Research context / doses studied
CJC-1295 dosing, as documented in the research record
What was administered, to which species, at which dose, by which route — and where the human evidence stops. No human dosing is established for any indication.
Doses studied in the CJC-1295 literature
CJC-1295 dosage in the published record is a research-context matter, not a recommendation. The human pharmacokinetic studies used single subcutaneous doses of 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram in healthy volunteers [1][3]. The GHRH-knockout mouse growth study used a fixed 2 micrograms per dose at intervals of 24, 48 or 72 hours, and found that the once-every-24-hours schedule fully normalized growth while less frequent dosing was progressively inferior [6].
Those are the doses that appear in controlled studies. The fixed-dose figures that circulate for no-DAC Modified GRF 1-29 and for CJC-1295/ipamorelin — commonly cited as 100 to 300 micrograms — are not derived from controlled human trials and should be read as community convention, not evidence [1]. No human dosing is established for any indication, and CJC-1295 is not approved for human use anywhere [7].
How much CJC-1295 should I take?
Published human PK studies used single subcutaneous doses of 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram in research settings [1][3]. No human dosing is established for any indication; the fixed-dose protocols circulating online are not derived from controlled trials [7]. This site describes how the compound was studied, not how it should be used.
Route, half-life and handling in research
The route studied throughout the literature is subcutaneous injection, with intravenous administration appearing only in the earliest GRF(1-29) pharmacokinetic work [1][9]. Oral bioavailability is negligible, as expected for a peptide of this size [2].
Half-life depends entirely on the form, and this is where the dosing logic actually lives. The DAC variant's estimated half-life was 5.8 to 8.1 days in healthy adults, and IGF-1 elevation persisted up to 28 days after multiple doses [1]; the no-DAC Modified GRF (1-29) is short-acting, in the minutes-to-hours range [8]. That difference is why the two forms were studied so differently — a multi-day peptide was given as infrequent single doses, while a minutes-to-hours peptide would clear long before the next day. In research handling, the lyophilized peptide is reconstituted with bacteriostatic water and refrigerated, and the four substitutions confer protease resistance while DAC conjugation confers the multi-day duration [1][2].
Where to inject CJC-1295?
The route studied in the literature is subcutaneous injection [1]. This describes how the compound was administered in research settings; no human use is approved or recommended, and the description is not an instruction for use.
How to reconstitute CJC-1295?
In research handling, the lyophilized peptide is reconstituted with bacteriostatic water and refrigerated [1]. This is laboratory handling information rather than a use instruction. CJC-1295 is not approved for human use, and nothing here is a direction to administer it.
Why the half-life drives the schedule
Dosing schedule in the research record follows directly from pharmacokinetics, and the GHRH-knockout mouse study makes the point cleanly. There, the same 2-microgram dose normalized growth fully when given once every 24 hours but worked progressively less well at 48- and 72-hour intervals [6]. Frequency, not just amount, governed the effect — which is exactly what a long-acting peptide with a multi-day reservoir would predict.
In humans, the long DAC half-life means a single subcutaneous dose elevated GH for six days or more and IGF-1 for nine to eleven days, and repeated dosing pushed IGF-1 above baseline for up to 28 days [1]. A compound that lingers that long does not fit a daily-injection model; it fits an infrequent one. The short-acting no-DAC form sits at the opposite pole, clearing within hours, which is why community protocols for Modified GRF 1-29 describe frequent small doses rather than weekly ones [8].
None of this constitutes a recommended human regimen. The published human data come from a handful of pharmacokinetic studies, the long-acting clinical program was discontinued, and the fixed-dose figures circulating in forums — whether for CJC-1295 alone or paired with ipamorelin — are not derived from controlled trials [1][7]. The honest summary is that the literature characterized kinetics, not a dosing standard, and that CJC-1295 is not approved for human use anywhere [7].
Combination protocols and the limits of the data
Much of the dosing discussion online concerns combinations rather than CJC-1295 alone, and the most common is CJC-1295 and ipamorelin. The mechanistic rationale is sound — a GHRH analog and a GH-releasing peptide act on different receptors and produce more GH together than either does alone [11]. But a rationale is not a regimen. There is no controlled human trial of the specific pairing from which a dose, an interval, or a ratio could be drawn, so the numbers attached to it in forums are convention, not evidence [11].
The same gap applies across the board. The published human PK studies used weight-based single doses of 30 to 90 micrograms per kilogram to characterize kinetics [1][3]; the fixed milligram or microgram figures that circulate for ongoing use were never the subject of a controlled efficacy or safety study. Reading those figures as established dosing inverts the actual state of the evidence, where well-characterized pharmacokinetics sit next to an almost entirely uncharacterized long-term picture.
That is why this page describes doses strictly as 'what was administered in which study,' and stops there. It does not convert any of those figures into guidance, because the literature does not support that step and CJC-1295 is not approved for human use [7]. For how the two forms differ in the schedule they imply, see CJC-1295 DAC vs no-DAC.