CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin Blend UK - Research Peptides UK
CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin Blend UK: What the Science Actually Supports
CJC-1295 No DAC and Ipamorelin are frequently sold together as a dual peptide blend. The scientific rationale is that one component acts through the growth hormone-releasing hormone receptor and the other acts through the ghrelin receptor. That rationale is biologically credible, but direct human evidence for the exact co-formulated blend is absent from the published clinical record reviewed for this article.
Direct Answer
The product commonly called CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin is a mixture of two chemically distinct peptides. The first component is more accurately called Modified GRF 1-29, a 29-residue analogue of the active portion of human growth hormone-releasing hormone. The second is Ipamorelin, a five-residue synthetic growth hormone secretagogue that activates the ghrelin receptor.
Older human studies show that natural GHRH combined with members of the growth hormone-releasing peptide class can produce a larger acute growth hormone response than either pathway alone. This class-level finding explains the commercial interest in the blend. It does not establish the effectiveness, long-term safety or clinical value of the exact Modified GRF 1-29 plus Ipamorelin combination.
No current UK marketing authorisation for either component or the combined blend was identified in the official sources checked in July 2026. Both growth hormone-releasing hormone analogues and growth hormone secretagogues are prohibited in sport under the 2026 World Anti-Doping Agency list.
Key Points
What Is a CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin Blend?
It is not one new molecule. It is a co-formulated mixture of two separate peptides that act through different receptors within the growth hormone regulatory system.
The phrase “blend” generally means the two ingredients are placed in the same container in a stated proportion. Mixing them does not create a new covalent peptide, a new approved active ingredient or a clinically validated fixed-dose combination.
A genuine scientific description must identify each component independently. It should also state the salt or counterion form, quantity basis, ratio and analytical methods used to verify the finished mixture.
Plain-English explanation: imagine two keys placed in the same box. One key is designed for the GHRH receptor and the other for the ghrelin receptor. Putting them in the same box does not prove how well they work together, whether the amounts are correct or whether the mixture is safe.
Why “CJC-1295 No DAC” Is a Confusing Name
The search term is popular, but the stricter scientific name for the no-DAC component is Modified GRF 1-29.
The research compound originally called CJC-1295 includes a Drug Affinity Complex, or DAC, attached through an added lysine. That modification was designed to bind albumin and prolong exposure. The human CJC-1295 studies published in 2006 investigated this DAC-containing molecule.
Products advertised as “CJC-1295 No DAC” usually contain the shorter Modified GRF 1-29 sequence without the albumin-binding extension. The two forms have different molecular identities, expected masses, pharmacokinetic behaviour and testing requirements.
A supplier or article that cites CJC-1295 DAC trial results without clearly explaining that the blend contains Modified GRF 1-29 risks applying evidence from the wrong molecule.
The Two Peptide Components
Each component has its own structure, receptor and evidence history.
Modified GRF 1-29
Modified GRF 1-29 is a 29-residue analogue of the active N-terminal portion of human GHRH. Four positions are changed to improve resistance to enzymatic breakdown.
It acts at the GHRH receptor. Direct published human evidence for the exact tetrasubstituted no-DAC sequence is limited. Much of the surrounding discussion relies on natural GHRH, related analogues or CJC-1295 with DAC.
Ipamorelin
Ipamorelin is a synthetic pentapeptide developed as a selective growth hormone secretagogue. Its sequence includes non-standard amino-acid residues.
Ipamorelin activates the ghrelin receptor, also called GHS-R1a. Early human pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic research measured its disposition and growth hormone response. A later phase 2 programme studied postoperative ileus, not body composition, recovery or anti-ageing.
| Feature | Modified GRF 1-29 | Ipamorelin |
|---|---|---|
| Common search name | CJC-1295 No DAC | Ipamorelin or Ipamorelin acetate |
| Length | 29 residues | 5 residues |
| Primary receptor | GHRH receptor | Ghrelin receptor, GHS-R1a |
| Biological role | Mimics an upstream hypothalamic GHRH signal | Mimics a growth hormone secretagogue signal |
| Direct human evidence | Limited for the exact no-DAC compound | Early PK and PD studies plus a phase 2 ileus programme |
| UK authorisation | None identified | None identified |
Interactive Dual Receptor Explorer
Select either component or the proposed combination to see what is supported and what remains an inference.
