MT1 mogs MT2

[receipt]

most people choose to run mt2 since its all they see recommended by retarded peptide tiktokers, which often results in its superior, mt1, being overlooked.

mt2 is faster acting, yes, however if you overdo it you will become an orange.
this issue doesnt exist with mt1, giving you a more natural and even tone.
this is due to mt1’s lower potency and targeted stimulation on the MC1R receptor, which does mean it takes longer to get the tan, but that isnt to say that mt1 is exactly "slow".

mt1 is selective and only works on the MC1R receptor, in a more natural manner, meaning that there are greatly reduced risks when compared to mt2 (functions also on MC3/4/5R which will lead to other side effects you may not want).
with mt1 you wont notice as many more moles (due to more controlled signalling), nor as nearly darkened moles, which is the biggest downside to mt2 since itll make you look retarded as well as greatly increasing risk of melanoma and skin diseases alike.

not to say that mt1 is completely risk free, which it isnt, due to direct stimulus on melanocytes which also includes the cells inside of your moles.

most people also assume that you need uv exposure on mt1, but you really dont (of course, its beneficial if you can).
in the uk at this time of year we have near to nothing for uv, yet mt1’s effects have been clear, leading to people asking me how ive gotten so tan.

all in all, mt1 is a more gentle yet still effective tanning peptide than mt2, which results in greater safety, and in my opinion, a more pleasant tan.

ive personally been running mt1 since december, first running it nightly for 1-2 weeks, and now occasionally topping it off (few days in a row) if i feel a need for boosted tan.
started at 500mcg ed, but i now do 1mg ed when i do.

 

[til<3D]

 

[neverstresssss]

DNR

 

[receipt]

DNR

GTFO

 

[Snucell]

why nightly

 

[receipt]

why nightly

no time during day
but yes in day 30-60 mins before sun exposure is ideal AFAIK

 

[123.5]

most people choose to run mt2 since its all they see recommended by retarded peptide tiktokers, which often results in its superior, mt1, being overlooked.

mt2 is faster acting, yes, however if you overdo it you will become an orange.
this issue doesnt exist with mt1, giving you a more natural and even tone.
this is due to mt1’s lower potency and targeted stimulation on the MC1R receptor, which does mean it takes longer to get the tan, but that isnt to say that mt1 is exactly "slow".

mt1 is selective and only works on the MC1R receptor, in a more natural manner, meaning that there are greatly reduced risks when compared to mt2 (functions also on MC3/4/5R which will lead to other side effects you may not want).
with mt1 you wont notice as many more moles (due to more controlled signalling), nor as nearly darkened moles, which is the biggest downside to mt2 since itll make you look retarded as well as greatly increasing risk of melanoma and skin diseases alike.

not to say that mt1 is completely risk free, which it isnt, due to direct stimulus on melanocytes which also includes the cells inside of your moles.

most people also assume that you need uv exposure on mt1, but you really dont (of course, its beneficial if you can).
in the uk at this time of year we have near to nothing for uv, yet mt1’s effects have been clear, leading to people asking me how ive gotten so tan.

all in all, mt1 is a more gentle yet still effective tanning peptide than mt2, which results in greater safety, and in my opinion, a more pleasant tan.

ive personally been running mt1 since december, first running it nightly for 1-2 weeks, and now occasionally topping it off (few days in a row) if i feel a need for boosted tan.
started at 500mcg ed, but i now do 1mg ed when i do.

Mt2 genuinely raped my skin in terms of moles. If you can be bothered it’s one of my first threads

 

[receipt]

Mt2 genuinely raped my skin in terms of moles. If you can be bothered it’s one of my first threads

yeah
moles and freckles due to overstimulating mc1r

 

[aids]

This is all larp. Completely incorrect.

 

[receipt]

This is all larp. Completely incorrect.

lmk
no larp lol

 

[aids]

lmk

Some nuance with MT1/MT2, melanoma & photoaging

Hi all, I want to preface, this is a quick thread I'm writing while on a plane. I don't have WiFi so unfortunately I'm not able to make explicit reference to any literature or sources, I'm writing this all from memory, as well as giving my interpretation of particular beliefs pertaining to the...

looksmax.org

Have a read, dumbass.
There is no relatively greater risk of melanoma using a comparable dose of MT1 to MT2 as they both agonise the exact same receptor responsible.
Selectivity has no part.

 

[aids]

no larp lol

Yes, it is. You are a pseudointellectual and don't know what you're talking about.
So don't give advice, because your advice is incorrect.

 

[aids]

Read literature or even how these drugs work before you start spouting stupid shit with bullshit mechanistic interpretation.
Your conversation with AI where it reinforces your already-existing ideals doesn't count.

 

[receipt]

Some nuance with MT1/MT2, melanoma & photoaging

Hi all, I want to preface, this is a quick thread I'm writing while on a plane. I don't have WiFi so unfortunately I'm not able to make explicit reference to any literature or sources, I'm writing this all from memory, as well as giving my interpretation of particular beliefs pertaining to the...

looksmax.org

Have a read, dumbass.
There is no relatively greater risk of melanoma using a comparable dose of MT1 to MT2 as they both agonise the exact same receptor responsible.
Selectivity has no part.

