cant tell honestly
⚠️4🙏15
#other-peptides 2026-04-15
Wednesday26 messages5 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- power_through_no — purity varies more on these than on the GLP-1s in my experience, 96.8 on one lot and 99 on another 18:20
- power_through_no — is the secretagogue appetite increase a real effect or dose dependent 18:35
- noct.titrate — i think most of what gets reported here is regression to the mean, my own reports included 19:12
- noct.titrate — the labs will run purity on most of these, its identity and content, not efficacy 19:28
- noct.titrate — while im here GHK-Cu is the one where photos would help and nobody ever controls the lighting BPC-157 human evidence is close to absent, the rodent work is extensive… 19:35
placebo maybe
purity varies more on these than on the GLP-1s in my experience, 96.8 on one lot and 99 on another
👀15📉5📈1
anyone had a purity result under 99.2 on one of these
get it tested
whats the evidence base for tesamorelin outside the licensed indication
is the secretagogue appetite increase a real effect or dose dependent
❤️5⚠️4📈1
injuries heal anyway
anyone reconstituted a 20 vial of these to 2 and had it stay clear
how many weeks is a fair run for GHK-Cu topically
*week 32 not week 7
are secretagogues worth it if you sleep badly anyway
tesamorelin has a licensed indication and everything outside it is us extrapolating, not advice obviously
ran it alone
🧊5🧪5👍1
the tendon claims trace back to a small number of animal studies that get cited well past what they support
slightly off topic but i stacked three things for 26 months and the honest conclusion is that i learned nothing
genuine question how do you separate healing from time when the injury was going to heal anyway
anyone run TB-500 on its own rather than stacked with something
came back after 10 months off and my baseline was where it was before, so nothing persisted, take that with a pinch of salt
i think most of what gets reported here is regression to the mean, my own reports included
😂12
GHK-Cu did something to my skin texture and i cannot rule out that it was the moisturiser
verification channel has some
update on the earlier thing anyone got a before and after on GHK-Cu that isnt just lighting
the labs will run purity on most of these, its identity and content, not efficacy
ran one thing at a time for 4 years and ended up with three conclusions, two of them boring
the labs will run purity on most of these, its identity and content, not efficacy
coa-a-2418.pdf
1 page · 900 KB · not retained in the public archive
while im here GHK-Cu is the one where photos would help and nobody ever controls the lighting
BPC-157 human evidence is close to absent, the rodent work is extensive and thats a different thing