Skip to content

AHK-Cu (topical) user reports (20)

Glowing 1Positive 8Mixed 7Nothing 3Negative 1

20 reports

  • The photos attached show just 11 weeks of usage on my temples, and 4 weeks of usage on my lashes. As shown in the hair photo, which I think speaks for itself, my baby hairs have vastly increased in density and thickness.

    • 41 points
    GlowingTopicalhair and lash growth (no hair loss)

    No diagnosed hair loss; 11 weeks on temples and 4 on lashes, no other new products or supplements; serum feels like water, no residue.

  • Just measure out the concentration you want on a scale. I did 1%. Been working well.

    • 3 points
    Positive1% in 30 ml hyaluronic acid/B5Topicalhairline

    Thread author, DIY 1% serum on the hairline; later said he uses it on and off, not consistently.

  • I’ve tried a Korean hair loss product with AHK-Cu and it worked pretty well for me.

    • 2 points
    PositiveTopicalhair loss

    Commercial Korean hair-loss product containing AHK-Cu.

  • ive used both with ask-cu and will not be using the hair serum again. Noticeable difference with the hyaluronic acid that I didn't feel or see with the hair serum.

    • 1 point
    PositiveTopicalhair growth

    Tried AHK-Cu in two bases; saw a difference only with the hyaluronic-acid base.

  • ive got quite a few new baby hairs at my hairline, some of which are now darkening and in the past 2-3 weeks my shedding has begun to reduce noticeably in the shower.

    • 1 point
    Positivepremade serum, ~2.5 mg/dayTopicalandrogenetic alopecia

    AGA since 2023; ~13 weeks of premade AHK-Cu serum on top of a decade of minoxidil, a year of alfatradiol and 1 mm microneedling.

  • I did the shots for a while got very little from that I switched to ghk / ahk topical mixed with HA and started seeing results within 1-2 weeks

    • 1 point
    PositiveTopicalfacial hair growth (minoxidil alternative)

    43M avoiding minoxidil; injections did little, switched to topical GHK+AHK in hyaluronic acid.

  • I mix with distilled water and use it daily, 1x weekly dermaroll on scalp. Moderate regrowth all around. I'm quite happy. I don't use anything else.

    • 1 point
    Positive~250 mcg per 30 ml distilled water, dailyTopicalhair thinning

    AHK-Cu in distilled water daily with weekly dermarolling, no other treatment.

  • Topicals are super safe girly. I’ve been doing 4% GHK/AHK for months with great results

    • 0 points
    Positive4% GHK/AHKTopicalhair loss

    Months of a 4% GHK/AHK topical; no detail on other treatments.

  • AHK-cu seems to be the only thing I have seen working. I bought some in Aus and it worked for me.

    • 0 points
    Positivehair growth

    Comment in a thread on The Ordinary serum; bought AHK-Cu in Australia, route not stated.

  • Can’t say it helped at all but it did made my hair look cosmetically thicker and when I started it somewhat made my scalp feel healthier and less dry

    • 7 points
    MixedTopicalhair loss

    GHK/AHK serum used irregularly for 6-9 months alongside topical minoxidil.

  • I have since obtained topical ahk-cu and Ghk-CU and have been applying it for 2 months. I am also running Ghk-CU subq in intervals. Hairs continue to pop up and my hair is getting thicker.

    • 5 points
    MixedTopicalreceding hairline

    Topical AHK+GHK for 2 months on top of minoxidil, earlier finasteride and intermittent injected GHK-Cu/KLOW; the user himself cannot credit the topical.

  • I mixed 1g AHK-Cu and 1g GHK-CU into ordinary serum. I’m probably 45 days in(on 2nd bottle). I haven’t noticed much. Maybe not losing as much.

    • 2 points
    Mixed1 g AHK-Cu + 1 g GHK-Cu in a 60 ml serumTopicalhair loss

    45 days, on top of topical and oral minoxidil, dutasteride and injected KLOW.

  • Too soon to tell on visual additional growth. But my hair does feel thicker.

    • 1 point
    MixedTopicalthinning hair

    DIY serum, roughly 3 months in.

