'Research use only' is not an authorization: bioethics in Panama

What the CNBI member said in La Prensa about experimental peptides in Panama

On September 17, 2026, the newspaper La Prensa published in its opinion section the column 'Péptidos experimentales: cuando la promesa va más rápido que la evidencia' (Experimental peptides: when the promise outruns the evidence), signed by Jean Paul Carrera, a researcher, mathematical epidemiologist and member of the National Research Bioethics Committee (CNBI)¹. It is an opinion column: it reflects its author's view, not an official statement of the committee, and should be read that way in Panama.

Carrera does not condemn peptides as a class. He writes that 'there are peptide-based medicines that have transformed modern medicine'¹. His objection is different: that experimental molecules are promoted on social media, in gyms and in clinics as if they were proven treatments for gaining muscle, losing fat, recovering or slowing aging¹. And he sums up the underlying principle: 'In health, something being novel, popular or biologically plausible does not mean it is safe or effective'¹.

Why 'research use only' is not an authorization

The core of the column is about the label. Carrera mentions substances sold under labels such as 'research use only' or 'solo para investigación' and states: 'This designation means precisely that the product has not been authorized for therapeutic use in people'¹. The column cites no specific rule and does not mention the DNFD, the Ministry of Health (Minsa) or any particular molecule; we draw those links here from other sources¹.

Under a different legal framework, the U.S. FDA reaches a compatible conclusion. In warning letters dated August 24, 2026, it acknowledged that the products carried labels such as 'research use only' and 'not for human or veterinary use,' and concluded that 'evidence obtained from your website establishes that your products are intended to be drugs for human use'⁴. The intended-use rule, 21 CFR 201.128, defines that use by the 'objective intent of the persons legally responsible for the labeling,' which can be shown by 'labeling claims, advertising matter, or oral or written statements'⁵. A law firm summed it up with the headline 'Research Use Only Is Not a Legal Strategy'⁶. Earlier coverage in FDA rejects the 'research use only' label.

What is lost outside a protocol: ethics, consent and traceability

According to Carrera, using these products outside a research protocol removes the safeguards those studies require: 'ethical oversight, inclusion criteria, informed consent, dose control,' plus adverse-event follow-up and product traceability¹. He adds that through unregulated channels 'additional problems of purity, concentration, contamination, storage may arise'¹.

Those safeguards rest on the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki, revised in 2024⁸⁹¹⁰. Its paragraph 23 requires the protocol to be submitted to a research ethics committee for approval, and paragraph 26 calls for freely given, documented informed consent⁸. Paragraph 37, on unproven interventions in clinical practice, warns that 'these interventions must never be undertaken to circumvent the protections for research participants'⁸.

In Panama, CNBI president Luis Coronado said in August 2026, about stem cells, that 'an experimental treatment cannot be presented as a proven therapy' and that 'people should not pay to take part in clinical research trials'⁷. The local trial approval framework is in Clinical trials in Panama: Law 84, the CNBI and registration; Law 84 of May 14, 2019 was published in Gaceta Oficial Digital 28775-A¹⁶.

The health context: retatrutide without registration and PAHO's warning

On August 24, 2026, TVN reported that the DNFD received alerts about products with retatrutide, which 'currently has no sanitary registration in Panama'; Pharmacy and Drugs director Uriel Pérez said that using a medicine that 'has not even been authorized' puts life at risk, and Minsa asked people to avoid injectables bought through unauthorized channels³. More context in Retatrutide without registration in Panama: Minsa alert.

Regionally, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) called on March 3, 2026 for stronger pharmacovigilance after reports of misuse of GLP-1 medicines and said 'these medicines should be used exclusively under medical prescription and with appropriate clinical follow-up'². That warning concerns GLP-1 medicines; it shows that even they are meant to be used under prescription and clinical follow-up.

What independent quality analyses show: the label does not certify content

No study we reviewed analyzes 'research use only products' in Panama. What exists is data from parallel markets. A study published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research in 2024 evaluated semaglutide sold without prescription by illegal online pharmacies: of six purchases, three vials arrived; all were considered probable falsified or substandard products, measured purity was 7.7% to 14.37% (versus 99% labeled), content exceeded the label by 28.56% to 38.69%, and endotoxin was detected in every sample (2.1645 to 8.9511 EU/mg)¹¹.

In Italy and the Netherlands, 2026 clinical reports described hypoglycemic coma after injecting 'semaglutide' bought online or without prescription: toxicological analysis of the vial in one case found insulin instead of semaglutide¹³¹⁴. The WHO had already warned of falsified semaglutide in the global supply chain¹⁵.

A 2020 paper shows the problem also reaches research peptides: using nuclear magnetic resonance, the authors found undeclared mannitol at 20% and 43% (w/w) in two commercially sourced custom synthetic peptides, and concluded that experimental verification supersedes trust in both pharmaceutical and research quality control¹². These studies do not prove that every product labeled for research is defective; they show that the label alone does not certify identity, purity or quantity.

What it means for physicians: an ethics question before a supply question

• A 'research use only' product has no sanitary registration or approved indication; the column puts it as the absence of authorization for therapeutic use in people¹.
• Research with participants requires a protocol, approval by an accredited committee and documented consent before it begins⁸.
• FDA evaluates everything the seller offers, not just the label⁴⁵⁶.
• Independent analyses of parallel-market products found content different from the label, endotoxin and substitutions¹¹¹²¹³.

This article is regulatory journalism and not a recommendation for use. Research products are not intended for human or veterinary use. Medico-legal framework in Prescribing, importing, administering and in the Peptides in Panama 2026 guide; the debate on how each product is regulated, in Sanitary registration: the question asked of peptides but not of exosomes.