Masters athletes: supplement review 2026

A 2026 narrative review published in Current Sports Medicine Reports examined how a range of supplements, including protein, creatine, caffeine, beta-alanine, nitrates, collagen peptides, BPC-157, and thymosin beta-4 variants (including what is marketed as TB-500), may affect athletic performance and musculoskeletal health in adults over 55^[1]. The key finding from Nguyen, Allen, Hornburg, and Fredericson is not that these compounds work well in older athletes. It is that the literature for this specific population is thinner than the marketing implies.

Who the review covers

Masters athletes are generally defined as competitive athletes over the age of 35, though many studies place the threshold at 50 or 55. The review focused on adults in that upper range, which matters because the physiology is different from younger adults. Protein turnover slows, anabolic signalling blunts, satellite cell function declines, and cardiovascular reserve shrinks. Supplements studied in 25-year-old university athletes do not automatically translate to 60-year-old masters competitors.

A parallel 2026 review in Sports Medicine by Mendias and Awan covered overlapping ground on peptide-specific compounds, noting that while 'many unapproved peptides demonstrate favorable tissue repair and metabolic outcomes in animal models', rigorous human safety data for these compounds are limited, and the potential for harm remains real^[2].

The conventional supplements

Protein and creatine have the most-established evidence base in older adults. The narrative review notes that protein supplementation is supported across age groups, though the anabolic threshold per meal may be higher in older adults (the literature commonly reports doses in the range of 35-40 g per serving to stimulate muscle protein synthesis, compared with 20-25 g in younger populations^[1]). Creatine similarly has a decades-long record in older populations: a 2022 meta-analysis in Nutrients found that creatine supplementation combined with resistance training improved muscle mass and strength outcomes in older adults compared with training alone. Caffeine retains performance-enhancing effects in masters athletes, though there is evidence that the magnitude of the ergogenic effect may diminish with age. Beta-alanine and nitrates have less age-specific evidence; both are supported in general athletic populations, and the review notes that the data in masters athletes specifically is limited.

Collagen peptides

Collagen peptides are the one category among the peptides covered where there is some human evidence relevant to older adults. Hydroxyproline-containing collagen hydrolysates have been studied for joint pain and connective-tissue support in aging populations, with several trials showing modest reductions in joint discomfort. The review flags these as more substantiated than the regulatory-grey-zone peptides covered later in the same section, though the authors note that trial quality varies and effect sizes are generally moderate^[1].

BPC-157 and thymosin beta-4: what the review says

The most contested part of the review is its inclusion of BPC-157 and thymosin beta-4 variants (including the fragment marketed as TB-500) alongside established supplements. The authors characterise the animal literature for these compounds as 'interesting' for tissue repair, while acknowledging that the human data is sparse^[1]. That framing is accurate as far as it goes, but it understates the regulatory and safety picture.

BPC-157 has no approved indication in any jurisdiction. The US Department of Defense's Operation Supplement Safety programme describes it as 'an unapproved drug' and lists it as prohibited for service members. USADA classifies it as a banned substance under the WADA Code's S0 category (non-approved substances). There is no published phase-2 or phase-3 randomised controlled trial of BPC-157 in humans for any indication, athletic or otherwise.

Thymosin beta-4 and its derivative TB-500 are prohibited in sport under a different WADA category: S2.3 (growth factors). The prohibition was explicit from 2018 onward, when WADA added 'thymosin-beta4 and its derivatives, e.g. TB-500' as named examples of prohibited growth factors^[3]. The full TB-500 peptide page covers the regulatory history, WADA status, and the July 2026 FDA compounding committee review. Any masters athlete competing under a WADA-compliant anti-doping programme, at any age, would face a doping violation if tested positive for thymosin beta-4 or TB-500.

The human evidence gap on peptides in masters athletes

The Mendias and Awan review, published the same year in Sports Medicine, put the gap in direct terms: for compounds like BPC-157 and thymosin beta-4, the positive preclinical findings have not translated into peer-reviewed human trials with outcomes relevant to athletic performance or musculoskeletal recovery^[2]. The available data suggests the mechanisms are plausible (angiogenesis, actin-sequestering, tissue-repair signalling), but plausible is not the same as proven.

The gap is larger for older adults specifically. The animal models in which BPC-157 and thymosin beta-4 show positive effects are generally young rodents with acute injuries, not aged animals with age-related musculoskeletal decline. Whether the same repair signals remain active and relevant in aging tissue is an open question the current literature does not answer.

What masters athletes should take from this

The conventional supplements, protein and creatine in particular, have the strongest evidence for older adults. Collagen peptides have some human data for joint support. BPC-157 and TB-500 have animal data that is worth monitoring and no human evidence worth acting on, plus real regulatory and anti-doping risk for competing athletes. The BPC-157 peptide page and the TB-500 page set out the country-by-country legal picture for readers who want the regulatory detail.

If you are considering any of the peptides covered in this review, that conversation belongs with a clinician or sports medicine physician who knows your training history, your medication list, and whether you compete under anti-doping rules. This article is educational and does not constitute medical advice.