GHRP-2 has no noticeable effect on my sleep, ipa helps, GHRP-6 makes me drowsy for about half an hour, and then I'm wide awake.
NothingSleep · Injection
compared with ipamorelin (helps sleep) and GHRP-6 (disrupts it)
Strict case
GH/IGF-1 axis elevation with cortisol and prolactin spikes; FDA notes raised insulin needs and deaths in critically ill subjects.
Users report
Seven first-hand reports, too few to judge. The consistent effect is a strong hunger spike within minutes, sometimes with weakness, tiredness or nausea for up to an hour, and one user had to eat constantly to keep blood sugar up. Sleep is 'amazing' for one user and unchanged for another. Two users rate it positively (muscle kept on a cut, appetite easier to manage than GHRP-6); one switched to CJC-1295/ipamorelin and preferred it. Most discussion threads push people toward ipamorelin or plain GH instead, citing GHRP-2's cortisol and prolactin effect. Felt nothing: 1 of 7 reports felt nothing; too few reports to put a rate on it..
Best effects
Acute GH pulse (peaks within 60 minutes) · hunger within minutes · better sleep for some · faster gastric emptying
Downsides
Intense hunger, shakiness if a meal is skipped · weakness, tiredness or nausea for up to an hour after injection · water retention and bloating · two to four injections a day timed around meals
Watch
GH/IGF-1 axis elevation (glucose, theoretical neoplasm promotion) · Acute ACTH/cortisol and prolactin rises, comparable to a CRH challenge for cortisol (Arvat 1997) · FDA category 2 (2023): reports of increased insulin requirement, pancreatitis, infection and deaths of critically ill study subjects, causality not established · Grey-market vials: aggregation and peptide-impurity immunogenicity concerns (FDA); GHRP-2 also turns up undeclared in other grey-market products
Evidence
Approved drug — approved in Japan (2004) only as a single 100 mcg IV test for GH deficiency; no trial shows benefit from repeated dosing, and a 48-week placebo-controlled pediatric trial found no growth effect
Caveat
Japan's approval covers one IV dose under supervision, not daily injections. The repeated-dose trials are in children and ran intranasally; no adult chronic-use safety data exist. One user got nausea rather than hunger, and a commenter suggested the vial might hold something else.
Typical use
Users: 100-300 mcg subq 1-3x/day, fasted, 20-30 minutes before eating, often with mod-GRF. Diagnostic label: 100 mcg IV once (2 mcg/kg in children).
Getting it
Prescription diagnostic only in Japan (single IV vial). Elsewhere sold as research-peptide vials and in blends such as 'Triple G' (GHRP-2, GHRP-6, sermorelin). FDA put it in compounding category 2 in 2023; WADA-prohibited.
Stacked with
CJC-1295 / mod-GRF(1-29): The classic pairing: a GHRH analogue amplifies the GHRP pulse, injected together 2-3 times a day before meals. · Retatrutide or other GLP-1 agonists: Some users add a GHRP to blunt GLP-1 appetite suppression and speed gastric emptying. · Ipamorelin: Often recommended in its place: same receptor, little cortisol or prolactin effect.
Shortly after injection, I usually feel very hungry, especially the first few times. Also weak and tired. These effects wore off every time after around 45 minutes.
MixedImmune · 300 mcg, then 150 mcg · Injection · 2 weeks
rheumatoid/psoriatic arthritis, previously on methotrexate; self-experiment discussed with a doctor
Had to inject 3x/day. Bloated, lots of water weight, had to eat constantly to keep my blood sugar from getting too low. Not much improvement in the gym.
NegativeRecovery · Injection
switched to CJC-1295/ipamorelin afterwards and preferred it
Safety
Tier by safety barStrict ExcludedBalanced CautionEvidence only Caution
The feared harms are IGF-1-driven tumour promotion, which is silent and delayed and counts as 3 under the rubric even though theoretical, and worsening glucose control, which would show on a blood test (a 2). Hunger, nausea and flushing are immediate but not the concern. Renehan et al. 2004: IGF-I and cancer risk ↗
Pregnancy or possible pregnancy (contraindicated on the Japanese label) and breastfeeding · Active or past cancer · Diabetes, prediabetes or insulin use · Pituitary tumours, including prolactinoma · Cushing's syndrome or other cortisol excess · Critical illness · Children and teenagers (no benefit on growth in a 48-week trial)
Each bead is one amino acid in the peptide's chain, coloured by its side chain: grey for non-polar, cyan for polar, blue for positively charged and fuchsia for negatively charged. Length and mix tell related peptides apart at a glance, from a two-residue dipeptide like carnosine to a 43-residue protein like thymosin beta-4. The colours describe chemistry only and predict neither effect nor safety.
non-polarpolarpositivenegative
Report grades
Every first-hand Reddit or X report is graded on its own, from glowing through positive, mixed, nothing and negative to bad reaction, and the bar shows how those grades split. Posts that look vendor-adjacent stay on the peptide's page but are left out of the counts.
