CJC-1295 and ipamorelin show up together on vendor shelves and on most ranking pages, usually described as a pair. We read the primary papers, two recent reviews and the vendor listings to see what is actually on record. This page explains what each compound is, what was measured in people, and what the paperwork looks like. It is not advice to use either one. Vendors label both for laboratory research only.
What CJC-1295 is
CJC-1295 is a synthetic analog of growth hormone releasing hormone. It comes in two forms that are different molecules. The without DAC form, also written Modified GRF (1-29), has 29 amino acids and a stated mass of 3,367.95 Da on the Peptryn listing. The with DAC form carries an added drug affinity complex and a different mass, so a price comparison between the two means little. Core Power Peptides says the without DAC form acts for a shorter time.
The main human paper is a 2006 trial in healthy adults aged 21 to 61. It gave a long-acting CJC-1295, with a half-life of 5.8 to 8.1 days, and measured hormone levels. Mean growth hormone rose 2 to 10 fold for six days or more, and IGF-I rose 1.5 to 3 fold for 9 to 11 days. No serious adverse reactions were reported. It measured those levels and safety and did not report muscle.
What ipamorelin is
Ipamorelin is a five amino acid synthetic peptide that releases growth hormone through a receptor shared with the earlier GHRP compounds. Peptryn lists it at 711.85 Da. The 1998 paper that described it reports work in rat pituitary cells, rats and pigs, and found that it did not raise ACTH or cortisol in pigs the way two older compounds did.
In people, we found a 1999 pharmacokinetic study in healthy men, which reported a half-life of about 2 hours and a single episode of growth hormone release after each infusion. We also found a 2014 phase 2 trial in 117 patients after bowel surgery, which tested it for postoperative ileus. It was well tolerated for up to 7 days and showed no significant difference from placebo on its efficacy measures. Neither study measured muscle.
Why vendors sell them together
The vendor rationale is that the two act on different receptors. The Core Power Peptides blend listing says ipamorelin acts on the ghrelin receptor and CJC-1295 without DAC acts on the growth hormone releasing hormone receptor, and says the pair acts synergistically. That is the vendor's statement. We searched PubMed for a trial of the combination and found reviews but no trial of the pair, so we cannot confirm the claim.
At a glance
Swipe the table sideways to see every column.
| CJC-1295 | Ipamorelin | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A growth hormone releasing hormone analog, in two forms | A growth hormone secretagogue with five amino acids |
| Mass on the Peptryn listing | 3,367.95 Da (without DAC) | 711.85 Da |
| Human studies we found | One 2006 trial in healthy adults, hormone levels and safety | A 1999 pharmacokinetic study and a 2014 phase 2 ileus trial |
| Muscle measured in those studies | No | No |
| Listed by | All four vendors we review | All four vendors we review |
What reviews of the evidence conclude
A 2026 scoping review from UCLA covered six peptides including CJC-1295, ipamorelin and MK-677. It found that 67% of the publications used animal models, that human studies were limited to a handful and mostly lacked robust controls, and that the claimed benefits for musculoskeletal recovery and performance remain unsubstantiated by human trials. A separate 2026 critical review of peptides in sport and bodybuilding reports that most published studies examine therapeutic uses under controlled dosing, and that the supply chain is largely unregulated, with products often mislabeled or contaminated.
What the vendor paperwork shows
Peptryn () states lot 2026-08-05 for both compounds at 10 mg: ipamorelin at 99.34% purity and CJC-1295 without DAC at 99.11%, each by HPLC-UV-MS with a negative endotoxin result, tested by MZ Biolabs. The ipamorelin certificate links to a report on the lab's own site. We read the CJC-1295 figures on its product page and not its certificate.
Core Power Peptides is thinner. Its CJC-1295 with DAC page states 99% purity and says nothing about a COA or a lab. The without DAC 5 mg page and the 12mg/6mg blend page say a COA exists, and both were out of stock when we read them. The 10 mg blend page says a COA is available on request. The 12mg/6mg title gives two numbers and the description does not say what each refers to. Our guide to reading a COA explains why those differences matter, and the Core Power Peptides review and Peptryn review cover the rest. Peptides for Sale also lists both compounds and a blend. We did not read its lab paperwork for this post, and our review scores its documentation lower than the other three.
Sports and FDA status
The 2026 WADA Prohibited List, as reproduced by the Cologne anti-doping laboratory, names CJC-1295 among the growth hormone releasing hormone analogs and ipamorelin among the secretagogues. The FDA's bulk substances page, current as of 22 April 2026, lists ipamorelin acetate in category 2 for outsourcing facilities and notes a published study in which serious adverse events, including death, occurred when it was given intravenously for gastric motility. Its entry for CJC-1295, in the withdrawn nominations list, records increased heart rate and a systemic vasodilatory reaction and says clinical data are limited.
Frequently asked questions
Is CJC-1295 the same as CJC-1295 with DAC?
No. They are different molecules with different masses and, per Core Power Peptides, different durations of action. A listing should say which one it sells, and prices are only comparable between like forms.
Are CJC-1295 and ipamorelin the same kind of compound?
No. CJC-1295 is a growth hormone releasing hormone analog and ipamorelin is a growth hormone secretagogue. They act on different receptors, according to the papers and the vendor listings we read.
Has the pair been studied in people?
We found no published trial of the two together. We found one trial of CJC-1295 and two studies of ipamorelin in people, and none measured muscle. Reviews call the human evidence limited.