Source comparison
CJC-1295 Versus Short-Acting GHRPs: Cycle Structure Comparison
CJC-1295 DAC 6–8 days 12–16 weeks 4–6 weeks Sustained GHRH receptor occupancy; desensitisation begins at 10–14 days of continuous exposure Requires longer cycles than traditional peptides due to extended pharmacokinetics. Standard 4-week protocols underutilise
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- CJC-1295 DAC
- 6–8 days
- 12–16 weeks
- 4–6 weeks
- Sustained GHRH receptor occupancy; desensitisation begins at 10–14 days of continuous exposure
- Requires longer cycles than traditional peptides due to extended pharmacokinetics. Standard 4-week protocols underutilise the compound's sustained release profile
- CJC-1295 No DAC
- 30 minutes
- 8–12 weeks
- 2–4 weeks
- Pulsatile receptor activation; minimal sustained occupancy between doses
- Functions similarly to short-acting GHRPs; benefits from traditional cycling to prevent tachyphylaxis
- GHRP-2 / GHRP-6
- 20–30 minutes
- 4–8 weeks
- Rapid receptor activation and clearance; desensitisation risk with chronic dosing above 3x daily
- Short half-life necessitates frequent dosing; cycling every 4–6 weeks maintains receptor sensitivity
- Ipamorelin
- 2 hours
- Selective ghrelin receptor agonism; less receptor fatigue than GHRP-2 but still benefits from cycling
- Longer half-life than GHRP-2 but still cleared within hours; standard cycling applies
- MK-677 (Ibutamoren)
- 24 hours
- Continuous (often not cycled)
- Variable (4–8 weeks if cycled)
- Oral ghrelin mimetic; sustained receptor activation leads to tolerance after 6–12 months
- Non-peptide structure allows continuous use but receptor desensitisation occurs over months, not weeks