Is GHK-Cu LEGIT Or Just Cope?

[Sketchyy]

title

 

[aids]

Of course it's legit.

 

[Confusedmax]

Yeah it's legit just get it from a good source

 

[Copercel]

title

How can it not be legit?

 

[forwardridge]

Topical is cope, injectable isnt

 

[chrishell]

Topical is cope, injectable isnt

Wrong. Both are good. Do both.

Make sure to reconstitute with bac water. Everyone thinks bac water is best!

 

[forwardridge]

Wrong. Both are good. Do both.

Make sure to reconstitute with bac water. Everyone thinks bac water is best!

wrong. Topical does fuck all & wont promote any skin cell turnover. if you think you are supposed to reconstitute ghk-cu with PBS ur a retard, it literally causes it to form insoluble copper phosphate making it useless. BAC clears

 

[Sketchyy]

just copped the injectables rn i heard hella controversy about the topicals so fuck that

wrong. Topical does fuck all & wont promote any skin cell turnover. if you think you are supposed to reconstitute ghk-cu with PBS ur a retard, it literally causes it to form insoluble copper phosphate making it useless. BAC clears

 

[chrishell]

wrong. Topical does fuck all & wont promote any skin cell turnover. if you think you are supposed to reconstitute ghk-cu with PBS ur a retard, it literally causes it to form insoluble copper phosphate making it useless. BAC clears

Brutally and thermonuclearly incorrect. Topical GHK-CU's ability to increase collagen production is proven by studies.

"GHK-Cu applied to thigh skin for 12 weeks improved collagen production in 70% of the women treated, in contrast to 50% treated with the vitamin C cream, and 40% treated with retinoic acid [16]. In addition to improving skin laxity, clarity, firmness and appearance, reducing fine lines, coarse wrinkles and mottled pigmentation, and increasing skin density and thickness, GHK-Cu cream applied twice daily for 12 weeks also strongly stimulated dermal keratinocyte proliferation [17]."

If anything, there are no peer-reviewed studies on the effects of injecting GHK-CU subcutaneously. Nonetheless, I would still recommend injecting it, too. There is no reason to not do both.

Also, reread my post. I said very clearly to reconstitute with bac water, not PBS.

Unfortunately, 15 minutes has passed, so the window has closed for you to edit your post and remove the embarrassingly wrong statements.

Regards,
chrishell

 

[Sketchyy]

Brutally and thermonuclearly incorrect. Topical GHK-CU's ability to increase collagen production is proven by studies.

"GHK-Cu applied to thigh skin for 12 weeks improved collagen production in 70% of the women treated, in contrast to 50% treated with the vitamin C cream, and 40% treated with retinoic acid [16]. In addition to improving skin laxity, clarity, firmness and appearance, reducing fine lines, coarse wrinkles and mottled pigmentation, and increasing skin density and thickness, GHK-Cu cream applied twice daily for 12 weeks also strongly stimulated dermal keratinocyte proliferation [17]."

If anything, there are no peer-reviewed studies on the effects of injecting GHK-CU subcutaneously. Nonetheless, I would still recommend injecting it, too. There is no reason to not do both.

Also, reread my post. I said very clearly to reconstitute with bac water, not PBS.

Unfortunately, 15 minutes has passed, so the window has closed for you to edit your post and remove the embarrassingly wrong statements.

Regards,
chrishell'

would you reccomend injectable pens or nah? i find it easier than prepping it up by myself

 

[chrishell]

would you reccomend injectable pens or nah? i find it easier than prepping it up by myself

Whatever you are comfortable with, makes no difference as long as you get the liquid inside your little incel body, I use regular insulin syringes and don't have an issue.

 

[forwardridge]

Brutally and thermonuclearly incorrect. Topical GHK-CU's ability to increase collagen production is proven by studies.

"GHK-Cu applied to thigh skin for 12 weeks improved collagen production in 70% of the women treated, in contrast to 50% treated with the vitamin C cream, and 40% treated with retinoic acid [16]. In addition to improving skin laxity, clarity, firmness and appearance, reducing fine lines, coarse wrinkles and mottled pigmentation, and increasing skin density and thickness, GHK-Cu cream applied twice daily for 12 weeks also strongly stimulated dermal keratinocyte proliferation [17]."

