Higher dosages than the "recommended" amount.

[aepower2016]

Has anyone taken a peptide dosage above the recommended amount the Internet has deemed acceptable?

Many of these protocols we see scattered online seem to be based off of animal trials. Which of course is the proper way to start an investigation into the potential benefits of a medication/supplement. However, many of these trials take place with animals who have experienced minor side effects. It makes me wonder if a ton of these protocols could be increased at least temporarily to more efficiently achieve your goals.

Peptides that always comes to mind for me about this is BPC-157 & TB500. Two peptides designed to help accelerate the repair process for the body. It would make sense to increase your dosages if a major bodily repair is needed. Such as, torn ligaments and muscles.

For many of these peptides we don't know the true threshold to fully max out there benefits. Of course higher dosages could lead to worse side effects or even new side effects but it certainly seems as if many popular protocols could use a refinement.

 

[tcpnomad]

It would make sense to increase your dosages if a major bodily repair is needed.

Only if increasing the dose actually increases its effects. That is not necessarily true. They may have observed that beyond the max suggested dose, the effects don't necessarily scale linearly (or at all). And in fact, it may actually be harmful e.g. if it overstimulates whatever axis the peptide operates on.

The body is not that simple. The cause and effects are not that straight forward. I would not play with higher doses based on some simplistic intuition. See if you can find some data first.

 

[eidos]

Certain molecules are involved in a signal. Increasing the dose is like holding your finger on the doorbell, hoping someone will come to answer it faster.

 

[Grogu]

Just like “regular” medications there is probably a range of dosing where peptides are most effective. Less then the range, you’re on a sub-therapuetic dose and likely not seeing any of the benefits. Above the range, and you’re looking at some potentially dangerous things like toxicity, immunogenicity, axis disruption, etc.

For glp-1 medications, there is tons of human testing and real world data suggesting that higher doses (than those established in clincial trials) are probably safe and effective. But for some of these other peptides there is scant primary research, nevery mind extended dose research. It’s kinda of like the wild west in general, but I think that there is more to worry about than increased sides with experimenting with higher doses on some of these less researched peptides.

 

[aepower2016]

Certain molecules are involved in a signal. Increasing the dose is like holding your finger on the doorbell, hoping someone will come to answer it faster.

I agree this could be the case but with limited to no human data we don't know how much signaling is needed for maximum efficiency.

 

[aepower2016]

Only if increasing the dose actually increases its effects. That is not necessarily true. They may have observed that beyond the max suggested dose, the effects don't necessarily scale linearly (or at all). And in fact, it may actually be harmful e.g. if it overstimulates whatever axis the peptide operates on.

The body is not that simple. The cause and effects are not that straight forward. I would not play with higher doses based on some simplistic intuition. See if you can find some data first.

That's the million dollar question we still don't know the answer for many of these peptides. Will the increases in dosages equate to better outcomes. We simply don't know. So we can't necessarily say it's "bad" to increase dosages. It most definitely will be a bigger risk and at times irresponsible however until we have clear human data we simply won't know. Who is to say increasing your dosage for a given peptide by a small margin is dangerous when no clear data states what even is a good range for humans. If we're already taking peps with no real human studies than wouldn't it already be considered some sort of risk. Most protocols out on the Internet are really hypothetical thresholds that create good results yes but what if more is better with small increase to side effects. We are our own lab rats which means doing our due diligence in checking blood work and other biomarkers is really the only way to know if taking more of something is causing more harm than good and even that won't necessarily tell the full story

 

[Super Trips]

you should prolly follow me for dosage research

 

[aepower2016]

Just like “regular” medications there is probably a range of dosing where peptides are most effective. Less then the range, you’re on a sub-therapuetic dose and likely not seeing any of the benefits. Above the range, and you’re looking at some potentially dangerous things like toxicity, immunogenicity, axis disruption, etc.

For glp-1 medications, there is tons of human testing and real world data suggesting that higher doses (than those established in clincial trials) are probably safe and effective. But for some of these other peptides there is scant primary research, nevery mind extended dose research. It’s kinda of like the wild west in general, but I think that there is more to worry about than increased sides with experimenting with higher doses on some of these less researched peptides.

I think we're on the same boat. It's very evident what dosages are considered safe with GLP's due to the extensive amount of human trials. So we don't necessarily have to experiment with increased dosages since we already have a clear recommended range of dosage that would be very effective with minimal side effects.