Yes, it is. You are a pseudointellectual and don't know what you're talking about.
So don't give advice, because your advice is incorrect.

well
still increases number of moles and darkening of moles
works in a more subtle way

theres a reason people always complain about moles on mt2
-> but alright, if they both have similar melanoma risk then so be it
--> just relaying what ive heard previously on the melanoma topic

 

[aids]

well
still increases number of moles and darkening of moles
works in a more subtle way

Yes, because it has lesser affinity for the MC1R (MT1 does) relative to MT2.
But if you consider their relative affinity and account for that, MT1 will not give any less moles than that of MT2.
Dropping the MT2 dose yields the exact same outcome. The MC1R agonism is what causes moles to darken, of which Afamelanotide or any of its analogues is meant to do.

theres a reason people always complain about moles on mt2
-> but alright, if they both have similar melanoma risk then so be it
--> just relaying what ive heard previously on the melanoma topic

Are you retarded?
I can't believe I have to explain this so simply to you with a hypothetical because you are that incompetent:

Let's say MT1 has a strength of 2.
MT2 has a strength of 10.

According to said hypothetical values, if you take 5x the dose of MT1, it will be equivalent to x dose of MT2.
That is, 5x mcg of MT1 = x mcg of MT2.

So you aren't getting as many moles because you are taking a relatively weaker dose of MT1 than what you would otherwise take of MT2 (with whatever the true ratio is), you are just causing lesser MC1R agonism.
Literally the exact same thing can be achieved by just taking less MT2.

Again, you're a pseudointellectual. Never post about MT1/MT2 again please because you are perpetuating the bullshit that I wrote to disprove.

 

[aids]

For anybody reading, the primary benefit of MT1 is that MT1 has a better ratio in regards to its affinity for the MC1R relative to the other melanocortin receptors meaning you can take a relatively higher dose to achieve greater MC1R agonism than that of MT2 without any of the acute side effects people note i.e., mild nausea for a few minutes post-injection, appetite loss, erections.

Then you can use it with a shorter amount of UV exposure to achieve comparable tan... so you prevent photoaging as significantly as possible without any nausea.

If you want such effects, take MT2. But I think it's retarded to take a drug because it is less selective since these effects may inhibit/exacerbate the effects of other drugs you might take.

Disregard this thread.

 

[receipt]

Yes, because it has lesser affinity for the MC1R (MT1 does) relative to MT2.
But if you consider their relative affinity and account for that, MT1 will not give any less moles than that of MT2.
Dropping the MT2 dose yields the exact same outcome. The MC1R agonism is what causes moles to darken, of which Afamelanotide or any of its analogues is meant to do.


Are you retarded?
I can't believe I have to explain this so simply to you with a hypothetical because you are that incompetent:

Let's say MT1 has a strength of 2.
MT2 has a strength of 10.

According to said hypothetical values, if you take 5x the dose of MT1, it will be equivalent to x dose of MT2.
That is, 5x mcg of MT1 = x mcg of MT2.

So you aren't getting as many moles because you are taking a relatively weaker dose of MT1 than what you would otherwise take of MT2 (with whatever the true ratio is), you are just causing lesser MC1R agonism.
Literally the exact same thing can be achieved by just taking less MT2.

Again, you're a pseudointellectual. Never post about MT1/MT2 again please because you are perpetuating the bullshit that I wrote to disprove.

do you have anger issues?
no pseudo-intelligence, just wrote this with near to nothing for research, just relaying what ive heard before on the topic lol
my point still stands, mt1 is the better choice than mt2 for other reasons as well.

good info bud

 

[aids]

do you have anger issues?
no pseudo-intelligence, just wrote this with near to nothing for research, just relaying what ive heard before on the topic lol
my point still stands, mt1 is the better choice than mt2 for other reasons as well.

good info bud

Stop trying to change the topic of conversation you mutt.
I said you were incorrect. If you aren't experienced and have to fall back to "just relaying what ive heard before" to try and save your positive face on a forum, then you shouldn't be a part of the forum in the first place.
So, go fuck yourself, and stop posting stupid shit.
Written completely calmly, @Orka can vouch.

 

[gymcelld]

Stop trying to change the topic of conversation you mutt.
I said you were incorrect. If you aren't experienced and have to fall back to "just relaying what ive heard before" to try and save your positive face on a forum, then you shouldn't be a part of the forum in the first place.
So, go fuck yourself, and stop posting stupid shit.
Written completely calmly, @Orka can vouch.

He’s selfed but yeah this guy don’t have a clue in the world JFL

 

[Realism]

which is the biggest downside to mt2 since itll make you look retarded as well as greatly increasing risk of melanoma and skin diseases alike.

Show some proof of that.
Simply increasing melanin systemically (which moles have the highest concentration of) is not gonna magically make moles turn cancerous. Cancer is caused by cell damage, not increased melanin. Arguably MT2 is going to reduce the chance of cancer by reducing chance of sun burns.

 

[SwedishRetard]

all in all, mt1 is a more gentle yet still effective tanning peptide than mt2, which results in greater safety, and in my opinion, a more pleasant tan.

okay but does it suppress my hunger and make my peenor stiffy iffy? checkmate truecel

 

[aids]

Show some proof of that.
Simply increasing melanin systemically (which moles have the highest concentration of) is not gonna magically make moles turn cancerous. Cancer is caused by cell damage, not increased melanin. Arguably MT2 is going to reduce the chance of cancer by reducing chance of sun burns.

These tards just regurgitate the bullshit they read from other retards.
Nobody knows MT1 is legit prescribed for photosensitive individuals to reduce the likelihood of burning/melanoma.