If anything, there are no peer-reviewed studies on the effects of injecting GHK-CU subcutaneously. Nonetheless, I would still recommend injecting it, too. There is no reason to not do both.

Also, reread my post. I said very clearly to reconstitute with bac water, not PBS.

Unfortunately, 15 minutes has passed, so the window has closed for you to edit your post and remove the embarrassingly wrong statements.

Regards,
chrishell

JFL at you copehell. How are you gonna use a study as evidence to promote topical over injectable, then still promote injectable although YOU stated it has no studies done on it which is why its invalid? The study provided doesnt reference anything about deep tissue delivery or systemic bioavailability which both matter a ton. Topical ghk is limited my skin barrier protection and the inability to penetrate deeply. Many topical ghk studies are done with microneedling to fix that. How about you fucking try topical vs injectable to see which mogs? We both know damn well injectables better which is why YOU STILL PROMOTE INJECTABLE EVEN AFTER CITING A STUDY AS TO WHY TOPICALS BETTER. youre a contradictive retard. logic mogged your dumbass jfl jfl jfl

 

[5'7" 3/4s]

wrong. Topical does fuck all & wont promote any skin cell turnover. if you think you are supposed to reconstitute ghk-cu with PBS ur a retard, it literally causes it to form insoluble copper phosphate making it useless. BAC clears

most studies ive read involving ghk-cu are reconstituted in PBS, matter fact i havent read one study that said the copper ion was insoluble as a result.. esp considering they are testing it as copper tripeptide-1 and are trying to control for results against standard GHK.. can u explain the logic?

 

[Copercel]

Topical is cope, injectable isnt

Wouldn’t say topical is cope, but yeah injectable is superior to it

 

[forwardridge]

Wouldn’t say topical is cope, but yeah injectable is superior to it

topical did fuck all for me

 

[chrishell]

JFL at you copehell. How are you gonna use a study as evidence to promote topical over injectable, then still promote injectable although YOU stated it has no studies done it which is why its invalid? The study provided doesnt reference anything about deep tissue delivery or systemic bioavailability which both matter a ton. Topical ghk is limited my skin barrier protection and the inability to penetrate deeply. Many topical ghk studies are done with microneedling to fix that. How about you fucking try topical vs injectable to see which mogs? We both know damn well injectables better which is why YOU STILL PROMOTE INJECTABLE EVEN AFTER CITING A STUDY AS TO WHY TOPICALS BETTER. youre a contradictive retard. logic mogged your dumbass jfl jfl jfl

Of course topical GHK-CU is not going to be delivered to the deep tissues or be systemically bioavailable. Nobody has ever claimed it does. Regardless of the mechanism, if applied topically, it increases collagen by 70% over 12 weeks. There is just no way to finesse that information. Results matter more than theory. But theory still does matter, and it is why I still advocate injecting GHK-CU despite the lack of studies, since the theoretical explanation for why making them systematically bioavailable is beneficial is sound enough to make it worth a shot. This is a better logic than yours, which is totally ruling out topical application despite crystal clear evidence that it dramatically improves collagen production.

That is strike two. On strike three, you unleash my full wrath.

most studies ive read involving ghk-cu are reconstituted in PBS, matter fact i havent read one study that said the copper ion was insoluble as a result.. esp considering they are testing it as copper tripeptide-1 and are trying to control for results against standard GHK.. can u explain the logic?

The supposed rationale for using PBS is that GHK-CU supposedly degrades slower if reconstituted in PBS as opposed to bac water. The chemical reasoning is fine but the marginal purity loss you get over time with bac water is well balanced by the sterility guarantee you get with it, assuming you are using the vial within around 3 weeks, which is what you should be doing anyway. By around 3 weeks an originally 99% vial of ghk-cu, if reconstituted in bac water, will get to around 65% purity. With PBS you get to around 85% by that time.

To illustrate: suppose you reconstituted 50mg of ghk cu with 2ml bac water vs. 2ml PBS. Suppose you injected 10 units daily, a dose of 2.5mg, meaning the vial would last 3 weeks. If you do a linear regression analysis on both, with the bac water solution, after 3 weeks, 41.25mg of that ghk cu would ultimately end up in your system vs. 46.25mg of the pbs solution. Moreover, if you did a dose higher than 2.5mg daily, as many here do, the difference between the two would be even smaller. You are looking at trading a loss of 3-5mg over a month for a guarantee of perfect sterility and much more practicality. It's essentially doing gymnastics for little gain for most people. But I can see how if you are prone to injection site pain you might consider PBS to make the injections marginally less painful towards the end of your vial(?), since the hypothesis that the slightly higher free copper ions you get from slightly accelerated degradation in the bac water solution is what causes the pain is plausible if unconfirmed.

