YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → CJC-1295 vs Tesamorelin: A Doctor Reveals Which Is Overrated

CJC-1295 vs Tesamorelin: A Doctor Reveals Which Is Overrated — Transcript

by Dr. Alex Tatem · 4,406 words · 666 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00CJC1295.
0:02Does it actually boost your growth
0:04hormone? Short version, yes. But the
0:06full version is a little more
0:08complicated because the CJC that's
0:10actually been proven to work probably
0:12isn't the version you're currently
0:13considering buying from Shanghai. And to
0:16make things even more complicated, using
0:18the version that hasn't been proven to
0:20work may just be the better choice.
0:22Theoretically speaking, of course,
0:23Ronic, run the disclaimer.
0:25Look, CJC1295
0:28has one of the messiest, most
0:29complicated histories of any compound
0:31we've covered on this channel because
0:33it's basically two different drugs
0:35sharing one name. The original one, the
0:37one with something called drug affinity
0:39complex or DAC on it, absolutely works.
0:42In actual humans, one shot raised growth
0:45hormone for about a week and IGF-1 for
0:4810 days. But it also turns your growth
0:50hormone signal into something your body
0:52never makes on its own. It got
0:54permanently shelved after a patient
0:56death that was probably unrelated, but
0:58still ended its phase 2 trial. And then
1:00the company that invented it went
1:02bankrupt. Meanwhile, the other one, CJC
1:05without DAC, aka the one sitting in
1:07basically every biohacker's fridge, has
1:09never been tested in a single human
1:11being. Not once. Which doesn't mean it
1:14doesn't work. It just means that
1:16nobody's checked. And everything you've
1:18been told about it is basically borrowed
1:19from Samoran. So, does CJC1295
1:23work? The one that nobody takes, proven.
1:26The one everybody takes, never proven,
1:28but never disproven because nobody's
1:31ever tested it. If you want to
1:32understand why that is, and whether this
1:34thing can actually stand in for
1:36something proven like Tessa Morland,
1:38listen up.
1:40What's up, LabRat Legion? Dr. Alex here,
1:42and here's exactly what you're getting
1:44in the next 20 minutes. Ronic says he's
1:46tired of editing my 30 plus minute
1:47ramblings on esoteric biochemistry. one,
1:50how the version everybody takes
1:52technically isn't CJC1295,
1:54at least not originally, and how the
1:57power of the Internet Hive Mind
1:58basically changed both a drug's name and
2:01identity. So much so that even the FDA
2:04agrees with the new naming convention.
2:06Two, the one human study that shows what
2:08the DAC actually does to your growth
2:10hormone pulses and how that's probably
2:12less than ideal. Three, whether the NO
2:15DAC version is a real standin for Tessa
2:18Morlin, because that's the question most
2:19of you are actually asking. Four, why
2:22this molecule has a legal future Tessa
2:24Morlin can never have and the FDA 13 to
2:27nothing vote that everybody's reading
2:29wrong. And five, what people are
2:32actually doing with it and my honest
2:34take. But first, we are almost done
2:36covering all the secrets. So, comment
2:38down below on which one you guys want
2:40next. Give me an A for Ipamoralin, B for
2:44MK677 aka Ibutamorin, C for GHRP2 and
2:48GHRP6, or D if you want something
2:51totally different. Just let us know. And
2:54please take a moment and hit that like
2:56button. It's honestly the only thing
2:57that's keeping Ronic going these days.
2:59And subscribe because crazy enough,
3:02YouTube says only about 50% of you are
3:04subscribed and we are trying our best to
3:06break 300K before the end of the year.
3:10All right. So, what is this thing? Well,
3:12for context, growth hormone releasing
3:14hormone, the peptide that tells your
3:16pituitary to release growth hormone,
3:18imagine that, is 44 amino acids long.
3:21Tessimorin is basically a one:1 copy of
3:24it with a fatty acid cap on the front.
