Hydrogen Inhalation “Review”
July 11, 2021Hydrogen Water vs. Caffeine & The Impact On Sleep Deprivation | Drink HRW
July 23, 2021My Experience With CJC-1295 (With DAC)
2mg/week
As some readers know, I had some nasty long-term effects from COVID-19. I alluded to a very stupid decision I made while asymptomatic and quarantined in my article “My experience with COVID-19”, in which I drank several bottles of wine one night, while very bored and restless. This was after a heavy workout, and then I added a heavy workout in the morning to try to compensate. I ended up getting moderately sick for a couple of days. Nothing serious, but what happened to my blood sugar and metabolism was absolute carnage.
My fasting glucose had been rock solid for the last couple of years: 4.1–4.3 mmol. Even after a night of alcohol and pizza, I would only spike to 4.5–4.6 mmol. What happened after COVID-19 was a shock to my system. My fasting glucose rapidly rose and broke past 6 mmol, consistently. For context, this was a higher reading than when I was 270 lbs., working 100–120 hours a week, eating like trash, and drinking almost every day as a poorly advised tool for stress relief. After COVID-19, I couldn’t fast; to be more precise, I couldn’t even time-restrict my eating for the first couple of weeks after COVID-19. It took over a month for me to be able to get back to doing 48-hour fasts, and it was agony. I abandoned multiple attempts during this time, as I felt dizzy and faint.
From late November until January, I gained 30 lbs. But realistically, I gained more, as I believe I was also losing muscle mass. I slowly started chipping away, and throughout February I was able to maintain my weight. I ordered the peptide CJC-1295 (with DAC) in order to try to repair my metabolism, but first I wanted to make sure I could stabilize my weight, body composition, diet, and energy expenditure before I started the experiment. If I were still “on the rise”, I wouldn’t be able to properly assess any potential efficacy of the peptide.
What is CJC-1295? (With DAC)
CJC-129 and DAC are both peptides that act as growth hormone–releasing hormones, the only difference being they have a different half life. CJC-1295 has been shown to elevate plasma growth hormone by 2 times to 10 times for 6 days, and plasma IGF-1 levels by 1.5–3 times for up to 9–11 days with a single dose. Growth hormone, or more commonly known as human growth hormone (HGH) may increase lean body mass and stimulate fat loss, although the jury is still out, with some conclusions being that increased HGH could just lead to more stored water in muscle.1 IGF-1, or insulin-like growth factor 1, is a hormone that has anabolic effects in adults (anabolism meaning “building up”). IGF-1 administration has also been shown to reduce hemoglobin A1C levels in type 1 and 2 diabetics, leading to a lower requirement of insulin dosages.
My justification for experimenting with CJC-129 was this: Increased growth hormone could potentially lead to increased lean muscle mass, while increased IGF-1 could potentially lead to restoration of my damaged blood glucose levels and metabolic processes.
What is the Evidence for CJC-1295?
1. At 60 μg/kg, CJC-1295 has been shown to raise GH and IGF-1 significantly in young healthy males after a single injection.2
2. Safety and efficacy have been established in healthy subjects for durations of up to 49 days. A dose-dependent response has been observed, with the lowest dose administered starting at 30 μg/kg, with safety being established, particularly at the doses of 30 and 60 μg/kg (higher doses came with higher side effects). Of note, a cumulative effect was observed, with stronger results after multiple injections. As a criticism of my self-experiment, even a raise to 30 μg/kg from 20 μg/kg resulted in significantly greater results.3
It is of note that a patient died during a clinical trial exploring the use of CJC-1295. However, the researchers did not believe it was likely that CJC-1295 was the cause of death.4
My Dosing Protocol
In an abundance of caution, I went with a smaller dosage with this peptide: 2mg per week, which is in line with the lower results at 20 μg/kg. I opted for this lower dosage for several reasons;
1. Dosing is typically recommended based on an individual’s lean body mass, not their total mass.5 This would have put me at a dosage of 25 μg/kg, splitting the difference between the 20 and 30 μg/kg dosages.
2. Vials were overwhelmingly only available in either 2 mg or 5 mg dosages, which would have put me into the higher dosage range of 50 to 60 μg/kg.
3. 60 μg/kg is still established as safe. However, research is not published beyond 49 days, and I intended to administer it for 70 days. Due to the cumulative effects of multiple doses, I decided to err on the lower side.
I injected 2 mg per week subcutaneously. I did experience itching, irritation, and swelling around the injection site.
My Results
I decided to measure multiple outcomes to figure out if CJC-1295 was likely to have had any effect. I measured sleep; not that I was expecting any sleep changes, but since I was monitoring my calories, it was simple to track my sleep and recovery, just in case.
I monitored my fasting blood sugar at three different points, for baseline, 5 weeks in and at completion (10 weeks). I also measured my blood pressure and heart rate. An improvement in body composition could have potentially led to changes in blood pressure.
