Less Is More: Handling the Impulse to Raise Your Dose or Stack More Peptides

[Mr. Blonde]

And then...I simply fill the syringe and begin going all out!

 

[lessthanhalf]

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

 

[birdwhacker]

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

 

[birdwhacker]

jason370 said:

I have totally given in to this urge. There is no limit to how much questionable Chinese WhoKnowsWhat I can inject into myself around the clock. Oddly enough, I feel amazing, with virtually no side effects.

Repeat that so the folks at the back can hear it. Sticking random crap into my body has left me healthier than ever before.

Throwfa said:

lessthanhalf said:

Throwfa said:

Hold off and give it time. A single bout of hunger is enough to make far too many people raise their dosage.

Getting through stretches like this still takes a certain amount of self discipline. That hunger will fade, and a lower dose can carry you through the coming weeks.

When hunger becomes a constant presence, resist the reflex to simply double the dose. Instead, titrate upward gradually, or try stacking with another low dose. It is also worth reworking your dosing schedule so that a steadier active level is maintained across the week.

My take is that this is usually the wrong way to go about it. The exception might be if you're using GLP drugs without starting from obesity, meaning you're taking them for cosmetic reasons or to lower fat percentage, which is a different situation. Outside of that, I don't believe stacking low dose GLPs, or adding other peptides on top of GLPs at low doses, is a good idea in most cases. Doing so raises the chance of side effects and allergic reactions while not delivering better results than simply using higher doses of a single GLP.

When the drug is being used for what it's meant for, treating obesity, then tuning the dose so that very long term treatment remains tolerable is critical, and that includes having reasonable hunger control. If you use tiny doses and just push through hunger, that's not really different from dieting without the drug at all, and the nonstop mental strain of restraining eating while hungry wears people down, and in the end they run out of willpower and regain the weight. What makes these drugs valuable is that they can break that cycle, ideally for good, and achieving that depends on solid hunger control. Hunger will never drop to zero unless the drug is also making you feel quite sick, because the body's appetite regulation system is extremely complex and has a lot of redundancy. But it does need to reach the point where what you decide to eat comes close to matching the calorie intake needed to lose weight and keep it off long term. The notion that you can retrain your body to accept a lower calorie diet permanently is largely wishful thinking. It's not impossible to achieve major long term weight loss without drugs or surgery, but it demands extreme lifestyle changes that must become long term unconscious habits, and the probability of succeeding at that is genuinely terrible, only a few percent. Losing weight and maintaining that loss on GLPs calls for 1 injection per week, and while better lifestyle habits are a good idea, they aren't necessary for the drugs to work.

I'm carrying extra weight, I lack self-control, and I will definitely make a drastic lifestyle overhaul so that I never return to this weight again. GLP1s make that possible for me.

Aren't we attempting to address the root problem? Not merely aiming to shed the pounds?

The OP wanted to know how to keep impulsive behavior in check so they don't escalate too quickly. Well, that same impulsive outcome-craving fixation is also responsible for a great many kilos.

GPL1s let you drop weight, but they aren't magic. Fixing the deeper problems and maintaining health is still something you have to do yourself.

Trial data can definitely be misread, so please check out some of Dr. Jones's materials on the lowest effective dose and titrating upward.

Doctors who are influencers? Not my thing.

5byfive said:

lessthanhalf said:

On that point I partly agree, partly don't.

Back in 2022 I weighed 145kg, which is very overweight. At the time I thought GLP medications cost far too much for me to afford, though I had gone through the studies.

Over roughly a year I went from 145 down to 75 kg. My intake was 1600-1800 kcal/day, built mostly from lean meat, fruit, vegetables and salad — foods that are generally low in calorific density. I placed a hard ban on anything high calorie, highly rewarding or high glycaemic index, and kept protein very high at 40-50%. What I had noticed before was that even small quantities of rich, high calorie food would set off overwhelming hunger an hour or 2 afterward, and after weight loss that reaction got much stronger, and once it began it was very difficult to halt. My guess is it involves blood sugar spikes, then dips, then something going wrong in brain chemistry, producing extreme hunger. Whatever the mechanism, it is still food addiction or binge eating disorder. Between 2014, when I was 65kg, and 2022, I reached 145.

For about a year I held around that weight ( 75kg ), yet it was difficult and hunger was almost constant even though I had built the diet specifically to keep hunger down. So in most respects I had solved the problem, using diet and behavioural strategies on myself to control eating, but there is no way it was sustainable long term. I had got to normal weight in the past but could never stay there for more than a year or 2. At some point I would give in and eat too much after being just too hungry for too long.

Then I learned that in Australia a low dose of ozempic was not super expensive, around $40/w aud. It made me less hungry, but it also brought nausea that did not improve across a year. After that I came across this forum and cheap peptides, and tirz 15mg/w plus reta 5mg/w plus cagri 0.5mg/w control hunger and cravings for not allowed foods far better. I still follow the no high calorie foods approach and have done so for 3.5 years now, but on GLP drugs it is nowhere near as hard as it was without them and feels like it might be sustainable. This absolute avoidance of high calorie trigger foods is not going to be for everyone, but it worked for me. And I got to 65kg recently at a BMI of 23.

My view of GLP drugs is that they alter appetite: you feel less hungry, you feel full after fewer calories, they produce some food aversion so high calorie foods seem less appealing, they lower cravings for high calorie foods and reduce thinking about food overall, and most importantly of all they still do this after you have lost a lot of weight, where normally hunger is massively increased.

GLP drugs also do work regardless of diet or lifestyle changes, the studies that gave the drugs alone or with diet and exercise interventions did not really show much difference in weight loss, and they improve diet choices unconsciously, people are more likely to eat and buy fresh fruit and vegetables and less likely to buy and eat ultraprocesssed food when they are on GLP drugs. They temporarily modify the functioning of some brain reward circuitry to do this.

