Skip to content
Recovery & Performance PeptidesRecovery research and practical context
Source comparison

9. Sermorelin vs CJC-1295 vs tesamorelin

A practical comparison for UK research protocol design: Pulsatility preservation (sharp, isolated pulses): Sermorelin: best (native-like pulse) CJC-1295 no-DAC: very good (slightly broader pulse) Tesamorelin: good (modestly broader pulse) CJC-1295 with DAC: no

This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.

  • A practical comparison for UK research protocol design:
  • Pulsatility preservation (sharp, isolated pulses):
  • Sermorelin: best (native-like pulse)
  • CJC-1295 no-DAC: very good (slightly broader pulse)
  • Tesamorelin: good (modestly broader pulse)
  • CJC-1295 with DAC: none (tonic)
  • Duration of GH-releasing effect per dose:
  • Sermorelin: 60-90 min
  • CJC-1295 no-DAC: 60-120 min
  • Tesamorelin: 180-240 min
  • CJC-1295 with DAC: continuous at steady state
  • IGF-1 elevation magnitude at maintenance:
  • Sermorelin at 1 µg/kg daily: modest (15-30% above baseline)
  • CJC-1295 no-DAC at 100 µg 2-3× daily: moderate (20-40%)
  • Tesamorelin 2 mg daily: large (50-100%)
  • CJC-1295 with DAC at 1-2 mg weekly: large (50-100%)
  • DPP-4 resistance:
  • Sermorelin: no (Ala² cleaved rapidly)
  • CJC-1295 (both forms): yes (D-Ala² substitution)
  • Tesamorelin: yes (trans-3-hexenoyl N-terminal block)
More references

Related material