You gotta a point here. Mk-677 was my only experience with any kind if peptides. Noticed fullness and bloat. First time it flared up some gyno, I think I'm sensitive to prolactin. Second time I tried superiors, no gynk symptoms.Just keep it simple and take hgh,
You wouldn't be asking whats better, taking a shot of testosterone or doing some complicated protocol of HCG, clomid, nolvadex etc hoping to match 100mg of test
in my experiance peptides "work" faster then gh, like visual difference, they seem to have more of a cieling though compared to gh.
i think gh is better to be thought of as a long term thing where as peptides more short term or cycling.
cjc/ghrp even at 2x ed 400mcg each, great effect, arguably any different then 3-4x ed.
all that said i keep going back n forth on the gh idea recently.. makes me a lil nervous but...
How would u compare peps to HGH?
Like going ghrp/cjc 100mcg x 3 a day equivalence to how many eco HGH?
Didn't B boy say in his thread he liked peps better. Like the ghr2 and 6.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Professional Muscle mobile app
Here is my issue with the whole thing. When you purchase peptid es the compound inside the vial is most likely what it's labeled as (aside from myostatin inhibitors). When you purchase GH weather it's labeled as generic (blue tops) or pharm grade (nords) you don't know if it is what it claims to be without getting it tested. It's a lot of money to buy GH on its own let alone running lab work. If I had a legit source that was domestic and wasnt shipped from BFE being thrown around a hot cargo bay of an airplane and then trucks I would invest in it 100%. There is no argument that HGH is superior to peptide but peptid e are afordable, they work, and they are most likely what they are labeled as.
Here is my issue with the whole thing. When you purchase peptid es the compound inside the vial is most likely what it's labeled as (aside from myostatin inhibitors).
Here is my issue with the whole thing. When you purchase peptid es the compound inside the vial is most likely what it's labeled as (aside from myostatin inhibitors). When you purchase GH weather it's labeled as generic (blue tops) or pharm grade (nords) you don't know if it is what it claims to be without getting it tested. It's a lot of money to buy GH on its own let alone running lab work. If I had a legit source that was domestic and wasnt shipped from BFE being thrown around a hot cargo bay of an airplane and then trucks I would invest in it 100%. There is no argument that HGH is superior to peptide but peptid e are afordable, they work, and they are most likely what they are labeled as.
Which is better?
Well, that is an IMPOSSIBLE question to answer without taking into consideration the relevant variables, such as compound type and dosage.
Obviously, if someone is using 12 iu of exo. GH daily, there is no peptide combo, regardless of dose, which can match that dose of exo. GH it in terms of GH or IGF-1 elevation. However, when we are comparing doses of 6-8 iu or less, peptides absolutely can compete and in many cases provide better results than exo. GH.
For example, if someone says "which is better, 100 mcg of GHRP-6 three times daily...or 6 iu of exo. GH?", the exo. GH is obviously going to come out on top. But...if someone says "what is better, 5 mg Dac/week and 25 mg MK-677/day...or 3 iu of exo. GH?"...then the answer is most definitely the Dac and MK-677.
Lab work has proven this many, many times over. In fact, high-dose Dac in combination with MK-677 has increased some people's IGF-1 levels so high (600+) that it usually requires 8 iu of exo. GH/day (or more) to achieve comparable lab results.
It's fairly easy to achieve GH and IGF-1 readings comparable to 5 iu of GH with even low dose Dac and MK-677.
So, before anyone asks this question again they would do well to be more specific by comparing particular compounds and dosages, rather than making general comparisons that cannot be answered with any accuracy.
These peptides are made in the same labs/factories as hgh, why would they make legit peptides and fake gh. Plenty of good gh in the sponsor section
Which is better?
Well, that is an IMPOSSIBLE question to answer without taking into consideration the relevant variables, such as compound type and dosage.
Obviously, if someone is using 12 iu of exo. GH daily, there is no peptide combo, regardless of dose, which can match that dose of exo. GH it in terms of GH or IGF-1 elevation. However, when we are comparing doses of 6-8 iu or less, peptides absolutely can compete and in many cases provide better results than exo. GH.
For example, if someone says "which is better, 100 mcg of GHRP-6 three times daily...or 6 iu of exo. GH?", the exo. GH is obviously going to come out on top. But...if someone says "what is better, 5 mg Dac/week and 25 mg MK-677/day...or 3 iu of exo. GH?"...then the answer is most definitely the Dac and MK-677.
Lab work has proven this many, many times over. In fact, high-dose Dac in combination with MK-677 has increased some people's IGF-1 levels so high (600+) that it usually requires 8 iu of exo. GH/day (or more) to achieve comparable lab results.
It's fairly easy to achieve GH and IGF-1 readings comparable to 5 iu of GH with even low dose Dac and MK-677.
So, before anyone asks this question again they would do well to be more specific by comparing particular compounds and dosages, rather than making general comparisons that cannot be answered with any accuracy.