GLP drugs are being considered as therapies for binge eating disorder, for the simple reason that they work. Most therapies for that disorder are psychological, mainly cognitive behavioural therapy , which can help, but is not very effective. In general there is a bit of an issue with a psychologist's way of viewing the disorder and a more medical therapy viewpoint. Until GLP drugs the only approved therapy was amphetamines, which help a bit but not a lot. But this field issue is a problem, in general psychologists are going to view it as a problem that needs therapy, not something fixable with drugs, so a lot of what I have seen is from their perspective which does not view them as a solution regardless of how well they work. From what I have read GLP drugs are probably the most effective therapy for binge eating disorder yet found, but this is far from the current consensus, and I would argue this is because of the way it is seen by the people who usually treat it, psychologists, who view it as a problem to be managed with therapy, usually cognitive behavioural ( which in general is a very useful and effective treatment for many psychological and psychiatric disorders, and is often better than medication )

Just from my experience GLP drugs do reduce impulsive or otherwise poorly controlled eating behaviours. Mainly by rewiring the reward circuitry so that the underlying impulse or desire for the food is weaker, and this effect works on other addictions, for alcohol, cocaine amphetamines and opioids, to the point where they are also being considered seriously as therapies for these problems and being actively researched. In my case I had decided to exclude a wide range of foods from my diet totally to bypass this problem, so it is not as easy to say how hard it would have been to start doing this on GLP's, but I can definitely say it is much much easier to stick to it long term with them , and requires a lot less mental effort fighting those impulses, because they are not as strong.

For me GLP drugs are literally lifesaving , were I to regain the 80kg I lost I would be at very high risk, well over 50% of serious cardiovascular disease over the next decade, with a risk reduced to 10-20% with GLP drugs, weight loss and statins etc. Despite having lost the weight without GLP drugs, I do see them as the closest thing there has ever been to a long term solution to obesity, short of surgery which is not without adverse effects. In general all of the research ever done on reducing obesity with diet and exercise shows initial successes with very poor long term results, with single digit percentages ever maintaining major weight loss long term. So as far as I am concerned diet and exercise , as a treatment for obesity do not work, or at best help a bit or temporarily. GLP drugs so far show weight loss and maintenance up to 5 years from start to end of study, with no trend to increased weight over time if the dose used to lose the weight is maintained, and depending on which drug, can cause an average of 15-29% weight loss, much more than diet therapies could ever achieve. And after that 5 years , when the GLP was stopped weight started going up immediately.

In people especially with severe obesity including those with binge eating or food addiction disorder, GLP drugs help to fix the problem. The appetite regulation system in long term obesity gets broken somehow, in a way that is not fully understood as the appetite regulation system is extremely complicated, redundant and full of all sorts of feedback loops. Until GLP drugs there was nothing that really worked , best previous drugs had at best 5-8% weight loss, and weight loss surgery is no picnic. And weight loss , good diet and exercise do not fix the broken appetite regulation system. After weight loss , especially massive weight loss, energy expenditure is quite a bit lower than would be expected for a person of that age and activity level, and hunger is higher than normal. This is the impossible state of trying to maintain weight loss without GLP's. Having to stick to a lower than normal, low calorie diet long term, despite your body telling you it is hungry all the time, which is exactly what I have experienced, requiring 1600-1800 kcal/day to be weight neutral. Which is why so few people succeed in long term weight loss from diet and exercise, so it does not really help to develop excellent eating and exercise patterns, a very small percentage can do it, and develop unconscious habitual patterns of new behaviour with exercise and diet , so that weight can be maintained without constant mental effort in controlling eating, but even then the basic energy equation is fighting you , requiring less calories in at the same time as more hunger. The only fix for this problem that exists so far is GLP drugs.

And taking them long term benefits health, reducing risks of many diseeases related to obesity, so it is not a trade off of weight control for bad health outcomes, you get both better health and lower weight. So long as side effects do not reduce quality of life while taking them, there are very few downsides to GLP drugs. Apart from the extreme cost if you are using the legit versions.

Working as a therapist focused on addiction and eating disorders, my view is fairly firm: BED has been placed in the wrong category. It fits far better under substance abuse disorders. The psychological and neurological processes involved line up much more closely with that framework. With substance abuse problems, GLPs appear to offer some benefit — not a cure, but in my view they will likely be recognized as a meaningful adjunctive treatment — and my expectation is that they would perform even more strongly for BED.

Beyond that, I suspect they may also prove useful for other eating disorders. In terms of brain mechanisms, eating disorders and substance abuse disorders share considerable overlap. Just don't say this to anyone in the ED therapist world. I have never encountered a group so closed off, so convinced of their own moral high ground, so sealed within their own bubble. Bring up GLPs at all and they will show up with pitchforks. Getting these medications accepted as a treatment is going to be an uphill battle.

Having spent years abusing substances, I'm 100% with you. Food and I have had a relationship that was, and you could argue still is, purely pharmaceutical. I'm on some part of the autistic spectrum, and drugs turned into both my special interest and my way of coping with trauma. Every single thing I look at, I see through a chemical filter. Ordering a milkshake would get me thinking "all that sugar is going to feel great going down, and if the timing lines up I could even manage a nap." Or "this cheeseburger is going to help me let off steam once work is done." Compulsive redosing. Taking it from friends and family. Working people to get more.

These days, that relationship has shifted somewhat, and I look at food the way a bodybuilder might look at anabolic compounds. The green stuff and fruit go in because fiber and micronutrients are needed. Chicken breasts go in because they keep my muscles up. Cheese sticks go in before bed so the casein digests slowly and keeps my insulin release going through the night.

Something is deeply broken in me, but at least now it isn't aimed at my face.

 

[lessthanhalf]

birdwhacker said:

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

With GLP peptides, things can go south fast: bump the dose even slightly and you may end up feeling awful, possibly nauseous or vomiting, which is far from enjoyable.

birdwhacker said:

jason370 said:

I have totally given in to this urge. There is no limit to how much questionable Chinese WhoKnowsWhat I can inject into myself around the clock. Oddly enough, I feel amazing, with virtually no side effects.

