

I reassess my supplement protocol every single month.

I spend about 4 hours over a weekend doing so. This does not include the time spent reading and analyzing studies throughout the month.

This approach may surprise some people, but it is based on a very simple biological reality:

👉 The human body is not a static system.

Needs evolve depending on:

• environmental stressors (toxins, infections, travel, mycotoxins)

• inflammatory status

• gut permeability

• mitochondrial function

• autonomic nervous system balance

• and the adaptations induced by the supplements themselves

  

  

A protocol that made perfect sense three months ago can become useless, excessive — or even counterproductive — today.

To those who believe that “eating well is enough,” my answer is twofold:

First, our soils are severely depleted, meaning the foods we eat today are far less nutrient-dense than they once were.

Second, while a perfectly balanced diet allows you to live a normal life, a balanced diet plus intelligent supplementation allows you to live an optimal life.

The physiological reasons behind changes in my protocol

Monthly adjustments are mainly driven by three situations:

1. A therapeutic objective has been reached

Example: targeted work on mycotoxins, which becomes unnecessary once biomarkers return to normal. I still have the OTAs to take care of though.

2. Controlled exploration of new molecules

Some emerging supplements show interesting mechanisms of action (mitochondrial, inflammatory, neuro-immune). I choose to test them in a measured, monitored, and controlled framework.

3. Conditions poorly or insufficiently addressed by conventional medicine

Or situations where I aim to avoid treatments with heavy side effects, when structured alternatives exist.

This protocol is personal, experimental, and monitored

The protocol presented here is strictly my own.

It is:

• not a recommendation

• not a model to replicate

• not medical advice

It is an individual case, based on:

• specific medical history

• specific symptoms

• biomarkers that are regularly tracked

I share it solely because so many of you ask me what I take, why I take it, and how.

Prescription molecules: framework and precautions

This protocol intentionally includes prescription-only molecules, known for their powerful systemic effects.

Example: colchicine

It is used here to modulate chronic inflammation, notably via inhibition of the NLRP3 inflammasome pathway, which is now well documented in inflammatory, metabolic, and neurodegenerative conditions.

👉 But colchicine is not benign:

• it can impact pancreatic function

• it requires regular lipase monitoring

In my case:

• a moderate elevation in lipase led to an initial 75% dose reduction

• that reduction was accompanied by a rebound in inflammatory markers

• a subsequent adjustment to 50% of the dose was then implemented

This is exactly how any serious approach should work:

observe → measure → adjust → reassess

Formulation logic: absorption and digestive load

One often overlooked aspect: the form of supplements.

Whenever possible, I favor:

• powders

• liquid forms

• transdermal forms

Objectives:

• reduce digestive burden

• improve bioavailability

• avoid excessive capsule ingestion (currently ~80–100/day)

“What about your liver? Your kidneys?” — a biological answer, not an emotional one

This question comes up often — sometimes sarcastically — often from people sipping cocktails or enjoying processed foods.

My answer is simple:

👉 I measure.

• Liver function

• Kidney function

• Inflammatory markers

Everything is tracked and documented.

And most importantly:

I publish the results — unfiltered, no storytelling, no spin.

Supplement quality: a central issue

The scientific literature is clear:

👉 Supplement quality varies enormously.

That is why:

• I detail my choices on valbiohacker

• I am using as much as I can my own products though my line is very short on ZellNova.com (made in the USA, no fillers, clean).

  

  

Few products, but:

• verified manufacturing chains

• maximum traceability

• coherence with a serious biohacking approach

April protocol: intentionally restricted access

The detailed protocol (timing, dosages, combinations, prescription molecules) is placed behind a paywall.

Not out of elitism.

But to avoid:

• superficial reading

• misuse

• and, above all, dangerous misinterpretations

👉 Only those truly committed to understanding can access it.

In this protocol, you will not see the BioBloom NADH patches I use twice per week.
Nor will you see the SomaPeptides peptides I use under fairly complex protocols.
Follow the links to access the exclusive discounts I negotiated for you.

Those require a dedicated article.

If peptides interest you, head to the PEPTIDES section on valbiohacker.com

Why this protocol is heavily modified this month

The past six months were focused on mycotoxins (I eliminated all of them except one originating from tea, spices, alcohol, and coffee).

As a result, for April I reduced all binders (chelators) to zero except for charcoal which I am keeping in the morning.