3:26Meanwhile, samorin is just the front 29
3:28of those because that's the part that
3:30does most of the work. Now, back in the
3:3280s and 90s, chemists figured out that
3:34if you swap four of those 29 amino acids
3:37at positions 2, 8, 15, and 27, the
3:41peptide holds up a little better.
3:43Position two gets a mirror image amino
3:45acid. So, the enzyme that eats GHR can't
3:48get its teeth in, and the other three
3:50are basically stability and grip tweaks.
3:53That for swap version has a boring
3:55scientific name. Tetra substituted
3:57GRF129 and the internet just calls it
3:59Mod GRF129,
4:01but remember that name because it's
4:03going to come back around later. Then
4:05around 2005, a company in Montreal
4:07called Kjukim took that four swap
4:09peptide, stuck one extra amino acid on
4:12the end, a lysine, and then bolted a
4:14drug affinity complex aka DAC onto it.
4:16Now, DAC's job is to grab onto albumin.
4:19And we'll talk about why that's
4:20important in a second. And then it's
4:22that molecule, the four swaps plus the
4:24lysine plus the DAC that conjukim named
4:26CJC1295.
4:28And that's what the human studies were
4:29done on. CJC1295
4:32by definition includes DAC. So here's
4:34the naming situation. In the original
4:36papers, CJC1295
4:38means the DAC version. Meanwhile, on the
4:41street, in every clinic, and on every
4:43vendor page, CJC1295
4:45now means the bare molecule, the four
4:48swap backbone with no DAC on it. And the
4:50original gets called CJC1295
4:53with Dak. The name moved and nobody
4:55really decided that. It just sort of
4:57happened. Kind of like the whole Malfoy
5:00thing on X. But enough about my Harry
5:02Potter fanfic bookmarks. But the naming
5:04conventions around CJC moved so
5:06completely that when the FDA reviewed
5:08this thing in December 2024, their own
5:11paperwork listed CJC1295
5:14and CJC1295
5:17DAC as two separate substances. while
5:19also complaining, I'm not kidding, about
5:22inconsistent naming. So, for the rest of
5:24this video, I'm using the street version
5:26because that's probably what's in your
5:28fridge right now. Moving forward,
5:30CJC1295
5:31is the bare molecule without the extra
5:33lysine and DAC.
5:35>> So, the one everybody buys but has never
5:37been studied.
5:38>> Correct.
5:39>> But that's the one
5:41>> also correct.
5:44>> Welcome to the world of peptides and the
5:45internet in 2026. All right, origin
5:48story. CJC basically came out of a two
5:51company faceoff over the lipodistrophe
5:53market. And both companies were based
5:55just down the street from each other in
5:57Montreal because Kjakim, the main
5:59character in CJC's story, was developing
6:02CJC at the exact same time that Thera
6:05Technologies was developing Tessa
6:06Morland for the exact same indication.
6:08And they were basically neighbors this
6:10entire time, which makes this the
6:12Canadian pharmaceutical equivalent of
6:13the Hatfields versus McCoys. Ronic's
6:16going to have to look up that reference
6:17later. Here's the problem both companies
6:19were trying to solve. Your own GHR lasts
6:22about 7 minutes in your bloodstream
6:23before DPP4, the GLP-1 enzyme we
6:27mentioned in our Tessa Morland video
6:28bites the front of it off and turns the
6:30whole message into slag. And despite
6:32lasting only 7 minutes being totally
6:34normal for some things, a 7-minute
6:36half-life is a terrible property for a
6:38drug. Now, Thera Technologies approached
6:41this problem with TessaMorlin by just
6:43copying GHRH one:1 and slapping a fatty
6:46acid cap on the front that prevented
6:48DPP4 from grabbing it. It was a solid
6:51plan that actually worked well. Check
6:52out our Tessa Morland video above and
6:54below if you want to learn more. But
6:56even then, it still required nightly
6:58injections. And this was back in the
7:00early 2000s before we had all accepted
7:01our fate as pin cushions. So, the whole
7:04meta at the time was that fewer
7:05injections equals more commercial
7:07success. So, Kjukim based their entire
7:10strategy around one trick. Take a
7:12short-lived peptide and attach it to
7:14albumin so it can last in serum as long
7:16as humanly possible. Now, for those of
7:18you that actually talk to girls, albumin
7:20is the most common protein in your
7:22blood. It's huge. Your kidneys can't
7:24filter it out, and it lives for about 3
7:26weeks. So, Kjukim designed the DAC to
7:28grab album the second it hits your
7:30bloodstream, and it does not come off.
