Anyone use MK 677 in a cut?
- Thread starter JoePaul39
- Start date
mawalega
Member
I was going to add it in but didn't seem like a good fit for me at least. Increases cortisol, bloats, lowers insulin sensitivity overtime and makes you hungry.
Rip also found an interesting study of fat gain vs placebo.
Invalid Link Removed
average increase in limb fat in the MK-677 group (1.1 kg) was greater than with placebo (0.24 kg)
Rip also found an interesting study of fat gain vs placebo.
Invalid Link Removed
average increase in limb fat in the MK-677 group (1.1 kg) was greater than with placebo (0.24 kg)
JoePaul39
Well-known member
After reading the study I don’t think that study participants were in a calorie deficit we’re they? Also, weren’t they all elderly?
mawalega
Member
"Participants were asked to maintain their typical diet "
They're all over 60's but better candidates for supplementation imo since gh decreases with time and they'd be better tells.
An increase in appetite was reported in 8/22 (36%) subjects on placebo vs. 29/43 (67%) on MK-677 (P=0.02); in 50% of subjects on MK-677, appetite returned to normal within 3 months and more gradually in others.
Eating more or maybe insulin desensitization caused weight gain? But got to factor in its a 2 year study and most say the hunger goes away after a few weeks. Either way if more calories out than in you'll lose weight, but seemed to me like mk in a cut is somewhat counter productive. Not telling you not to, as I know some do, just didn't seem like a fit for me.
They're all over 60's but better candidates for supplementation imo since gh decreases with time and they'd be better tells.
An increase in appetite was reported in 8/22 (36%) subjects on placebo vs. 29/43 (67%) on MK-677 (P=0.02); in 50% of subjects on MK-677, appetite returned to normal within 3 months and more gradually in others.
Eating more or maybe insulin desensitization caused weight gain? But got to factor in its a 2 year study and most say the hunger goes away after a few weeks. Either way if more calories out than in you'll lose weight, but seemed to me like mk in a cut is somewhat counter productive. Not telling you not to, as I know some do, just didn't seem like a fit for me.
Last edited:
Rockslide
Member
same. I think I have tried like 2 or 3 times now and failed. Also gives me calve/shin pumps making it hard to run more than a mile (and I typically run 10-15 a week) which affects cardio
JoePaul39
Well-known member
I am gonna give it a try. I am hoping the hunger pains won’t be too much. If I find myself binging while on it will probably just put it on the shelf and run it when I am bulking on a Superdrol cycle next year lol.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
If you can control your appetite now you should be ok. While not ideal it is dooable. If you struggle to control appetite on a good day and even struggle when using stims then it might not be the best choice. Make sure you have something you can binge on without blowing your diet if you do break. I used egg whites, keto fiber toast and carrot sticks. No matter how much you mess up with those it is not the end of the world lol.
If you have chips and cookies and ice cream and pizza laying around and you struggle with appetite and then take MK then it will be a disaster at some point. lol
If you have chips and cookies and ice cream and pizza laying around and you struggle with appetite and then take MK then it will be a disaster at some point. lol
JoePaul39
Well-known member
The study I cited pertained to younger individuals age 24 to 39 in a calorie deficit for a short period of 2 weeks (I am only going to be cutting and in a calorie deficit for 12 weeks and I am 42 years of age). The study you cited on the other hand was for very elderly people age 60 to 81 pertained to a VERY long period of 2 years (compared to my 12 week cut)
who were not in a cut, but rather eating their regular diet too, so which study do we conclude is more analogous to my situation ?? HINT- Not much brain activity is taken to reach the correct logical conclusion.
mawalega
Member
Lol ok. Higher cortisol and hunger doesn't seem like a good fit for a cut imo. We just have different definitions of how to cut. Take care, logically.
