Loose skin protocol — GHKCU?

[Mariusdr]

Not about been cheap, even at low doses it stings can’t imagine at 20mg

Also risky with that much copper, if you want to go this high you will need to test copper levels regularly. Which then kinda makes the cheap point redundant

 

[lipzz17]

Not about been cheap, even at low doses it stings can’t imagine at 20mg

Not on myself, never had this problem

 

[lipzz17]

Also risky with that much copper, if you want to go this high you will need to test copper levels regularly. Which then kinda makes the cheap point redundant

Here on my country copper bloodwork costs less than 4 doll

 

[PrairieSteel]

Yes copper is necessary for collagen, but you need to understand that 99% of people are not deficient in copper, so yea copper deficiency can impair collagen, more copper does nothing for collagen output. Once enzyme needs are met, Adding more copper does nothing.

its like saying Oxygen is vital for muscles, therefore breathing in more oxygen will build more muscles ? you see how that doesnt make sense ?


I am going to give a few reasons why GHK-CU is the biggest scam:

1. The bac water mixed with copper makes the copper ions unstable due to PH balance (So instability paired with a short half life, your lucky if it even reaches the eperdermis of the skin, n even than, with a short half life, it cant make any meaningful difference on the skin)

2. The Half life of GHK-CU is very short so claims like ("2mg injections for 2 months cause glow and purge and collage") make no pharmacological sense
n mechanistically doesnt even work that way due to not being able to bind the receptors responsible for creating a purge like effect.

3. Gene modulation benifits are massively overstated, n no one even understands what there talking about when mentioning this as a benifit.

4. If it truly worked, research would not have stalled, it couldn't even go through phase 1 of systemic use in humans causes even the PHD researcher's knew it was a waste of time, Research does not stall for no reason. (mind you, going through phase 1 is a very low bar) If copper delivery was as powerful as you say, Big Pharma would've exploited it.

5. Hair thickening claims are placebo at best, it doesnt even interact with the follicle nor manipulate the anlagen phase like minox and fin/dut. nor does It bind to androgen receptors.

7. There are legit better options that exist for every claim about it that has been made regarding this peptide. The collagen benifits are comical compared to things like Tazarotene, Trentnoin, RedLight, Elavated IGF-1 levels, micro needling, the list goes on. GHK is not producing more collagen than any of these options at all.

Not looking for an argument. In my opinion, your claims are embellished. Not trying to be rude.

There is absolutely clinicly studied benefit to taking copper peptides.

Regenerative and Protective Actions of the GHK-Cu Peptide in the Light of the New Gene Data - PMC

To each their own.

 

[adrenalytic]

Not looking for an argument. In my opinion, your claims are embellished. Not trying to be rude.

There is absolutely clinicly studied benefit to taking copper peptides.

Regenerative and Protective Actions of the GHK-Cu Peptide in the Light of the New Gene Data - PMC

To each their own.

I think the point is that GHK-Cu is not a magic bullet. It's a subtle addition to a skin protocol. It will not work wonders but, as an additive to other more effective approaches, it can help stimulate collagen production to a small degree. It's a good support supplement but not something to base your hopes on.

 

[Nardicus69]

Not looking for an argument. In my opinion, your claims are embellished. Not trying to be rude.

There is absolutely clinicly studied benefit to taking copper peptides.

Regenerative and Protective Actions of the GHK-Cu Peptide in the Light of the New Gene Data - PMC

To each their own.

Dude, before you even drop a study as way to support you argument its best you read you're own study your dropping .

But since you lack comprehension, ill go over it with you n this goes for every Meso-RX user recommending this sub par fuck of a molecule

First this Paper was done by Loren Pickart, who is strongly associated with GHK-CU commercialization thefore making claim bias > net neutral style paper.




But when we look further we realize he also sells it on top of that:
(Conflict of interest ?)




It jus so happens He's the owner of a place as well, more foccused on selling a product that cant even fix his own Norwood 7 AKA the GHK-CU y'all love rave about:




Owner of this, selling products BTW.




1.)Not only that, This paper you cited was a review, not a new clinical trial so prove my point there.

