MK-677

Has anyone heard about the need to:

"Dissolve in water first... It contains benzyl chloroformate which is highly toxic"

in reference to raw mk-677?

This information was pulled from a comment on the ppl website. There appear to be a couple of people in the source thread that have heard similar anecdotes before, but ppl himself has not.
 
Pulled from Wikipedia:

"Benzyl chloroformate is the ester of chloroformic acid. It is also known as benzyl chlorocarbonate and is an oily liquid whose color is anywhere from yellow to colorless. It is also known for its pungent odor. When heated, benzyl chloroformate decomposes into phosgene and if it comes in contact with water it produces toxic, corrosive fumes."

Sounds nasty. i guess if you have to "wash" the MK, might want to wear a mask.
 
Has anyone heard about the need to:

"Dissolve in water first... It contains benzyl chloroformate which is highly toxic"

in reference to raw mk-677?

This information was pulled from a comment on the ppl website. There appear to be a couple of people in the source thread that have heard similar anecdotes before, but ppl himself has not.

Pulled from Wikipedia:

"Benzyl chloroformate is the ester of chloroformic acid. It is also known as benzyl chlorocarbonate and is an oily liquid whose color is anywhere from yellow to colorless. It is also known for its pungent odor. When heated, benzyl chloroformate decomposes into phosgene and if it comes in contact with water it produces toxic, corrosive fumes."

Sounds nasty. i guess if you have to "wash" the MK, might want to wear a mask.
@purplepandalabs
 
After discussing further in the ppl thread I do not think this is an issue (when ordered from ppl). If you check the purity test included on his site, it does not appear to have the impurity.
 
Should MK raise igf levels the same as a couple units of HGH?
And if one were to get bloodwork done, what kind of timing is ideal between dose and draw? Does it even matter?
 
I ran this for about 12 months back in 2013-14. Had solid gains, a lot of water weight with it though. Side effects basically went away after a few months (or else I just didn't notice them as much). Great pumps in the gym, significantly increased appetite, and some slight strength increase. Had bloodwork done and it showed an increase in igf. I've never used hgh so I'm not sure how it compares. I had a great log on elite fitness but those fucking losers (Dylan g, stevesmi rick rock and hurricane) deleted the entire thing because I got it from a board sponsor they didn't like.
 
Last edited:
Should MK raise igf levels the same as a couple units of HGH?
And if one were to get bloodwork done, what kind of timing is ideal between dose and draw? Does it even matter?

Honestly, and dont believe what other people tell you because if they dont agree with me then they are making profits of their statements somehow, Mk677 is never ever as strong as real pharmaceutical gh from a legit source. No matter what people tell you, its not. There is no way you can compare mk to real gh. No Way!
But still i am a huge fan of mk677 and i like it alot but its never as potent as real gh if taken correctly. Not even close.
If you want to get bloods done take mk677 on an empty stomach and draw your bloods 3 hours later. Get your igf1 and gh levles and while your at it check your prolactin too.
 
Well low dosed gh of combined with real doses Cjc w/dac.

It is better for bulking though unless you are running high doses gh.
 
Should MK raise igf levels the same as a couple units of HGH?
And if one were to get bloodwork done, what kind of timing is ideal between dose and draw? Does it even matter?

According to a pubmed study posted earlier in this thread mk677, at 25mg daily people averaged a 60% increase in igf-1 after 6 weeks and 72% after 12 months.
 
Has anyone continued testing with GH and IGF-1? Curious to see if we have any results on a low GH dose + IGF-1 to supplement.
 
An update from me, made my MK6 into liquid 50/50 glycerine, 96% ethanol. Liquid is of yellow color, no particles floating around at 17.5mg/ml. Few more days on my cut and actually I found a lab which can do IGF-1 test for me so I can have the baseline
 
With any study I always ask where was it done, what country? and who paid for it? Also this was done on unhealthy individuals and diet of the subjects wasn't even mentioned. Neither was it done under any physical stress or exercise. I say as interesting as the study is its totally useless and inconclusive to anything we are trying to do here as far as athletics. Healthy obese males? are you kidding me lol. Removing sugar from their diets would give a more drastic change lol I find what members on the board say about a compound to be more reliable then a study like this. But thanks for posting

These are all legitimate questions BUT one in particular strike a chord IME

Who paid for the studies? And did the researchers disclose whether they had either a direct or indirect relationship with the manufactures?
 
These are all legitimate questions BUT one in particular strike a chord IME

Who paid for the studies? And did the researchers disclose whether they had either a direct or indirect relationship with the manufactures?
The answers are never clear and even when they supposedly are, I'm highly suspicious still
 
I'd like to see more data, if you have it... I.e. bloods while on 2-3ius, natty bloods and bloods on MK-677. By the way, I'm not doubting you, I'm genuinely interested.

Agreed, bc a large portion of MK studies involve bony or collagenous metabolic markers, IGF specific data becomes much more important.

What do I mean exactly, well bc the more impressive P values involve collagenous or bony precursors, substrates or metabolites, IGF changes must be investigated IN DETAIL to determine IF the results are beneficial for BB or those interested in this drug as a PED.

Such data is important be like most, if not all, GH secretagogues there's one huge problem -SOMATOSTATIN !

And somatostatin thru negative feedback limits secretagogue mediated IGF rise, particularly those with a functional GH/IGF axis.

Consequently MK-677 may prove useful as an adjunct to other PEDs, especially in those with "low end" IGF levels or folk with a dysfunctional GH/IGF axis, but based on the data Ive reviewed from several citations it's utility as a legitimate PED remains limited IMO!
 
Last edited:
So far I was intrigued enough to order 200 tabs. All three studies seem to be pretty consistent with one another.

I have seen some blood work from few and it seems to be working by raising IGF-1 significantly.

mands

Agreed but the "responder" citations seem more limited to those with a "low end" IGF levels such as the elderly or kiddo's with growth retardation.

In fact the "normal adult" study is entirely consistent with the limitations observed in other secretagogue studies "a 40% rise in IGF-1"

While a 40% rise is certainly statistically significant the authors conclusions are less impressive when interpreted on more objective or clinical perspective; such as an increase in IGF-1 from 100ng/ml to 140ng/ml.

To that end I'll pull and review the entire study bc I'm curious about the upper end IGF-1 median and the degree of variance bt study subjects.


Best
JIM
 
Last edited:
Back
Top