GHRH Receptor Pathway
Modified GRF 1-29 is designed to activate GHRH receptors on pituitary somatotroph cells.
Ghrelin Receptor Pathway
Ipamorelin activates GHS-R1a, a receptor involved in growth hormone secretagogue signalling.
Proposed blend effect
Class-level human studies with GHRH plus older GHRPs show that simultaneous receptor stimulation can produce a larger acute growth hormone response than either stimulus alone. No peer-reviewed human trial specifically testing Modified GRF 1-29 plus Ipamorelin was identified.
How the Dual Pathway Is Thought to Work
The rationale combines two upstream signals that converge on pituitary growth hormone release.
GHRH Receptor Signal
Modified GRF 1-29 activates the GHRH receptor and supports intracellular cyclic AMP signalling.
Ghrelin Receptor Signal
Ipamorelin activates GHS-R1a through a separate receptor pathway linked to intracellular calcium signalling.
Pituitary Convergence
The signals can converge on somatotroph cells and may amplify acute growth hormone release.
Downstream GH and IGF-1 Axis
Growth hormone can influence IGF-1, metabolism, fluid balance and many tissue-signalling systems.
Mechanism Is Not Outcome Evidence
A larger growth hormone pulse is a pharmacological measurement. It does not prove improved sleep, recovery, fat loss, muscle growth, appearance or longevity. Those outcomes require controlled studies of the exact combination in the relevant population.
What Does the Human Evidence for “Synergy” Actually Show?
The word synergy is often used as though it describes a clinical benefit. The published research mainly describes acute hormone secretion.
In 1990, researchers reported that a growth hormone-releasing peptide and GHRH stimulated growth hormone release through partly independent mechanisms and produced a synergistic response when given together. Later studies with GHRP-6 and GHRP-2 also demonstrated larger acute GH responses when paired with GHRH.
These experiments support the general biological concept that the GHRH receptor and ghrelin receptor pathways can interact. They used older secretagogues and defined research conditions. They did not use the exact commercial blend discussed here.
Ipamorelin was described in 1998 as a selective growth hormone secretagogue with less stimulation of ACTH and cortisol in preclinical models than some earlier GHRPs. That selectivity is one reason it became commercially popular. Selectivity does not establish long-term safety, clinical benefit or superiority in a co-formulated blend.
Evidence strength by question
Mechanistically established
Shown with other GHRPs
No direct human trial identified
Dr Rimas Geiga
Medical Doctor, Nutrition and Wellness Adviser
Dr Geiga’s proposed review focus is the distinction between acute growth hormone secretion and clinically meaningful metabolic outcomes. A larger laboratory hormone response should not be converted into claims about fat loss, lean mass, recovery or healthy ageing without direct trials.
What Research Exists for the Individual Components?
The component evidence is uneven and cannot be added together as though it were a clinical trial of the blend.
Design and Mechanistic Evidence
The tetrasubstituted 29-residue sequence was used as the peptide core during development of CJC-1295. The published work supports GHRH receptor activity and the logic of stabilising substitutions.
No-DAC Human Evidence
No substantial clinical programme specifically evaluating the exact no-DAC tetrasubstituted peptide was identified. Human CJC-1295 DAC data should not be treated as equivalent.
Healthy Volunteer PK and PD
A 1999 study modelled Ipamorelin pharmacokinetics and growth hormone responses across a range of experimental exposures in healthy volunteers.
Postoperative Ileus Research
A randomised phase 2 study evaluated intravenous Ipamorelin after bowel surgery. It studied gastrointestinal recovery, not body composition, sleep, anti-ageing or athletic performance.
Related but Different Human Data
Small placebo-controlled studies reported prolonged GH and IGF-1 responses with the DAC-containing CJC-1295 molecule. The albumin-binding extension makes it different from Modified GRF 1-29.
