CJC-1295 (with DAC and without DAC / modified GRF 1-29)
CJC-1295: What The Studies Actually Say
About 63 healthy adults have been given CJC-1295 in published studies, most of them just once. It raised growth hormone in blood tests. No published study measured muscle, fat or any other real result. The no-DAC version has never been tested in a published human study.
Updated 22 September 2026
Before you read this
This page explains what published studies found. That is all it is. It is not medical advice, and it is not instructions for using anything. Nothing here is meant to find, treat, cure or stop any illness. The compounds discussed on this site, retatrutide included, are not approved by the FDA for use in people. Research compounds are sold for laboratory use only — not for use in humans or animals. A study tells you what happened to the people in it. It does not tell you what would happen to you. What you do with what you read here is your responsibility, so talk to a doctor first. This page is published by Ascend Vials, which sells research compounds.
Read the full guide
Confirm you have read the notice above and enter an email address. We will send you a link back to this guide, and sometimes an email when we publish a new one. You can unsubscribe any time.
FDA counted everyone given CJC-1295 in a published study. It came to 63 healthy adults, and most of them got one shot. FDA review, 2024
Here is what those studies found, and what they never checked. Every claim has a link. Read them yourself.
The 30-second version
- CJC-1295 is a lab-made copy of part of GHRH, the signal that tells the body to release growth hormone.
- Two different molecules share the name: with DAC and without DAC. FDA says they are not interchangeable.
- In small studies of healthy adults, one shot of the DAC version raised growth hormone 2 to 10 times for 6 days or more. No published study measured a real result — not muscle, fat, sleep or recovery.
- In one trial, 94% of people on it had a side effect, against 29% on a fake shot.
- The only trial in patients was stopped in 2006 after a participant died of a heart attack. Nobody has shown whether the drug played a part. No results were ever published.
- The no-DAC version has never been tested in a published human study. No form is approved in the US, the EU, or any of the 12 other countries FDA checked.
- Nothing sold online has been shown to match what the studies used. No study has checked.
What it is
CJC-1295 is a lab-made copy of the first 29 building blocks of GHRH — growth hormone-releasing hormone. GHRH is the signal the brain sends to the pituitary gland to release growth hormone. That growth hormone then pushes up a second hormone, IGF-1. FDA review, 2024
A Montreal company, ConjuChem, made it and first described it in 2005. Endocrinology, 2005
Four of the 29 building blocks were swapped, to help the chain last longer in the blood and work better on its target. FDA review, 2024 · Source, 1994 The same piece without the swaps is sermorelin, a drug FDA approved as Geref. Its maker stopped selling it in 2008. NLM · Federal Register, 2013
The original CJC-1295 also carries a chemical hook called DAC. It latches onto albumin, the most common protein in blood. Endocrinology, 2005 In healthy adults, it took 5.8 to 8.1 days for the body to clear half of it. JCEM, 2006
The numbers, from the real studies
The main study was two small trials in healthy adults aged 21 to 61. Some got a fake shot so the results could be compared, and nobody knew who got what. JCEM, 2006
In the first trial, 42 people got one shot each. 35 got the drug, at one of four dose levels, and 7 got a fake shot. FDA review, 2024
- Growth hormone in the blood rose 2 to 10 times, depending on the dose, for 6 days or more. JCEM, 2006
- IGF-1 rose 1.5 to 3 times, for 9 to 11 days. JCEM, 2006
- IGF-1 went above the normal range for a person's age and sex only at the highest dose. FDA review, 2024
In the second trial, 24 people got two or three shots each. IGF-1 stayed above where it started for up to 28 days, and each new shot pushed the peak higher. JCEM, 2006
A separate study measured growth hormone in 12 healthy men every 20 minutes overnight — before one shot, and again a week after. It had no fake-shot group. Overnight study, 2006
Growth hormone normally comes out in bursts. The bursts did not get bigger or more frequent. The low level between them rose 7.5 times, and average growth hormone rose 46%. Overnight study, 2006
That is a 45% rise in IGF-1. Nobody went above the top of the normal range. Overnight study, 2006 A follow-up on stored blood from 11 of these men found a few shifted blood proteins — possible markers to study, not results. Growth Horm IGF Res, 2009 · FDA review, 2024
Every one of those results is a blood test in a healthy volunteer.
Two different things share one name
| With DAC | Without DAC | |
|---|---|---|
| Also called | DAC:GRF, CJC-1295 DAC | Mod GRF 1-29, "no-DAC" |
| Albumin hook | Yes | No |
| Published human studies | 3, all in healthy adults | None |
| Time to clear half, in people | 5.8 to 8.1 days | Never measured |
| Shown to do anything? | Raised growth hormone and IGF-1 | No study shows it |
| Approved where FDA checked | No | No |
Read the whole table. The left column has three small studies behind it. The right column has none.