I also aimed to eradicate salmonella without antibiotics, which I successfully achieved based on my latest test results.

Therefore, several supplements are no longer necessary (like oregano oil).

I have also removed all biofilm disruptors for now as I am embarking on a long 3-month trip and I cannot take every single supplement.

Here is my updated list:

Read more

Share

I keep repeating my subtitle because it’s IMPORTANT and ignored!

Here’s what nobody tells you first. GLP-1 — glucagon-like peptide-1 — is not a pharmaceutical discovery. It’s a hormone your body produces on its own, naturally, and has been doing so forever.

It’s secreted by the L-cells of your small intestine at every meal. It regulates your blood sugar, sends a satiety signal to your brain, and slows digestion to prevent glucose spikes.

It does exactly what Ozempic and Wegovy claim to do.

The difference? Your endogenous GLP-1 is degraded within minutes by an enzyme called DPP-4. The drugs have been chemically modified to resist that degradation — maintaining pharmacological levels far beyond what your biology naturally produces.

Chronic stress elevates cortisol and inhibits GLP-1 secretion. Excess sugar and ultra-processed foods deplete the microbiome that stimulates its production. Sleep deprivation disrupts the circadian rhythm of this hormone. Sedentary behavior reduces receptor sensitivity.

Modernity breaks the machine, and the pharmaceutical industry sells the spare part.

The global GLP-1 market was valued at $62.83 billion in 2025. It’s projected to reach $180 billion by 2035. Around 10 million Americans were on GLP-1s in 2025 — a number expected to hit 25 million by 2030. This is one of the fastest-growing pharmaceutical markets in history.

This is not a moral judgment — it’s context that helps explain why emerging side effects aren’t making headlines the way they should.

In this article, we’ll do three things.

First, show you how to push your body to naturally rebuild its GLP-1 production — yes, it’s possible, and the science is solid.
Second, document the risks being hidden from you, some of them very serious and potentially irreversible.
Third, share pathways emerging from the literature to wean off GLP-1s — this is information from scientific literature, not medical advice: any decision to modify or stop a treatment must be made under medical supervision.

Let’s go.

Read more

Share

Why? Because I want to apply this to myself. I have no interest in writing about something I am not willing to do.

And what I have found goes far beyond anything mainstream medicine is currently offering — and much of it isn’t even happening in the United States.

We are living through a quiet revolution in joint medicine.

Cartilage — long declared the tissue that “cannot heal itself” — is being coaxed back to life through combinations of biological agents that work synergistically at the cellular level.

The three-pronged protocol that has captured my attention most is…

Read more

Share

I was born with juvenile arthritis.

A few years ago, I was told (by a doctor who did not know I was born with it) what millions of people hear every year: “You have osteoarthritis. It’s degenerative. Nothing can be done except manage the pain.”

Today, I have none.

Zero symptoms.
Zero pain.
Genuinely.
It still blows my mind even though I live it every day.
Zero cracking or popping when I bend my fingers like before.
And joints that handle high-altitude climbs, daily fitness sessions, and a full-throttle life.

So before you accept the verdict of “irreversible” — read this.

Read more

Quinoa for breakfast.
Chia seeds in your smoothie.
Raw spinach salad.
A bowl of legumes for lunch.
Oat milk vs real milk.

You’re doing everything right… right?

You read labels.

You follow nutrition influencers.

You apply the official recommendations.

You eat clean.

You eat plant-based.

You eat superfoods.

But here’s the question almost nobody in the wellness industry ever asks:

At what dose?

With what preparation?

For which metabolic profile?

Because behind the rainbow marketing of “superfoods” lies a biochemical reality that colorful packaging carefully avoids mentioning:

And when consumed daily, without proper preparation, their impact on health deserves serious attention.

Read more

Share

Subscribe now

I have been a biohacker since 1998, before it was even a word….at the time taking 1 gr of vit C a day was considered dangerous for our kidneys and liver :)

I’ve been a biohacker since 1998 — before the word even existed. Back then, taking 1g of vitamin C a day was considered dangerous for your kidneys and liver. 😄

The world has changed quite a bit since. And in the meantime, I’ve reversed several conditions and dramatically improved my biomarkers.

This time, I’ll be focusing on the power of mycotoxins — and how addressing them can truly transform your health. It remains a vastly overlooked field in biohacking, yet mycotoxins have a profound impact on longevity. I’ll be speaking at the conference on Saturday — but I’ll be around all weekend, so don’t hesitate to come say hello. I’m usually easy to spot: I’m the lady in red!