Finally, I measured my body composition with the FitTrack scale. I’ve previously reviewed this scale, giving significant warnings about the reliability. That said, since I measured after the same type of feeding schedule the day before, each period, at the same time of day, it should have been reasonably accurate against the prior measurements done in the same way.
So, what did I find?
Table 1: Fasting Glucose, Blood Pressure, and Heart Rate
I did not find any benefit to my blood sugar, or blood pressure and heart rate, at the completion of this experiment. Perhaps my blood sugar was more consistent when considering the range from extremes. However, it was still significantly elevated beyond what I normally am. My blood pressure increased substantially, which is interesting, as my weight went down.
Test | Fasting Glucose | Blood Pressure | Heart Rate |
Baseline, 12 hours fasted | 5.3 mmol | 122/72 | 51 |
Baseline, 36hrs fasted | 4.5 mmol | 127/78 | 60 |
Baseline, 12 hours fasted after intoxication + carb-heavy meal (pizza) | 6.3 mmol | 136/71 | 75 |
5 weeks, 12 hours fasted | 5.2 mmol | 138/75 | 67 |
5 weeks, 36 hours fasted | 5.7 mmol | 136/82 | 68 |
5 weeks, 12 hours fasted after intoxication + carb-heavy meal (pizza) | 5.2 mmol | 125/69 | 84 |
10 weeks, 12 hours fasted | 5.2 mmol | 135/85 | 65 |
10 weeks, 36 hours fasted | 5.1 mmol | 138/87 | 63 |
10 weeks, 12 hours fasted after intoxication + carb-heavy meal (pizza) | 5.9 mmol | 141/81 | 77 |
Table 2: Sleep, Recovery, and Calories Burned
There was nothing to note in sleep score, quality, or recovery. That said, my active calories burned rose significantly during the 10 weeks for several reasons. In particular, the weather improved and I started walking more. Additionally, around the beginning of week 6, I took possession of an acreage I bought. The acreage needed (and still needs) hundreds of hours of grueling hardscaping and landscaping, as it was an overgrown forest when I took possession. I can say that I felt “less sore” than I expected. Over the last several years, every time I have tried to significantly up my activity, I have become “broken” after a few weeks. This did not happen this time around.
One thing to note is my total sleep time rose in line with my active calories burned. This significant observation is enough to cast doubt that the peptide aided in my recovery; the increased sleep may have been the causative factor here. The other great confounding variable is I am able to sleep more now. In past years I worked 100+ hours a week and was quite sleep-deprived. As my businesses have become more and more established, I have eased back to 60- to 70-hour work weeks. This allows me to “sleep in” a bit, and recover better.
Period | Sleep Time | Sleep Score | REM t | REM % | DEEP t | DEEP % | Latency | RHR | HRV | RR | Body Temp | Calories Burned |
Baseline | 377.7 | 71.2 | 74.5 | 19.5 | 132.4 | 35.8 | 11.5 | 44.1 | 80.7 | 14.4 | -0.08 | 1085.4 |
5 Weeks | 398.3 | 72.1 | 73.9 | 18.4 | 123.6 | 31.5 | 14.7 | 43.4 | 77.9 | 14.5 | -0.05 | 1285.5 |
10 Weeks | 423.7 | 74.2 | 79.4 | 18.5 | 125.83 | 30.1 | 13.9 | 43.8 | 78.2 | 14.9 | 0.04 | 1463.8 |
Table 3: Weight and Body Composition
Between baseline and week 5 I lost 7.7 lbs. I fasted 2 additional days, and my average calorie consumption on non-fasting days was about 4000 calories (4000 calories a day average, 5 days a week). I burned 7000 additional active calories during this period. Burning 3500 calories = 1 lb. of fat loss. I should have been expected to lose just under 4.3 lbs.
I achieved an additional 3.4 lbs. of fat loss above expectations in the first 5 weeks.
Between weeks 5–10, I lost an additional 2.7 lbs. I burned an additional 13,244 active calories as compared to my baseline “consistent weight” number, and I again fasted an additional 2 days, for an additional 8000 calories over baseline. This is an anticipated 6 lbs. of loss, rather than the 2.7 lbs. I lost.
Of course, this isn’t correcting for a new base metabolic rate, given my lower weight. A loss of 7.7 lbs. should not have accounted for this difference. However, let’s err on the side of caution. When comparing the weight at end of week 5 to that at the end of week 10, and assuming my weight had stabilized by the end of week 5, I burned an extra 6,240.50 calories and fasted the same number of days as I did in the first 35 days. That is a loss of 1.8 lbs. expected, rather than the 2.5 lbs. I lost.
Or, we can consider the totality of the 70 days. I had a combined caloric deficit (estimated) of 36,244, for an expected weight loss of 10.4 lbs. I lost 10.4 lbs.
When considering this, I did not lose any additional weight as would be expected. My lifestyle changes account for the entire change in body composition.