JoePaul39
Well-known member
Comparing the people you cited as old af (as high as 80 years old) over 2 fukin years of eating their REGULAR dieT who are also NOT dieting to a man who is age 42 over a 12 week period who is in a caloric deficit, rather than using the much more similar study I cited that was over just a 2 week period with men in their 20s to 30s in a caloric deficit is much further removed from the facts to my actual situation , is it not?? Let me break it down simple for you. Age 80 or 30, which number is closer in comparison to age 42? A 2 week period compared to a 2 year period which is closer in time frame to a cutting period of 12 weeks?? As concerning your comment of, “higher cortisol doesn’t seem like a good fit” to a cut the study I cited in the short term explicitly stated, “NEITHER the serum CORTISOL nor the PRL response was significantly greater after 7 days of MK-677 dosing compared with 7 days of placebo” so what the f are you talking about the negative impact of cutting of “higher cortisol from cutting SHORT TERM on MK 677? Finally, please explain why you feel extrapolating the results of 80 year old men near death age in a study NOT regarding men on a diet over a LONG 2 year period is more reasonable to extrapolate and compare to a man near 40 in a caloric deficit for only a 12 week period ?? Also, your study said NOTHING and factored in NOTHING in regards to total protein nitrogen retention impact when in a caloric deficit, is this not an important measurement to factor in for a cutting cycle to a bodybuilder looking to retain lean mass buddy?
Last edited:
Whisky
Well-known member
MK for cutting is a no IMO. It doesn’t actually seem to do anything for fat loss (this is my personal experience but Mike Arnold has spoken about it a number of times recently on BFR, in fact in the latest episode it comes up and he said that he would use it in a bulk sometimes to drive hunger but that’s it).
The main issue is that people see ‘increased GH/IGF’ and assume that increased GH will do the same thing whether it’s from a ghrelin mimetic or hgh. Sadly they don’t. Just different compounds.
I personally get great recovery benefits from mk and I’ve used it in a cut before but not to aid the cut, just for the recovery at the start and then I dropped it midway and switched to tesamorelin for actual fat loss.
having read more on it recently I’d probably always cut with either tesamorelin or gh in the future.
The main issue is that people see ‘increased GH/IGF’ and assume that increased GH will do the same thing whether it’s from a ghrelin mimetic or hgh. Sadly they don’t. Just different compounds.
I personally get great recovery benefits from mk and I’ve used it in a cut before but not to aid the cut, just for the recovery at the start and then I dropped it midway and switched to tesamorelin for actual fat loss.
having read more on it recently I’d probably always cut with either tesamorelin or gh in the future.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
I have to politely disagree to a point. The GH being released from one's pituitary, whether from ghrp, mk or any ghrelin mimetic, is the same. It is not like the pituitary has different GH it releases when one compound binds to the ghrelin receptor vs another vs natural release.
MK is hard, not impossible, to cut on. The increase in cortisol and prolactin coupled with never ending hunger and water retention is why it gets a bad rep. IF IF IF one can run it while controlling food intake and then wait two weeks after stopping to honestly assess one's results it can be used IMO.
Now maybe I am wrong but I am unaware of any science showing why the GH released on MK will not have the same lipolytic action as any other gh release.
Overall do I think most people can use MK successfully on a cut? HELL NO. Most people cannot successfully cut without including a compound that increases hunger and water retention lol.
If I had my pick I would use the following in this order:
1. Actual GH
2. Ipam/CJC
3. GHRP/CJC
4. MK/CJC
JoePaul39
Well-known member
I know the hunger pains are going to be the biggest obstacle. I am going to rotate every other day between eating below maintenance and days of eating at maintenance in hopes that this will make a psychological difference knowing I will only have to survive in a deficit for a 24 hour period at a time, rather than 12 weeks straight. Will be drinking plenty of water and consuming tons of fiber as well.
Whisky
Well-known member
tbh bro I used to think the same but smarter people than me are saying there’s a difference (I definitely not smart enough to fully understand it).