A huge thank you to Olia and Mike for creating this beautiful event that brings together people from all walks of life. I asked Olia why they created Biohackers World — here’s what she told me:

Whether you’re a baby biohacker or a seasoned pro, you’ll find talks that will pique your curiosity and modalities to explore.

No ticket yet? Use my code for 30% off 👇

BUY TICKETS WITH A 30% DISCOUNT WITH CODE VALERIE 30

See you there!

Share

Subscribe now

Valérie Orsoni
Biohacker since 1998 | Longevity Expert

Instagram : @valerieorsoni

My fave brands + super promo codes here ==> ValerieOrsoni.com

My clean, vegan, made-in-the-USA supplement line ==> ZellNova

🎙 Longevity Leadership Conference – Verizon Innovation Lab, Los Angeles - Mar 18–19, 2026)
🎤 Sommet de l’HyperSanté, Paris (Mars 21-22, 2026)
🎤 Biohackers World Conference & Expo, Los Angeles (Mars 28-29, 2026)
🎙 Life Summit, Berlin (May 29-30, 2026)
🎙 Biohacking Week, Propriano (June 7-14, 2026)
🎤 RAADFest, Sedona (Sept 4-6, 2026)
🎙 HealthSpan Summit, Los Angeles (Oct 2–4, 2026)
🎙 Reclaiming Health & Longevity Symposium (El Salvador, Nov 8–9, 2026)

Share

As always, nothing in this article constitutes medical advice.
Research this alongside a qualified healthcare provider before making any decisions.

Everyone has an opinion about peptides these days — and BPC-157 is squarely at the center of the debate. In one corner: biohackers, functional medicine practitioners, and athletes swearing by its healing properties. In the other: skeptics citing the absence of large-scale human clinical trials, plus regulatory agencies that have either banned it outright or left it in a gray zone.

Here’s what I’ve noticed: most people talking about BPC-157 are missing critical context. The conversation gets flattened into “it works” versus “there’s no evidence,” and both sides tend to ignore the more interesting, more nuanced reality. Let me try to fix that.

My N=1: When the Science Becomes Personal

I want to be transparent about something before we dive into the research: I am not a neutral observer on BPC-157. I have used it, repeatedly, and the results in my own life have been striking enough that I feel an obligation to share them — while being equally clear that personal experience, however compelling, is not the same as controlled data.

Shoulder dislocation — surgery avoided. After a severe shoulder dislocation that caused significant tendon damage, I spent a full year working through every conventional protocol my doctors recommended. Nothing worked. I was scheduled for surgery. As a last resort, I began locally injecting BPC-157 daily for four weeks. The surgery was cancelled. I still have full function in that shoulder.

Broken ankle — back on my feet in 5 days. Following an ankle fracture, I injected BPC-157 twice daily, as close to the injury site as possible, combined with TB-500. Within five days I was walking without the boot. My orthopedist was puzzled. I was not.

My father — hip replacement avoided. My father was facing hip replacement surgery. He began a BPC-157 injection protocol. The surgery is no longer on the table.

A friend’s frostbitten fingers — near-amputation reversed. A friend suffered severe frostbite across three fingers, to the point where amputation was being discussed. Having nothing to lose, he started injecting BPC-157. He retained approximately 90% of his fingers.

Are these anecdotes? Yes.
Can they be dismissed as such from a scientific standpoint? Technically, yes.
But these are real people, real outcomes, and they are part of why I take this compound seriously and why I will continue to. N=1 data, when it accumulates consistently across multiple people and multiple tissue types, starts to look less like coincidence and more like signal.

🔬 A Note on Sourcing and Quality

If you decide to explore BPC-157, sourcing is everything. The gray-market peptide space is flooded with products of wildly variable purity and concentration. I only use Soma Peptides — their quality standards and third-party testing are what I trust for my own body and my family’s.

Use code VALBIOHACKER at checkout for 10% off.

Disclosure: I receive a commission on purchases made through this code. However, I only partner with brands I personally use. I ONLY use SOMA PEPTIDES for all my peptide needs.

Share

What Is BPC-157, Actually?

BPC-157 — Body Protection Compound 157 — is a synthetic pentadecapeptide, meaning a chain of 15 amino acids. What makes it unusual is its origin: it was derived from a protective protein found naturally in human gastric juice. Your stomach already produces something related to this compound as part of its protective lining. Researchers isolated it, stabilized it, and began testing it for therapeutic applications.