Repeat that so the folks at the back can hear it. Sticking random crap into my body has left me healthier than ever before.

Throwfa said:

lessthanhalf said:

Throwfa said:

Hold off and give it time. A single bout of hunger is enough to make far too many people raise their dosage.

Getting through stretches like this still takes a certain amount of self discipline. That hunger will fade, and a lower dose can carry you through the coming weeks.

When hunger becomes a constant presence, resist the reflex to simply double the dose. Instead, titrate upward gradually, or try stacking with another low dose. It is also worth reworking your dosing schedule so that a steadier active level is maintained across the week.

My take is that this is usually the wrong way to go about it. The exception might be if you're using GLP drugs without starting from obesity, meaning you're taking them for cosmetic reasons or to lower fat percentage, which is a different situation. Outside of that, I don't believe stacking low dose GLPs, or adding other peptides on top of GLPs at low doses, is a good idea in most cases. Doing so raises the chance of side effects and allergic reactions while not delivering better results than simply using higher doses of a single GLP.

When the drug is being used for what it's meant for, treating obesity, then tuning the dose so that very long term treatment remains tolerable is critical, and that includes having reasonable hunger control. If you use tiny doses and just push through hunger, that's not really different from dieting without the drug at all, and the nonstop mental strain of restraining eating while hungry wears people down, and in the end they run out of willpower and regain the weight. What makes these drugs valuable is that they can break that cycle, ideally for good, and achieving that depends on solid hunger control. Hunger will never drop to zero unless the drug is also making you feel quite sick, because the body's appetite regulation system is extremely complex and has a lot of redundancy. But it does need to reach the point where what you decide to eat comes close to matching the calorie intake needed to lose weight and keep it off long term. The notion that you can retrain your body to accept a lower calorie diet permanently is largely wishful thinking. It's not impossible to achieve major long term weight loss without drugs or surgery, but it demands extreme lifestyle changes that must become long term unconscious habits, and the probability of succeeding at that is genuinely terrible, only a few percent. Losing weight and maintaining that loss on GLPs calls for 1 injection per week, and while better lifestyle habits are a good idea, they aren't necessary for the drugs to work.

I'm carrying extra weight, I lack self-control, and I will definitely make a drastic lifestyle overhaul so that I never return to this weight again. GLP1s make that possible for me.

Aren't we attempting to address the root problem? Not merely aiming to shed the pounds?

The OP wanted to know how to keep impulsive behavior in check so they don't escalate too quickly. Well, that same impulsive outcome-craving fixation is also responsible for a great many kilos.

GPL1s let you drop weight, but they aren't magic. Fixing the deeper problems and maintaining health is still something you have to do yourself.

Trial data can definitely be misread, so please check out some of Dr. Jones's materials on the lowest effective dose and titrating upward.

Doctors who are influencers? Not my thing.

5byfive said:

lessthanhalf said:

On that point I partly agree, partly don't.

Back in 2022 I weighed 145kg, which is very overweight. At the time I thought GLP medications cost far too much for me to afford, though I had gone through the studies.

Over roughly a year I went from 145 down to 75 kg. My intake was 1600-1800 kcal/day, built mostly from lean meat, fruit, vegetables and salad — foods that are generally low in calorific density. I placed a hard ban on anything high calorie, highly rewarding or high glycaemic index, and kept protein very high at 40-50%. What I had noticed before was that even small quantities of rich, high calorie food would set off overwhelming hunger an hour or 2 afterward, and after weight loss that reaction got much stronger, and once it began it was very difficult to halt. My guess is it involves blood sugar spikes, then dips, then something going wrong in brain chemistry, producing extreme hunger. Whatever the mechanism, it is still food addiction or binge eating disorder. Between 2014, when I was 65kg, and 2022, I reached 145.

For about a year I held around that weight ( 75kg ), yet it was difficult and hunger was almost constant even though I had built the diet specifically to keep hunger down. So in most respects I had solved the problem, using diet and behavioural strategies on myself to control eating, but there is no way it was sustainable long term. I had got to normal weight in the past but could never stay there for more than a year or 2. At some point I would give in and eat too much after being just too hungry for too long.

Then I learned that in Australia a low dose of ozempic was not super expensive, around $40/w aud. It made me less hungry, but it also brought nausea that did not improve across a year. After that I came across this forum and cheap peptides, and tirz 15mg/w plus reta 5mg/w plus cagri 0.5mg/w control hunger and cravings for not allowed foods far better. I still follow the no high calorie foods approach and have done so for 3.5 years now, but on GLP drugs it is nowhere near as hard as it was without them and feels like it might be sustainable. This absolute avoidance of high calorie trigger foods is not going to be for everyone, but it worked for me. And I got to 65kg recently at a BMI of 23.

My view of GLP drugs is that they alter appetite: you feel less hungry, you feel full after fewer calories, they produce some food aversion so high calorie foods seem less appealing, they lower cravings for high calorie foods and reduce thinking about food overall, and most importantly of all they still do this after you have lost a lot of weight, where normally hunger is massively increased.

GLP drugs also do work regardless of diet or lifestyle changes, the studies that gave the drugs alone or with diet and exercise interventions did not really show much difference in weight loss, and they improve diet choices unconsciously, people are more likely to eat and buy fresh fruit and vegetables and less likely to buy and eat ultraprocesssed food when they are on GLP drugs. They temporarily modify the functioning of some brain reward circuitry to do this.