You're absolutely right about the wild West with many of these peps but isn't that what makes us lab rats. If I were to increase a given dosage it would be done minimally depending on previous side effects I had and recent blood work. I just don't think without any clear human trials we should be taking any of these protocols as the maximum threshold the human body can take at a given time.

 

[Grogu]

I think we're on the same boat. It's very evident what dosages are considered safe with GLP's due to the extensive amount of human trials. So we don't necessarily have to experiment with increased dosages since we already have a clear recommended range of dosage that would be very effective with minimal side effects.

Agree! I think we're on the same boat, but even with GLPs I would say that people are experimenting beyond what's recommended. I'm on 20mg of tirzepatide and will likely titrate up from here. So, there is still a little bit of lab ratting going on . There are few clinical studies on stacking, so stacking glp-1s and amylin agonists is mostly uncharted. Some more lab ratting...

I just don't think without any clear human trials we should be taking any of these protocols as the maximum threshold the human body can take at a given time.

I'm in the early stages of looking at the research on some of these other peptides, but there are a lot of peptides that sound very appealing to me. But the question isn't about how much of these I should take, more if I should be taking them at all if there isn't enough research, especially research in human bodies.

 

[Gr33dyOctopus]

I am also very interested in bpc dosages.

I tan a cycle 6 months ago and felt amazing. Stopped because of course I was worried about tumor growth, but started again because of a painful injury thats not going away on its own.

 

[CNCCurrency]

I am also very interested in bpc dosages.

I tan a cycle 6 months ago and felt amazing. Stopped because of course I was worried about tumor growth, but started again because of a painful injury thats not going away on its own.

Huh? I tan a cycle 6 months ago??

 

[spanky2026]

Agree! I think we're on the same boat, but even with GLPs I would say that people are experimenting beyond what's recommended. I'm on 20mg of tirzepatide and will likely titrate up from here. So, there is still a little bit of lab ratting going on . There are few clinical studies on stacking, so stacking glp-1s and amylin agonists is mostly uncharted. Some more lab ratting...

I'm in the early stages of looking at the research on some of these other peptides, but there are a lot of peptides that sound very appealing to me. But the question isn't about how much of these I should take, more if I should be taking them at all if there isn't enough research, especially research in human bodies.

So have you indeed found better efficacy at higher tirz dose? Or did you go up because 15 lost its feeling ? Interested in deets.

 

[Gr33dyOctopus]

Huh? I tan a cycle 6 months ago??

Ran not tan!!

 

[Gr33dyOctopus]

So have you indeed found better efficacy at higher tirz dose? Or did you go up because 15 lost its feeling ? Interested in deets.

Im at 13mg now, still have around 26 pounds to lose, only losing about a pound a week now, thinking about a higher dose, its been 10 months now.

 

[aepower2016]

Agree! I think we're on the same boat, but even with GLPs I would say that people are experimenting beyond what's recommended. I'm on 20mg of tirzepatide and will likely titrate up from here. So, there is still a little bit of lab ratting going on . There are few clinical studies on stacking, so stacking glp-1s and amylin agonists is mostly uncharted. Some more lab ratting...

I'm in the early stages of looking at the research on some of these other peptides, but there are a lot of peptides that sound very appealing to me. But the question isn't about how much of these I should take, more if I should be taking them at all if there isn't enough research, especially research in human bodies.

Right! We shouldn't be taking many of these peptides at all yet so many of us myself included are. Until human data becomes available for a given peptide, no dosage should be considered "safe". Outside of anecdotal claims we simply have no conclusive guidelines for most of these peps.

 

[aepower2016]

I am also very interested in bpc dosages.

I tan a cycle 6 months ago and felt amazing. Stopped because of course I was worried about tumor growth, but started again because of a painful injury thats not going away on its own.

That's valid. I have heard of potential cancerous cells growing from peptides however, that too is just a theory. I myself wouldn't risk taking a prolong peptide without extensive blood work and monitoring from a licensed doctor. Right now, taking peptides should be like a get in and get out type of thing. At least for the unresearched peps.

 

[Gr33dyOctopus]

That's valid. I have heard of potential cancerous cells growing from peptides however, that too is just a theory. I myself wouldn't risk taking a prolong peptide without extensive blood work and monitoring from a licensed doctor. Right now, taking peptides should be like a get in and get out type of thing. At least for the unresearched peps.

Yep, thats exactly where I am at. During my one and only run of bpc I felt like it helped with some issues immensely, so despite the potential risks last night I started another run on it