7:32The DACK latches onto albumin with a
7:34stage five clinger death grip. And the
7:36only way for it to get off is to wait
7:38for the album to die of old age. Gosh,
7:40that crazy girlfriend metaphor just got
7:42dark, huh? This strategy allowed CJC1295
7:46with DAC to be dosed as infrequently as
7:48once weekly, which was considered to be
7:50a major advantage over Tessa Morland at
7:52the time. There are some major caveats
7:53there, though, and we'll get to that
7:54later. And things really got cooking
7:56with CJC in 2005 when Lucy Jet and
7:59Dominique Briden's team published their
8:01first paper in rats. One shot of CJC
8:05with DAC produced four times the growth
8:07hormone of plain samorin and it was
8:09still detectable 3 days later. And then
8:11in 2006 the first human studies came out
8:14all run by an endocrinologist named
8:16Lawrence Froman. Fun fact, Froman is the
8:19guy who back in 1986 figured out that
8:22GHR is turned off by DPP4 chopping off
8:25its front end. So he discovered the
8:27problem in the 80s and then 20 years
8:29later was testing the fix in a potential
8:31commercial drug product. And I think
8:33that's pretty freaking cool. So after
8:35its successful phase 1 safety studies,
8:38the time came to figure out whether or
8:39not CJC actually worked. Kjukim's phase
8:422 had 192 patients on weekly injections.
8:46But unfortunately, in July of 2006, a
8:49participant at their site in Argentina
8:50died after his 11th weekly dose. It was
8:53unexpected and also totally unrelated.
8:56Probably the company said that the
8:57treating physician believed it was a
8:59heart attack from coronary disease that
9:00nobody knew about. But rules are rules
9:03and the trial stopped on July 17th. The
9:05data never got published and the program
9:07never came back online, which by the way
9:10is the exact same kind of thing that
9:12killed MK677.
9:14Comment B down below if you want that
9:16video next. Meanwhile, Thera
9:18Technologies trial kept going while
9:20Kanjukim kept bleeding cash with no
9:22other viable drug candidates. And
9:24eventually, Kanjukim was forced to
9:26declare bankruptcy in July of 2010. And
9:29then to add insult to injury, Tessa
9:32Morland got its FDA approval just four
9:34months later in November of 2010. Same
9:37city, same hormone, same year, but one
9:40of them is currently an FDA approved
9:42biologic, while the other one is in a
9:43filing cabinet at a bankruptcy trustees
9:45office in Montreal and also probably in
9:48your fridge. Now, you might be tempted
9:50to think that this is where the story
9:51ends. But it absolutely does not because
9:55in 2009, a doping lab in Norway got
9:58handed a vial by the police with no
10:00label on it and something inside that
10:02they had to identify from scratch. And
10:04what did they find? but 29 amino acids,
10:07the exact same four swaps, but no extra
10:10lysine or DAC. Now, at the time, that
10:13technically wasn't even CJC1295.
10:16It was technically mod GRF129
10:19because CJC1295
10:21still meant the version with DAC on it.
10:23Somebody had just synthesized the
10:25backbone molecule, left the DAC off, and
10:27started selling it under the CJC name.