No Direct Clinical Trial Identified
No peer-reviewed controlled human study specifically testing a fixed Modified GRF 1-29 plus Ipamorelin blend was identified in the sources reviewed.
Evidence at a Glance
The evidence is strongest for receptor biology and weakest for the popular consumer outcomes attached to the blend.
| Question | Evidence type | Current conclusion | Main limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do the components act through different receptors? | Mechanistic and pharmacological evidence | Yes | Does not establish a clinical benefit |
| Can GHRH and GHRP pathways produce a larger acute GH response? | Older controlled human studies with other GHRPs | Class-level synergy supported | Not the exact Modified GRF plus Ipamorelin blend |
| Has Ipamorelin been studied in humans? | PK and PD studies plus phase 2 ileus research | Yes, in limited settings | Not evidence for marketed wellness claims |
| Has Modified GRF 1-29 been studied directly in a mature human programme? | Limited direct evidence | Not established | Much evidence is borrowed from related molecules |
| Has the exact blend been tested in a controlled human trial? | No direct trial identified | Not established | Commercial popularity is not clinical evidence |
| Does the blend improve body composition? | No reliable blend-specific trial identified | Unproven | Pathway inference only |
| Does it improve sleep or recovery? | No reliable blend-specific trial identified | Unproven | Anecdotes and hormone biology are insufficient |
| Is long-term safety established? | Insufficient combination data | No | Unknown combined endocrine and immunogenic effects |
| Is it an authorised UK medicine? | Official regulatory sources | No authorisation identified | Classification can depend on presentation and intended purpose |
What Research Has Not Established
The most important facts about the blend are the questions that remain unanswered.
- A validated clinical indication for the exact combination
- Long-term safety of simultaneous exposure to both components
- Reliable effects on fat loss, lean mass, sleep, recovery or ageing
- An optimal component ratio supported by clinical trials
- Whether co-formulation changes stability, aggregation or degradation
- Whether one component affects the recovery or assay of the other
- Equivalence between a commercial blend and materials used in published studies
- Safety of products made outside regulated medicines manufacture
- Whether persistent changes in GH or IGF-1 would improve health outcomes
- A current UK marketing authorisation
The absence of direct combination evidence matters because blending can change the analytical and biological problem. Two individually characterised ingredients do not automatically create a characterised finished product.
How a CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin Blend Should Be Tested
A finished blend requires more evidence than two separate ingredient certificates.
Confirm Both Peptides
LC-MS or suitable high-resolution mass analysis should detect signals consistent with each expected component.
Component-Specific Mapping
Peptide mapping or tandem MS can provide evidence for Modified GRF substitutions and Ipamorelin’s unusual residues.
Resolve Both Main Components
A chromatographic method should separate the two intended peptides from detectable related substances.
Assay Each Component Separately
Total vial mass cannot show how much of each peptide is present. Component-specific quantitative methods are needed.
Verify the Stated Proportion
A blend claim requires evidence that the two components are present in the declared ratio within a justified tolerance.
Assess Finished-Vial Consistency
Testing should consider whether different vials or samples contain consistent quantities of both components.
Review Related Substances
Truncations, oxidation, deamidation, deletion sequences, aggregates and residual synthesis materials may differ by component.
Study the Co-Formulated Product
Separate raw-material stability information does not prove the stability of the finished mixture.
What a Blend-Specific Certificate of Analysis Should State
- The exact name of each component
- Whether the first component is Modified GRF 1-29 rather than CJC-1295 with DAC
- The sequence and salt or counterion form of each peptide
- The batch number for the finished blend
- The declared quantity of each component
- The measured quantity of each component
- The measured component ratio
- The identity method and observed masses
- The chromatographic method and raw chromatogram
- Known or detected related substances
- The laboratory name, report number and analysis date
- A clear statement of tests not performed
Why Two Separate COAs Are Not Enough
A report for Modified GRF 1-29 raw material and a second report for Ipamorelin raw material do not prove that the final combined vial contains either ingredient at the stated quantity. They also do not establish mixing uniformity, finished-product stability or the absence of contamination introduced during blending.
