Peptide Law by State: Free Dataset and Enforcement Data (2026)

This page collects the Bureau's state law research and its enforcement tracker in one place, as downloadable data. Every row links to the statute, board statement, court filing or agency page it rests on. It is free to use with a link back (licence below). Research peptides are discussed in a regulatory context only; nothing here is medical or legal advice.

Map: which states have acted

Use this map: download it as an image (PNG), or embed the live version, which updates when the data does. Credit with a link to this page.

Download

• Peptide law by state, CSV (50 rows: state drug schedules, pharmacy board and medical board positions with dates and sources, state enforcement, telehealth)
• Peptide law by state, JSON (the full research record with citations)
• Enforcement tracker, CSV (29 rows: date, party, action type, summary, sources)
• July 2026 advisory committee votes, CSV (7 peptides, yes, no, abstain)

Licence and how to cite

The data is published under CC BY 4.0: use it, chart it, republish it, with credit and a link to this page.

Spotted an error or a newer board statement? Email [email protected] with the link; corrections are dated on the page they change.

Medical boards that barred research-grade peptides

• Alabama (2026-05-26): The Board of Medical Examiners issued an official notice on non-FDA-approved, research-grade peptides. All drugs given to patients must be prescription quality, so under no circumstances may a physician compound, administer or dispense a non-FDA-approved or ... Source
• South Carolina (2026-08): The Board of Medical Examiners posted a "Notice Concerning the Prescribing of Non-FDA Approved (Research-Grade) Peptides" as an alert on its home page in August 2026 (it appears on the page as captured on 15 August 2026). The notice itself could not be ... Source
• Mississippi (2026-08-19): A joint statement of the State Board of Medical Licensure, the Board of Nursing and the Board of Pharmacy (19 August 2026) says that under no circumstances may a healthcare provider compound, administer, dispense, advise, recommend, supply or prescribe a ... Source

The July 2026 advisory committee votes

The FDA's Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee voted on 23 and 24 July 2026 on adding seven peptides to the 503A bulks list. Six passed and one failed. The votes are advisory; no rule has followed as of 20 October 2026. Tallies from the McDermott Will & Emery meeting summary, cross-checked against AJMC, PharmExec and STAT reporting (the FDA meeting page does not publish counts).

Download: PCAC votes, CSV. Background on what the vote does and does not change: PCAC vote explainer.

Enforcement tracker, by type

• FDA warning letter or batch of letters: 16
• FDA proposal, statement or advisory vote: 4
• DOJ case: 4
• Manufacturer lawsuit: 3
• State attorney general case: 2

The full list, newest first and with a source on every row, is the enforcement tracker. The reported plan to allow temporary sale of some peptides is checked against the record in the fact check, and the July 2026 advisory committee tallies are on the PCAC vote page.

All 50 states

Each state name opens that state's page with the full text, citations and sources.

Method

State entries were researched from each state's controlled substances act and schedules, its board of pharmacy and medical board websites, and attorney general press releases, and checked against the linked source in late September 2026 (the state pages carry each check date). Federal entries are listed only when a primary source could be opened: the FDA warning letter database, justice.gov, a state attorney general, a court filing or the company's own release. Confidence is marked per state in the data. Where nothing was found the field says so; nothing is inferred.

Peptide Bureau is an independent reference site. It earns affiliate commission on some other pages; this dataset page carries none.