Experience With CJC-1295

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. 

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.

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.

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.