A single “99% purity” figure for a blend is especially ambiguous. It may refer to one peak, one ingredient, total detected area or a method that does not resolve both components properly.
Safety and Product-Quality Risks
There is no mature clinical safety programme for the exact blend.
Ipamorelin Safety Context
The US FDA states that compounded Ipamorelin acetate may pose immunogenicity risks because of aggregation or peptide-related impurities. The agency notes that Ipamorelin contains unnatural amino acids, which add complexity to characterisation. FDA also cites serious adverse events, including death, in a study using intravenous Ipamorelin for gastrointestinal motility and states that it lacks sufficient safety information for other injectable routes.
CJC-1295 and Related Material Safety Context
FDA materials also identify potential immunogenicity and peptide-characterisation concerns for CJC-1295 forms and report serious adverse events associated with CJC-1295, including increased heart rate and a systemic vasodilatory reaction. These findings relate to CJC-1295 forms evaluated by the agency and should not be rewritten as a precise adverse-effect rate for Modified GRF 1-29.
Combined Endocrine Effects
Both components are intended to stimulate growth hormone release. Potential biological concerns may involve excessive or unpredictable GH and IGF-1 responses, fluid retention, joint or nerve symptoms, glucose regulation, headache, flushing and consequences in people with conditions influenced by growth signals.
These concerns are based on endocrine biology and related products. The exact frequency, severity and long-term profile for the blend are not established.
Finished-Product Risks
- Incorrect component identity
- Use of CJC-1295 with DAC instead of Modified GRF 1-29, or the reverse
- Incorrect ratio or total quantity
- Uneven distribution between vials
- Peptide aggregation or degradation
- Unverified sterility or endotoxin control
- Uncharacterised peptide-related impurities
- Misleading borrowing of evidence from regulated or different molecules
Dr Snieguole Geige
Dentist, Medical Doctor and Senior Adviser
Dr Geige’s proposed review focus is the difference between a plausible receptor combination and a clinically validated medicine. Combining two experimental components increases the number of identity, safety and interaction questions rather than reducing them.
CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin Blend UK Regulatory Position
Regulatory position checked on 21 July 2026.
No Current UK Marketing Authorisation Identified
No current UK marketing authorisation for Modified GRF 1-29, Ipamorelin or their fixed blend was identified in the official UK medicine-information sources checked for this article.
The blend should not be presented as an approved UK treatment for growth hormone deficiency, weight management, recovery, sleep, anti-ageing or body composition.
How the MHRA Assesses Product Presentation
MHRA guidance explains that a product can be assessed using its pharmacological properties, explicit and implied claims, intended purpose, website presentation, social media content, customer reviews and overall context. The guidance was updated on 2 July 2026.
A “Research Use Only” label does not settle classification when the surrounding page provides injection instructions, protocols, physique claims, testimonials or language aimed at personal use.
Advertising of Unauthorised Medicines
Regulation 279 of the Human Medicines Regulations restricts advertising a medicinal product where the required marketing authorisation, registration or certificate is not in force.
WADA Prohibited Status
The 2026 WADA Prohibited List covers GHRH and its analogues, including CJC compounds, as well as growth hormone secretagogues and ghrelin mimetics, including Ipamorelin. Both components therefore fall within prohibited growth hormone-releasing categories for athletes.
Common Blend Claims Examined
The claims below are widespread online but extend beyond direct evidence.
“The blend is clinically proven to be synergistic.”
What is supported: GHRH and older GHRP pathways produced larger acute GH responses together in human experiments.
What is not supported: no direct controlled trial of the exact Modified GRF 1-29 plus Ipamorelin blend was identified.
Balanced conclusion: mechanistic rationale is not blend-specific clinical proof.
“It increases lean muscle and reduces body fat.”
Why the claim appears: GH and IGF-1 influence metabolism and tissue biology.
Evidence limitation: no reliable blend-specific body-composition trial was identified.
