# CJC-1295 Dosage: The Doses Used in the Published Research > CJC-1295 dosage in the literature: human PK studies used single subcutaneous doses of 30, 60 or 90 ug/kg (Teichman 2006; Ionescu/Frohman 2006). Research-context doses, routes, and handling, cited. What was administered, to which species, by which route — research-context only. No human dose is established for any use. ## Doses used in the published research CJC-1295 dosage in the controlled literature is narrow and early. Human pharmacokinetic studies used single subcutaneous doses of 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram [1][3]. The GHRH-knockout mouse growth study used 2 micrograms per dose at 24-, 48- or 72-hour intervals, and only the 24-hour schedule fully normalized growth — the 48- and 72-hour schedules were progressively less effective [4]. Those are the figures the research actually administered, and they are weight-scaled single doses in pharmacokinetic studies, not a regimen. The dose-dependence matters: at 30 versus 60 micrograms per kilogram the GH response scaled up across the studied range, which is part of how the early work established the kinetics rather than an efficacy endpoint [1]. None of these studies set out to define a therapeutic dose, because no therapeutic indication exists. Community and clinic "protocols" for the no-DAC Modified GRF (1-29) and for CJC-1295/ipamorelin commonly cite 100-300 microgram fixed doses, but these are not derived from controlled human trials [1]. The gap between a weight-scaled pharmacokinetic dose and a fixed milligram-fraction protocol is exactly where unsupported numbers enter the popular literature. This site reports the research-context doses and stops there: no human dosing regimen for CJC-1295 has been validated for any use. ### How much CJC-1295 should I take? Human PK studies used single subcutaneous doses of 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram [1][3]. Community fixed-dose protocols are not derived from controlled human trials, and no human dose is established for any use [1]. This describes what was studied, not a recommendation. ## Half-life, route, and handling The DAC variant's half-life is what makes its dosing distinctive: 5.8 to 8.1 days in healthy adults, with IGF-1 elevation persisting up to 28 days after multiple doses [1]. That is days, not hours — a single input keeps the GH/IGF-1 axis elevated across most of a week, which is the whole reason the long-acting form was developed. The no-DAC Modified GRF (1-29) is short-acting, in the minutes-to-hours range, reflecting native GHRH(1-29) clearance with the protease-resistant substitutions. The two forms are not interchangeable on any schedule — see [CJC-1295 DAC vs no-DAC](/dac-vs-no-dac). The route studied in humans and animals is subcutaneous injection, with intravenous used in early GRF(1-29) pharmacokinetic work [1][2]. Because CJC-1295 is a peptide, oral bioavailability is negligible — it would be digested before absorption — so the injectable route is not a preference but a consequence of the molecule. In laboratory handling the lyophilized peptide is reconstituted with bacteriostatic water and refrigerated; the four substitutions (D-Ala2, Gln8, Ala15, Leu27) confer the protease resistance, and the DAC albumin conjugation confers the multi-day duration [2]. Those two stability features do different jobs and should not be conflated. The substitutions keep the peptide intact against dipeptidylpeptidase-IV regardless of form; the albumin handle is what extends residence time, and only the DAC variant has it. A no-DAC peptide is protease-resistant but still short-acting — protease resistance and long half-life are separate properties, a point the dac-versus-no-DAC page returns to. ### How to reconstitute CJC-1295? In research handling the lyophilized peptide is reconstituted with bacteriostatic water and refrigerated; oral bioavailability is negligible [1]. This describes laboratory handling only, not a human-use protocol, and the route of administration studied is subcutaneous. ### Where to inject CJC-1295? The route studied in humans and animals is subcutaneous injection, with intravenous used in early GRF(1-29) pharmacokinetic work [1][2]. Site-specific injection guidance is outside the research literature and is not provided here. ## The ipamorelin pairing in dose terms The CJC-1295/ipamorelin combination is studied mechanistically — the two act on distinct receptors and synergize [10] — but no controlled human dosing regimen for the pairing is established. Ipamorelin's own potency and exposure-response have been modeled in animals [10]; the combination's human dose has not. ### How much CJC-1295 / ipamorelin should I take? The GHRH-analog-plus-GHRP pairing is studied mechanistically — the two act on distinct receptors and synergize [10] — but no controlled human dosing regimen for the combination is established, and circulating fixed-dose protocols are not trial-derived [1]. No human dose is established for the pairing. ## Why the dose record is this thin It is worth saying directly why a dosage page on a high-volume compound is this short on numbers. The human clinical data for CJC-1295 are limited: a small set of early-phase pharmacokinetic studies in healthy volunteers established the GH and IGF-1 kinetics [1][3], and a ConjuChem Phase 2 trial in HIV-associated visceral obesity was discontinued, after which the DAC program did not advance [1]. There are no large efficacy trials and no long-term safety trials in healthy adults. That is the entire controlled human dose record. Everything beyond it — the fixed-microgram protocols, the once- or twice-daily schedules, the combination ratios — comes from community practice rather than trials, and this site does not launder community practice into research [1]. The honest dosage answer for CJC-1295 is the narrow set of weight-scaled doses the studies used, plus a clear statement that no human regimen has been validated. The numbers that exist are above; the numbers that would justify a recommendation do not exist at all. --- A corporate process deck mapping the CJC-1295 record phase by phase — the GH and IGF-1 kinetics logged to source, the DAC-versus-no-DAC split kept apart, and the missing efficacy and long-term safety data marked, not filled; no clinic behind the deck and nothing here listed, priced, or sold.