BFR Mike Arnold QnA episode 45 (most recent one). 11min 45s - listen to that. I respect Mike’s views on these things and Alex is well educated on gh. They discuss this in response to a question on using mk in a cut.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
I just listened and he basically said the same thing I did. The GH released is the same but the other attributes of the drug make it less than ideal. I personally do not feel the prolactin, cortisol and hunger completely cancel out the lipolytic action/results of the gh being released. That being said MOST PEOPLE will not be able to use MK during a cut as most people already fail without adding additional challenges to a cutting cycle.
I do agree with what they state: GH will be FAR SUPERIOR to MK on a cut.
I tend to be very nitpicky and would never say it is impossible to use MK on a cut but I do agree it is FAR from ideal for almost everyone, lol.
Whisky
Well-known member
oh I wouldn’t disagree at all that you can cut on it, it’s just not ideal. I have cut on it before.
I haven’t got the time to find it but I’m sure they’ve dived into some of the detail around what those ‘opposing fat loss actions’ are (and increased hunger was only on of them) in a different podcast.
apologies as I hate making a point without backing it up so obviously I could be wrong but I was sure they was some other actions of mk which prevented the fat loss occurring at the same rate as we would with hgh.
regardless, we are both on the same page re gh would be better than MK on a cut
BCseacow83
Well-known member
I think the fact that it is 24/7 in it's action hurts on a cut as well. With synthetic you take your shot, go do your cardio and a number of hours later you are back to somewhat baseline. Having 24 hour a day GH elevation is far worse for insulin sensitivity vs 6-8 hours of exposure. Couple that with cortisol and prolactin and it can turn into a metabolic **** show real quick.
I think then we are actually in agreement, 99% of people should stay the F away during a cut. If one cannot source or does not want to Ipam/CJC no dac would be an ok alternative as there is no cortisol/proactin/hunger issues with those compounds.
I think then we are actually in agreement, 99% of people should stay the F away during a cut. If one cannot source or does not want to Ipam/CJC no dac would be an ok alternative as there is no cortisol/proactin/hunger issues with those compounds.
CroLifter
Well-known member
I am a sort of a fan of mk677 as it is cheap and convenient, here are my remarks.
A) It does boost hunger, especially sugar cravings, but i never ever had problems in a sense that i was gaining fat on mk, quite the opposite
B) To add onto A, i start to notice fat loss as early as 2 weeks after i start using. Also i do not bloat from it at all, if anything i get veinier
C) Significant increase in muscle glycogen and pumps while working out, brings back the memories of my teenage years
D) it does boost prolactin, in my case enough to completely disable my libido (but my libido is extremely weak anyway, so it may not for everyone)
E) I would use sth like ashwagandha if you think increase in cortisol may be an issue, however in my experience mk leads to fat loss, not fat gain
F) it does fuk with your insulin sensitivity and it increases fasting blood glucose, i would strongly advise cycling it
A) It does boost hunger, especially sugar cravings, but i never ever had problems in a sense that i was gaining fat on mk, quite the opposite
B) To add onto A, i start to notice fat loss as early as 2 weeks after i start using. Also i do not bloat from it at all, if anything i get veinier
C) Significant increase in muscle glycogen and pumps while working out, brings back the memories of my teenage years
D) it does boost prolactin, in my case enough to completely disable my libido (but my libido is extremely weak anyway, so it may not for everyone)
E) I would use sth like ashwagandha if you think increase in cortisol may be an issue, however in my experience mk leads to fat loss, not fat gain
F) it does fuk with your insulin sensitivity and it increases fasting blood glucose, i would strongly advise cycling it
Nac
Well-known member
Would you be running any anabolics during the cut? They will be the main anti-catabolics, depending on how aggressive your deficit is.
I thought you were already cutting? Or had been for awhile?
JoePaul39
Well-known member
No anabolics except my 160 mg a week trt test. Just finished a cycle a couple of weeks ago and yes it was also a cut. I’m trying to get down to 13 percent body fat as a long term goal of mine. I normally only cut on anabolics to prevent muscle loss since I am 42. Was hoping MK might be something I can run between cycles that might at least help a bit in that regard.