Date | Weight | Body Fat % | Muscle Rate % | Metabolic Age | Fat Mass | Body Water % |
Baseline | 245.4 | 31 | 69.3 | 42 | 76.1 | 49.3 |
5 Weeks | 237.7 | 29.3 | 69.1 | 42 | 69.7 | 50.6 |
10 Weeks | 235 | 29.1 | 68.8 | 43 | 68.3 | 50.7 |
Takeaway
In evaluating my results, I do not see any evidence for efficacy of CJC-1295 (with DAC) at a 25 μg/kg dosage for a 70-day period. Perhaps the dosage was insufficient, or perhaps a raise in hGH and IGF-1 was not a suitable strategy to combat my sudden change in body composition. Overall, I consider this experiment a null hypothesis. The peptide, simply put, did not work for me at the dose and duration administered.
References
1Liu, H., Bravata, D. M., Olkin, I., Nayak, S., Roberts, B., Garber, A. M., & Hoffman, A. R. (2007). Systematic review: The safety and efficacy of growth hormone in the healthy elderly. Annals of Internal Medicine.
2Ionescu, M., & Frohman, L. A. (2006). Pulsatile secretion of growth hormone (GH) persists during continuous stimulation by CJC-1295, a long-acting GH-releasing hormone analog. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 91(12): 4792–4797.
3Teichman, S. L., Neale, A., Lawrence, B., Gagnon, C., Castaigne, J.-P., & Frohman, L. A. (2006). Prolonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 91(3): 799–805.
4https://www.aidsmap.com/news/jul-2006/lipodystrophy-study-halted-after-patient-death
5Barras, M., & Legg, A. (2017). Drug dosing in obese adults. Australian Prescriber 40(5): 189–193.
8 Comments
good post
Hi Damian, I wasn’t able to find anything published from either of these doctors on their researchgate profiles. Have they published actual research, or is this just blogs/advice they give based on anecdotal findings and conjecture based hypotheses? If it is the latter, which I found plenty of regarding various peptide protocols from many physicians, then I dismissed it. That type of haphazard approach is quite dangerous, and is my biggest criticism of the biohacking community, and many integrative and anti-aging physicians.
Some of them may have found far better protocols than those which have been published. If they have, it is their scientific and medical duty to design well controlled trials to test their protocols to see if they actually work. If they aren’t doing this, it is to protect their ego and income.
Ipamorelin is sold on the black market. The company that developed it and was funding the research, Novo Nordisk, discontinued it due to lack of efficacy. It failed to reach primary or secondary end points, showing results no better than placebo:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00384-014-2030-8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipamorelin
Apologies for the multiple comments, I missed one part. You mention that ipamorelin was discontinued. Where was it discontinued as it is still actively prescribed/recommened by doctors I know (typically as a ipam/cjc no dac combo).
It’s plausible (and likely) that with the underground popularity of self-experimentation with peptides, there have been protocols discovered that are significantly more effective than those published in the randomized controlled trials. The big issue is the lack of tracking, publication, controls, side effect reporting etc. This is something I want to address in the not for profit that is *lowly* coming together, myjourney.science
real good information is in peptide protocols from William A. Seeds, you can find it at amazon. If you combine a GHRH and a GHRP
you get a much higher pulse of HGH, than with each one single. Usually Ipamorelin and Tesamorelin or Ipamorelin and CJC 1295 without DAC are used. Take it in the morning, before exercise and before going to bed. Without training even with HGH nearly no muscle growth. You can improve the training with blood flow restriction training. Either the original from KAATSU or the cheaper one from Bstrong. Taking essentiel aminoacids, perfect amino from Dr. Minkoff improves it further. As you may have a postviral syndrom ozone therapy (major autohemotherapy) 10x, every second day will resolve that.
Hi Damian, advised by who? The published clinical research is weekly. Perhaps it is more effective this way, but I’d like to see some data on this, or at least strong rationale based on data.
I have heard from a few people they have had success with Ipamorelin, and no additional success when combining. This is interesting as ipamorelin was discontinued due to lack of efficacy
Typically I try to test one molecule at a time. Testing multiple together, at once, isn’t good science, or good biohacking.
Feel free to read up on any of the research provided by Dr William Seeds , Dr Elizabeth Yurth, etc… they are way beyond my knowledge base and are at the forefront when it comes to peptides. Logically if you are trying to mimick your body’s natural response, you are not doing so using DAC. Also, using a GHRH alongside a GHRP seems to yield much better results. Once again, I am just basing this on research I have read and listened to from people I consider experts in the field, which also does match my own personal experiences alongside many others I talk with in the “biohacking” community
It is typically advised to go with the “non DAC” version of CJC and inject daily to help mimic your own GH pulse. In addition, typically CJC should be combined with Ipamorelin. I don’t believe the protocol you used is best practice. That being said, I believe the results from CJC/Ipam are modest at best, and I have had more significant results in terms of body composition with Tesamorelin / Ipamorelin.