LongevityVentfort A-3Ventfort Lingual

Ventfort (A-3)

Khavinson 'Cytomax' bovine vascular-tissue extract · NOT a defined molecule · zero independent literature under its own name

Ventfort is a Russian 'Cytomax' peptide preparation from the Khavinson school (St. Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology), sold as a dietary-supplement 'bioregulator' for the vascular system. The single most important fact about it is what it is NOT: it is not a defined molecule. Ventfort is a peptide complex extracted from bovine (calf) vascular and aortic tissue — a mixture of low-molecular-weight peptides, with no single sequence, formula or weight. That means there is nothing to verify in the chemical database: no PubChem entry, no CAS number, no structure. It also has no scientific literature of its own — a search of the primary biomedical database returns zero records under the name 'Ventfort.' A common point of confusion makes this worse: Ventfort is frequently mixed up with Vesugen, a different product that IS a defined synthetic tripeptide (KED). They are not the same thing, and Vesugen's verifiable chemistry must not be borrowed to make Ventfort look more substantiated than it is. Vendors attach sweeping claims to Ventfort — that it repairs blood vessels and treats atherosclerosis, hypertension, varicose veins and more — none of which is backed by any clinical trial under this name. The honest framing: a bovine tissue extract with expansive vascular disease claims, no defined chemical identity, and no independent evidence of its own.

The short version

Ventfort is a Russian supplement from the Khavinson 'bioregulator' family, sold for blood-vessel ('vascular') health. The key thing to understand is that it is not a single peptide with a known structure — it is an extract, a mixture of small peptides pulled from calf blood-vessel tissue. So unlike a defined drug, there is no exact molecule to point to: no chemical-database entry, no formula, no weight, no structure.

It also has essentially no science of its own. When you search the main medical research database for 'Ventfort,' you get zero results. The Khavinson school as a whole has published a fair amount, but none of it is actually about this specific product — and it would be misleading to borrow studies of other peptides to prop it up.

There is one more trap worth knowing. Ventfort is often confused with Vesugen, which is a different product — Vesugen is a defined synthetic tripeptide (called KED) that does have a real chemical identity. Ventfort is not Vesugen, and you should be wary of any source that gives Ventfort a precise chemical formula or sequence, because that information almost certainly belongs to Vesugen. Meanwhile, vendors claim Ventfort repairs blood vessels and treats serious conditions like atherosclerosis, high blood pressure and varicose veins. None of that is supported by a clinical trial of Ventfort. Treat it as a tissue extract with big marketing claims and no independent evidence behind them.

Molecular identity

Specs

Structure / class: Natural peptide extract ('Cytomax A-3') from bovine vascular/aortic tissue; Khavinson-school bioregulatorVendor product literature (marketing)
Sequence: Not applicable — multi-peptide tissue extract, no ordered sequenceVendor describes a peptide complex; no sequence asserted
Molecular formula: Not applicable — undefined extractNo single molecule — cannot be assigned a formula
Molecular weight: Not a single species; vendor cites a mixture 'up to ~10,000 Da'Vendor claim about the peptide mixture (not a defined MW)
CAS / UNII: Unverified — not asserted (undefined extract)No CAS or UNII for an undefined tissue-extract mixture
PubChem CID: Unverified — not assertedPubChem search for 'Ventfort' returns no matching compound (count = 0). Do NOT borrow Vesugen's CID 87571363
Molecular target: No defined molecule and no classic receptor; vendor claims a vascular 'bioregulator' effect (no Ventfort-specific evidence)Vendor marketing (not independently established)
Half-life: Not established (undefined mixture; no pharmacokinetics)Not established
Not to be confused with: Vesugen (synthetic tripeptide KED / Lys-Glu-Asp, CID 87571363) — a DIFFERENT, defined productIdentity disambiguation
Regulatory status: Sold as a dietary supplement; not approved as a medicine by any major regulator; no controlled human trials locatedNo NDA/BLA/EMA record located

Plain English

Mechanism

Vendors describe Ventfort using the general Khavinson 'peptide bioregulator' story: that tissue-specific short peptides reach cells, influence gene activity, and 'restore' the function of their target organ — here, the blood vessels. But this is the school's broad hypothesis applied by analogy; there is no Ventfort-specific experiment demonstrating any such mechanism.