JoePaul39
Well-known member
Also gonna rotate and eat at a deficit only every other day because my cycle was a long 12 week cut so doing it this way will give me more of a psychological advantage to enable me your o continue cutting without having to completely sacrifice calories every day which has gotten old for me.
Nac
Well-known member
Ah ok, you did say that earlier.
So if Im following, youll do say 3 days of the week in deficit, 4 days maintainence? What will your weekly average deficit come out to?
BCseacow83
Well-known member
OP have you ever been lean before? This is not a knock but if you struggle to get below 13% as is I would advise against MK. The reason I say this is due to everything we have discussed in this thread. Someone who has to fight to get below 13% will most likely only increase the difficulty of doing so with MK.
Jinsun
Well-known member
Haha get of your high horse bro. Also, you are just wrong. Giving an appetite stimulant to a populi that isn't used to controlling their caloric intake and isn't used at monitoring their bodily functions (like appetite) is surely going to make them eat a lot more. I gave my ex gf Mk and she "didn't notice anything much" just gained a couple of pounds lol. And when she went off of it she kinda noticed she eats less and isn't hungry as much. @JoePaul39 worded his thoughts nicely.
Jinsun
Well-known member
Depends on how much GH you pin bro. If you pin 2 iu in am and then 2 iu in PM your GH levels will be elevated through the whole day. And insulin sensitivity is a big issue on 4 IU's of rGH. Much more so then on Mk. And 4 IU is somewhat of a standard dose.
Last edited:
Jinsun
Well-known member
Ya'll should consider this, especially @JoePaul39 : Mk can't compare to synthetic GH because Mk works off of what your natural capacities of producing GH are. At 40 y/o your IGF1 is probably around 120, Mk can't elevate it more then 45 - 50%. This means your IGF will be elevated to a meagerly 180 max. That really isn't anything but your hunger effects will be just as high as young @CroLifter s hunger sides but his IGF1 gets elevated to 400 with Mk.
In comparison, synthetic rGH at 4 IU will elevate your IGF1 to 400, no matter what your age is. And IGF1 is inversely correlated to GH off course. It's hard measuring GH pulses, but you can safely judge the height your GH is elevated to by measuring your IGF.
So point being, I wouldn't use Mk for cutting purposes if older then, idk ..., let's say 35 ... I would definitely look at cjcdac or rGH. Or even hexarelin/ipamorelin for fasted cardio.
In comparison, synthetic rGH at 4 IU will elevate your IGF1 to 400, no matter what your age is. And IGF1 is inversely correlated to GH off course. It's hard measuring GH pulses, but you can safely judge the height your GH is elevated to by measuring your IGF.
So point being, I wouldn't use Mk for cutting purposes if older then, idk ..., let's say 35 ... I would definitely look at cjcdac or rGH. Or even hexarelin/ipamorelin for fasted cardio.
JoePaul39
Well-known member
I was near 30 percent body fat when I began cutting and have gotten down to about 17 percent. I will meet my goals. Never been 13 percent because i never set the goal and tried. Like I said, if I can’t control the hunger pains I will just abandon using it so really no harm no foul.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
Sounds good. I know I have been arguing the point that MK CAN BE used during a cut but I don't think it is a great option for most. I will be honest I am dropping it now myself. I love the fullness and pumps and I can control the hunger but it gets old having to fight appetite all day everyday when I already have a "healthy" appetite anyways. Good luck and keep it up you will reach your goals.
As to some of the numbers being thrown around in this thread, i have labs with IGF-1 at 316 and 322 on 12.5mg/day of MK at the age of 33. Yes rHGH will always be able to outperform as there is no limit to dosing beyond finances/risk tolerance and side effect tolerance but to say that MK cannot significantly raise IGF-1 is wrong.
