Source comparison
CJC-1295 no DAC & Ipamorelin Fat Loss: Protocol Comparison
CJC-1295 no DAC + Ipamorelin (3x daily, continuous) Morning, afternoon, pre-sleep 250–350% above baseline Moderate-high after 8 weeks Excellent (95–98%) Best for short protocols (≤8 weeks); requires cycling beyond this window to maintain efficacy CJC-1295 no D
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- CJC-1295 no DAC + Ipamorelin (3x daily, continuous)
- Morning, afternoon, pre-sleep
- 250–350% above baseline
- Moderate-high after 8 weeks
- Excellent (95–98%)
- Best for short protocols (≤8 weeks); requires cycling beyond this window to maintain efficacy
- CJC-1295 no DAC + Ipamorelin (2x daily, 5-day-on / 2-day-off)
- Morning, pre-sleep
- 200–300% above baseline
- Low
- Optimal for 12–16 week research phases; cycling preserves receptor sensitivity without sacrificing outcomes
- Ipamorelin solo (3x daily)
- Morning, post-workout, pre-sleep
- 150–200% above baseline
- Moderate after 10 weeks
- Good (90–93%)
- Less effective than combination but useful when GHRH pathway contraindications exist
- CJC-1295 DAC + Ipamorelin
- Weekly CJC-1295 DAC injection + daily Ipamorelin
- 180–250% above baseline (blunted peaks)
- High. DAC version suppresses natural pulsatility
- Good (88–92%)
- Convenience of weekly dosing offset by reduced peak amplitude and higher adaptation risk
- The 5/2 cycling pattern with twice-daily dosing consistently outperforms continuous three-times-daily protocols in research extending beyond 10 weeks. The data shows that more frequent dosing doesn't produce proportionally greater outcomes. It accelerates receptor adaptation.