GLP drugs are being considered as therapies for binge eating disorder, for the simple reason that they work. Most therapies for that disorder are psychological, mainly cognitive behavioural therapy , which can help, but is not very effective. In general there is a bit of an issue with a psychologist's way of viewing the disorder and a more medical therapy viewpoint. Until GLP drugs the only approved therapy was amphetamines, which help a bit but not a lot. But this field issue is a problem, in general psychologists are going to view it as a problem that needs therapy, not something fixable with drugs, so a lot of what I have seen is from their perspective which does not view them as a solution regardless of how well they work. From what I have read GLP drugs are probably the most effective therapy for binge eating disorder yet found, but this is far from the current consensus, and I would argue this is because of the way it is seen by the people who usually treat it, psychologists, who view it as a problem to be managed with therapy, usually cognitive behavioural ( which in general is a very useful and effective treatment for many psychological and psychiatric disorders, and is often better than medication )

Just from my experience GLP drugs do reduce impulsive or otherwise poorly controlled eating behaviours. Mainly by rewiring the reward circuitry so that the underlying impulse or desire for the food is weaker, and this effect works on other addictions, for alcohol, cocaine amphetamines and opioids, to the point where they are also being considered seriously as therapies for these problems and being actively researched. In my case I had decided to exclude a wide range of foods from my diet totally to bypass this problem, so it is not as easy to say how hard it would have been to start doing this on GLP's, but I can definitely say it is much much easier to stick to it long term with them , and requires a lot less mental effort fighting those impulses, because they are not as strong.

For me GLP drugs are literally lifesaving , were I to regain the 80kg I lost I would be at very high risk, well over 50% of serious cardiovascular disease over the next decade, with a risk reduced to 10-20% with GLP drugs, weight loss and statins etc. Despite having lost the weight without GLP drugs, I do see them as the closest thing there has ever been to a long term solution to obesity, short of surgery which is not without adverse effects. In general all of the research ever done on reducing obesity with diet and exercise shows initial successes with very poor long term results, with single digit percentages ever maintaining major weight loss long term. So as far as I am concerned diet and exercise , as a treatment for obesity do not work, or at best help a bit or temporarily. GLP drugs so far show weight loss and maintenance up to 5 years from start to end of study, with no trend to increased weight over time if the dose used to lose the weight is maintained, and depending on which drug, can cause an average of 15-29% weight loss, much more than diet therapies could ever achieve. And after that 5 years , when the GLP was stopped weight started going up immediately.

In people especially with severe obesity including those with binge eating or food addiction disorder, GLP drugs help to fix the problem. The appetite regulation system in long term obesity gets broken somehow, in a way that is not fully understood as the appetite regulation system is extremely complicated, redundant and full of all sorts of feedback loops. Until GLP drugs there was nothing that really worked , best previous drugs had at best 5-8% weight loss, and weight loss surgery is no picnic. And weight loss , good diet and exercise do not fix the broken appetite regulation system. After weight loss , especially massive weight loss, energy expenditure is quite a bit lower than would be expected for a person of that age and activity level, and hunger is higher than normal. This is the impossible state of trying to maintain weight loss without GLP's. Having to stick to a lower than normal, low calorie diet long term, despite your body telling you it is hungry all the time, which is exactly what I have experienced, requiring 1600-1800 kcal/day to be weight neutral. Which is why so few people succeed in long term weight loss from diet and exercise, so it does not really help to develop excellent eating and exercise patterns, a very small percentage can do it, and develop unconscious habitual patterns of new behaviour with exercise and diet , so that weight can be maintained without constant mental effort in controlling eating, but even then the basic energy equation is fighting you , requiring less calories in at the same time as more hunger. The only fix for this problem that exists so far is GLP drugs.

And taking them long term benefits health, reducing risks of many diseeases related to obesity, so it is not a trade off of weight control for bad health outcomes, you get both better health and lower weight. So long as side effects do not reduce quality of life while taking them, there are very few downsides to GLP drugs. Apart from the extreme cost if you are using the legit versions.

Working as a therapist focused on addiction and eating disorders, my view is fairly firm: BED has been placed in the wrong category. It fits far better under substance abuse disorders. The psychological and neurological processes involved line up much more closely with that framework. With substance abuse problems, GLPs appear to offer some benefit — not a cure, but in my view they will likely be recognized as a meaningful adjunctive treatment — and my expectation is that they would perform even more strongly for BED.

Beyond that, I suspect they may also prove useful for other eating disorders. In terms of brain mechanisms, eating disorders and substance abuse disorders share considerable overlap. Just don't say this to anyone in the ED therapist world. I have never encountered a group so closed off, so convinced of their own moral high ground, so sealed within their own bubble. Bring up GLPs at all and they will show up with pitchforks. Getting these medications accepted as a treatment is going to be an uphill battle.

Having spent years abusing substances, I'm 100% with you. Food and I have had a relationship that was, and you could argue still is, purely pharmaceutical. I'm on some part of the autistic spectrum, and drugs turned into both my special interest and my way of coping with trauma. Every single thing I look at, I see through a chemical filter. Ordering a milkshake would get me thinking "all that sugar is going to feel great going down, and if the timing lines up I could even manage a nap." Or "this cheeseburger is going to help me let off steam once work is done." Compulsive redosing. Taking it from friends and family. Working people to get more.

These days, that relationship has shifted somewhat, and I look at food the way a bodybuilder might look at anabolic compounds. The green stuff and fruit go in because fiber and micronutrients are needed. Chicken breasts go in because they keep my muscles up. Cheese sticks go in before bed so the casein digests slowly and keeps my insulin release going through the night.

Something is deeply broken in me, but at least now it isn't aimed at my face.

I'm completely with you on that—this may be about the least trustworthy medical source out there, since they're nearly always pushing a product or promoting themselves, and that rarely yields dependable, scientifically sound information.

 

[cloratheshadow]

birdwhacker said:

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

In my case, the problem came from piling on too many peptides, which left me feeling off. Cagri wipes me out, Reta brings on aches, and CJC/Ipa produces head rushes, so going overboard with any of them leaves me feeling awful. Tolerances vary from person to person, though! I appear to be a hyper responder to nearly everything I use. Supplements became another fixation for me too, and I was taking around 12. What I realized was that I had brought in too many new things at the same time. A slower approach works better, because when something feels strange you can pinpoint the cause! These days, whenever I introduce something, it is the only new item until I am certain it is tolerated. On top of that, there are on and off cycles, so I tell myself the others can wait for an off cycle. Wanting to try everything is hard to resist. It gets even harder when you are already taking a large number of supplements.

