ResearchSafe

GHRP-2 hunger vs GHRP-6 hunger, is one actually worse than the other in practice?

Posted by fasted_scientist in GH & Growth Peptides - 1 points, 2 comments.

Right so I keep going back and forth on this and figured I'd ask people who've actually tried both. I ran GHRP-6 a while back and the hunger was genuinely ridiculous, like 20 minutes after pinning I'd be raiding the cupboard for anything that wasn't nailed down. Worked great for bulking, not so great when I was trying to hold a deficit.

I've been thinking about swapping to GHRP-2 for the next block partly because people say the appetite hit is softer, and partly because the GH release from what I've read is supposed to be a bit stronger. But ngl I'm sceptical because both hit the same ghrelin receptor, so how much softer can it actually be?

For anyone who used them back to back, was the hunger difference meaningful to you or is it one of those things that sounds good in theory but you'll still be staring at the fridge either way? And did you notice any difference in sleep or recovery between the two, or did it basically feel the same once you got past the eating?

Comments

  • weekendnate: Honestly they both kicked the hunger in for me, but GHRP-2 was noticeably softer than GHRP-6, more like "I should probably eat" than "I will eat the drywall if I don't". Not gone though, anyone telling you it's appetite neutral is selling something. On the receptor question, ghrelin receptor is ghrelin receptor, but the downstream ghrelin signaling isn't identical between the two. GHRP-6 has more affinity at the appetite side, GHRP-2 leans more toward the GH pulse. That's at least what the rece
  • gina636: Yeah that tracks with what I remember reading too, the binding studies do show GHRP-6 pulling harder on the appetite side. Do you remember if you got any water retention with either, or was that a non issue for you?

Community discussion - research and educational context only. Not medical advice.