GlowingPositiveMixedNothingNegativeBad reaction
% positive
The share of a peptide's graded Reddit and X reports that are glowing or positive, vendor-adjacent posts left out. A peptide with few reports is pulled toward the average of all reports, as if it had eight average ones besides its own, so two glowing posts cannot top the list. Kept peptides rank by the same reports' mean grade, shrunk the same way, and excluded ones follow in that order.
Researcher estimate
No first-hand report of this peptide has been graded yet, so the figure is the researchers' own rating out of 10 from what they read about it. It ranks alongside the computed scores until reports arrive.
Safety tier
Each peptide is tiered clean, caution or excluded from its five risk axes under the chosen safety bar. An excluded peptide has a plausible route to serious harm, so it stays listed with the reason but ranks behind every other entry, however good its reviews.
Safety bar
The safety bar sets how much risk it takes to exclude a peptide. Strict: out on any serious mechanism with little human data, or any documented serious harm. Balanced: out on documented serious harm (unless it is obvious, reversible and from a regulated product), or a serious mechanism whose harm would be silent with no human data at all. Evidence only: out only on documented serious harm in humans that is lasting, delayed or from grey-market product.
Seen harm
Documented serious adverse events in humans, from 0 for none despite real exposure to 3 for deaths or several well-documented serious harms. Serious means a hospital or emergency visit or harm lasting weeks, so a headache or a bad night does not count.
Mechanism
A plausible biological route to serious harm at the doses people use, such as growth-factor signalling, hormone-axis suppression, heart or blood-pressure effects or immune activation. It runs from 0 when none is known to 3 when a dangerous pathway has been shown in living animals.
Data gap
How little human safety data exists for the molecule actually sold, from 0 for an approved drug with large trials and years of use to 3 for no human safety data at all. A modified analogue does not inherit its parent's trials.
Silent harm
Whether the feared harm would show quickly or stay hidden, from 0 when it is obvious and goes on stopping to 3 when it is silent and delayed, like tumour promotion or slow organ damage. User reports cannot reveal a harm that takes years to appear, so a high score here limits what good reviews can tell you.
Product
The risk of what people actually buy, from 0 for a regulated pharmacy or supplement product taken by mouth or on the skin to 3 for a grey-market injectable. In one dataset of 6,441 grey-market samples, 42–71% failed basic quality criteria and 15% carried endotoxin.
Evidence
The strongest kind of study behind the peptide's effects, from an approved drug through human controlled trials and small human studies to animal work or nothing of its own. Animal results often fail to carry over to people.
Access
How people get it: as an approved drug, a compounded prescription, an over-the-counter supplement or from the grey market, where nobody checks the vial. The channel decides both the legal position and the risk of a bad batch.
Price per month
Thirty days of the typical dose, from its low end to its high end, priced at the listing a careful buyer would choose: in stock, from a shop scoring 4 of 5 on trust (third-party tested where no score is set), failing that 3, a pure pack before a blend, a European shop first, then the cheapest per mg. The range is the dose's, not the shops'. A per-dose amount counts once a day unless the dose says otherwise. Prices are in euros at ECB rates of 2026-10-29, before shipping; the shop table keeps each listing's price per mg, per gram for bulk supplements. Where no listing can be priced the researchers' own estimate stands in, and says so.
Dose users report
The middle half of the daily doses stated in at least five first-hand reports, vendor posts left out. Where its middle sits more than twice above or below the declared dose, the month is priced at it as well, since what people take is what they pay for.
Testing
Whether the shop publishes lab results: third-party tested means an independent lab checks each batch, own COA means the shop's own certificate of analysis, and no public tests means neither. A certificate shows purity, not safety.
Added peptide
Some packs sold under one peptide's name hold a second one, such as 5 mg GHK-Cu in a nasal kit, stated only in the description. Sprayed in the nose or injected it reaches the blood like an injection, so it carries the risk of that route and is tiered as the injectable form, whatever its tier on the skin. A pack whose page gives no contents list may hold more than its name.