What has your experience with epithalon been like? I have been curious about trying it myself!

 

[Smiter]

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Like others have already pointed out, my take is that the shells stay metabolically active even after adipose tissue sheds all its cytoplasm. How do you see it? If someone underwent liposuction following weight loss—surgically removing the remainder—would their outcome in this respect be improved? Leptin resistance has been a long-standing subject of my research, though only as a secondary focus. The logic of this situation strikes my mind with too much force for me to overlook it.

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Here is where I put forward the approach of picking a suitable counter rather than endlessly playing defense. To put it another way: since GLP's role is to mandate hunger suppression without providing a cure, perhaps one could attempt the inverse of what fat cells do. Counter by using metabolically active tissues—build muscle to the greatest extent possible. Muscles burn energy, yet they also lift our TDEE, which grants us greater leeway in daily calorie intake. Moreover, among the myokines muscles release are ones that raise metabolism, Irisin being an example.

 

[birdwhacker]

cloratheshadow said:

birdwhacker said:

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

In my case, the problem came from piling on too many peptides, which left me feeling off. Cagri wipes me out, Reta brings on aches, and CJC/Ipa produces head rushes, so going overboard with any of them leaves me feeling awful. Tolerances vary from person to person, though! I appear to be a hyper responder to nearly everything I use. Supplements became another fixation for me too, and I was taking around 12. What I realized was that I had brought in too many new things at the same time. A slower approach works better, because when something feels strange you can pinpoint the cause! These days, whenever I introduce something, it is the only new item until I am certain it is tolerated. On top of that, there are on and off cycles, so I tell myself the others can wait for an off cycle. Wanting to try everything is hard to resist. It gets even harder when you are already taking a large number of supplements.

What has your experience with epithalon been like? I have been curious about trying it myself!

My initial reaction is positive, but I need more time before I can say for sure. Tonight marks just my 3rd night using it.

For anyone who enjoys vivid dreams, DSIP worked really well in my case! Truthfully, it isn't worth the cost, though I received mine at no charge. Once I'm done with the epitalon, I'm looking forward to running a cycle of it

 

[bonelifts]

Neptide said:

I've come across a number of seasoned peptide users who argue that keeping things minimal helps preserve both tolerance and results over a longer stretch. I'd like to hear how others here see it, and what they've personally run into.

Whether less is more likely hinges on which peptide you're talking about. Any that act on receptors can certainly see reduced returns from escalating, continuous use, since that effect will fade as time goes on. Then there are peptides whose use doesn't involve receptor action, and those can likely be taken over the long haul or at higher doses that remain reasonable.

 

[Smiter]

birdwhacker said:

cloratheshadow said:

birdwhacker said:

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

In my case, the problem came from piling on too many peptides, which left me feeling off. Cagri wipes me out, Reta brings on aches, and CJC/Ipa produces head rushes, so going overboard with any of them leaves me feeling awful. Tolerances vary from person to person, though! I appear to be a hyper responder to nearly everything I use. Supplements became another fixation for me too, and I was taking around 12. What I realized was that I had brought in too many new things at the same time. A slower approach works better, because when something feels strange you can pinpoint the cause! These days, whenever I introduce something, it is the only new item until I am certain it is tolerated. On top of that, there are on and off cycles, so I tell myself the others can wait for an off cycle. Wanting to try everything is hard to resist. It gets even harder when you are already taking a large number of supplements.

What has your experience with epithalon been like? I have been curious about trying it myself!

My initial reaction is positive, but I need more time before I can say for sure. Tonight marks just my 3rd night using it.

For anyone who enjoys vivid dreams, DSIP worked really well in my case! Truthfully, it isn't worth the cost, though I received mine at no charge. Once I'm done with the epitalon, I'm looking forward to running a cycle of it

Are new members being recruited by your group?

 

[birdwhacker]

Smiter said:

birdwhacker said:

cloratheshadow said:

birdwhacker said:

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

In my case, the problem came from piling on too many peptides, which left me feeling off. Cagri wipes me out, Reta brings on aches, and CJC/Ipa produces head rushes, so going overboard with any of them leaves me feeling awful. Tolerances vary from person to person, though! I appear to be a hyper responder to nearly everything I use. Supplements became another fixation for me too, and I was taking around 12. What I realized was that I had brought in too many new things at the same time. A slower approach works better, because when something feels strange you can pinpoint the cause! These days, whenever I introduce something, it is the only new item until I am certain it is tolerated. On top of that, there are on and off cycles, so I tell myself the others can wait for an off cycle. Wanting to try everything is hard to resist. It gets even harder when you are already taking a large number of supplements.

What has your experience with epithalon been like? I have been curious about trying it myself!

My initial reaction is positive, but I need more time before I can say for sure. Tonight marks just my 3rd night using it.

For anyone who enjoys vivid dreams, DSIP worked really well in my case! Truthfully, it isn't worth the cost, though I received mine at no charge. Once I'm done with the epitalon, I'm looking forward to running a cycle of it

Are new members being recruited by your group?

It really hinges on whether you've got any experience with an iron.

Kidding aside, HKMS shipped me KPV, but what showed up was 2 kits of DSIP by mistake. They made good on the KPV, and honestly I couldn't be happier LOL.

Take a look at what I ordered today. Without bothering with a scale, I plan to dry scoop the SLU. From what I've gathered, there are zero human studies behind it, so I'm eager to give it a go. Choosing SLU over cardarine is basically like reaching for fruity pebbles when the thing you actually want is aquarium gravel.

 

[Smiter]

birdwhacker said:

Smiter said:

birdwhacker said:

cloratheshadow said:

birdwhacker said:

ambot88 said:

idk, microdosing doesn't really click for me - I prefer taking a dose that's strong enough to actually notice an effect. When it comes to avoiding insane stacks with 15 pins daily, I'm more restrained though; mentally I cap myself at 3 compounds simultaneously. Right now that's Reta, Klow and MOTS-C.