10:30And that's the moment the name started
10:31to move. Remember, this is in 2009, and
10:34Kanji Kim didn't even go out of business
10:36until 2010. So, the cut down version of
10:39their original failed trial drug was
10:41already being sold on the street with a
10:43different naming convention while they
10:45were still in business. Kind of reminds
10:47me of that Polish channel that keeps
10:48copying all our videos.
10:52>> Shout out to our one Lab Rat Legion
10:54customer from Poland. I can't pronounce
10:56your name, but I see you, bro. Okay, so
10:58let's talk about what the original one
11:00actually does because this is the part
11:02that everybody seems to get wrong.
11:03Ronic, let's see if you were paying
11:05attention earlier. Your own GHR, the
11:08actual thing your brain makes. How long
11:10does it last in your blood?
11:11>> I remember.
11:15>> Mhm. Any minute now.
11:18>> I'm so disappointed. Try seven minutes.
11:21Now, samoralin the 29 amino acids of
11:24that sequence only last about four and
11:27then CJC1295
11:29with DAC 5.8 to 8.1 days, not hours,
11:34days. And that's the whole reason this
11:36drug has the negative reputation that it
11:38does in some circles. Because here's
11:41what that DAC does to the signal. In a
11:43second study performed in 2006,
11:45researchers took a bunch of healthy
11:47young men, drew blood every 20 minutes
11:49for 12 hours overnight, then gave them
11:51one shot of CJC with DAC, and then did
11:54the whole night again a week later. Now,
11:56the pulses were still there, same number
11:59and same size. So, the whole it kills
12:01your pulses crowd isn't right, at least
12:03not technically. But the floor between
12:05the pulses, the trough, set 7 and a half
12:08times higher than before, which resulted
12:10in mean growth hormone production
12:12jumping 46% and IGF-1 increasing by
12:15about the same margin. But here's the
12:18kicker. The IGF-1 rise didn't track the
12:20pulses at all. It tracked the floor. So,
12:23picture it like this. Your hypothalamus
12:26is supposed to pulse GHR to stimulate
12:29your pituitary to release GH. You have a
12:31call, a response, and then a period of
12:34quiet. And that period of silence is
12:36part of the message. Think of it like
12:38Morse code. If you don't have that break
12:40between the signals, then you're saying
12:42something entirely different. Then what
12:44DAC does is basically like leaning on
12:46the transmitter. Yeah, you can still get
12:48pulses, but your body can't really
12:49respond to them cuz it's already deaf
12:51from the constant stimulation. So yeah,
12:54CJC with DAC doesn't technically turn
12:56off your pulses, but it basically makes
12:59them irrelevant. And nobody on Earth
13:00knows what that can do to you over
13:02years. And funny enough, this is the
13:05version Brian Johnson chose to use
13:07during his peptide experiment a few
13:08months ago. And as you might have
13:10predicted, it totally wrecked his sleep,
13:12which kind of makes sense because Dak
13:15totally ignores basic GH biology. Brian,
13:18if you're watching this, I'm the doctor
13:19who asked you about sleep recovery after
13:21taking call at the Enhanced Games. call
13:23me. All right, now to the one you
13:25actually care about. CJC1295
13:27with no DAC. Here's the complete list of
13:30every published human study on it. Are
13:32you ready?
13:35Yeah, there aren't any. I searched and
13:37when the FDA reviewed this in 2024,
13:40every human study they could point to
13:42was the version with DAC. Now, normally
13:45this is the part of the video where I
13:46say in mice, always in mice, but I can't
13:49even give you a single mouse study for
13:51this one. I tried, guys. The closest
13:54thing that exists is a 1994 study where
13:5710 men got the single most important of
13:59the four swaps, the mirror image amino
14:02acid at position 2, and their half-life
14:04went from about 4.3 minutes with somorin
14:07to 6.7. 2 and 1/2 minutes. That is the
14:10entire human evidence base for the gain
14:13that you get from going from Samorland
14:15to CJC without DAC is one of its horse
14:18swaps bought you two and a half minutes,
14:20but I know some of you would kill to
14:22last 2 and 1/2 minutes longer.