Because Ventfort is an undefined extract rather than a single molecule, even the usual single-school mechanistic claims (a specific peptide binding specific DNA) cannot be pinned to it — there is no defined peptide to study. What is left is a general 'bioregulation' narrative with no molecular detail and no data of its own.

The honest mechanistic picture is essentially empty: an extract with a marketing rationale borrowed from the wider bioregulator hypothesis, and no demonstrated mechanism specific to Ventfort.

Why people reach for it

Potential benefits

Ventfort is positioned for one thing — vascular support in aging — so here is what draws people to it, framed honestly given how little stands behind it.

A 'vascular' slot in a Khavinson longevity routine — Within the Khavinson 'one bioregulator per tissue' framework, Ventfort is the piece assigned to the blood vessels — which is the main reason people who run that whole protocol reach for it, not because any vascular outcome has been demonstrated.
An aging-focused, course-based supplement — It is used the way the rest of the Cytomax line is used: short periodic 'courses' aimed at general age-related decline, appealing to people already invested in the bioregulator approach to longevity.
A low-burden addition by design — Marketed as a simple, well-tolerated supplement rather than a drug — part of its appeal is that it asks little of the user, though 'no reported harm' here reflects the absence of any study, not a proven safety record.
Pulls attention to the vascular levers that do work — The most defensible reason to engage with Ventfort's vascular framing is that it points at vascular health at all — and the proven levers there (exercise, blood-pressure control, not smoking, NO-precursor nutrition) vastly outweigh the extract itself.

Sources:PubMed (verified count = 0 for 'Ventfort')PubChem (no compound for 'Ventfort')

What people reach for Ventfort for, based on how it is positioned and used — NOT proven outcomes. Ventfort has zero studies under its own name and no defined molecule, so none of these are demonstrated effects or medical claims.

Implied timing

Best time to dose

Implied best time

Anytime (consistent)

There is no meaningful timing for Ventfort — pick a time you can keep to every day across the course and stay consistent.

Ventfort has no defined molecule and no pharmacokinetics — no half-life, no absorption curve — so there is literally nothing to time a dose against. Consistency of habit is the only lever left.
It is used as a once-daily injection within a short Khavinson-style course; what matters for adherence is locking it to a fixed daily slot, not chasing an 'optimal' hour that the evidence cannot define.
If it is run alongside other bioregulators, spacing the injections through the day is purely for comfort and site rotation — not because any interaction or rhythm has been shown.

No study establishes an ideal time of day for Ventfort — there are no studies at all, and no pharmacokinetics to reason from. This is a consistency recommendation, not a mechanistic one. As a general rule peptide dosing lands in the midday-to-evening window; for Ventfort any consistent time is equally defensible.

Sources:PubMed (verified count = 0 for 'Ventfort')PubChem (no compound for 'Ventfort')

How to run it

Dosing & protocol

Ventfort is sold historically as an oral capsule and sublingual tablet. The research-peptide community, however, sources it as a lyophilized powder and reconstitutes it for subcutaneous injection — the route this calculator and page are built around. There is no validated human dose for Ventfort under any route, because there are no trials. The figures below are unverified vendor convention only; read this as a map of how injectable Ventfort is actually used, not as evidence-backed dosing.

Unverified vendor convention: Ventfort has ZERO human trials and no published dose. It has no single-molecule identity and no PubMed record under its own name. The injectable SubQ use described here is research-peptide-community convention — not a study finding. Every number is a usage pattern lifted from vendor protocols, labeled as such.

Dose — vendor convention only (unverified)

The dose range in community use follows the vendor's oral-course equivalent converted to injection volume — an unverified convention with no pharmacokinetic basis.

Vendor-stated course dose:: Vendors typically recommend a 'complex A-3' daily amount in the range of 10–20 mg per day for an oral course. When the powder is reconstituted for SubQ injection, this is most commonly translated to a 1,000–2,000 mcg (1–2 mg) subcutaneous dose per day — unverified, extrapolated from the vendor's oral protocol.
Route:: Subcutaneous injection — the form sourced as a research peptide. The oral capsule and sublingual tablet are the vendor's primary commercial format; SubQ injectable use is the research-community convention. See 'Formulation note' below for the reconstitution math.
Dose is unverified:: No pharmacokinetic study has established what SubQ dose corresponds to the oral vendor protocol, or what dose is even biologically active. These numbers are the community's working convention — not a validated figure.

