About This Logbook

What Peptide Cycles is

Peptide Cycles is a protocol logbook for the published research on three Growth Hormone Axis peptides — CJC-1295, ipamorelin, and MOTS-c — with ipamorelin as the lead compound. The name points to research cycles: the specific dosing schedules, trial durations, and follow-up windows scientists have used to study these molecules — not a recommendation for how anyone should personally cycle any compound.

The organizing idea is protocol literacy. A number in a study means something different depending on the design that produced it — a single-dose pharmacokinetic study in eight volunteers is not the same kind of evidence as a 114-person randomized controlled trial, and neither is the same as an observational biomarker association in a hemodialysis cohort. This logbook treats the study design as part of the finding, not a footnote to skip past, because that design is what tells a reader how much weight a given number can actually bear.

The three compounds sit at very different points on that evidence curve. CJC-1295 has several small human pharmacokinetic studies and no efficacy trial. Ipamorelin has the most complete human trial record of the three, including a Phase 2 study whose primary endpoint was not met — a result the logbook reports rather than reframes. MOTS-c has almost no human interventional data at all, its evidence built instead from cell and rodent work. All three receive the same editorial treatment regardless of how favorable or unfavorable the data happen to look.

How it is compiled

Three rules shape every entry in the logbook.

One — every quantitative claim is anchored to a numbered citation. Effect sizes, dose levels, sample sizes, trial durations, and statistical results are each tied to a specific source — peer-reviewed journal articles, registered clinical trials, and mechanistic studies, collected with full citation details on the references page.

Two — study design is logged alongside the result, never apart from it. Whether a finding comes from a randomized controlled trial, a single-dose pharmacokinetic study, an observational cohort, or a rodent model is stated plainly wherever the finding appears, because the strength of a claim cannot be pried away from the design that produced it.

Three — negative and null results carry the same weight as positive ones. Ipamorelin's Phase 2 trial missing its primary endpoint stands in the logbook as prominently as its pharmacokinetic data — dropping or softening a null result would misrepresent the very evidence base this logbook exists to describe.

What it is not

Peptide Cycles is no pharmacy, no clinic, no telehealth platform, and no vendor of any kind. It sells, supplies, sources, and brokers no compound, and holds no affiliate or referral tie to any research-chemical supplier. It keeps no clinicians, diagnoses no condition, and prescribes nothing, and it recommends no dose, schedule, or route of administration for anyone, for any of the three compounds it covers.

None of CJC-1295, ipamorelin, or MOTS-c is approved by the FDA or any regulatory body for human use anywhere. All three are sold and handled strictly as research chemicals. Anyone seeking clinical guidance should consult a licensed healthcare provider in their own jurisdiction. Notes on citation corrections or newly published research can go to the contact page; that correspondence is watched, but requests for medical advice cannot be answered.