About this archive
About CJC-1295 Source
An independent editorial project that inscribes the peer-reviewed CJC-1295 literature — what it establishes, and where it stops.
What this site is
CJC-1295 Source is an independent editorial project that publishes summaries of the peer-reviewed research literature on CJC-1295. We are not a clinic. We do not employ clinicians and we do not provide medical advice. We do not manufacture, sell, or distribute any product. Our work is editorial commentary on publicly available science.
The register here is an inscribed archive — a codex of what the GHRH-analog research has measured. We summarize the human pharmacokinetic studies, the founding animal work, the mechanism, and the regulatory record, and we mark plainly where controlled evidence does not yet exist. The aim is a record a careful reader can verify line by line against the full reference list.
What 'source' means here
The word 'source' in this site's name is an editorial register, not a storefront. It names the position this publisher occupies relative to the literature: a primary, traceable source of summaries that point back to the original studies. It does not mean we supply, sell, or broker the compound, and nothing on this site is offered for sale.
We hold a specific editorial line on CJC-1295 because the compound is so often misrepresented online. The DAC and no-DAC forms are pharmacokinetically opposite and are routinely conflated; most circulating 'protocols' have no controlled-trial basis; and the development history — a discontinued long-acting DAC program and an early, halted Phase 2 trial — is frequently omitted. Inscribing those facts accurately is the whole point of the archive.
How we handle accuracy
Every quantitative claim on this site is tied to a numbered citation in the references, drawn from PubMed-indexed journals and regulatory records. Where registries disagree — as they do on the exact molecular formula and on the loose application of a CAS number to both forms — we say so rather than pick a tidy answer. Where the human evidence is thin, we say that too. CJC-1295 is not approved for human use, and this archive is a reading of the science, not a recommendation to use it.