Every published human study used the DAC version, made or supplied by ConjuChem. FDA found no study, in animals or people, showing whether the no-DAC version is active at all. It says the DAC results "cannot be extrapolated" to it. FDA review, 2024
You may hear that the no-DAC version wears off in about half an hour, or gives a more "natural" growth hormone pattern. No published human study has measured either. FDA review, 2024 The only study of the burst pattern used the DAC version. Overnight study, 2006
What it was never tested for
No published study in people has measured muscle, fat loss, strength, sleep, recovery, healing or aging. The studies measured hormones in the blood, and side effects, in healthy volunteers. FDA review, 2024
A hormone going up in a blood test is not a result you can see or feel. Nobody checked whether it led to one.
The popular mix of CJC-1295 and ipamorelin has never been tested in a published human trial, and the US trial registry lists none. PubMed search · ClinicalTrials.gov search
The only trial in patients was stopped
ConjuChem started one trial to test whether the drug helped patients. It took adults with HIV who had built up deep belly fat, and was meant to run 12 weeks against a fake shot. Trial record
In July 2006, a man in the trial in Argentina felt chest discomfort about two hours after his 11th weekly shot. A heart test confirmed a heart attack, and he died about an hour later. ConjuChem, 2006
His doctor's most likely explanation was heart disease nobody had found yet. ConjuChem said earlier studies had shown no sign of harm to the heart, and it stopped the trial. ConjuChem, 2006
No public source shows whether the drug played a part in his death. No results were ever published, and FDA could find nothing more about the other patients or their side effects. FDA review, 2024 ConjuChem said 192 people had enrolled. The registry lists 120. ConjuChem, 2006 · Trial record
ConjuChem pulled CJC-1295 from clinical trials that year. FDA review, 2024
The pituitary worry comes from mice
In mice born without their own GHRH, daily shots for five weeks brought body weight and length up to normal. Their pituitaries grew more of the cells that make growth hormone. Am J Physiol, 2006
That growth is also the worry. Normal adult male mice given shots for eight weeks ended up with pituitary glands 47% heavier than mice given salt water, and more signs of DNA damage. Their weight and length were no different. JCI, 2020
Mice built to make too much GHRH grow extra pituitary tissue and tumors. No cancer study of any form of CJC-1295 has been done, so FDA says it cannot rule out pituitary overgrowth or tumors with long-term use. FDA review, 2024
Short safety tests in rats and dogs, published only as abstracts, found lower red blood cell levels at every dose tested. FDA review, 2024
This is animals. It is not proof of harm in people. It is a question no human study has answered.
What to expect
Side effects were common in the single-dose trial. All of them except the itchy welts were more common at the two highest doses. FDA review, 2024
| Single-dose trial | Fake shot (7 people) | CJC-1295 (35 people) |
|---|---|---|
| Any side effect | 29% | 94% |
| Headache | 14% | 63% |
| Reaction where the shot went in | — | about 70% |
| Diarrhea | — | 43% |
| Flushing, warmth, brief drop in blood pressure | — | 30% |
| Itchy welts where the shot went in | — | almost 30% |
A dash means FDA's summary gave no fake-shot number. FDA review, 2024
In the repeat-shot trial, everyone on the drug had a reaction where the shot went in. Flushing hit 40% of people at the low dose and all of them at the high dose. Two people had brief dizziness and low blood pressure after their first shot. One had leg muscles that tightened on their own for a while. FDA review, 2024
FDA's public risk list names a faster heart rate and whole-body flushing reactions as serious side effects linked to CJC-1295. FDA risk list
Three bigger questions matter more than that table.
Antibodies. The main study reported "no significant antibody formation." FDA says the test was not described, and most people got only one shot. The drug is 86% the same as the body's own GHRH, so antibodies could in theory attack that too. FDA review, 2024
Growth hormone's own risks. Approved growth hormone labels warn about tumors, diabetes, fluid buildup, pancreatitis and more. FDA found no data showing CJC-1295 avoids them. FDA review, 2024
Almost nobody has taken it. Of the 63 people in FDA's count, 87% were men and nearly three in four got a single shot. For the no-DAC version, there is no human safety data at all. FDA review, 2024
Is it approved?