Jinsun
Well-known member
If this is a response to my writing; maybe you should have taken 5 more minutes to think and read a bit more thoroughly. But let me spare you the tedious task of actually using your head for a change: you have high baseline IGF1 brah. Mk has been shown in studies (proper studies) that it has a limit to how much it can elevate IGF1. This is expressed in percents in relation to baseline IGF1 readings. And baseline means; IGF1 levels of subjects (you know, the ones that were participating in the studies), prior to administration of Mk. This has been shown to be around 50% at the dosage of 25mg. Beyond that it's highly diminishing returns. And it's not that much lower at 15mg, a few percents.
And let me paint this even more clear. Your baseline IGF must be around 220 - 240. Which is high for your age; you are lucky. At the age of 32 I took 25mg Mk. My baseline was 170 and after Mk it was 240. So if OP does a baseline test and finds out his IGF1 is at 100 - 150, then I say screw MK for the purpose of fat loss and get some ipa or hex or rGH, which isn't that expensive to begin with (app 150€ for 100iu is the current norm).
BCseacow83
Well-known member
You know it is possible to have a debate discussion without being a complete condescending jerk brah. It is attitudes like yours that have slowly been killing off forums. I feel sorry for you oh wise one. Have a great day.
Hyde
Legend
Can you use it? Sure. But will it help more than it will hinder?
I would say elevated cortisol, hunger & decreased insulin sensitivity are bigger enemies to losing bodyfat for me than protecting a few lbs of muscle that can be rebuilt easier later when leaner and with a better starting insulin sensitivity.
A lot of good points have already been expressed here. I mean if you have a bunch and you just wanna try it and see what happens, go for it. But I would never buy Mk677 specifically for a cut or advise it - the variable water I hold on it alone makes it harder to see what is really going on day to day.
I like Mk in a bulk in the month prior to using an oral. It adds some size and leverage for heavier lifting, then the oral afterwards increases insulin sensitivity for renewed growth potential and picks up the waterweight I lost from MK. More size over a longer period working different growth pathways.
I would say elevated cortisol, hunger & decreased insulin sensitivity are bigger enemies to losing bodyfat for me than protecting a few lbs of muscle that can be rebuilt easier later when leaner and with a better starting insulin sensitivity.
A lot of good points have already been expressed here. I mean if you have a bunch and you just wanna try it and see what happens, go for it. But I would never buy Mk677 specifically for a cut or advise it - the variable water I hold on it alone makes it harder to see what is really going on day to day.
I like Mk in a bulk in the month prior to using an oral. It adds some size and leverage for heavier lifting, then the oral afterwards increases insulin sensitivity for renewed growth potential and picks up the waterweight I lost from MK. More size over a longer period working different growth pathways.
JoePaul39
Well-known member
Do you know what you IGF-1 was before MK?
BCseacow83
Well-known member
Unfortunately, those numbers are in my old yahoo email that I can no longer access. I was never out of range prior to use. I also was only using 12.5. This thread has some good numbers in it: Invalid Link Removed
If access and finances allowed I would of course use rhgh but that is simply not the situation I am in. I agree MK is a MUCH BETTER bulking compound vs cutting.
CroLifter
Well-known member
Exactly. No way my igf is elevated only to 1-1.5 iu of gh equivalent. I would personally say more like 3 iu for sure. The difference in pumps and fullness is pretty massive.
To me its about as equivalent as going from natty to 250mg test e a week, using mk677 as far as pumps and fullness goes.
and i aint trying to lie to anyone, i for sure notice fat loss from it. @Alchemist11 and I used mk from the same source and it was good stuff, too bad its gone for good.
But whenever i use it, after a high simple sugar meal, like post workout especially (tbh only time it happens is post workout and after a carb protein shake, but only when using mk) i can get hypoglycemic and start sweating as if i pinned some insulin, i ended up on the floor a few times even. I am definitely over reacting to that stuff as it does a number on my blood sugar spikes obviously.
Also, this is pure broscience, but i seem to suffer more form this crashes when only using mk. When on aas also, especially when i was using tren ace, those crashes didnt seem so intense. Idk, perhaps tren helps control blood sugar to an extent. Aas in theory should, and tren is especially powerful at nutrient partitioning.