The isolation and early research happened in Croatia, at the University of Zagreb, led by Dr. Predrag Sikiric and his team — and this is the first piece of crucial context most commentators skip entirely.

The Croatian Problem (and Why ClinicalTrials.gov Isn’t the Whole Story)

Here is the point I want to make very clearly: the absence of a compound on ClinicalTrials.gov does not mean it has never been studied in humans.

ClinicalTrials.gov is a U.S.-based registry, managed by the National Library of Medicine. It became mandatory for many trials only relatively recently, and it primarily reflects the research ecosystem of the United States and, to a lesser extent, other Western countries. It is not — and was never intended to be — a complete global database of all human research ever conducted.

BPC-157 research began in the early 1990s at the University of Zagreb. Croatian scientists, working within their own institutional and regulatory framework, were building a body of preclinical and early clinical data for decades before most Americans had heard of peptides. The Croatian pharmaceutical company Pliva — which at the time was one of the largest pharma companies in Central and Eastern Europe — sponsored clinical trials for BPC-157 (under drug names PL-10, PLD-116, and PL14736) as a treatment for inflammatory bowel disease in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Phase I safety data from those trials indicated that BPC-157 administered rectally was safe and well-tolerated in healthy volunteers. Phase II trials in patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis were also initiated.

Are these trials on ClinicalTrials.gov? No. Did they happen? Yes.

The problem — and I want to be fair here — is that the peer-reviewed publications resulting from these trials appear never to have been indexed in major global databases like PubMed, and the full data was never made publicly available. That is a legitimate scientific criticism. Published, peer-reviewed data that can be scrutinized and replicated is the cornerstone of how medicine advances. The Croatian team’s transparency around these trial results has been incomplete, and that matters.

But incomplete data disclosure is a very different claim than “no human trials have ever been conducted.” Those two statements are not the same thing, and conflating them leads to misinformation.

The Funding Problem: Who Pays for Clinical Trials?

Let’s talk about how drug development actually works, because this is the core of why BPC-157 remains in regulatory limbo after three decades of promising research.

Large-scale Phase III clinical trials — the kind that lead to FDA or EMA approval — are extraordinarily expensive. We’re talking hundreds of millions of dollars. Who funds them? Almost exclusively: pharmaceutical companies that hold or expect to hold intellectual property that gives them market exclusivity upon approval.

This is not a conspiracy. It’s basic economics.

BPC-157 is a peptide derived from human gastric juice. Its synthesis is not particularly exotic. It has been around long enough that broad patent protection on the compound itself is difficult to establish. No major pharmaceutical company has determined that the investment required to run a large-scale Phase III trial would generate a sufficient return. Without that commercial incentive, the pipeline stalls.

This is not unique to BPC-157. Dozens of compounds — many of them genuinely interesting — never reach the clinical trial finish line because the funding logic doesn’t work out. Ivermectin, low-dose naltrexone, and a host of natural compounds have faced the same structural problem. Lack of a large trial does not equal lack of efficacy. It often means lack of a patent-protected profit motive.

Does this mean BPC-157 is proven to work? No. It means the absence of a large Phase III trial is not, by itself, evidence of failure. The two things are not synonymous.

What the Animal Data Actually Shows

Several hundred animal studies — primarily conducted by Sikiric’s group at Zagreb — have tested BPC-157 across a remarkable range of applications. The results have consistently shown beneficial effects on:

• Gastrointestinal tissue healing (ulcers, IBD, fistulas, anastomosis healing)

• Tendon-to-bone attachment repair

• Muscle and ligament healing

• Nerve regeneration

• Bone fracture healing

• Neurological models (Parkinson’s, serotonin syndrome, dopamine dysregulation)

• Wound healing at multiple tissue levels

That’s an unusually broad profile. In pharmacology, a compound that claims to do everything is a red flag — unless the mechanism explains the breadth. In BPC-157’s case, the proposed mechanism involves modulation of the nitric oxide system, promotion of angiogenesis (new blood vessel formation), and interaction with growth factor pathways including VEGF. These are genuinely pleiotropic mechanisms, meaning they could logically affect multiple tissue types.

Independent researchers from universities in the U.S., UK, and Poland have published reviews in recent years largely corroborating that the preclinical data looks promising — while acknowledging the critical gap in robust human data.

