U.S., Iran Stuck in a Cycle of Escalation --- Trump threatens to intensify bombing, while Tehran's allies widen the conflict. Growing price of oil demonstrates who is defeated here.

 

Never listen to what combatants say. This is called war propaganda operation. Don’t waste your time.

War propaganda operations mean you should ignore what fighting sides claim, saving time by focusing on actions instead of words.

Key Points of War Propaganda

•     False Claims: Sides lie to make themselves look good.

•     Hidden Truths: Facts take time to come out after fights end.

•     Real Actions: Watch what armies do, not what they say.

“ISTANBUL -- The U.S. and Iran are being drawn into an escalating conflict as they are running up against the limits of what they can achieve through military force.

 

The conflict widened this past week after Iranian-allied militants in Yemen began striking ships transiting a Red Sea chokepoint, driving oil prices above $100 a barrel Thursday.

 

The U.S. meanwhile has escalated its bombing campaign in Iran in recent days, striking throughout the country during the most intense period of fighting since President Trump and Israel began bombing Iran in late February.

 

Trump and other administration leaders have threatened to ratchet up the military campaign against Iran, including by striking a suspected Iranian nuclear facility at Iran's Pickaxe Mountain or by attacking Iran's infrastructure such as power plants in response to attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

 

"The price will continue to get higher every single night until they come to their senses," Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters Thursday at a summit in Manila, citing Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi's description of Tehran's approach as "an eye for an eye."

 

"The president's policy is a head for an eye," Rubio said. "I mean, honestly, that is what it is going to be." He added that Trump would decide whether to escalate in the coming days.

 

The challenge facing Washington and Tehran is that both governments have shown a willingness to escalate, but neither is capable of achieving a decisive advantage over the other. The stalemate heightens the risk that the U.S. and Iran could be drawn into more months of fighting as both sides attempt to generate leverage, military analysts say.

 

"There is an escalatory dynamic now," said Alan Eyre, a former senior U.S. diplomat who participated in negotiations with Iran. "I don't think the United States administration has a clear strategic concept of what it is trying to do."

 

Trump could escalate further by attacking Iran's civilian infrastructure, which likely would trigger Iranian retaliation against globally important energy infrastructure throughout the Middle East.

 

Even if Trump were to use a small nuclear weapon to attack one of Iran's underground atomic facilities, that would be merely a symbolic blow against the regime, said Hamidreza Azizi, a visiting fellow specializing in Iran at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

 

"None of these are going to fundamentally change the situation," he said of Trump's options. "I see it as both sides reaching the limits of what military means can achieve."

 

Iran showed it still has room to maneuver.

 

The Iranian-allied Houthi militia in Yemen said it was launching a maritime blockade of Saudi Arabia and threatened shipping in the Bab al-Mandeb strait that connects the Red Sea with the Indian Ocean.

 

The group said it targeted two Saudi oil tankers Wednesday, while international maritime officials confirmed at least one vessel was struck.

 

Any sustained attacks on ships transiting Bab al-Mandeb would expand Iran's strategy of intensifying economic pressure on the U.S. and its allies. Iran's efforts to close shipping through the Strait of Hormuz since March have caused he worst supply disruption in the history of the oil market.

 

The Houthis, who control a large part of Yemen, including the capital San'a, are an important ally for Tehran, though they have remained largely on the sidelines. The group receives weapons and training from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, but is seen as operating with a larger degree of independence from Tehran compared with Iran-backed militants in Iraq or Lebanon's Hezbollah.

 

"The Iranians certainly gained an escalation advantage with the Houthi action," said Byran Clark, a former senior U.S. Navy official and now a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute in Washington. "I don't think they have escalation dominance because the U.S. can still choose to attack civilian targets and adopt a total-war approach."

 

The Houthis' involvement expands an already complex problem for the U.S. military, which faced difficulties during weeks of bombing against the militia group last year in a campaign launched by Trump called Operation Rough Rider.

 

During the campaign, the Houthis downed more than a half-dozen U.S. Reaper drones and launched a missile attack on the USS Harry S. Truman, forcing the carrier to make a hard turn that sent an F/A-18 jet rolling into the Red Sea.

 

The surge in oil prices showed how the Houthis action could counter Trump's ability to lower oil prices by talking about the potential for de-escalation, also known as "jawboning" the market.

 

"Expanding the conflict to the Houthis could be a counter-jawboning strategy," said Erik Meyersson, the chief emerging markets strategist at the Swedish bank SEB. "It doesn't necessarily mean that the Houthis are going to launch as many strikes as the Iranians are. It just means that you do one or two, and every now and then you squeeze that button, and then that counters Trump."” [1]

 

1. World News: U.S., Iran Stuck in a Cycle of Escalation --- Trump threatens to intensify bombing, while Tehran's allies widen the conflict. Malsin, Jared.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 25 July 2026: A8.  

