What peptides will you never try?

Status
Not open for further replies.
PT-141

I’m not even sticking a needle in YOUR dick🤣🤣🤣
 
RuhRoRaggy said:
PT-141

I’m not even sticking a needle in YOUR dick🤣🤣🤣
So...we need the tea. I got my mug at the ready. What is this dick-tide malarkey you speak of?

200-12898f477a67.gif
 

Attachments

  • 200-12898f477a67.gif
    200-12898f477a67.gif
    56.9 KB · Views: 1
randompersonrandom said:
NAD+ did nothing positive that I could perceive, and it hurt and was a lot of volume, which grosses me out. MOTS-C hurt, MAY have granted some energy, but hurt and left lumps that remained for months (one of which is still there.)

I'll tolerate some hurt because I really do believe KLOW is doing SOMETHING. But if it hurts and doesn't seem to do anything for me, no thanks. And the MOTS-C leaving those for-way-too-long lumps was what made "and there's some risk to this" real for me.
Before I started buffering, I would get hard indurations from MOTS-C (and GHK-Cu) too. I am currently using dry-brushing, massage with arnica gel, red + near-IR light, and BPC/TB injected nearby to reduce the size of the fibrotic tissue. It's helping, but it's a slow process. If I didn't confound the variables...I'd actually know which one was helping. Maybe one of these methods can help you as well. 🙂
 
sheilarae74 said:
I don't see myself needing anything that isn't fat loss or body recomp related. I do want to try GHK-cu.
I don't know though. The more I research, the more I find things that could solve my life problems. 🤣🤣🤣
 
DunningKruger said:
Before I started buffering, I would get hard indurations from MOTS-C (and GHK-Cu) too. I am currently using dry-brushing, massage with arnica gel, red + near-IR light, and BPC/TB injected nearby to reduce the size of the fibrotic tissue. It's helping, but it's a slow process. If I didn't confound the variables...I'd actually know which one was helping. Maybe one of these methods can help you as well. 🙂

Yeah, I really think that last lump will eventually heal on its own; and even if it didn't, it's so small at this point that it's not causing me any real issues. But I'll definitely never touch MOTS-C (which was buffered) again, or anything but KLOW that's known for ISR's. And I honestly feel like I've tried all of the low-risk peps that I believe might do something, and I'm very happy with just Klow's components, epitalon, and SS-31. All three of those I know work fine for me, and I believe all three of them DO something.
 
RuhRoRaggy said:
PT-141

I’m not even sticking a needle in YOUR dick🤣🤣🤣
Yeah. Um....I don't think PT-141 works like you think it works.
 
What a good idea for a " post"!!!! One day, I made a list of every peptides that I read here and I google each of them.

It's kind of a new passion for me! My strange addiction, like the old reality show ( but I don't eat my sofa filling and I don't eat Ajax).

So, as a woman who want to be thin, the thing that I WONT try, its IPAMORELIN and all peptide who promote growing hormones and muscle mass growing. Maybe I am wrong, but I prefer loosing weight and after building my muscles?

I am willing to try peptides who help my skin, wrinkles, hairs.

And you?
 
For me reta and 5 amino 1mq subcu so far, i want to try KPV by itself, heard good things about ss-31 andepitalon but have tried those yet. Definitely staying away from those that cause angiogenesis
 
AlexSilver said:
From my notes:

LL37 - Never use - works as described but also causes massive inflammation on several levels, definitely causes and/or accelerates tumor growth, promotes histamine release, and exacerbates arthritis and skin conditions like psoriasis and eczema.

This sounds absolutely horrible
 
Brouette said:
So, as a woman who want to be thin, the thing that I WONT try, its IPAMORELIN and all peptide who promote growing hormones and muscle mass growing. Maybe I am wrong, but I prefer loosing weight and after building my muscles?
I think that assumption is too simplistic. Wanting to be “thin” is not the best frame; preserving a lean, strong physique is a better goal during weight loss.

Peptides associated with growth signalling do not automatically make a woman bulky. That depends on the full context: dose, diet, training, genetics, and total energy balance.

If you’re on a GLP, I’d actually be more concerned about muscle loss than “bulking.” In that context, a GH secretagogue may help support lean mass retention, especially if protein intake is below 1g/lb of ideal body weight and resistance training is not in place.

I can say from personal experience that GH secretagogues do not automatically make a woman bulky. I eat 80–120 g of protein daily, have taken Tesa (1 mg) /Ipa (200 mcg) nightly this past quarter, and have been very satisfied with the results—lean, athletic, and far from bulky.

Included: last week’s DEXA and my smart scale data as a real-world example.
 
DunningKruger said:
I think that assumption is too simplistic. Wanting to be “thin” is not the best frame; preserving a lean, strong physique is a better goal during weight loss.

Peptides associated with growth signalling do not automatically make a woman bulky. That depends on the full context: dose, diet, training, genetics, and total energy balance.

If you’re on a GLP, I’d actually be more concerned about muscle loss than “bulking.” In that context, a GH secretagogue may help support lean mass retention, especially if protein intake is below 1g/lb of ideal body weight and resistance training is not in place.

I can say from personal experience that GH secretagogues do not automatically make a woman bulky. I eat 80–120 g of protein daily, have taken Tesa (1 mg) /Ipa (200 mcg) nightly this past quarter, and have been very satisfied with the results—lean, athletic, and far from bulky.

Included: last week’s DEXA and my smart scale data as a real-world example.
Thank you for you answer! It complete, and you giving me the idea to try something new! Thank you again !!!
 
Brouette said:
Thank you for you answer! It complete, and you giving me the idea to try something new! Thank you again !!!
Gladly. I once thought the same thing. Now, I have a strong and capable body that I love, and Tesamorelin takes the #2 spot in my top 3 peptides. ☺️
 
CandyCap said:
Yeah. Um....I don't think PT-141 works like you think it works.
Tummy works for me 😬 But now I want to know what would happen if someone did it. Would it work differently?
 
chmuse said:
Would it work differently?
Not in a good way, lol.

I'm surprised I tried PT-141 at all after watching the episode of The Pitt where the nurses had to manage priapism in a hands-on way. But some bros would like the attention, I guess, at least from certain nurses.

The standard dosage of 1.75 mg is intended for "premenopausal women with HSDD (Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder)" and seems too high for most men, IMHO.

I tried a full dose the first time, but I only microdose now, mostly for a mood boost:

Gemini said:
PT-141 Protocol Evaluation: Gender Response & Dosing Comparison

Feature Clinical Dose (1.75 mg) Microdose (0.5 mg – 1.0 mg) Target Population FDA-approved for premenopausal Women (HSDD). Preferred by Men and sensitive responders. Primary Mechanism High-level CNS receptor saturation. Threshold activation; avoids "over-stimulation." Response (Men) Often too intense. Prolonged erections (priapism risk). Natural responsiveness. Better control/timing. Response (Women) Standard for HSDD; triggers significant arousal signal. May be too subtle for some; depends on baseline drive. Side Effect Profile High Nausea/Flushing. Can last several hours. Minimal Nausea. Maintains the "mood boost." Dopamine/Mood Masked by physical distress or "flu-like" feeling. Clean mood lift. Focus, motivation, and "wanting." BP / Cardiovascular Notable transient spikes in blood pressure. Negligible impact for most healthy users.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trending content

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
2,620
Messages
55,146
Members
1
Latest member
Admin
Back
Top