Balanced conclusion: pathway inference cannot establish a predictable physique outcome.
“It improves sleep and recovery.”
Why the claim appears: natural GH secretion varies with sleep and recovery biology.
Evidence limitation: association does not prove treatment effect, and the blend has not been validated for either outcome.
Balanced conclusion: the claim remains unproven.
“No DAC means it is automatically safer.”
What is supported: no-DAC and DAC forms have different structures and exposure profiles.
Evidence limitation: shorter exposure does not prove safety, quality or suitability for use.
Balanced conclusion: different is not the same as safer.
“Ipamorelin is selective, so it has no endocrine risks.”
What is supported: Ipamorelin showed greater GH selectivity than some older GHRPs in preclinical work.
Evidence limitation: selectivity does not remove immunogenicity, impurity, GH, IGF-1 or glucose-related concerns.
Balanced conclusion: selective does not mean risk-free.
“A high-purity COA proves the blend is pharmaceutical grade.”
What HPLC may show: relative peak areas under one analytical method.
What it cannot prove alone: both identities, exact ratio, net quantity, uniformity, sterility, endotoxin control or clinical equivalence.
Balanced conclusion: one percentage cannot characterise a two-component blend.
Comparison with Related Research Peptides
Similar catalogue groupings can hide important differences in receptor, duration and evidence.
| Product or compound | Components | Primary pathway | Direct human evidence | Key distinction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Modified GRF 1-29 + Ipamorelin blend | Two co-formulated peptides | GHRH receptor plus ghrelin receptor | No direct blend trial identified | Commercial combination with mechanistic rationale |
| Modified GRF 1-29 alone | 29-residue GHRH analogue | GHRH receptor | Limited direct evidence | Commonly called CJC-1295 No DAC |
| Ipamorelin alone | Five-residue secretagogue | Ghrelin receptor | Limited PK, PD and ileus research | Different receptor pathway from GHRH analogues |
| CJC-1295 with DAC | Modified GHRH analogue with albumin-binding extension | GHRH receptor | Small early human pharmacology studies | Long-acting DAC-containing molecule |
| Sermorelin + Ipamorelin | Natural-sequence GHRH 1-29 fragment plus Ipamorelin | GHRH receptor plus ghrelin receptor | No direct fixed-blend trial identified | Different GHRH component |
| Tesamorelin | Full-length stabilised GHRH analogue | GHRH receptor | Large human trials for a specific HIV-associated indication | US-authorised medicine in regulated formulations |
Myth and Reality
How to Read Blend Claims Critically
Use this checklist before accepting a scientific or analytical claim.
- Does the source identify Modified GRF 1-29 accurately?
- Does it distinguish the no-DAC material from CJC-1295 with DAC?
- Was the cited study performed on the exact blend?
- Was Ipamorelin used in the cited combination study?
- Was the study performed in humans?
- Was the outcome a hormone measurement or a clinical benefit?
- How many participants were included?
- Was there a control group?
- Was follow-up long enough to assess safety?
- Does the source discuss negative or uncertain findings?
- Does the COA belong to the finished blend batch?
- Are both components identified separately?
- Is the component ratio measured?
- Is net quantity reported for each peptide?
- Are uniformity and stability addressed?
- Are sterility or endotoxin claims supported by appropriate tests?
- Is the claimed use authorised in the UK?
- Is the source selling the same blend it is praising?
Medical and Editorial Review
This final article has been reviewed for medical context, scientific accuracy, evidence presentation, patient-safety language and editorial clarity by the multidisciplinary panel below.
The reviewers and contributors are identified to provide transparent authorship and accountability. Their inclusion does not represent endorsement of any research product, supplier, personal use, treatment claim or commercial statement discussed in this article.
Dr Laura Geige
Medical Director and Senior Aesthetics Practitioner at It’s Me & You Clinic, with a professional background in dentistry, medical aesthetics and cosmetic dermatology.
Read professional profile
Dr Rimas Geiga
Medical doctor with a professional interest in nutritional sciences, dietology, metabolic health and evidence-based preventative care.
