Source comparison
Ipamorelin vs Other Secretagogues — Fat Loss Comparison
Ipamorelin 12–15 Minimal (<10%) None Conditional (requires deficit) Most selective profile. GH elevation without metabolic interference. Best for research focused on pure GH-mediated lipolysis without confounding appetite or cortisol effects. GHRP-6 13–18 Mode
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- Ipamorelin
- 12–15
- Minimal (<10%)
- None
- Conditional (requires deficit)
- Most selective profile. GH elevation without metabolic interference. Best for research focused on pure GH-mediated lipolysis without confounding appetite or cortisol effects.
- GHRP-6
- 13–18
- Moderate (40–60%)
- High
- Inconsistent (appetite surge negates deficit)
- Strong GH response but ghrelin activation drives hyperphagia, making fat loss difficult outside tightly controlled settings. Cortisol elevation opposes lipolysis.
- CJC-1295 (DAC)
- Sustained 8–12 (chronic elevation)
- Low
- Limited (receptor downregulation over time)
- Extends GH half-life but loses pulsatility. Chronic elevation blunts receptor sensitivity and insulin signalling. Not ideal for fat loss protocols exceeding 4–6 weeks.
- Hexarelin
- 18–22
- High (60–80%)
- Moderate
- Poor (cortisol-driven fat storage)
- Highest GH peak but cortisol surge activates lipoprotein lipase and promotes visceral fat deposition. Net effect often neutral or negative for body composition.
- MK-677
- 10–14 (oral bioavailability)
- Variable (depends on appetite control)
- Non-peptide ghrelin mimetic with oral dosing convenience. GH elevation is reliable but appetite increase (15–30% caloric intake surge) makes fat loss contingent on strict dietary adherence.