 

[forwardridge]

Of course topical GHK-CU is not going to be delivered to the deep tissues or be systemically bioavailable. Nobody has ever claimed it does. Regardless of the mechanism, if applied topically, it increases collagen by 70% over 12 weeks. There is just no way to finesse that information. Results matter more than theory. But theory still does matter, and it is why I still advocate injecting GHK-CU despite the lack of studies, since the theoretical explanation for why making them systematically bioavailable is beneficial is sound enough to make it worth a shot. This is a better logic than yours, which is totally ruling out topical application despite crystal clear evidence that it dramatically improves collagen production.

That is strike two. On strike three, you unleash my full wrath.

ANOTHER AIRBALL BY COPEHELL. The paragraph YOU cited from the study states that 70% of women saw increase in collagen production, not that 100% of women saw a 70% increase of collagen. We dont even know how much collagen was fucking increased jfl. All we can see is number of genes affected. This is NOT statistically significant evidence that topical will even guarantee you ANY collagen boost, considering a staggering 30% of women DIDNT EVEN GET RESULTS. I dare you to unleash ur full wrath copehell, jfl. What you said about PBS was extremely smart, which is why im so confused about how retarded you are when it comes to topical vs injectable.

 

[forwardridge]

ANOTHER AIRBALL BY COPEHELL. The paragraph YOU cited from the study states that 70% of women saw increase in collagen production, not that 100% of women saw a 70% increase of collagen. We dont even know how much collagen was fucking increased jfl. All we can see is number of genes affected. This is NOT statistically significant evidence that topical will even guarantee you ANY collagen boost, considering a staggering 30% of women DIDNT EVEN GET RESULTS. I dare you to unleash ur full wrath copehell, jfl. What you said about PBS was extremely smart, which is why im so confused about how retarded you are when it comes to topical vs injectable.

@chrishell

 

[notagreycell]

title

Yeah i have been using it for month i see some results

 

[slaters]

@chrishell @forwardridge I used topical it’s mid asf maybe better if ur old idk

 

[chrishell]

ANOTHER AIRBALL BY COPEHELL. The paragraph YOU cited from the study states that 70% of women saw increase in collagen production, not that 100% of women saw a 70% increase of collagen. We dont even know how much collagen was fucking increased jfl. All we can see is number of genes affected. This is NOT statistically significant evidence that topical will even guarantee you ANY collagen boost, considering a staggering 30% of women DIDNT EVEN GET RESULTS. I dare you to unleash ur full wrath copehell, jfl. What you said about PBS was extremely smart, which is why im so confused about how retarded you are when it comes to topical vs injectable.

That's a very good catch, queen! This was your first good post so far--for that reason, I'll withhold my wrath. 70% of women saw a collagen increase, not 100% of women seeing a 70% increase of collagen. However, the fact 30% of women did not see any improvement is not grounds enough to rule it out entirely. Not even everyone sees significant change from less controversial treatments that are universally agreed to increase collagen like microneedling, tretinoin, tazarotene, glycolic acid, and so on. At the very least, one should use it with lower expectations. What one should not do is rule it out entirely. It takes 10 seconds to apply and the serum is like $20.

@chrishell @forwardridge I used topical it’s mid asf

Thank you for adding your anecdote. If we add your case to the aforementioned study, then we might say something like only 69.999% of people see benefits from topical application of GHK-CU instead of 70%. All-around great contribution!

 

[Sketchyy]

@chrishell @forwardridge I used topical it’s mid asf maybe better if ur old idk

i think its just marketed towards old people for the money when its effects are chemically demonstrated for all ages

 

[slaters]

i think its just marketed towards old people for the money when its effects are chemically demonstrated for all ages

It was ghk cu powder mixed into hyaluronic acid

 

[Sketchyy]

It was ghk cu powder mixed into hyaluronic acid

wtv ur right topical is kind of ass thats why ima try inject

 

[forwardridge]

That's a very good catch, queen! This was your first good post so far--for that reason, I'll withhold my wrath. 70% of women saw a collagen increase, not 100% of women seeing a 70% increase of collagen. However, the fact 30% of women did not see any improvement is not grounds enough to rule it out entirely. Not even everyone sees significant change from less controversial treatments that are universally agreed to increase collagen like microneedling, tretinoin, tazarotene, glycolic acid, and so on. At the very least, one should use it with lower expectations. What one should not do is rule it out entirely. It takes 10 seconds to apply and the serum is like $20.