14:24Meanwhile, you'll see 30 minute halflife
14:26on every vendor page on the internet.
14:28Now, I went looking for that measurement
14:30and I can't find it. So, if any of y'all
14:32want to educate me, please drop your
14:34sources in the comments down below. I
14:35can be taught. Now, I need to be clear
14:38about this one. That lack of data
14:40doesn't mean that CJC without DAC
14:42doesn't work. It just means that
14:43nobody's ever checked. So what is
14:46CJC1295,
14:47the bare one? It's basically Samorin
14:50with a better haircut and the exact same
14:52molecule as Mod GRF129. It works on the
14:56same receptor. It has the same
14:57minutesish long half-life and it's
15:00probably a little bit sturdier in the
15:01vial, which means that everything we
15:03speculate about it, including the sleep,
15:05the recovery, and the skin, we're
15:07basically borrowing from Samorin and GHR
15:09studies along with a lot of anecdotal
15:11reports. And again, that's not nothing.
15:14Samorin has real human sleep EEG data,
15:16and we included that in our video. Just
15:19understand that every claim on the
15:20vendor page is basically earned by a
15:22different molecule. Okay, cool story,
15:24Tatum. But theoretically speaking, can
15:27it strip visceral fat the same way
15:29tessimorin does? Fair, that is a
15:31reasonable question. So here's my honest
15:33answer. Is that proven? No. Is it
15:36disproven? Also no. Nobody's run the
15:39trial. Just purely mechanistically
15:41speaking, it's the same receptor in the
15:43same cascade. So it should do something
15:45in that direction. But Tessa Morland has
15:47800 patients, two phase three trials,
15:49and CT scans to back it up. This one has
15:52a Norwegian police seizure. And the dose
15:54gap is brutal. Tessa Morland's dose was
15:57two milligrams a night. The GHR studies
16:00that move body composition in adults ran
16:02from just under a milligram a night up
16:04to 4 milligrams twice a day. The CJC/IPA
16:08protocols people are actually running in
16:10the gray market use about 100 micrograms
16:12of CJC one to three times a day. So
16:15you're trying to replace a phase 3 drug
16:17with its untested little cousin at
16:19roughly a tenth of the dose.
16:23I don't. Nobody does.
16:26>> That's the whole video.
16:29>> Not that it's ever stopped any of you
16:30lab rats. Now, in fairness, there's a
16:33steelman against this. CGC was
16:35compounded for years before it was put
16:37on the category 2 list in 2023. And most
16:40clinicians, including myself, reported
16:41seeing IGF-1 levels above simorin but
16:44below tessamorin, which is why people
16:46started stacking it within. Because when
16:48you stack it with ipomorin, you're
16:50hitting two different receptors at the
16:52same time, GHR and ghrein. And in
16:55humans, that combination releases more
16:57growth hormone than either one alone.
17:00And that's real pharmarmacology, not
17:02just vibes. And it's why CJC/IPA
17:04exists as a product. But that's an
17:07argument for the stack and not for CJC
17:09on its own. And honestly, that's a topic
17:11for the future IPA Morlin video. Comment
17:13a down below if you want that one. Okay,
17:15because I'm a policy wonk, this is the
17:17part that I actually find really
17:19interesting and it's one of the reasons
17:20I wanted to make this video. Remember
17:22the 40 amino acid rule from the
17:24tessaorin video? If you're over 40 amino
17:27acids, it's technically a biologic and
17:29it can't legally be compounded. And
17:31tessor is 44, which means every
17:33compounded tessor vial in America from a
17:365030 pharmacy is basically a bet that
17:38the FDA doesn't feel like enforcing the
17:40rules this week. And those guys can
17:42barely tie their own shoes. So that's
17:43probably a pretty safe bet. But CJC
17:46without DAC is actually 29 amino acids.
