.gif "IP Gear")
I posted this in a similarly related thread but didnt get a response, so I thought I'd post it here. I have a couple questions. One of the board sources has both cjc 1293 and cjc 1295 (no dac). I know that the 1295 without the drug afinity complex has a much shorter life than the DAC version, but still a couple hrs? My reading has brought me to the conclusion (correct me if I am wrong) that shorter pulses of gh increase, as with cjc 1293 and ghrp-2, are optimal. I also know that the pulse length is more dynamic and shorter in duration for men, compared to a more steady release for women. This may explain the benefit in shorter lengths of increased levels. Some of this confusion may as well be due to earlier sources incorrectly labeling cjc 1293 as "1295."
I am looking to run either ghrp-6, 2, or ipam, along with cjc-1293/cjc-1295 and would lend ear to some input or experience. Gaining weight wouldnt be a problem right now, especially if I am leaning out at the same time. I will also be taking an otc somatostatin inhibitor, in hopes that it will aid in gh pulse. I am on a budget, so I prob wont be including igf-1, etc. However, if I can get it cheap enough, what kind of impact would be made by MGF? I hear very mixed reviews, but do have a couple lagging sites I'd like to bring up. Thanks, and I apologize for the multiple directions in conversation.
I am looking to run either ghrp-6, 2, or ipam, along with cjc-1293/cjc-1295 and would lend ear to some input or experience. Gaining weight wouldnt be a problem right now, especially if I am leaning out at the same time. I will also be taking an otc somatostatin inhibitor, in hopes that it will aid in gh pulse. I am on a budget, so I prob wont be including igf-1, etc. However, if I can get it cheap enough, what kind of impact would be made by MGF? I hear very mixed reviews, but do have a couple lagging sites I'd like to bring up. Thanks, and I apologize for the multiple directions in conversation.