JAV naujienos: FDA komitetas balsuoja už peptidų, įskaitant BPC-157, apribojimų sušvelninimą

 

 

BPC-157 yra eksperimentinis 15 aminorūgščių sintetinis peptidas, gautas iš apsauginio baltymo žmogaus skrandžio sultyse. Jis yra plačiai populiarus sveikatingumo ir sporto sluoksniuose dėl audinių, sausgyslių ir žarnyno gijimo skatinimo, nors jis vis dar yra nepatvirtintas vaistas, kuriam trūksta didelio masto klinikinių tyrimų su žmonėmis.

 

Tyrimai ir siūloma nauda

 

• Minkštųjų audinių atstatymas: pagreitina sausgyslių, raiščių ir griaučių raumenų gijimą gyvūnų modeliuose, skatindamas naujų kraujagyslių augimą (angiogenezę) ir kolageno gamybą.

 

• Virškinimo trakto sveikata: pasižymi apsauginiu ir regeneraciniu poveikiu žarnyno gleivinei ir buvo tirtas dėl uždegiminių žarnyno ligų.

 

• Priešuždegiminis: moduliuoja ląstelių atstatymo mechanizmus ir padeda sumažinti lokalizuotą uždegimą aplink pažeidimo vietas.

 

Saugumas ir reglamentavimas

• Reglamentavimo statusas: FDA nepatvirtino šio produkto vartoti žmonėms, nors FDA patariamasis komitetas 2026 m. liepos mėn. įvertino jo sudėties taisykles. Internetu parduodami produktai, skirti „tik moksliniams tyrimams“, yra nereglamentuojami ir kelia grynumo riziką.

• Draudimai sportui: Pasaulinė antidopingo agentūra (WADA) draudžia šį produktą kaip S0 medžiagų klasę (nepatvirtintos medžiagos).

• Žmonių duomenų spragos: ilgalaikis saugumas, optimalus dozavimas ir šalutinio poveikio profiliai žmonėms lieka neįrodyti dėl griežtų klinikinių tyrimų trūkumo.

 

„Biohakeriai, ilgaamžiškumo entuziastai ir alternatyviosios medicinos gydytojai nori peptido BPC-157. Dabar junginių gamintojai gali būti vienu žingsniu arčiau teisėto jo tiekimo.

 

Maisto ir vaistų administracijos (FDA) Vaistinių junginių patariamasis komitetas balsavo už šešių iš septynių svarstomų peptidų apribojimų sušvelninimą, po griežtų agentūros mokslininkų įspėjimų. Dabar FDA turi nuspręsti, ar leisti vaistams gaminti junginius vaistinėse – ir atverti kelią peptidų aukso karštligei.

 

Šiandien terminas „peptidai“ dažnai reiškia injekcinių medžiagų kategoriją, kuri žada fizinius pokyčius ir nėra patvirtinta reguliavimo institucijų. Socialinėje žiniasklaidoje influenceriai, alternatyviosios medicinos gydytojai ir paprasti žmonės juos reklamuoja viskam – nuo ​​raumenų atsigavimo iki jaunatviškesnės odos.

 

Šie peptidai daugiausia parduodami internetinėje pilkojoje rinkoje, kur jie žymimi kaip „tik moksliniams tyrimams“ arba „neskirti vartoti žmonėms“. Sveikatos apsaugos sekretorius Robertas F. Kennedy jaunesnysis pasisakė už šių medžiagų apribojimų sušvelninimą.

 

Peptidų populiarumas buvo prieštaringas. Gydytojai nurodė pavojų sveikatai, o šios medžiagos nebuvo išsamiai ištirtos. Kai kurie junginių gamintojai jau gamina šiuos vaistus, nepaisant FDA apribojimų.

 

Penktadienį vykusiame posėdyje Russellas Wesdykas, FDA pareigūnas farmacijos kokybės biure, apibūdino kai kuriuos iššūkius, su kuriais susiduria nagrinėjami peptidai. „Kai rašote TB-500 receptą, kokią formą, jūsų manymu, gauna jūsų pacientai?“ – paklausė jis. „Ar kas nors žino? „Aš tikrai to nedarau, ir tai mums yra iššūkis.“

 

Posėdyje komiteto nariai, įskaitant vaistininkus, gydytojus, klinikų savininkus, akademikus ir reguliavimo ekspertus, įvertino kiekvieną peptidą. Kai kurie komiteto nariai turėjo ryšių su peptidų verslu. FDA paprastai laikosi patariamojo komiteto rekomendacijų, tačiau neturi pareigos to daryti.