That's 6 things, Stacy.

cloratheshadow said:

Hold off until you've overdone it and notice something feels wrong. That's miserable. Focusing on just 1 or 2 objectives at a time works out better. For instance, losing weight plus sleeping better. Choose 2-4 peps and stay with them.

With peps, how did you pull that off? I'm curious.

I've pulled this off MANY times with supplements—wrecking my methylation cycle by megadosing niacin or glycine, pulling heavy metals loose with ALA, shutting down DAO with NAC, spacing myself out on absurd Vitamin C and Magnesium doses... Kept at it for years.

Still, I picked up a lot and supplements are in a really solid spot for me now, while the peptides are simply clicking into place. Right now it's reta, BPC and KPV, bronchogen, epitalon every day, and TB4 is about to go in too. A few other peps come and go. I'm trying not to pile anything on too quickly and... it's working. Honestly I feel pretty great lol.

So tell me where it went wrong for you so I can steer around it!

Neptide said:

msyntakz said:

I take small amounts of Tirz on Friday and Reta on Monday, aiming for a higher GLP-1/GIP ratio. That adds up to just 4.5mg of medication in total, and I've been at it for 8 weeks now.

If I followed the titration schedules, I'd be increasing by this point. But they're still working for me, even if the effect has weakened somewhat at this stage. Either way, I'm still receiving enough support to keep going.

So I'm glad my meds will stretch further, and I won't be chasing efficacy anytime soon.

I’ve also been thinking about dividing Tirz and Reta. Appreciate it

Count me as the third. Taking 12mg of reta isn't really something I want. Down the road I'm interested in adding both tirz and cagri, maybe near 8mg. Shotgun polypharmacology is something I believe in firmly. Hitting more receptors makes things less likely to go south.

Pushing one drug to its max dose is the pharmacokinetic version of growing only 1 crop – you're basically asking for a plague.

In my case, the problem came from piling on too many peptides, which left me feeling off. Cagri wipes me out, Reta brings on aches, and CJC/Ipa produces head rushes, so going overboard with any of them leaves me feeling awful. Tolerances vary from person to person, though! I appear to be a hyper responder to nearly everything I use. Supplements became another fixation for me too, and I was taking around 12. What I realized was that I had brought in too many new things at the same time. A slower approach works better, because when something feels strange you can pinpoint the cause! These days, whenever I introduce something, it is the only new item until I am certain it is tolerated. On top of that, there are on and off cycles, so I tell myself the others can wait for an off cycle. Wanting to try everything is hard to resist. It gets even harder when you are already taking a large number of supplements.

What has your experience with epithalon been like? I have been curious about trying it myself!

My initial reaction is positive, but I need more time before I can say for sure. Tonight marks just my 3rd night using it.

For anyone who enjoys vivid dreams, DSIP worked really well in my case! Truthfully, it isn't worth the cost, though I received mine at no charge. Once I'm done with the epitalon, I'm looking forward to running a cycle of it

Are new members being recruited by your group?

It really hinges on whether you've got any experience with an iron.

Kidding aside, HKMS shipped me KPV, but what showed up was 2 kits of DSIP by mistake. They made good on the KPV, and honestly I couldn't be happier LOL.

Take a look at what I ordered today. Without bothering with a scale, I plan to dry scoop the SLU. From what I've gathered, there are zero human studies behind it, so I'm eager to give it a go. Choosing SLU over cardarine is basically like reaching for fruity pebbles when the thing you actually want is aquarium gravel.

So your dojo has cracked the code on getting suppliers to ship the wrong stuff by mistake? That's some straight-up Sun Tzu strategy. And since the suppliers are Chinese, it lines up perfectly. With that kind of luck, Vegas is calling your name; strippers will be tumbling off snapped poles right into your lap

 

[Neptide]

bonelifts said:

Neptide said:

I've come across a number of seasoned peptide users who argue that keeping things minimal helps preserve both tolerance and results over a longer stretch. I'd like to hear how others here see it, and what they've personally run into.

Whether less is more likely hinges on which peptide you're talking about. Any that act on receptors can certainly see reduced returns from escalating, continuous use, since that effect will fade as time goes on. Then there are peptides whose use doesn't involve receptor action, and those can likely be taken over the long haul or at higher doses that remain reasonable.

Totally agree . The peptide in question makes all the difference. What matters most, I think, is figuring out the proper way to cycle on and off.

 

[lessthanhalf]

Smiter said:

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Like others have already pointed out, my take is that the shells stay metabolically active even after adipose tissue sheds all its cytoplasm. How do you see it? If someone underwent liposuction following weight loss—surgically removing the remainder—would their outcome in this respect be improved? Leptin resistance has been a long-standing subject of my research, though only as a secondary focus. The logic of this situation strikes my mind with too much force for me to overlook it.

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Here is where I put forward the approach of picking a suitable counter rather than endlessly playing defense. To put it another way: since GLP's role is to mandate hunger suppression without providing a cure, perhaps one could attempt the inverse of what fat cells do. Counter by using metabolically active tissues—build muscle to the greatest extent possible. Muscles burn energy, yet they also lift our TDEE, which grants us greater leeway in daily calorie intake. Moreover, among the myokines muscles release are ones that raise metabolism, Irisin being an example.

Since my knowledge of liposuction was limited, I went and researched it, recalling only a vague notion that individuals often put the weight back on after the procedure. The reality is more nuanced than that, but a minimum of 50% do end up regaining a substantial portion of the weight that was removed, only in different areas. Blood test biomarkers derived from fat cells can also show improvement, yet this benefit does not persist over time, and long-term studies appear to be extremely scarce. So my conclusion is that simply extracting all the fat cells, whether depleted or not, and expecting to eliminate the unhelpful signalling is not realistic.