No. No form of CJC-1295 is approved as a medicine in the US, the EU, or any of the 12 other countries FDA checked, including Australia, Canada, Japan and the UK. FDA review, 2024
- United States: in December 2024, FDA's advisers voted against letting pharmacies make it from any of its forms: 13 to 0 on each DAC form, and 13 to 0 and 12 to 1 on the two no-DAC forms. FDA's risk list now carries a safety warning for it. FDA minutes, 2025 · FDA risk list
- Australia: prescription-only under the national poisons rules, and illegal to possess without authority. That is a legal category, not an approval. Poisons Standard, 2026
- Europe: no entry at all in the European Medicines Agency's medicines data. EMA data, 2026
- Sport: banned at all times on the 2026 anti-doping list. WADA, 2026
What is still unknown
These gaps come from FDA's 2024 review. FDA review, 2024
- Whether the no-DAC version does anything in people. It has never been studied in a person.
- Any real result. Muscle, fat, sleep, recovery, aging — never reported in people.
- Long-term safety. The longest published study lasted 49 days.
- What happened in the 2006 trial, including whether the death was linked to the drug.
- Cancer and pituitary tumors with long-term use.
- Women, older adults, children, and people with heart disease. Most people studied were healthy men.
- Whether the DAC hook grabs proteins other than albumin. Nobody has checked.
- Even the head count. FDA's per-study numbers add up to 67 people on the drug, not the 63 it states, and it does not explain the gap.
What is in the bottle is not what was studied
One more thing.
Every human result on this page came from the DAC version, made or supplied by ConjuChem for its own trials. FDA review, 2024
FDA counted at least nine names used for five different CJC-1295 substances, and called that "a safety risk for patients." FDA review, 2024 In 2009, Norwegian police and customs sent a lab an unknown preparation. Its sequence matched the peptide marketed as CJC-1295, with no DAC. Drug Test Anal, 2010 Powders seized by Danish customs held a mod GRF 1-29 with an extra building block added at one end. Source, 2019
No study has ever shown that a product sold online as "CJC-1295" is the same thing the studies used. Not the same purity. Not the same strength. Not even proof it is the same molecule. And for the no-DAC version, there is no human study to compare it with at all.
So take every number on this page for what it is. It describes ConjuChem's DAC version, in a few dozen healthy adults. It describes nothing else.
How to check a number yourself
You are going to see more claims about CJC-1295. In a reel. In a comment. On somebody's store page.
Here is how to tell a real one from a marketing one. Five questions. About ten seconds each.
1. Is there a link to a study?
A real number comes from a paper you can open. No link means it is a claim, not a result. Search the name on pubmed.gov yourself. If nothing comes back, nothing was published.
2. Which CJC-1295?
Every human number on this page is for the DAC version. A no-DAC product that quotes these studies is borrowing results that were never measured for it.
3. Did it measure the thing being claimed?
This is the big one here. The studies measured hormones in blood. A claim about muscle, fat or sleep needs a study that measured muscle, fat or sleep. None has been published.
4. How many people, and for how long?
Small studies swing. Here it was 63 healthy adults, mostly men, mostly one shot, 49 days at the longest. That says nothing about years of use.
5. Was there a group that got nothing?
The fake shot is the whole point. In the single-dose trial, 2 of the 7 people on the fake shot still reported a side effect. The overnight study had no fake-shot group, so nobody can say how much of its change came from the drug.
Now run those five on this page
Every number above links to its paper. The table says which version each result is for. The study sizes are in the text, and the fake-shot numbers are in the side-effect table.
The claims in the ads — muscle, fat loss, sleep, recovery, anti-aging — have no link, because no published study in people has measured them. And the one trial in patients never published a result.
That is the whole difference: a number you can check, and a number you are asked to believe.
This page has a date on it, near the top. If a new human study of CJC-1295 is published, this page changes.
Read the studies yourself
- Two trials in healthy adults, JCEM 2006 — the main one
- Overnight growth hormone study, JCEM 2006
- Blood protein follow-up, Growth Horm IGF Res 2009
- FDA review for the December 2024 advisory meeting — the source for most safety and status facts
- FDA advisory meeting minutes, 2025 — the votes
- FDA safety-risk list
- HIV trial record · ConjuChem announcement, 2006 (archived)
- Discovery paper, Endocrinology 2005
- Why the four swaps, 1994
- Mice born without GHRH, Am J Physiol 2006
- Pituitary and DNA damage in mice, JCI 2020 · PubMed
- Norwegian sample, Drug Test Anal 2010 · Danish customs powders, 2019
- Sermorelin: NLM entry · Federal Register, 2013
- Australia Poisons Standard, June 2026
- EMA medicines data
- WADA 2026 Prohibited List
- CJC-1295 with ipamorelin: PubMed search · ClinicalTrials.gov search
Everything above describes what studies gave to enrolled volunteers and patients, or to lab animals. This is not advice, a plan, or instructions. CJC-1295 is not an approved medicine in the US, the EU, or any other country FDA checked. Research compounds are not for human or animal use.