17:49So that makes it a drug, not a biologic,
17:52meaning it's cheap and easy to
17:53synthesize. And legally there is a door
17:56for affordable access that Tesla Morlin
17:58just doesn't have. The 503A bulks list.
18:02This is the same list that BPC, TB500,
18:05KPV, Matsi, Simax, and Epatalon are
18:08currently being considered for. So, if
18:10CJC can get on that list, then
18:12compounders can make it forever out in
18:15the open with no betting on non-
18:16enforcement required. So, on paper, the
18:19unproven one has a legal path where the
18:22proven one doesn't, which seems a little
18:24backwards, but here we are. Here's the
18:26catch with that. CJC has already been
18:29considered for the bulks list. And uh
18:31that meeting didn't go so well. In
18:33September 2023, the FDA put both CJC1295
18:37and epomorlin into category 2. They said
18:40there was a significant safety risk,
18:41even though they had no data to back
18:43that up. But compounding had to stop all
18:45the same, and it was included in the
18:47same batch of peptides that ended up
18:49putting me in front of that committee
18:50this past July. Now, following that
18:53move, the FDA was sued for not backing
18:55that decision up with any data. And the
18:57original nominations back in 2023 and
19:002024 for consideration on being put onto
19:02the bulks list were honestly not that
19:05organized. No shade to the guys who
19:07nominated them. So, recognizing this, in
19:10September of 2024, the people who had
19:12nominated CJC pulled their nominations
19:14on purpose with the idea of coming back
19:16with a better game plan. But the FDA,
19:19not wanting to give them that chance,
19:21decided to review it anyways with none
19:23of the supporting information. That
19:25information was submitted. They just
19:27chose not to review it. So on December
19:294th, 2024, the pharmacy compounding
19:32advisory committee under the Biden era
19:34FDA voted on all five forms of it. And
19:37what do you know? It was shot down 13 to
19:40nothing. At least for all the freebase
19:41forms. The acetate form was 12 to1. So
19:44at least we got one vote. In our Tessa
19:46Morlin video, I told you that in this
19:49country, the shest way to make a peptide
19:51unaffordable is to prove that it works.
19:53Well, here's the other half to that. The
19:55shest way to kill one is to hold a vote
19:58without looking at any of the supporting
19:59evidence in the room. But there is a
20:02silver lining here. Luckily, the federal
20:04government is terrible at finishing its
20:06homework on time. That PCAC vote was a
20:10recommendation, not a final rule. And
20:12the FDA still hasn't finished writing
20:15that rule. So theoretically, CJC could
20:18still have another shot at the title if
20:20someone can convince the FDA to let it
20:22be brought before the PCAC again. And in
20:24the wise words of Lloyd from Dumb and
20:26Dumber,
20:26>> so you're telling me there's a chance?
20:29>> PS. Lab Ratat Legion hoodies officially
20:31have more human data behind them than
20:32CJC1295 without DAC. Links in the
20:35description. What are people actually
20:37doing? Well, people are reporting using
20:39the no DAC version at about 100
20:40micrograms anywhere from 1 to three
20:42times a day at bedtime on an empty
20:44stomach, usually mixed with 100 to 300
20:47micrograms of epipamorin. And that's the
20:49whole CJC/IP blend the longevity world
20:52sold until 2023. And the research use
20:54only sites sell even now. The withdac
20:57crowd reports using 1 to 2 milligrams
20:59once a week. To all the feds listening
21:01outside, I'm not recommending here. I'm
21:03just reporting.
21:05But what about side effects? Well, in
21:07the human studies, almost everybody on
21:09the drug reported some sort of secondary
21:11effect, either flushing, headache,
21:14injection site reactions, and maybe GI
21:16upset, compared to about a third of
21:18people reporting those symptoms on
21:19placebo, and none of it was considered
21:21serious over about a month of testing.
