Source comparison
Comparison: CJC-1295 No DAC vs With DAC vs Endogenous GHRH
Plasma Half-Life ~30 minutes 6–8 days <2 minutes No DAC extends endogenous kinetics just enough for research utility without sustained accumulation Release Pattern Pulsatile (discrete peaks) Sustained elevation Pulsatile (ultradian bursts) Only No DAC replicat
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- Plasma Half-Life
- ~30 minutes
- 6–8 days
- <2 minutes
- No DAC extends endogenous kinetics just enough for research utility without sustained accumulation
- Release Pattern
- Pulsatile (discrete peaks)
- Sustained elevation
- Pulsatile (ultradian bursts)
- Only No DAC replicates natural pulsatility required for physiological studies
- Dosing Frequency
- 2–3× daily
- 1× weekly
- Continuous endogenous
- No DAC requires planning but allows temporal control; DAC simplifies dosing but sacrifices pattern fidelity
- GH Receptor Sensitivity
- Preserved (clearance allows resynthesis)
- Reduced (sustained occupancy downregulates)
- Preserved (natural clearance)
- Sustained exposure from DAC triggers receptor desensitisation within 48–72 hours
- IGF-1 Production Efficiency
- High (pulsatile signalling optimises hepatic response)
- Moderate (receptor downregulation reduces per-GH output)
- High (natural pattern)
- Pulsatile GH produces 30–40% more IGF-1 per nanogram than continuous exposure
- Research Application Fit
- Physiological dynamics, feedback loops, acute signalling
- Chronic GH exposure effects, long-term anabolic studies
- Baseline reference (impractical to administer)
- No DAC is the tool for studying natural GH physiology; DAC is the tool for studying sustained GH effects