  • Ive been doing topical AHK for about 4 months and am a month in pinning GHK. I also do RLT. Have started seeing progress in the last month or so. Still early but I am pleased with the results so far

    • 1 point
    Mixed1-2 g powder in water + The Ordinary hair serum, ~5x/weekTopicalhair loss

    4 months topical AHK with red light; progress appeared in the same month he started injecting GHK-Cu, so not attributable.

  • I've used ghk-cu and ahk-cu topically for a few months at least, but not sure if it has helped as I dye my hair. Definitely a bit thicker though.

    • 1 point
    MixedTopicalgrey hair / thickness

    Topical GHK+AHK for a few months.

  • Ive only been doing this about 2 months I think so maybe it takes longer but its not the miracle that others have posted here

    • 1 point
    MixedTopicalhair loss

    Months of a premade GHK-Cu serum with moderate results, then ~2 months with AHK-Cu powder added to it.

  • I’m using GHK-Cu for my skin (and seeing improvements) and AHK-Cu for my hair; I also use minoxidil. But I haven’t seen great results yet (after 1 month of use).

    • 7 points
    Nothing0.05 mg rubbed into scalpTopicalhair loss

    1 month of reconstituted AHK-Cu rubbed into the scalp alongside minoxidil (and GHK-Cu for skin).

  • I have been doing this for about 4 months with no noticeable improvement. Just added AHKCU about a month ago, but it’s difficult to source

    • 2 points
    NothingTopicalhair loss

    4 months of topical copper peptides with no change; AHK-Cu added for the last month.

  • Been using it morning and night along side micro needling (every 2-3days). Still nothing. So far I am only about 3 weeks in so not expecting much

    • 1 point
    Nothing2% in The Ordinary HA, twice dailyTopicalhair loss

    3 weeks, morning and night, with microneedling every 2-3 days; early.

  • I started noticing very mild shedding about a month into the peptide serum, but it’s ramped up concerningly since then.

    • 4 points
    Negative8% spray (4% GHK-Cu + 4% AHK-Cu)Topicalandrogenetic alopecia

    7 weeks of Neurogan 8% GHK/AHK spray added to long-term finasteride 1 mg and topical minoxidil.

Research notes, not medical advice. Updated .

Sequence

The peptide's chain of amino acids from its start (the N-terminus) to its end, one bead and one letter for each: A alanine, C cysteine, D aspartic acid, E glutamic acid, F phenylalanine, G glycine, H histidine, I isoleucine, K lysine, L leucine, M methionine, N asparagine, P proline, Q glutamine, R arginine, S serine, T threonine, V valine, W tryptophan, Y tyrosine. A modification such as an N-acetyl cap or a C-terminal amide changes how long it lasts in the body. Length tells related peptides apart, from a two-residue dipeptide like carnosine to a 43-residue protein like thymosin beta-4, and predicts neither effect nor safety.

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. Peptides rank by this figure, those with no graded report yet after those with one, and Avoid ones after every other entry.

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 after every peptide with graded reports until its own arrive.

Safety tier

Each peptide is tiered Clean, Caution or Avoid from its five risk axes under the chosen safety bar. An Avoid peptide carries a real risk of harm, a plausible route to serious harm rather than mere unpleasantness, 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 rate a peptide Avoid. 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; taken by mouth or in the nose, a pack avoids the injection risks.

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. 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.

Shop trust

Each shop's trust on a 1–5 scale, read from its testing and its reputation: 1 for serious red flags (fabricated COAs, scam reports, impersonation, a closed shop), 2 for no public testing, a new shop or active complaints such as seized parcels, 3 for its own COAs or a short track record, 4 for verified third-party testing or a strong reputation, and 5 for third-party batch reports that name the shop, with years of good independent reputation. A shop without a score counts third-party batch testing as 4, its own COAs as 3 and no public tests as 2.

Best value

Within a category or a goal, a peptide that no other beats on both counts: none is rated more positively for the same or a lower monthly price, and none costs less for the same or a higher rating. The chart joins these into the best-value line; the cheapest of them and the best-rated of them both make it, so the line spans the trade-off from cheap to best. Avoid entries never count, and a peptide needs both a % positive and a price to be compared.

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.