21:23Then you have all the other growth
21:24hormone access stuff from our other
21:26videos. We're talking fluid, joint
21:28issues, and drifts in sugar. But the one
21:30thing that's unique to the DAC version
21:32is that you can't just uningject a week.
21:35React badly on a Monday and that drug is
21:37still in you next Monday and the one
21:39after. Now, I have to put a giant
21:42asterisk here. Although I've never seen
21:44it in the compounded versions. CJC is
21:47notorious in the research use only space
21:49for causing profound histamine reactions
21:52and even anaphilaxis. Same thing for
21:54rotes, interestingly enough. In fact,
21:57it's so bad that some people even
21:59recommend having an EpiPen on hand if
22:01you're going to use it. And this past
22:03October, an Australian coroner found
22:05that the actor Richard Norton died
22:07exactly that way. He had an anaphylactic
22:10reaction that triggered a cardiac arrest
22:12after injecting CJC1295
22:14andorin. A couple caveats on that one.
22:17It was prescribed by a physician and it
22:19was made by a compounding pharmacy. So,
22:21that was not an RUO vial, but he was
22:23also taking double his prescribed dose.
22:26And this is in Australia which may have
22:28completely different standards around
22:29compounding. I just don't know. And
22:31there are some other hard stops here. If
22:33you're thinking about this, if you have
22:35an active cancer, please do not touch
22:37this family. IGF-1 is a growth signal
22:40and you don't want that if you have an
22:41active cancer. Also, if you have
22:43pituitary disease, there's nothing for
22:44it to talk to, so it's not worth it. And
22:47nobody has long-term antibbody data on a
22:49peptide that's permanently zip tied to
22:51your own albumin, which is yet another
22:53reason to avoid the DAC version. And
22:55again, let me say this plainly for the
22:57record. I am not telling anyone to
22:59inject anything. Ronic, run the
23:01disclaimer.
23:03If you want what Tessa Morland does, the
23:05visceral fat, the liver fat, and the
23:07stuff that shows up on a CT scan,
23:09nothing in the published record says
23:10that CJC in any form delivers it. So, if
23:14you can get Tessamorin legally, that's
23:16the better option. Hard stop. And if you
23:18want the samorin benefits like better
23:20sleep and better skin and hair, well,
23:22you're probably just better off using
23:24samorin. Now, CJC1295, the bear
23:27molecule, is probably perfectly fine and
23:29more potent simorland substitute with an
23:32admittedly more confusing name. But I
23:34have to say probably there because
23:36nobody has proven it or disproven it.
23:38And in case I haven't been clear enough,
23:40I just straight up can't recommend the
23:42DAC version. It totally disrespects the
23:44response to natural GH pulses in a way
23:46that no other secret does to include GH
23:49itself for that matter. I'll change my
23:51mind the day somebody runs a study. If
23:53you want muscle, this probably isn't the
23:55axis you're looking for. Those are
23:57called androgens. All right, if this
23:59video taught you something, hit the like
24:00button. It's free, only takes a second,
24:02and again, it's the only thing keeping
24:04me and Ronic from just jumping off a
24:06bridge these days. And subscribe because
24:08I am bound and determined to finish
24:10covering all the compounds in this axis.
24:12And because honestly the peptide
24:14regulatory war is far from over. And
24:16don't forget to comment A for epomorlin,
24:19B for MK677, C for GHRP2 and 6, and D
24:23for something else because you're sick
24:24of all these compounds that kind of
24:26basically do the same thing. And send
24:28this to your buddies and the Telegram
24:29group chat. They probably want to know
24:31the real story and it helps the channel
24:33and it might help them too. And until
24:34next time, I'm Dr. Alex. Stay curious,
24:37stay skeptical, and as always, proceed
24:40accordingly.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of CJC-1295 vs Tesamorelin: A Doctor Reveals Which Is Overrated by Dr. Alex Tatem, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 4,406 words across 666 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.