Long post, sorry. GHK-Cu: what actually has human evidence behind it, and what is extrapolation from animals?
I have started logging dose, time, and sleep because otherwise the anecdote is just a mood.
Mechanism is not outcome, and a plausible pathway is the most expensive kind of evidence there is.
Injection site reactions are trivial until they are not, and a fresh needling technique removes half of them.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation start?
Read methods. Not on GHK-Cu but the pattern is familiar.
Baseline first.
Narrow conclusion, briefly right. Broad conclusion, interestingly wrong. I know which I keep choosing.
Name the active ingredient, not just the brand. It makes these threads searchable years later.
Three questions kill most of the confidence in a thread like this: sample size, blinding, who paid. How long have you been on GHK-Cu?
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
Is a baseline blood test really necessary before starting something like this? Fatigue was my main issue with GHK-Cu too.
If it needs three other compounds to notice, you have not tested the first one.
Narrow conclusion, briefly right. Broad conclusion, interestingly wrong. I know which I keep choosing.
Narrow conclusion.
Test one thing at a time. It feels slower and it is the only way to learn anything.
Read methods.
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?