I'm a creature of habit; I learned the principle of the single variable factor in the experimental method in high school, and I stick to it.
Something I've learned to do recently is to juggle with half-lives. And yet, we don't have all the information about the different half-lives: for some substances that enter cells, we don't know how long they stay there.
But based on the available information, I calculate the time it will take to reach a steady state. Until I reach that state with a new peptide, I don't change anything regarding the doses, frequency, or stack.
For example, for products with a half-life of less than a day, it takes a good week. For half-lives on the order of a week, it takes about a month and a half, or two months if you want a little safety margin.
The most commonly cited data on half-lives are averages. Without the standard deviation, they mean nothing. When I dig into the scientific literature, I tend to find data such as: in 95% of patients, the half-life is between 4 and 8 days, with an average of 6 days (guess which peptide this is 😉
We don't have to be too precise, but that doesn't mean we can just do things randomly.
For example, I noticed that hunger returned around the 5th or 6th day with the Reta, and the sunburn returned on the sixth day. I interpret this as a circulating dose equivalent to d+1 and d+6. This is consistent with a rise to peak levels over 2 days and a half-life of more than 7 days in my case. It’s very rough, but sufficient for my purposes. I then decided to stick to 1 pin per week and not go below that.
I see that most people stick strictly to the doses used in the studies (2, 4, 6, etc.). It’s important to understand that these doses are defined pragmatically, based on what is easy for the lab to produce, easy to communicate to the patient, and simple to analyze. Researchers don't like to bother with problems they've created for themselves.
We have no reason to do otherwise. For example, I started with 10 and 20mg vials. I took doses of 2.5, 5, 6.7, and 10. What matters to me is continuous glucose monitoring. I didn't weigh myself very often at first; instead, I measured my waist circumference at the navel. It was more motivating.
For products that lack human clinical studies, such as MOTS-C or 5-amino-1-mq, the challenge is finding the sweet spot dose.
We often see so-called "protocols" circulating that include cycles and time limits, with no scientific basis whatsoever. You'll notice that these often involve expensive products and that users take them for a quick energy boost before working out, not to treat metabolic syndrome, for example. We need to critically evaluate our sources of information.
Another thing to consider is the reconstitution solvent. Some people swear by water with BA by Pfizer. But some other solvents work well, and sometimes even better. I now use 0.9% NaCl for SS31, MOTS-C, and GHK-Cu: it’s isotonic and helps prevent severe reactions at the injection site. I use only sterile water for 5AMQ. That’s more than enough when the pen lasts a week or two. It’s important to know that in some hospital practices, insulin is stored in the fridge in polypropylene syringes for a month or two, and 90% of it remains effective and sterile after three months (the paper is easy to find). I wouldn't do that if I had to produce millions of pre-filled pens that would have to last for months and travel halfway around the world.
Stacking peptides is a little more complicated than stacking crepes. But we also have to avoid lumps, and it’s just as rewarding when it works. Have fun 😉