 

FDA mokslininkai rekomendavo nepatvirtinti jokių sąraše esančių peptidų, kurie yra injekcijų, nosies purškalų ir vietinio poveikio kremų pavidalu. Jie nurodė ribotus klinikinius tyrimus ir įrodymų, rodančių jų veiksmingumą, trūkumą. Dėl nenuoseklių cheminių aprašymų ir pavadinimų jie teigė, kad neįmanoma tiksliai žinoti, kurios medžiagos yra junginiai. Jie taip pat teigė, kad yra FDA patvirtintų vaistų toms pačioms ligoms gydyti, kurie yra vertinami.

 

Shabbir Imber Safdar, visuomenės sveikatos koalicijos „Partnership for Safe Medicines“, orientuotos į tiekimo grandinės saugą, vykdomasis direktorius, teigiamus balsus pavadino „rimtu smūgiu pacientų saugumui“.

 

„Komiteto rekomendaciją daugelis neišvengiamai interpretuos kaip platesnio klinikinio naudojimo pritarimą.“ „Tai nėra tiesa“, – teigė jis pareiškime. „Pacientai neskaitys smulkiu šriftu parašyto teksto. Jie išgirs vieną dalyką: FDA sutiko.“

 

Praėjusiais metais dvi moterys sunkiai susirgo ilgaamžiškumo konferencijoje Las Vegase, kai joms buvo suleistos peptidų injekcijos stende. Tyrimo metu nepavyko tiksliai nustatyti, kodėl moterys susirgo, tačiau Nevados reguliavimo institucijos skyrė baudą gydytojui, kuris neturėjo licencijos jų valstijoje, ir dar dviem asmenims, susijusiems su incidentu. Nevados valstijos vaistininkų tarybos laiške gydytojui teigiama, kad vienas iš „peptidų kokteilių“ buvo laikomas turinčiu BPC-157 ir MOTS-c – du peptidus, už kuriuos balsavo FDA komitetas.

 

Komitetas, balsuodamas už populiarųjį BPC-157, taip pat patvirtino TB-500. BPC-157 buvo įvertintas dėl naudojimo opiniam kolitui gydyti, o TB-500 – žaizdų gijimui. Abu vaistai dažnai parduodami kartu, ši linija  pavadinta „Wolverine Stack“, teigiant, kad ji gali padėti viskam – nuo ​​raumenų ir audinių atstatymo iki uždegimo mažinimo. Komitetas taip pat pritarė peptidams KPV, Epitalon ir Semax.

 

Komitetas balsavo prieš vieną peptidą, vadinamą Emideltide, kuris buvo įvertintas dėl opioidų abstinencijos, lėtinės nemigos ir narkolepsijos. Davidas Pope'as, vaistininkas, kuris pritarė kitiems peptidams, balsavo „prieš“, nurodydamas sudėtingą režimą ir „potencialiai pavojingas pasekmes“.

 

Šalininkai teigė, kad prieinamo peptidų pateikimo būdo sukūrimas padėtų gydytojams, pacientams ir reguliavimo institucijoms surinkti daugiau įrodymų apie jų veiksmingumą. Kai kurie pacientai teigė, kad pilkosios rinkos produktai jiems padėjo, kai tradicinė medicinos sistema to nepadarė.

 

Pagal dabartinius reglamentus, vaistų gamintojai neprivalo pranešti FDA apie rimtus neigiamus šalutinius poveikius, susijusius su vaistų mišiniais. FDA pareigūnai teigė, kad agentūra neturi įgaliojimų to reikalauti šiuo atveju.

 

Scottas Brunneris, vaistų mišinių pramonės grupės „Alliance for Pharmacy Compounding“ generalinis direktorius, kuris pasisakė už peptidus, interviu sakė, kad turėtų būti reikalaujama pranešti apie nepageidaujamus reiškinius. „Nėra tokių esminių šių vaistų saugumo duomenų, kokių FDA paprastai reikalautų“, – sakė jis. „Šis momentas yra gana neįprastas ir reikalauja specialaus požiūrio.“ [1]

 

1. U.S. News: FDA Committee Votes to Ease Curbs on Peptides. O'Brien, Sara Ashley; Janin, Alex.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 25 July 2026: A3.  

U.S. News: FDA Committee Votes to Ease Curbs on Peptides, Including BPC-157

 

 

BPC-157 is an experimental 15-amino-acid synthetic peptide derived from a protective protein in human gastric juice. It is widely popular in wellness and athletic circles for promoting tissue, tendon, and gut healing, though it remains an unapproved drug lacking large-scale human clinical trials.

 

Research and Proposed Benefits

 

•     Soft-Tissue Repair: Accelerates healing in tendons, ligaments, and skeletal muscle in animal models by promoting new blood vessel growth (angiogenesis) and collagen production.

 

•     Gastrointestinal Health: Shows protective and regenerative effects on the gut lining and has been studied for inflammatory bowel conditions.

