Source comparison
[CJC-1295 No DAC Fat Loss Research]: Protocol Comparison
Healthy adults, no dietary control 60mcg/kg twice weekly 12 weeks −1.1kg (−3.2%) +1.2kg (+2.1%) No structured exercise or caloric restriction. Fat loss may reflect increased NEAT rather than direct lipolysis Modest but significant reduction in total fat mass;
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- Healthy adults, no dietary control
- 60mcg/kg twice weekly
- 12 weeks
- −1.1kg (−3.2%)
- +1.2kg (+2.1%)
- No structured exercise or caloric restriction. Fat loss may reflect increased NEAT rather than direct lipolysis
- Modest but significant reduction in total fat mass; effect size comparable to moderate caloric deficit alone
- Obese adults with MetS, calorie-restricted
- 30mcg/kg three times weekly
- 24 weeks
- −2.8kg VAT (−11%)
- +0.9kg (+1.8%)
- Caloric restriction was mandatory. Unclear if peptide provided additive benefit beyond diet
- VAT reduction exceeded subcutaneous fat loss, consistent with higher GHR density in visceral adipocytes; peptide may amplify calorie restriction effects
- Rodent model, pair-fed
- 100mcg/kg daily
- 8 weeks
- −18% body fat
- +6% lean mass
- Rodent GH physiology and receptor distribution differ significantly from humans. Translatability limited
- Dramatic fat loss in animal models not replicated at same magnitude in humans; suggests species-specific GH sensitivity
- Resistance-trained athletes
- 100mcg pre-sleep + 100mcg post-training
- 16 weeks
- −1.4kg (−4.1%)
- +2.3kg (+3.2%)
- Small sample size (n=22); no placebo control for training effect
- Timing peptide around endogenous GH surges (sleep, post-exercise) produced greater lean mass gains than previous trials; fat loss secondary to increased training capacity