<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Topics tagged with tesamorelin-ipamorelin]]></title><description><![CDATA[A list of topics that have been tagged with tesamorelin-ipamorelin]]></description><link>https://community.peptidecritic.com/tags/tesamorelin-ipamorelin</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 14:52:38 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://community.peptidecritic.com/tags/tesamorelin-ipamorelin.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Invalid Date</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Order of Operation for  Protocol Cycles]]></title><description><![CDATA[@ResearchCat said in Order of Operation for Protocol Cycles:

Welcome! This is a big topic. My rule #1 is to go slow. Rule #2 is to know what you are researching, why, and what you hope to get out of it. And track results. (Yeah, keep a journal.)
Popular peptides often work on one of 3 general interaction pipelines. Josh Holyfield has a good video explaining which is which. It often doesn’t make sense to research 3 different things that all affect the same target.
I research Glow for extended periods(2-3 months) while also cycling CJC/Ipa or other GHRH and currently MOTS-C/NAD+ over shorter periods.
I think it is probably fine researching epitalon with pretty much anything else, though I usually research it when not running a bunch of other stuff(for no particular reason.)
So I guess if you are researching a protocol someone recommended that you trust, you can go ahead and follow that. If you want to see what specific results you get from a particular peptide, the fewer other things involved will help with that.
FWIW, I recently cycled off CJC/Ipa(assume no DAC) and GLOW, am currently researching MOTS-C/NAD+, also very low dose Tirz, and in a week or two will begin researching tesa and KLOW.
I tend to plan a lot, but in this area I am generally thinking a few months out and make changes when it seems appropriate. For stuff like epitalon that one generally researches 1-2 times a year, I have a mental note that I will run it around June or something.
I hope my rambling is helpful.

Thanks for the info.
]]></description><link>https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/1155/order-of-operation-for-protocol-cycles</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/1155/order-of-operation-for-protocol-cycles</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[afkar7]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Invalid Date</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Cjc1295 no dac&#x2F;imp vs tes &#x2F;imp]]></title><description><![CDATA[I have both and tried both. My personal opinion is, the Tesa/Ipa is way better then the CJC/Ipa.
The CJC/pa made both me and my wife feel like shit, even at only 167mcg/167mcg once a day before bed. At 500mcg/500mcg it made us feel AWFUL. The 167mcg/167mcg did not help with sleep either.
The CJC/Ipa cause a hot flushed feeling when you take it, kinda of like MT2. It didn’t help with sleep and the next morning I woke up feeling hung over. That being said, some people like it.
Put it this way, I bought a kit from Nexaph (10 vials), I sent one vial out for testing, I mixed one vial and I have 8 vials left. I am just giving the 8 vials away….
]]></description><link>https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/1112/cjc1295-no-dac-imp-vs-tes-imp</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/1112/cjc1295-no-dac-imp-vs-tes-imp</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Commander]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Invalid Date</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[New regimen for my rat]]></title><description><![CDATA[@beachfun There are so many variables. I am currently on 2.5mg tirz, while my bride is at 12.5mg. She is plateaued and has some food and booze noise, where i have a little, but am flat - trying to build muscle.
Different nutrition and exercise regimens will have a big impact on results, but a lot of doctors are starting to agree that the process of titrating patients to max dose and staying there is more the marketing model(think: OxyContin) than it is good treatment prudence. Most patients should be on the lowest dose possible to get results and minimize side effect while also maintaining good nutrition and an active lifestyle.
Not trying to preach or criticize anyone, but I live with this every day.
]]></description><link>https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/1047/new-regimen-for-my-rat</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/1047/new-regimen-for-my-rat</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[ResearchCat]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Invalid Date</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Tesa&#x2F;Ipa vs. CJC&#x2F;Ipa]]></title><description><![CDATA[I like the Tesa/Ipa at 1mg/.3mg once a night before bed. It seems to work for me. For some reason my wife wanted to switch to the CJC/IPA (still not sure why) So I bought it for her from Nexaph. Actually today I am going to figure out how to send 1 of the vials to Freedom for testing.
I don’t like that flush feeling from anything, unfortunately I have to deal with it from the MT2. I definitely don’t want to deal with it from  CJC/Ipa.
I guess there is a cost savings over the Tesa if you are only doing 167mcg a day. But will 167mcg of CJC/Ipa give you the same results as 1mg of Tesa/Ipa?
]]></description><link>https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/973/tesa-ipa-vs.-cjc-ipa</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://community.peptidecritic.com/topic/973/tesa-ipa-vs.-cjc-ipa</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Commander]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Invalid Date</pubDate></item></channel></rss>