When it comes to leptin and ghrelin and similar factors, the difficulty is that appetite and weight regulation research keeps uncovering additional systems, neurotransmitters, hormones, and micro rnas, along with increasingly intricate brain circuitry that governs them. Although certain parts of this system are understood, I do not believe it can honestly be claimed that we currently know what controls weight, appetite, and eating. Not long ago I came across a paper that attempted to evaluate 4 distinct fundamental principles the system might operate on—weight set point theory among them—and they still cannot even provide an answer to that question. What we know today would fill a very large page consisting of various systems, chemicals, cells, interactions, and feedback loops involving hundreds of components.

 

[WLBLD]

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Like others have already pointed out, my take is that the shells stay metabolically active even after adipose tissue sheds all its cytoplasm. How do you see it? If someone underwent liposuction following weight loss—surgically removing the remainder—would their outcome in this respect be improved? Leptin resistance has been a long-standing subject of my research, though only as a secondary focus. The logic of this situation strikes my mind with too much force for me to overlook it.

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Here is where I put forward the approach of picking a suitable counter rather than endlessly playing defense. To put it another way: since GLP's role is to mandate hunger suppression without providing a cure, perhaps one could attempt the inverse of what fat cells do. Counter by using metabolically active tissues—build muscle to the greatest extent possible. Muscles burn energy, yet they also lift our TDEE, which grants us greater leeway in daily calorie intake. Moreover, among the myokines muscles release are ones that raise metabolism, Irisin being an example.

Since my knowledge of liposuction was limited, I went and researched it, recalling only a vague notion that individuals often put the weight back on after the procedure. The reality is more nuanced than that, but a minimum of 50% do end up regaining a substantial portion of the weight that was removed, only in different areas. Blood test biomarkers derived from fat cells can also show improvement, yet this benefit does not persist over time, and long-term studies appear to be extremely scarce. So my conclusion is that simply extracting all the fat cells, whether depleted or not, and expecting to eliminate the unhelpful signalling is not realistic.

When it comes to leptin and ghrelin and similar factors, the difficulty is that appetite and weight regulation research keeps uncovering additional systems, neurotransmitters, hormones, and micro rnas, along with increasingly intricate brain circuitry that governs them. Although certain parts of this system are understood, I do not believe it can honestly be claimed that we currently know what controls weight, appetite, and eating. Not long ago I came across a paper that attempted to evaluate 4 distinct fundamental principles the system might operate on—weight set point theory among them—and they still cannot even provide an answer to that question. What we know today would fill a very large page consisting of various systems, chemicals, cells, interactions, and feedback loops involving hundreds of components.

I've only done a bit of reading on this. From what I understand, the fat cells taken out during the procedure don't return, though the remaining ones may expand in size. That made me want to look into it further. I've also heard the procedure is extremely painful, so it likely isn't worth going through!!

 

[Mz-Ace]

So you're telling me it might actually be possible to keep my urges in check?

Guess that makes me a total flop on that front

 

[Smiter]

WLBLD said:

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Like others have already pointed out, my take is that the shells stay metabolically active even after adipose tissue sheds all its cytoplasm. How do you see it? If someone underwent liposuction following weight loss—surgically removing the remainder—would their outcome in this respect be improved? Leptin resistance has been a long-standing subject of my research, though only as a secondary focus. The logic of this situation strikes my mind with too much force for me to overlook it.

lessthanhalf said:

Smiter said:

Setting aside eating disorders or substance abuse disorders, when you examine the mental side, it becomes obvious that a major driver behind obesity's stubbornness is poor hunger regulation. Ghrelin has to be part of that picture. In the same way, cravings connect to dopamine. And the likeliest explanation for ghrelin being so out of control in people with obesity may not be simple ghrelin overproduction, but rather leptin resistance.

Individuals are accountable for what they choose and do. None of that rules out hormones influencing the mind. That much cannot be disputed. So once someone recognizes the problem, they should follow it with intentional effort and steps aimed at fixing it. If someone must stay on GLPs for life because they can't manage their hunger pangs, then beyond just weak willpower and poor self-control, it's also a clear indicator of a brain that isn't working properly, possibly brought on by long-term exposure to the unregulated activity of the offending hormone.

If leptin resistance is at the root, checking your satiety is a solid way to find out whether that applies to you. On the satiety index, potatoes rank highest. When people still want high-calorie foods after being satiated by potatoes, that points to leptin resistance being in play.

My approach would be to use GLp's until the body clears the leptin resistance, and as time passes, healthy routines should rewire the brain away from unhealthy ones. There's a reason Atomic Habits is among the most read books in the world.

What I've seen is that after weight loss, the metabolic situation—more hunger, less energy burned—doesn't go away. Before any GLP, I went from 145 down to 75kg, a loss of 70 kg, eating 1600-1900 kcal /day. Then, with no change in how much I ate, the weight loss stalled and halted at 75kg on the same calories, and it has remained there since: a year without GLP's, a year on low dose ozempic, and 10 months on reta/tirz. On reta/tirz I dropped a bit more, to 65kg, and all of that still needed the same calorie intake. I saw no hint of energy expenditure recovering or appetite dropping, apart from the GLP drug's effect on hunger, and likely 1-200 kcal/day less intake on reta/tirz to shed the last 10kg. This is even though my diet has almost no blood glucose swings, is very high protein, contains no high glycaemic index foods, and my hb1ac was 5 at the start and 4.5 on reta /tirz. So there's solid evidence of metabolic state improvements, but not in daily calories or hunger.

Some studies do show long term improvement in energy expenditure over time after weight loss, but on the whole, weight loss maintenance gets very little research. That's a shame, because to my mind it's the actual problem, and the point where nearly all weight loss fails—unless you stay on glps long term.

Here is where I put forward the approach of picking a suitable counter rather than endlessly playing defense. To put it another way: since GLP's role is to mandate hunger suppression without providing a cure, perhaps one could attempt the inverse of what fat cells do. Counter by using metabolically active tissues—build muscle to the greatest extent possible. Muscles burn energy, yet they also lift our TDEE, which grants us greater leeway in daily calorie intake. Moreover, among the myokines muscles release are ones that raise metabolism, Irisin being an example.