Last edited:
Jinsun
Well-known member
Yup, you're young, your baseline igf1 is high. But no way is your igf raised by 3 IU : D If you added 3 IU on top of your natural GH production, you would be at app 5 IU haha and your IGF would be much higher. You must understand that the 400 IGF result you get from 4 IU's of growth is bc your natural production of GH get's shut down. If your natural production would stay up, your IGF would be 400 + your natural IGF = app 600 ... So no, Mk is raising your IGF1 by a max off 50% as has been studied and this can not be nowhere near 3IU. If you were a 10 y/o kid, with levels around 500, then the Mk's IGF elevation would be equivalent to 2 - 3IU.
Yes, all anabolics are nutrient partitioners. GDA's basically, so when on cycle, especially when on DHT's or tren like you mentioned, your blood sugar will be better.
Jinsun
Well-known member
For sure, I got pissed off, sorry if I offended you little girl. I hope daddy buys you an ice cream.
Joking aside, I agree, but I also hate it when I (or somebody else) take the time and actually write something productive - and very much true - and then somebody only skimps through the posts and actually arrogantly negates them (which is also disrespectful). This is just as destructive and that happens so many times here I don't care to explain (and I am not exempt from this). And this is, as you say, hampering the forums, where as a little hostility, but still with properly helpful and exact content, doesn't do much damage. That only insulted your fragile ego, where as your post actually contributed false information and that is more "destructive". And you were so insulted that you couldn't even acknowledge you are wrong (or continue the discussion in a factually productive manner), which is also more inclined with the behavior of the little girl, that I apologized to in my first paragraph, then the grown up man I am supposed to be talking to right now.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
You win, and in such a classy fashion.
JoePaul39
Well-known member
Well this thread has just turned into all our arguing. Anyway, took MK yesterday for the first time and can already tell half way through today what you all have been telling me, probably not good for a cut. The hunger increase is very high so I not going to continue. Also the negative impact on insulin sensitivity is concerning even though I am not diabetic because on fasting blood glucose tests my blood sugar always tips almost to the too high point, thus it would be foolish to risk pushing myself toward the diabetic side just to run MK.
I am just going to cut on my 160 mg trt cruise test dose. Like @Hyde said though MK 677 might help preserve muscle on a cut the negatives like insulin sensitivity, increased hunger, and increased water retention probably outweigh the positives and any muscle lost on the cut can be easily regained through muscle memory (not to mention when I cycle for mass). Will probably be selling my MK 677 (less the one tab I took) in the supplement auction classified section of the forum for half price retail for anyone interested. It is tabs from board sponsor Pure Rawz.
I am just going to cut on my 160 mg trt cruise test dose. Like @Hyde said though MK 677 might help preserve muscle on a cut the negatives like insulin sensitivity, increased hunger, and increased water retention probably outweigh the positives and any muscle lost on the cut can be easily regained through muscle memory (not to mention when I cycle for mass). Will probably be selling my MK 677 (less the one tab I took) in the supplement auction classified section of the forum for half price retail for anyone interested. It is tabs from board sponsor Pure Rawz.
mawalega
Member
"Either way if more calories out than in you'll lose weight, but seemed to me like mk in a cut is somewhat counter productive. Not telling you not to, as I know some do, just didn't seem like a fit for me."
Not trying to prove anything as right or wrong at all, just pointing out some irony.
CroLifter
Well-known member
In all practicality using mk677 i got igf1 lvls at least as high as if i had used 3 iu of pharma gh at a fraction of the cost
thats all i wanted to say
And with aas in the mix especially tren i dont think little cortisol rise would have any detrimental effects.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
Any thoughts on bumping the test a little? A higher amount, even 250-300 would make a big difference during a cut.
JoePaul39
Well-known member
No, I have trt bloods coming up.
Side note on the MK 677, i don’t know if it was placebo, but it seemed to increase anxiety for me which I am prone to with just one dose. I did read a study in rats where it was shown to increase fear in rats so I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the MK that did that too.