Source comparison
MK-677 Muscle Growth Research Evidence: Comparison
| Study Population | Duration | Daily Dose | Mean LBM Gain | Strength Improvement | Body Fat Change | Professional Assessment ||—|—|—|—|—|—|| Healthy elderly (sedentary) | 24 months | 25mg | 1.1kg | No significant change | No change | Gains likely water/glycog
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- | Study Population | Duration | Daily Dose | Mean LBM Gain | Strength Improvement | Body Fat Change | Professional Assessment ||—|—|—|—|—|—|| Healthy elderly (sedentary) | 24 months | 25mg | 1.1kg | No significant change | No change | Gains likely water/glycogen, not contractile tissue. Functional capacity unchanged || GH-deficient adults (sedentary) | 12 months | 25mg | 2.0kg | Not measured | No change | IGF-1 rose 89%, but absence of fat loss suggests metabolic partitioning benefit without hypertrophy || Resistance-trained athletes | 8 weeks | 25mg | 2.8kg | 1RM squat +12kg, bench +7kg | −1.2% body fat | Only cohort showing strength gains. Training stimulus is the critical variable || Frail elderly (low protein intake) | 16 weeks | 25mg | 0.6kg | Grip strength +8% | No change | Modest outcome. Protein intake <1.2g/kg may have limited anabolic response |
- The comparison makes the mechanism clear: MK-677 muscle growth research evidence consistently shows that tissue gains correlate with training stimulus intensity, not peptide dose alone. Sedentary cohorts gain water and glycogen. Trained cohorts gain muscle. But only when progressive overload is applied.