Subcutaneous administration

Site and timing are the actionable choices; technique is straightforward SubQ.

Injection site:: The abdomen (a couple of inches clear of the navel), the love-handle area, or the outer thigh. Rotate sites between doses to prevent local irritation and fatty lumps (lipohypertrophy).
Time of day:: No chronobiology data exists for Ventfort, and with no defined molecule there is nothing to time the dose against — see Best time to dose above. The only sensible rule is a consistent daily time; a once-daily injection at whatever hour you can keep to reliably is the convention.
Food window:: Subcutaneous injection is independent of meals; no absorption competition with food.

Cycle & washout

The Khavinson school recommends periodic 'courses' rather than continuous use. The injectable community follows a similar pulse structure.

Standard course:: Vendor protocol: approximately 30 days on. The injectable community typically mirrors this as a 4–6 week run.
Washout:: Vendor recommendation: 3–6 months between courses. Injectable community convention is broadly similar — at minimum a 4–8 week break. No desensitization data exists to ground either figure.
Honesty note:: The cycle schedule is derived directly from the vendor's oral-supplement course recommendations. There is no controlled evidence that this structure is optimal — or that any cycle structure improves outcomes — given the absence of any human or animal study for Ventfort.

Formulation note

Ventfort is sold by some suppliers as a lyophilized powder. Here is the mixing math for a 10 mg vial — the calculator on this page handles any vial size.

Mixing:: 10 mg vial + 2 mL bacteriostatic water = 5,000 mcg per mL. On a 100-unit (1 mL) insulin syringe: 1,000 mcg = 20 IU · 2,000 mcg = 40 IU.
What this covers:: This card is mixing math only. No storage guidance is provided here — storage information for all peptides is on the calculator page. Sterile reconstitution technique (needle handling, aseptic prep) is not covered on any kiresearcher page.
Oral / sublingual form:: If using the commercial oral capsule or sublingual lingual format (the vendor's original form), no reconstitution applies. Vendor instructions state 1–2 capsules once or twice daily before meals. These are unverified marketing protocols, not evidence-derived schedules.

Sources:PubMed (verified count = 0 for 'Ventfort')PubChem (no compound for 'Ventfort')

Substrate the signal needs

Nutritional cofactor precision

Ventfort is positioned as a vascular product, so the most useful cofactors are the nutrients vascular biology actually runs on — not a Ventfort cofactor study (none exists). Up front: these lifestyle and nutrition inputs are by far the more-defensible investment than an unproven bovine extract. The proven levers come first.

Reasoned from vascular physiology and general nutrition science — not a Ventfort cofactor study, because no Ventfort study exists. Supplement doses are standard nutrition ranges, not Ventfort-specific findings. The lifestyle factors listed first (exercise, blood pressure control, not smoking) have dramatically better evidence than anything in this catalog.

The proven vascular levers (amplify what actually works)

These are not supplements — they are the interventions with the strongest evidence for vascular health. They vastly outweigh any unproven extract.

Exercise:: Regular aerobic exercise directly improves endothelial function, reduces arterial stiffness, lowers resting blood pressure, and upregulates endothelial nitric-oxide synthase (eNOS). 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity cardiovascular exercise is the evidence-backed minimum for vascular benefit. This single lever has orders-of-magnitude more evidence than Ventfort.
Blood pressure control:: Sustained elevated blood pressure is the dominant mechanical driver of vascular wall damage and atherosclerosis. Reducing and maintaining blood pressure in a healthy range — through diet, exercise, weight, or medication if needed — addresses the actual mechanism of vascular deterioration. No supplement replaces this.
Not smoking:: Tobacco smoking directly damages endothelial cells, promotes oxidative stress, and accelerates arterial stiffening. Cessation is the single highest-impact individual intervention for vascular health. Any supplement taken while continuing to smoke is working against a much larger opposing force.

Nitric-oxide substrate supply (L-arginine · L-citrulline · dietary nitrate)

Nitric oxide (NO) is the primary vasodilatory signal — it relaxes smooth muscle in vessel walls. Supply the precursors.

