Trying to separate three different claims about GHK-Cu: that it is the right molecule, that it is the right dose, and that it does something useful.
Tolerance and underdosing look identical from the inside, which is why the answer is usually a blood test and not more forums.
The measured outcome and the hoped-for outcome are rarely the same thing in these threads.
The animal data is stronger than the human data and the human data is not nothing, it is just small.
Happy to be corrected on any of the above.
My rule, after years of this: if it cannot survive being written down with the numbers attached, it is marketing.
My rule, after years of this: if it cannot survive being written down with the numbers attached, it is marketing.
Stupid question: how do you know whether what is in the vial matches the label at all?
Cold storage, light protection, date on the vial. Boring, removes half the variables.
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at. How long have you been on GHK-Cu?
Read the methods section. It is the only part that says whether the conclusion is allowed to exist. Two years in on GHK-Cu and it lines up.
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison.
Same here.
Most of what is called evidence here is one person, one vial, one month.
Test one thing at a time. It feels slower and it is the only way to learn anything.
Narrow conclusion.