Thank you for adding your anecdote. If we add your case to the aforementioned study, then we might say something like only 69.999% of people see benefits from topical application of GHK-CU instead of 70%. All-around great contribution!

Ahahaha calling me queen after exposing a huge error in your argument is jokes. Have you ever taken a statistics class? If so you’d know that the data taken from the study is highly inconclusive and doesnt “prove” that you will get the collagen benefits of ghk. Obv on a scientific level, any form of ghkcu would increase collagen, but theres no gaurantee that it will. Wait for studies to come out on injectable that prove it blows topical out of the water. JFL at that random jester for chiming in with his experience, like he knows what hes talking about

 

[chrishell]

Ahahaha calling me queen after exposing a huge error in your argument is jokes. Have you ever taken a statistics class? If so you’d know that the data taken from the study is highly inconclusive and doesnt “prove” that you will get the collagen benefits of ghk. Obv on a scientific level, any form of ghkcu would increase collagen, but theres no gaurantee that it will. Wait for studies to come out on injectable that prove it blows topical out of the water. JFL at that random jester for chiming in with his experience, like he knows what hes talking about

Alright bucko, you just undid yourself. I didn't claim it "proved" you will get the collagen benefits with 100% certainty. Nobody has ever claimed that. You just earned yourself a mute and a report. Next time you won't be talking to me but the looksmax.org forum administrators. Now go apply your topcial GHK-CU, eat some chips and dip in mommy's basement, and subscribe to some OnlyFans girls. Good day to you.

wtv ur right topical is kind of ass thats why ima try inject

Wrong. Topical improves collagen in 70% of people.

Do both. Now. Or pay the price.

 

[exe77]

Why do you have to say little incel body? Are you a faggot?

Whatever you are comfortable with, makes no difference as long as you get the liquid inside your little incel body, I use regular insulin syringes and don't have an issue.

 

[forwardridge]

Alright bucko, you just undid yourself. I didn't claim it "proved" you will get the collagen benefits with 100% certainty. Nobody has ever claimed that. You just earned yourself a mute and a report. Next time you won't be talking to me but the looksmax.org forum administrators. Now go apply your topcial GHK-CU, eat some chips and dip in mommy's basement, and subscribe to some OnlyFans girls. Good day to you.



Wrong. Topical improves collagen in 70% of people.

Do both. Now. Or pay the price.

Holy fearmonger . You claimed they both arent cope. I would assume by YOU saying its not cope, that YOU think it works. By it “WORKING”, i am assuming that i will get the benefits of whatever it is im doing. If thats not promised then you lied. Ur arguments had countless contradictions and lies, such at the 70% incident. anyway smd retard, the same way you do the admin

 

[chrishell]

Why do you have to say little incel body? Are you a faggot?

No. Are you?

 

[laworg]

title

How is a peptide cope do u think before slamming ur fingers across the board

 

[itsallgenesbtw]

Topical is cope, injectable isnt

not cope but there is better serums you can take

 

[Sketchyy]

Why do you have to say little incel body? Are you a faggot?

exactly ts nga is wierd

 

[Sketchyy]

How is a peptide cope do u think before slamming ur fingers across the board

not all peptides are magic tf are you saying

 

[Sketchyy]

not cope but there is better serums you can take

like what

 

[Soter]

why are nigs here so opposed to reconstituting ghk cu with pbs? With bac you're only getting ghk, not ghk cu

 

[laworg]

not all peptides are magic tf are you saying

But they all do their job

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

Topical is cope, injectable isnt

Other way around dumbass

 

[forwardridge]

Other way around dumbass

true A student

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

true A student

Topical is the only version that has in human evidence to work

 

[forwardridge]

Topical is the only version that has in human evidence to work

this is youre fucking argument?