L-citrulline:: 3–6 g daily (more survives gut transit than L-arginine, which is largely degraded by arginase before reaching circulation). The body converts L-citrulline to L-arginine in the kidneys, which then feeds eNOS to produce NO. Take in the morning, independent of meals.
Dietary nitrate:: High-nitrate vegetables — beetroot, arugula, spinach, celery — provide nitrate that gut bacteria convert to nitrite and then to NO via a distinct, non-eNOS pathway. A daily serving of leafy greens or a glass of beetroot juice amplifies the dietary nitrate route.
Why these:: Endothelial NO production is the biochemical mechanism behind vascular tone. If Ventfort has any vascular effect, it would operate in the same biology these precursors directly feed. At minimum, these are the raw material the vessel wall needs.

Vascular structural support (vitamin C · omega-3 · folate + B-vitamins)

The building blocks of vessel-wall integrity and the housekeeping nutrients that prevent vascular damage from metabolic byproducts.

Vitamin C:: 500–1,000 mg daily. A required cofactor in collagen hydroxylation — the step that makes collagen structurally stable. Vessel walls are collagen-dependent; deficiency directly weakens vascular structure. Take with meals to reduce GI discomfort at higher doses.
Omega-3 (EPA/DHA):: 2–3 g combined EPA/DHA daily from fish oil or algae oil. EPA and DHA reduce triglyceride levels, lower systemic inflammatory tone (via resolvin and protectin synthesis), and improve endothelial function — all well-supported vascular mechanisms. Take with food containing fat for absorption.
Folate + B6 + B12:: Standard multivitamin or dedicated B-complex at RDA–2× RDA levels. These B-vitamins drive homocysteine remethylation; elevated homocysteine is a recognised marker of endothelial stress and vascular risk. Keeping homocysteine in range removes a documented vascular risk factor.

Combinations + timing

Stacking notes + timing windows

Within the Khavinson 'one bioregulator per tissue' framework, Ventfort's natural in-family partner is Vesugen (KED), the other vascular-assigned product. Beyond that, users combine it with the broader bioregulator set. Two hard honesty caveats apply before any of this: Ventfort has zero studies and no defined molecule, so any stack is speculation layered on speculation — doubly unproven. And the Vesugen-conflation trap is real (read below).

Speculation-on-speculation: Ventfort has zero studies under its own name and no defined molecule. Any stacking rationale is framework-reasoning without evidence, compounded by the fact that the stack partners themselves are mostly single-school, unvalidated compounds. These are user combinations from the Khavinson framework — not protocols studied in any controlled setting.

Ventfort + Vesugen (KED) — the Vesugen-conflation trap

Vesugen is the other vascular-assigned Khavinson product. But before treating this as a natural pair, the conflation trap must be addressed directly.

The trap:: Ventfort and Vesugen are routinely confused. Vesugen is a defined synthetic tripeptide (Lys-Glu-Asp, KED, PubChem CID 87571363) with a real molecular identity. Ventfort is an undefined bovine tissue extract. They are different products. Any source giving Ventfort the KED sequence or CID 87571363 is incorrectly applying Vesugen's chemistry to Ventfort. Do not treat them as the same molecule — they are not.
Why the pairing is still proposed:: Within the Khavinson framework, Vesugen and Ventfort are both assigned to the vascular system, so users combine them on the 'cover the vascular system from two angles' logic. Vesugen has some single-school Russian-language evidence behind it (as a defined tripeptide); Ventfort has none.
The protocol:: Vendor convention: both products run as separate simultaneous courses — Ventfort at the vendor-stated dose, Vesugen at its own vendor convention (~10–20 mg oral equivalent, or 1,000–2,000 mcg SubQ by the same extrapolation). No head-to-head study exists.
Outcome:: Reached for in the Khavinson framework on a general vascular-support goal. Honesty: stacking two single-school, unvalidated compounds does not produce validated evidence — it produces compounded uncertainty.

Ventfort + broader Khavinson bioregulator set

Users who run Ventfort within the Khavinson framework often add organ-specific peptides — pineal (Epithalamin/Epitalon), thymic, or immune-targeted — to cover multiple systems at once.

Why it is done:: The Khavinson school frames aging as the cumulative decline of each tissue's 'regulation,' addressed by administering the corresponding tissue extract. Running several at once follows the multi-tissue logic of that framework. This is framework-reasoning, not experimental evidence.
The protocol:: Each product at its own vendor-stated dose run simultaneously, usually as a 30-day course. Doses are per-product vendor convention; no interaction or combined-dose study exists for any combination in this set.
Outcome:: Reached for in the Khavinson geroprotection framework as a broad multi-system 'bioregulation' approach. Note: the evidentiary value of each additional undefined extract is additive uncertainty, not additive evidence. The more-defensible vascular investment remains the lifestyle cofactors above.