Read professional profile
Dr Snieguole Geige
Dentist and medical doctor with experience across healthcare, preventative medicine and patient-centred clinical standards.
Read professional profile
Dr Giedre Narkiene
Medical doctor and board-certified dermatologist with expertise in medical and cosmetic dermatology, skin health and patient safety.
Read professional profile
Dr Veronika Matutyte
Medical doctor with training and professional experience in gerontology and healthcare management across clinical and hospital settings.
Read professional profile
Livija Samušienė
Qualified cosmetologist with a Bachelor of Health Sciences in cosmetology and a professional interest in skin health, acne and evidence-based aesthetic care.
Read professional profileCJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin Blend UK FAQs
Clear answers about naming, evidence, testing, safety and Research Peptides UK law.
What is CJC-1295 No DAC + Ipamorelin?
It is a mixture of Modified GRF 1-29 and Ipamorelin, two separate peptides that act through different receptors involved in growth hormone release.
Is CJC-1295 No DAC the correct scientific name?
Modified GRF 1-29 is the clearer scientific name for the no-DAC 29-residue component commonly sold under that label.
Is CJC-1295 No DAC the same as CJC-1295 with DAC?
No. The DAC-containing molecule has an additional albumin-binding modification and a different molecular identity.
What receptor does Modified GRF 1-29 activate?
It is designed to activate the growth hormone-releasing hormone receptor.
What receptor does Ipamorelin activate?
Ipamorelin activates the ghrelin receptor, also called GHS-R1a.
Why are the peptides combined?
The commercial rationale is that the two receptor pathways may produce a larger acute growth hormone response together than either pathway alone.
Has the exact blend been studied in humans?
No peer-reviewed controlled human trial specifically evaluating the exact Modified GRF 1-29 plus Ipamorelin blend was identified in the sources reviewed.
Does research prove the blend is synergistic?
Older human studies support synergy between GHRH and other growth hormone-releasing peptides. This is indirect class evidence, not direct proof for the exact blend.
Has Ipamorelin been studied in humans?
Yes. Limited human studies examined pharmacokinetics, growth hormone responses and postoperative ileus. They do not establish the popular wellness claims attached to the blend.
Has Modified GRF 1-29 been studied in humans?
Direct published human evidence for the exact tetrasubstituted no-DAC molecule is limited. Evidence from CJC-1295 with DAC is not equivalent.
Does the blend build muscle?
No reliable blend-specific controlled trial establishes muscle gain.
Does it reduce body fat?
No reliable blend-specific controlled trial establishes predictable fat loss.
Does it improve sleep or recovery?
These outcomes have not been established in controlled trials of the exact combination.
Is the blend approved in the UK?
No current UK marketing authorisation for the blend or either component was identified in the official sources checked in July 2026.
What does Research Use Only mean?
It describes an intended laboratory purpose. It does not prove authorisation, personal safety, sterility or legal compliance where the wider presentation suggests personal use.
Does a 99% HPLC result prove the blend is genuine?
No. A single purity percentage cannot establish both identities, exact quantities, ratio, uniformity, sterility or stability.
Are separate COAs for each ingredient enough?
No. They do not prove the identity, ratio or uniformity of the finished blended vial.
What should a blend-specific COA include?
It should include finished-batch identity, component-specific quantities, measured ratio, suitable chromatographic and mass methods, batch details and clear test limitations.
Is Ipamorelin considered risk-free because it is selective?
No. Selectivity does not remove uncertainty about impurities, immunogenicity, GH and IGF-1 effects or long-term safety.
Is the blend prohibited in sport?
Both GHRH analogues and growth hormone secretagogues, including Ipamorelin, fall within prohibited categories under the 2026 WADA list.
Why does this article not include a protocol?
The blend is not an authorised UK medicine and this article does not provide personal-use, dosing, preparation or administration guidance.
Key Takeaways
- The blend contains two distinct peptides, not one new molecule.
- The first component is more accurately called Modified GRF 1-29.