2.) Evidence point toward topical use, as if you read my comments where did I say anything topical ? this whole conversation was on sub-Q delivery.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

"GHK-Cu applied to thigh skin for 12 weeks improved collagen production in 70% of the women treated, in contrast to 50% treated with the vitamin C cream, and 40% treated with retinoic acid [16]"
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me give you the benifit of the doubt and assume your Focussed on topical application and not sub-q:

What makes it more comically obvious is the fact there trying to compare there collagen benifits to weaker products such as vitamin C and regular retinoid acid. NOTICE THEY DID NOT COMPARE Taz, Trent, Red Light, Micro needle, and so on. Cause he knew it would make the collagen benifits not look as good when compared to real products that actually fucking work LMFAO


3.) Using this paper to justify sub-q GHK-CU Glow/ Purge/ and Hair claims is a comical stretch to me.

4.) When something is as useful and powerful in medicine and science, there Will always be follow ups of other authors chiming in, meta analysis done. But it seems the molecule/proudct itself isnt strong enough to justify cost and efforts for other parties so they will view it as a waste of time thus making him his views even more bias.

5.) GHK-CU clashes with other topical agents/products like Retnoids, vitamin C, exfoliating acids, and niacinimide. The molecule is unstable n doesnt even work synergistically with other agents that have been proven to work. (With micro needling being n exception)


Your post has officially been Obliterated to the Dungeon.

 

[Nardicus69]

How can all you say be true when there is good evidence for the skin improvents benefits?

Especially with topica GHK-CU you have placebo controlled studies a few of them that all show huge benefits, such as 70% increase in collagen after 12 weeks.
Subq less studies.


With these studies showing good and proveable results, your reasoning for it not workings is not applicable.


Thanks

I already commented on this

 

[PrairieSteel]

Dude, before you even drop a study as way to support you argument its best you read you're own study your dropping .

But since you lack comprehension, ill go over it with you n this goes for every Meso-RX user recommending this sub par fuck of a molecule

First this Paper was done by Loren Pickart, who is strongly associated with GHK-CU commercialization thefore making claim bias > net neutral style paper.


View attachment 377014

But when we look further we realize he also sells it on top of that:
(Conflict of interest ?)


View attachment 377015

It jus so happens He's the owner of a place as well, more foccused on selling a product that cant even fix his own Norwood 7 AKA the GHK-CU y'all love rave about:


View attachment 377017

View attachment 377016 Owner of this, selling products BTW.




1.)Not only that, This paper you cited was a review, not a new clinical trial so prove my point there.

2.) Evidence point toward topical use, as if you read my comments where did I say anything topical ? this whole conversation was on sub-Q delivery.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
View attachment 377018
"GHK-Cu applied to thigh skin for 12 weeks improved collagen production in 70% of the women treated, in contrast to 50% treated with the vitamin C cream, and 40% treated with retinoic acid [16]"
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me give you the benifit of the doubt and assume your Focussed on topical application and not sub-q:

What makes it more comically obvious is the fact there trying to compare there collagen benifits to weaker products such as vitamin C and regular retinoid acid. NOTICE THEY DID NOT COMPARE Taz, Trent, Red Light, Micro needle, and so on. Cause he knew it would make the collagen benifits not look as good when compared to real products that actually fucking work LMFAO


3.) Using this paper to justify sub-q GHK-CU Glow/ Purge/ and Hair claims is a comical stretch to me.

4.) When something is as useful and powerful in medicine and science, there Will always be follow ups of other authors chiming in, meta analysis done. But it seems the molecule/proudct itself isnt strong enough to justify cost and efforts for other parties so they will view it as a waste of time thus making him his views even more bias.

5.) GHK-CU clashes with other topical agents/products like Retnoids, vitamin C, exfoliating acids, and niacinimide. The molecule is unstable n doesnt even work synergistically with other agents that have been proven to work. (With micro needling being n exception)


Your post has officially been Obliterated to the Dungeon.

Kudos to you for having the time in your day to make such a lengthy post just to prop yourself up amd bring others down.

I'm not going to argue with you. Only responding to say not being a PRICK is free.