Since my knowledge of liposuction was limited, I went and researched it, recalling only a vague notion that individuals often put the weight back on after the procedure. The reality is more nuanced than that, but a minimum of 50% do end up regaining a substantial portion of the weight that was removed, only in different areas. Blood test biomarkers derived from fat cells can also show improvement, yet this benefit does not persist over time, and long-term studies appear to be extremely scarce. So my conclusion is that simply extracting all the fat cells, whether depleted or not, and expecting to eliminate the unhelpful signalling is not realistic.

When it comes to leptin and ghrelin and similar factors, the difficulty is that appetite and weight regulation research keeps uncovering additional systems, neurotransmitters, hormones, and micro rnas, along with increasingly intricate brain circuitry that governs them. Although certain parts of this system are understood, I do not believe it can honestly be claimed that we currently know what controls weight, appetite, and eating. Not long ago I came across a paper that attempted to evaluate 4 distinct fundamental principles the system might operate on—weight set point theory among them—and they still cannot even provide an answer to that question. What we know today would fill a very large page consisting of various systems, chemicals, cells, interactions, and feedback loops involving hundreds of components.

I've only done a bit of reading on this. From what I understand, the fat cells taken out during the procedure don't return, though the remaining ones may expand in size. That made me want to look into it further. I've also heard the procedure is extremely painful, so it likely isn't worth going through!!

That's the reason I'm running Adipotide and AOD prior to starting Tesa, all while staying on Reta.

 

[myopicmystic]

I can’t decide whether to add more. Right now I’m only using tirz.

At some point I’d like to run a mitochondrial protocol. A KLOW cycle is also something I want to try. Semax and selank have caught my attention too.

Still, I’m unsure whether this is my hyper fixation speaking or whether it’s carrying over from the addictive eating habits I used to have. So I’ll wait on it until I figure out which one it is.

 

[LongevitybroTX]

myopicmystic said:

I can’t decide whether to add more. Right now I’m only using tirz.

At some point I’d like to run a mitochondrial protocol. A KLOW cycle is also something I want to try. Semax and selank have caught my attention too.

Still, I’m unsure whether this is my hyper fixation speaking or whether it’s carrying over from the addictive eating habits I used to have. So I’ll wait on it until I figure out which one it is.

I've run into the same issue — there are several things I'd like to test, yet I'm someone who needs to understand every detail about each one. I avoid piling on too many at once because I want to figure out what's not working for me. On top of that, the cost climbs quickly $$! ha!

 

[Smiter]

chewonmysac said:

At first, there was just 1 injection each week. These days, it's 6 shots per day. The stack has definitely expanded, to put it mildly. It feels like Groundhog Day on repeat. I've moved 80% of them to the glutes because my belly was becoming sore and developing lumps.

GHK-cu (6 months)

Tesamorelin (Until a kidney shadow becomes visible)

5-Amino-1mq (30 days) with a 2-week pause

AOD-9604 (60 days) with a 2-week pause

SS-31 (30 days) followed by MOTS-c (every other day)

KPV (daily)

Tirz (1 time per week)

An average person might see me as insane, but for everyone here, it's just business as usual.

Wow! If you're running a stack of injections like that, I'm surprised you've still got anything left to gnaw on.

ContainHer said:

chewonmysac said:

At first, there was just 1 injection each week. These days, it's 6 shots per day. The stack has definitely expanded, to put it mildly. It feels like Groundhog Day on repeat. I've moved 80% of them to the glutes because my belly was becoming sore and developing lumps.

GHK-cu (6 months)

Tesamorelin (Until a kidney shadow becomes visible)

5-Amino-1mq (30 days) with a 2-week pause

AOD-9604 (60 days) with a 2-week pause

SS-31 (30 days) followed by MOTS-c (every other day)

KPV (daily)

Tirz (1 time per week)

An average person might see me as insane, but for everyone here, it's just business as usual.

I combine GHK with KPV, and occasionally BPC, based on what my recovery requires, but this approach lets me reduce the number of injections.

What's your experience with AOD? I'm interested in trying it, but I haven't been able to locate a vendor that provides testing for it.

Don't bother. It won't do a thing.

ContainHer said:

sheilarae74 said:

I constantly feel the pull to expand my stack, yet I'm hopelessly wishy-washy about it—it's honestly embarrassing. For the time being, I'll simply keep digging into the research and stay focused on reaching my target weight with reta. That is, unless I stumble upon a solid gb covering something I've got on my list.

I should get familiar with GB's. I'm feeling excluded.

Count me in. We should form our own crew...The Leftouts.

Neptide said:

ContainHer said:

chewonmysac said:

At first, there was just 1 injection each week. These days, it's 6 shots per day. The stack has definitely expanded, to put it mildly. It feels like Groundhog Day on repeat. I've moved 80% of them to the glutes because my belly was becoming sore and developing lumps.

GHK-cu (6 months)

Tesamorelin (Until a kidney shadow becomes visible)

5-Amino-1mq (30 days) with a 2-week pause

AOD-9604 (60 days) with a 2-week pause

SS-31 (30 days) followed by MOTS-c (every other day)

KPV (daily)

Tirz (1 time per week)

An average person might see me as insane, but for everyone here, it's just business as usual.

I combine GHK with KPV, and occasionally BPC, based on what my recovery requires, but this approach lets me reduce the number of injections.

What's your experience with AOD? I'm interested in trying it, but I haven't been able to locate a vendor that provides testing for it.

I've got a vial of AOD on hand, and I plan to give it a shot. Based on what I've been hearing, the optimal approach appears to be taking it on an empty stomach and then heading to the gym.

Nah, the optimal method is to just put it out of your mind.

FartfulCodger said:

I wish there were a peptide out there that could suppress my urge to buy additional kits. If such a peptide existed, I'd purchase 10 kits of it.

Sure there is.. CharitAx-500. Every time that urge to buy more kits hits you, you wire 500usd my way. That's a surefire remedy.