- Modified GRF 1-29 acts at the GHRH receptor, while Ipamorelin acts at the ghrelin receptor.
- Older human studies support class-level synergy between GHRH and growth hormone-releasing peptides.
- No direct controlled human trial of the exact blend was identified.
- Popular claims about fat loss, muscle, sleep, recovery and ageing remain unproven for the combination.
- A finished blend requires component-specific identity, quantity, ratio, uniformity and stability testing.
- No current UK marketing authorisation was identified.
- Both components fall within prohibited growth hormone-releasing categories in sport.
Relevant It’s Me & You Clinic Resources
These companion articles explain the individual components and the closely related DAC molecule.
Modified GRF 1-29 UK
Explore the no-DAC peptide identity, evidence and testing questions.
Read the Modified GRF 1-29 UK guideIpamorelin UK
Review Ipamorelin receptor science, human evidence and analytical challenges.
Read the Ipamorelin UK guideCJC-1295 UK
Understand the difference between CJC-1295 with DAC and no-DAC terminology.
Read the CJC-1295 UK guideTesamorelin UK
Compare the blend with a full-length GHRH analogue that has a defined regulated clinical programme in the United States.
Read the Tesamorelin UK guideQuestions About Your Skin or Aesthetic Treatment Options?
At It’s Me & You Clinic, consultations focus on suitability, safety, realistic expectations and evidence-based treatment planning. The clinic does not present this peptide blend as an aesthetic treatment, anti-ageing service or weight-management product.
Explore the clinic’s doctor-led approachReferences
- Bowers CY, Reynolds GA, Durham D, Barrera CM, Pezzoli SS, Thorner MO. Growth hormone-releasing peptide stimulates GH release in normal men and acts synergistically with GHRH. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 1990. PubMed record
- Popovic V, Damjanovic S, Micic D, et al. Blocked GH-releasing peptide response and GHRH plus GHRP-6 synergy research. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 1995. PubMed record
- Pihoker C, Middleton R, Reynolds GA, Bowers CY, Badger TM. Diagnostic studies with GHRP-2 and combined GHRH plus GHRP-2 in children of short stature. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 1995. PubMed record
- Raun K, Hansen BS, Johansen NL, et al. Ipamorelin, the first selective growth hormone secretagogue. European Journal of Endocrinology. 1998. PubMed record
- Gobburu JVS, Agersø H, Jusko WJ, Ynddal L. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling of Ipamorelin in healthy volunteers. Pharmaceutical Research. 1999. PubMed record
- Beck DE, Sweeney WB, McCarter MD, et al. Randomised phase 2 study of Ipamorelin in postoperative ileus. 2014. PubMed record
- Jetté L, Léger R, Thibaudeau K, et al. Human GRF 1-29 albumin bioconjugates and identification of CJC-1295 as a long-lasting analogue. Endocrinology. 2005. PubMed record
- Teichman SL, Neale A, Lawrence B, Gagnon C, Castaigne JP, Frohman LA. Prolonged stimulation of GH and IGF-1 by CJC-1295 in healthy adults. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2006. PubMed record
- Ionescu M, Frohman LA. Pulsatile growth hormone secretion during continuous CJC-1295 stimulation. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2006. PubMed record
- PubChem. Ipamorelin, CID 9831659. Accessed 21 July 2026. PubChem record
- PubChem. CJC-1295 without DAC chemical record, CID 132595997. Accessed 21 July 2026. PubChem record
- US Food and Drug Administration. Certain bulk drug substances for use in compounding may present significant safety risks. Content current 22 April 2026. FDA safety information
- Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Borderline products: how to tell if your product is a medicine. Updated 2 July 2026. MHRA guidance
- Human Medicines Regulations 2012, Regulation 279. Legislation.gov.uk
- World Anti-Doping Agency. 2026 Prohibited List. Effective 1 January 2026. WADA 2026 List
- International Council for Harmonisation. ICH Q2(R2): Validation of Analytical Procedures. ICH guideline
- UK Accreditation Service. Laboratory accreditation and ISO/IEC 17025 scope. UKAS guidance