Reconstitution math

Reconstitution calculator

Calculated for a 1 mL U-100 insulin syringe (100 units/mL).

Peptide per vial

BAC water added

Desired dose

Units per dose

Draw to this mark on a U-100 syringe

Volume per dose: 0.2 mL
Doses per vial: 10
Concentration: 5 mg/mL

One vial lasts

Daily: 10 days
Every other day: 20 days
5×/week: 14 days

Research use only. Not for human consumption. Outputs are reference values based on research literature — verify all measurements independently.

From the studies

Side effects from research

There is no meaningful human safety database for Ventfort. With zero studies under its name, side effects, rare events, and long-term risk are simply uncharacterised. Absence of reported harm is not evidence of safety — it reflects the absence of any research.

Because the product is marketed for serious vascular conditions (atherosclerosis, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, varicose veins) that it has no evidence to treat, relying on it in place of proven cardiovascular care would be a real risk.

Bovine-extract sourcing adds batch variability and identity risk independent of any claimed peptide activity. The honest summary: Ventfort's human safety is entirely uncharacterised.

As reported in literature

Research dosing ranges

There is no study to tabulate. Under its own name, Ventfort has zero records in the primary biomedical database, so there is no experimental dose, model or outcome to show — only vendor 'course' schedules, which are marketing, not evidence. The single row below records that absence honestly rather than dressing up another peptide's data as Ventfort's.

Dose	Route	Model	Outcome	Sources:
None	No trial	No study exists under the name 'Ventfort' (verified PubMed count = 0)	There is no experimental or human dosing evidence for Ventfort. Vendor 'course' schedules (e.g. capsules daily for ~1 month, repeated periodically) are unverified marketing, not trial-derived doses	PubMed (verified count = 0 for 'Ventfort')

Quick answers

Frequently asked

What is Ventfort?

It is a Russian 'Cytomax' supplement from the Khavinson bioregulator family, sold for vascular (blood-vessel) health. It is a peptide complex extracted from bovine vascular tissue — not a single defined molecule — designated 'A-3.'

Is Ventfort the same as Vesugen?

No. This is a common and important confusion. Vesugen is a different product — a defined synthetic tripeptide (KED / Lys-Glu-Asp, PubChem CID 87571363) with a real chemical identity. Ventfort is an undefined tissue extract. Any source giving Ventfort a precise formula, sequence, or CID is almost certainly borrowing Vesugen's chemistry by mistake.

Does Ventfort repair blood vessels or treat atherosclerosis?

There is no evidence that it does. Vendors make sweeping vascular disease claims, but a search of the primary biomedical database returns zero studies under the name 'Ventfort.' These are unsubstantiated marketing claims, not clinical findings.

What is its chemical structure?

It does not have one. Ventfort is a mixture of peptides from animal tissue, so it has no single sequence, formula, molecular weight, or database identifier. This is why none of those fields can be filled in honestly.

Is there a known dose?

No. There is no citable, trial-grounded human dose — there are no trials at all. Vendor 'course' schedules are unverified marketing protocols. The SubQ doses listed on this page are the community's extrapolation of those vendor figures to an injectable format — also unverified.

Why is this the highest-uncertainty page on the site?

Three compounding reasons: (1) Ventfort is not a defined molecule — it is a tissue extract with no chemical identity to verify; (2) it has zero studies under its own name in PubMed; (3) it is frequently confused with Vesugen, a different product, causing even the modest Vesugen literature to be misattributed to it. No other page in this catalog combines all three.

Primary sources

References

PubMed (verified count = 0 for 'Ventfort')PubMed — a search for the exact name 'Ventfort' returns zero records (E-utilities esearch, empty result). There is no PMID-backed study of Ventfort; this entry documents that verified absence of evidence
PubChem (no compound for 'Ventfort')PubChem — a search for 'Ventfort' returns no matching compound (count = 0); Ventfort is an undefined tissue extract with no single-molecule record. Do NOT confuse with Vesugen (CID 87571363)

Research use only · Not medical advice · Updated 2026-06-01