 

•     Anti-Inflammatory: Modulates cellular repair pathways and helps reduce localized inflammation around injury sites.

 

Safety and Regulation

•           Regulatory Status: Not approved by the FDA for human use, though an FDA advisory committee evaluated compounding rules for it in July 2026. Online products sold "for research use only" are unregulated and carry purity risks.

•           Athletic Bans: Prohibited by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) under substance class S0 (Non-Approved Substances).

•           Human Data Gaps: Long-term safety, optimal dosing, and side effect profiles in humans remain unproven due to a lack of rigorous clinical trials.

 

“Biohackers, longevity enthusiasts and alternative medicine doctors want the peptide BPC-157. Now compounders may be one step closer to lawfully providing it.

 

The Food and Drug Administration's Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee voted in favor of easing restrictions on six of seven peptides up for consideration, following strong warnings from the agency's scientists. It's now up to the FDA to decide whether to greenlight the drugs for compounding pharmacies to make -- and pave the way for a peptide gold rush.

 

Today the term "peptides" often refers to a category of injectable substances that promise physical transformations and haven't undergone regulatory approval. On social media, influencers, alternative medicine doctors and everyday people have promoted them for everything from muscle recovery to more youthful skin.

 

These peptides are largely sold through an online gray market, where they're labeled "for research use only" or "not for human consumption." Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has advocated for loosening restrictions on the substances.

 

The rise of peptides has been controversial. Doctors have cited health risks, and the substances have not been studied extensively. Some compounders have already begun making the drugs despite FDA restrictions.

 

During the hearing on Friday, Russell Wesdyk, an FDA official in the office of pharmaceutical quality, described some of the challenges facing the peptides under review. "When you write a script for TB-500, what form do you think your patients are getting?" he said. "Does anybody know? I certainly don't, and that's a challenge for us."

 

At the hearing, committee members -- including pharmacists, doctors, clinic owners, academics and regulatory experts -- evaluated each peptide. Some of the committee members had ties to peptide businesses. The FDA generally follows advisory committee recommendations but has no obligation to do so.

 

The FDA's career scientists recommended against greenlighting any of the peptides on the list, which come in formulations including injections, nasal sprays and topical creams. They cited the limited clinical studies and a lack of evidence indicating their effectiveness. Because of inconsistent chemical descriptions and names, they argued that it is impossible to know exactly which substances are being compounded. They also stated that there are FDA drugs approved for the same conditions being evaluated.

 

Shabbir Imber Safdar, executive director of the Partnership for Safe Medicines, a public-health coalition focused on supply-chain safety, called the affirmative votes "a serious setback for patient safety."

 

"The Committee's recommendation will inevitably be interpreted by many as an endorsement of broader clinical use. It is not," he said in a statement. "Patients won't read the fine print. They will hear one thing: the FDA said yes."

 

Last year, two women became critically ill at a longevity conference in Las Vegas after they received peptide injections at a booth. An investigation was unable to conclude exactly why the women became ill, but regulators in Nevada fined the doctor, who wasn't licensed in their state, along with two other people in connection with the incident. A letter to the doctor from the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy said one of the "peptide cocktails" was believed to contain BPC-157 and MOTS-c, two peptides the FDA committee voted in favor of.

 

Along with voting in favor of the popular BPC-157, the committee also approved TB-500. BPC-157 was evaluated for use in ulcerative colitis and TB-500 for wound-healing. The two are often sold together online and called "the Wolverine Stack," with claims it can help with everything from muscle and tissue repair to reduced inflammation. The committee also voted favorably for the peptides KPV, Epitalon and Semax.

 

The committee voted against one peptide called Emideltide, evaluated for opioid withdrawal, chronic insomnia, and narcolepsy. David Pope, a pharmacist who voted affirmatively for other peptides, voted "no" on this one, citing a complex regimen and "potentially dangerous downstream consequences."

 

Proponents argued that creating an accessible pathway for peptides would help doctors, patients and regulators gather more evidence about whether or not they work. Some patients said the gray-market products had helped them when the traditional medical system didn't.

 

Under current regulations, compounders are not required to report serious negative side effects associated with compounded drug products to the FDA. FDA officials said the agency does not have the authority to require it in this case.

 

Scott Brunner, chief executive of compounding industry group the Alliance for Pharmacy Compounding, who spoke in support of peptides, said in an interview that adverse-event reporting should be required.

 

"There is not the sort of substantive safety data for these drugs that FDA would normally require," he said. "The moment that we're in is rather extraordinary, and it calls for a special approach."” [1]

 

1. U.S. News: FDA Committee Votes to Ease Curbs on Peptides. O'Brien, Sara Ashley; Janin, Alex.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 25 July 2026: A3.