One concern flagged by the Polish research team is worth noting: because BPC-157 promotes angiogenesis, there is a theoretical risk that it could accelerate tumor growth by improving oxygen delivery to cancerous tissue. This is not a confirmed finding, but it is a legitimate scientific question that deserves proper investigation. It is one more reason why rigorous human trials matter.

Share

The WADA Ban: What It Actually Means (and What It Doesn’t)

Here is where I need to address something that drives me slightly crazy in how this is presented online: the fact that BPC-157 is on the WADA Prohibited List is often cited as either proof of its danger, or ignored entirely as if it’s irrelevant to non-athletes.

Both framings are wrong.

WADA — the World Anti-Doping Agency — added BPC-157 explicitly by name to its Prohibited List in 2022, under the S0 category: Non-Approved Substances.
This category covers any substance not approved by a recognized global health authority for human therapeutic use.

What the ban tells us:

1. WADA believed the compound had sufficient performance-enhancement potential to warrant inclusion — specifically around tissue repair, recovery, and potentially endurance. You don’t ban something that doesn’t do anything.

2. The ban is global — not just American. WADA is an international body. Its prohibited list applies to athletes competing in Olympic sports and all sports governed by WADA-signatory federations worldwide. Australia’s Sport Integrity agency enforces it. European sports federations enforce it. This is not a US-centric regulation.

3. The S0 category is specifically for substances with no regulatory approval — meaning the ban does not require proof that BPC-157 is dangerous. It requires only that it lacks formal approval. This is important: being banned by WADA and being dangerous are not the same thing.

What the ban does not tell us:

The WADA ban does not apply to non-athletes using BPC-157 outside of competitive sport contexts. For the average person exploring it for gut healing, injury recovery, or longevity purposes, WADA’s position is regulatory context — not a personal health ruling. Understanding the distinction matters.

For competitive athletes, however, the consequences are severe and real. A professional combat athlete received a two-year suspension after testing positive for BPC-157. No Therapeutic Use Exemption exists for this compound because it is not approved anywhere as a therapeutic agent.

The Regulatory Reality: Gray Zone, Not Black and White

Let’s be precise about legal status, because this varies considerably depending on where you are:

• United States: BPC-157 is not FDA-approved. The FDA has also flagged it as a bulk drug substance that may present safety risks in compounding, citing concerns about immunogenicity and peptide purity in compounded preparations. It cannot be legally prescribed or sold as a supplement or drug. It circulates as a “research chemical” — a legal fiction that provides thin cover for what is, in practice, gray-market commerce.

• Outside the United States: Regulatory status varies widely. In many countries, BPC-157 is not specifically regulated as a controlled substance, and it occupies a gray zone that is distinct from — and often more permissive than — the American framework. The US FDA’s position is not the global default.

This matters because a significant portion of online discourse about BPC-157 is written from an American regulatory perspective and presented as if it reflects universal law. It does not.

What We Honestly Don’t Know

Intellectual honesty requires acknowledging the genuine gaps:

We do not have published, peer-reviewed Phase II data showing efficacy in a specific human condition. The Croatian Pliva trials were never published in full. The 2015 oral BPC-157 trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (under the name Bepecin) claimed the compound was safe and well-tolerated — but no peer-reviewed paper was published with the data.

We do not have established safe human dosing ranges derived from controlled studies.

We do not know the long-term effects of sustained BPC-157 use in humans — including the theoretical angiogenesis-cancer question.

The primary research base is heavily concentrated in one lab, one group, one country. That is a reproducibility concern. Science advances through independent replication. When a single research group produces the overwhelming majority of studies on a compound, and conflict-of-interest disclosures have been questioned, that is a legitimate flag.

Share

My Bottom Line as a Biohacker

BPC-157 is neither the miracle compound its most enthusiastic proponents claim nor the dangerous, evidence-free substance its harshest critics suggest.

It is a 30-year-old research compound with a substantial preclinical evidence base, some early human safety data that was never fully published, a plausible and interesting mechanism, and a funding problem that reflects the structural failures of pharmaceutical development — not necessarily a failure of the science itself.

The honest position is that we are waiting for the kind of rigorous, independent, transparent human trial data that would either confirm or refute what the animal studies suggest. That data may be a long time coming, given the economics of trial funding. In the meantime, those who choose to use BPC-157 are making an informed-risk decision with imperfect information — which is not entirely unlike many decisions in medicine and health optimization.

