Why would WADA ban things for which there is no evidence that they do anything?
1. It has the potential to enhance sport performance. (potential -> a theoretical mechanism, even if unproven)
2. It represents an actual or potential health risk to the athlete.
3. It violates the spirit of sport.
Most of these peptides haven't passed adequate human safety trials, and their long term side effect profile is unknown. Additionally, an attempt at using anything to gain an unfair advantage violates the spirit of sport, even if the effect is placebo or even negative.
zallarak•22m ago
The medical field has a terrible problem in terms of literature reproducibility and ethics. The beta blocker scandal is a great example.