Source comparison
IGF-1 Dynamics: Pulsatile vs Sustained
Both peptides elevate circulating IGF-1, but through qualitatively different kinetics. CJC-1295 non-DAC (pulsatile GH, peak and return) produces IGF-1 elevations with the same temporal pattern — hepatic IGF-1 synthesis rises transiently, returning toward basel
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- Both peptides elevate circulating IGF-1, but through qualitatively different kinetics. CJC-1295 non-DAC (pulsatile GH, peak and return) produces IGF-1 elevations with the same temporal pattern — hepatic IGF-1 synthesis rises transiently, returning toward baseline by 24 hours. CJC-1295 DAC (sustained GH) produces sustained IGF-1 plateau elevation: in human research subjects, mean IGF-1 SD score increased from approximately −0.4 at baseline to +0.8 at day 7 and was maintained through day 28 of repeated dosing.
- GHRP-6 produces pulsatile IGF-1 elevations aligned with its GH peak, with a lag of approximately 8–12 hours (reflecting hepatic synthesis time). When GHRP-6 is dosed 2–3 times daily, IGF-1 shows a modest plateau effect, though the fluctuations are substantially greater than DAC-CJC-1295. In anabolic biology research requiring sustained IGF-1 elevation (bone density, muscle protein synthesis, body composition endpoints), CJC-1295 DAC provides a more controlled steady-state IGF-1 exposure.
- IGF-1 endpoint attribution in combined CJC-1295 + GHRP-6 studies requires careful design: the 3.2-fold synergistic GH peak produces a disproportionately elevated IGF-1 plateau that complicates attribution of biological effects to GH vs IGF-1 vs GHS-R1a peripheral effects. Individual-peptide control arms are essential.