Topical is 90-95% less bioavailable and gives you no deep tissue delivery. Using topical ghkcu is the same as trying to throw pennies thru a brick wall. Ur fuckin lathering that shit on and PRAYING to the skin gods that the copper penetrates the stratum corneum

Jfl at retards like you who dont understand basic pharmacokinetics. Something doesnt need clinical trials on it to work btw

 

[Sub5kang]

Yeah it's legit just get it from a good source

U got cheap sources?

 

[Sub5kang]

just copped the injectables rn i heard hella controversy about the topicals so fuck that

What site U get them on?

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

this is youre fucking argument?

Topical is 90-95% less bioavailable and gives you no deep tissue delivery. Using topical ghkcu is the same as trying to throw pennies thru a brick wall. Ur fuckin lathering that shit on and PRAYING to the skin gods that the copper penetrates the stratum corneum

Jfl at retards like you who dont understand basic pharmacokinetics. Something doesnt need clinical trials on it to work btw

Topical has been proven to work, injectable hasnt

Injectable may be too disperse to make a comparable effect.
Not saying it doesnt work. But im not saying it does either. We just dont know, and I have every reason to he glazing the injectable as thats what im running

 

[aloooeJIEEES]

title

this is youre fucking argument?

Topical is 90-95% less bioavailable and gives you no deep tissue delivery. Using topical ghkcu is the same as trying to throw pennies thru a brick wall. Ur fuckin lathering that shit on and PRAYING to the skin gods that the copper penetrates the stratum corneum

Jfl at retards like you who dont understand basic pharmacokinetics. Something doesnt need clinical trials on it to work btw

Fucking untermenches

kys retarded dalits

 

[forwardridge]

Topical has been proven to work, injectable hasnt

Injectable may be too disperse to make a comparable effect.
Not saying it doesnt work. But im not saying it does either. We just dont know, and I have every reason to he glazing the injectable as thats what im running

Its been proven to work, but in trials not even 100% of the subjects gain collagen production. Thru theory alone we can tell injectable will clear topical out of the water in trials once they r done. i also dont see how injectable would not work if topical does some of the time considering how much more bioavailable injectable is? also funny everyone ive talked to including myself prefers the injectable over topical or still uses it regardless of their being no human evidence

 

[forwardridge]

Fucking untermenches

View attachment 4011960View attachment 4011961

kys retarded dalits

avg autistic larping neo nazi org user randomly talking shit and butting in a convo cus he has supbar social skills and nothing to contribute. post ur face ogre

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

Its been proven to work, but in trials not even 100% of the subjects gain collagen production. Thru theory alone we can tell injectable will clear topical out of the water in trials once they r done. i also dont see how injectable would not work if topical does some of the time considering how much more bioavailable injectable is? also funny everyone ive talked to including myself prefers the injectable over topical or still uses it regardless of their being no human evidence

Not reading. But i hope youre right

 

[chrishell]

Its been proven to work, but in trials not even 100% of the subjects gain collagen production. Thru theory alone we can tell injectable will clear topical out of the water in trials once they r done. i also dont see how injectable would not work if topical does some of the time considering how much more bioavailable injectable is? also funny everyone ive talked to including myself prefers the injectable over topical or still uses it regardless of their being no human evidence

Not even 100% of subjects gain collagen production for any treatment. I'm sure you've read online. Even according to these sketch anonymous online reviews, not everyone sees a change in injectable either. Does that fact alone mean you don't do it? That is not an excuse to forego it. If you are not doing both, you are lazy.

There is a good chance injectable will give comparable or better gains. But there is also a good chance it's overblown or viral hype. There are no studies on it. I have never seen anyone post a before/after online. 60% of the comments on reddit and elsewhere you see shilling it could be bots, like everything online now. Peptide companies are obscure and shady looking as fuck and the people marketing them on TikTok and YouTube could well be paid shills. Whenever I search ghk-cu peptide on tiktok and I watch the videos of people talking about it they always have reptilian vibes. Something's off. It is being skyrocketed by viral hype not evidence. Again, not saying it doesn't work. It probably does.

Regardless, I doubt incels are being motivated first and foremost by evidence. They are not motivated by the theory of systemic bioavailability or subdermal delivery. I think they think sheerly because it is the more invasive option, it must work better, regardless of the theory or evidence behind it. Anything involving a needle must, regardless of the theory, work better! Because needles are invasive and I'm a man and I'm not a pussy and I put needles in me instead of girly liquid cream.