Modified GRF(1-29) / 'CJC without DAC' vs Sermorelin
Sermorelin/native GHRH(1-29) has direct human endocrine evidence; exact tetrasubstituted Modified GRF lacks dedicated human clinical evidence. Do not transfer dose/PK directly.
| Attribute | Modified GRF(1-29) / 'CJC without DAC' | Sermorelin |
|---|---|---|
| Human evidence | No dedicated peer-reviewed human clinical trial of the exact tetrasubstituted Modified GRF(1-29) / 'CJC-1295 without DAC' product was identified in this search. Related human studies of native GHRH(1-29), D-Ala2 analogues and CJC-1295 with DAC establish GHRH biology but are different molecules. | Native GHRH(1-29)/sermorelin has genuine human endocrine and diagnostic evidence. In a tiny 6-week study of older men, nightly GHRH increased nocturnal GH but did not significantly improve IGF-I or DEXA body composition. |
| Research focus | Growth-hormone axis research | Growth-hormone diagnostic/deficiency research |
| Regulatory status | No specific FDA-approved product named 'CJC-1295 without DAC' was identified. | Historical FDA marketing approval existed for Geref (sermorelin acetate); this does not confer approval on generic research-market sermorelin. |
| Route / formulation | Chemical identity should be confirmed because 'without DAC' is often used loosely for modified GRF(1-29). | Current authorization and product quality must be checked by jurisdiction/product. |
Why these are compared
These compounds appear in the short-acting ghrh analogue evidence evidence landscape, but they are not interchangeable. Modified GRF(1-29) / 'CJC without DAC' is short-acting ghrh analogue / marketplace nomenclature studied in growth-hormone axis research; Sermorelin is ghrh(1-29) peptide analogue studied in growth-hormone diagnostic/deficiency research. The purpose of this page is to compare the evidence base, not to recommend one compound over another.
Evidence maturity
Modified GRF(1-29) / 'CJC without DAC': Direct human evidence gap; related-molecule human pharmacology only.
Sermorelin: Established human endocrine pharmacology; historical clinical use; lifestyle benefits unproven.
The table above gives the fuller human-evidence, regulatory and formulation context. Open the individual profiles for study-level records, limitations and source provenance.
What this comparison can and cannot establish
No direct head-to-head clinical outcome trial. Cross-study comparisons can be distorted by differences in population, route, formulation, dose, duration and endpoint. WhichPeps therefore does not turn indirect comparisons into a treatment recommendation or name a winner. A well-designed head-to-head human trial using comparable populations and clinically relevant outcomes would reduce uncertainty. For any compound with little or no established human exposure, published human safety and efficacy data would also materially change the evidence picture.