If you are a competitive athlete, the WADA position is clear and the consequences are real. Know your sport’s rules.

If you are not a competitive athlete and you are considering BPC-157 for a specific health purpose, understand that you are working in a gray zone: promising preclinical data, limited but not absent human safety data, no established dosing protocols, and no quality control on gray-market products. Source matters enormously. Purity matters enormously.

And the next time someone tells you that BPC-157 “has no human trials,” do them the favor of pointing out that ClinicalTrials.gov and the entire body of global biomedical research are not the same thing.

Share

As always, nothing in this article constitutes medical advice.
Research this alongside a qualified healthcare provider before making any decisions.

Valérie Orsoni
Biohacker since 1998 | Longevity Expert

Instagram : @valerieorsoni

My fave brands + super promo codes here ==> ValerieOrsoni.com

My clean, vegan, made-in-the-USA supplement line ==> ZellNova

🎙 Longevity Leadership Conference – Verizon Innovation Lab, Los Angeles - Mar 18–19, 2026)
🎤 Sommet de l’HyperSanté, Paris (Mars 21-22, 2026)
🎤 Biohackers World Conference & Expo, Los Angeles (Mars 28-29, 2026)
🎙 Life Summit, Berlin (May 29-30, 2026)
🎙 Biohacking Week, Propriano (June 7-14, 2026)
🎤 RAADFest, Sedona (Sept 4-6, 2026)
🎙 HealthSpan Summit, Los Angeles (Oct 2–4, 2026)
🎙 Reclaiming Health & Longevity Symposium (El Salvador, Nov 8–9, 2026)

It’s rarely discussed—sometimes never mentioned—and yet urinary leakage affects more than one in three women after 40, and up to 50% of women after menopause.

In men, prevalence increases after prostate surgery.

This is not an inevitable consequence of aging.

It’s a biological signal.

And like any signal, it can be understood, corrected, and optimized.

In this guide, we will decode the physiological mechanisms behind urinary incontinence, then apply a multi-layer biohacking approach: functional exercises, targeted nutrition, evidence-based supplements, and advanced therapies for those who want to go further.

With this program, YOU CAN PUT AN END TO THESE ANNOYING LEAKS!

Read more

Share

Sleep is the original biohack. You can optimize your diet, train hard, stack the best supplements in the world — but if you are not sleeping deeply and consistently, you are leaving every single longevity and performance gain on the table.

This is an updated look at exactly what I do each night to protect my sleep architecture, my hormones, and yes, my skin.

Over the years my routine has evolved, refined by my own lab results, biological age testing, and honest trial and error.

Here is where I stand today.

Read more

Share

What if the missing link wasn’t a new protocol or a new lab test — but the way you “come down” from your day?

Cortisol is not your enemy. Dysregulation is.

Cortisol has a bad reputation. Yet it is essential — it gets you out of bed in the morning, regulates inflammation, structures your circadian rhythm. The problem isn’t cortisol itself; it’s when it remains elevated continuously, never fully coming back down.

The HPA axis (hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis) orchestrates this stress response. In chronic stress, this axis runs in overdrive: the body remains on alert even when the threat is gone. The result?

Read more

I hear about it constantly.

Some friends swear it cured “incurable” conditions. Others dismiss it entirely: “Just a useless grandma’s remedy.” Some even warn about serious allergic risks.

So — who should we believe?

I decided to investigate. Deeply. Scientific studies, meta-analyses, biochemical composition, dosing protocols… and personal experimentation on my own body (N=1 — we work with what we have).

What I discovered surprised me. Between exaggerated marketing claims and systematic skepticism lies a fascinating scientific reality. And some truly striking results.

Welcome inside the hive. Full breakdown.

Read more

You wake up systematically between 3am and 5am. Eyes wide open. Brain running at full speed. Impossible to fall back asleep before 6am... right when your alarm goes off.

Welcome to the very exclusive “3am crew” club.

Contrary to what pseudo-experts in Chinese medicine say (”It’s liver detox time”), there are precise physiological explanations for these nocturnal awakenings. And yes, you’re right: nocturnal hypoglycemia and cortisol spikes are the two main culprits.

But there are others. Many others.

I’ve dug into the scientific literature and tested several protocols on myself (and with my coaching clients). Here’s what I discovered.

Read more