Peptide Codes Forum

okay so I promised myself I would write this up properly because I have been sitting on like 6 weeks of notes and photos and I keep putting it off because honestly there is a LOT to unpack here and I didn't want to do a half-assed post. so grab a coffee this is going to be long. you're welcome or I'm sorry, depending on your tolerance for my nonsense.

background because context matters: I'm 38, female, noticed significant thinning at my part and temples starting maybe 3 years ago. did all the bloodwork - ferritin was low (fixed that), thyroid fine, androgens slightly elevated but not dramatically so. dermatologist said "female pattern hair loss, here's some minoxidil" and I used it for about a year and genuinely hated it - the shedding phase destroyed me emotionally, and I got scalp irritation that would not quit. so I stopped and started researching alternatives which eventually led me down the peptide rabbit hole which, if you're reading this forum, you already know is a very deep rabbit hole.

I'd read the older literature on GHK-Cu - the Loren Pickart stuff, some of the more recent papers on fibroblast activation and hair follicle cycling, the work suggesting it can prolong anagen phase. I went in with genuinely measured expectations because I've been burned before (BPC-157 did basically nothing for my tendon issue but that's a whole other thread). the mechanism made sense to me - copper peptide promoting ECM remodeling, stimulating stem cells in the follicle bulge region, potentially downregulating DHT locally. on paper it's compelling.

so here's what I actually did.

sourced from two suppliers - I won't name the one I'm abandoning but I will say that RC Peptides and the other one I'm currently using have notably different reconstitution behavior which I'll get to. ordered 50mg vials, reconstituted in bacteriostatic water. my initial protocol was 0.1% solution applied topically to the scalp, twice daily. I made the solution myself by dissolving the powder and diluting into a DMSO/water carrier because I had read that penetration enhancement was important for topical copper peptides and DMSO seemed like the obvious choice.

this is mistake number one. oh god. I was using 20% DMSO which honestly in retrospect was way too aggressive for scalp application. the carrier was fine the first week and a half and then my scalp became visibly irritated, slightly red, and I developed this weird almost burning sensation about 45 minutes after application that would last a couple hours. I kept going because I am stubborn and also because I convinced myself it was just "adjustment." reader, it was not just adjustment. I was essentially creating a mild chemical irritation situation with every application and I did this for THREE WEEKS before I actually sat down and thought critically about what I was doing.

switched to 10% DMSO, irritation mostly resolved within a few days. then dropped to 5% and the slight residual redness cleared completely. currently at 5% and I have zero issues. lesson learned, go slower with the DMSO concentration, which like... I knew this about DMSO in other contexts but somehow convinced myself scalp would be different. it is not different lol.

the other thing I did wrong initially - and this one is more embarrassing - I was not doing consistent photographs. I have maybe four photos from the first month and they were taken in completely different lighting conditions and from different angles so they are basically useless for comparison. I got my act together at week 5 and have been taking standardized photos every two weeks since then: same bathroom, same overhead light (daylight bulb, 5000K), same phone distance, same parting of the hair, same three angles. if you are not doing standardized photos you are wasting your time with tracking, full stop.

okay so what have I actually observed.

weeks 1-4 (the chaos period with bad DMSO): hard to say anything meaningful given the irritation variable. would not include this data.

weeks 5-10: continued with twice daily application, 0.1mg/mL concentration (I recalculated and this is what I ended up at after dilution), 5% DMSO in distilled water, applied directly to scalp after parting hair, massaged in gently for about 2 minutes. no minoxidil, no other active treatments except basic dermarolling once per week (0.5mm). at the week 8 photos I noticed what I thought was either wishful thinking or the beginning of actual change at my right temple - shorter, finer hairs that could be either new growth or broken hairs. I genuinely could not tell and I am someone who tries not to see what she wants to see.

weeks 11-16 (current): I am now fairly confident this is new growth and not breakage. the hairs at the temple are now long enough that the base of them - the root end that was growing in - was clearly fine and tapered which is characteristic of new anagen hairs and not broken hair ends. I have maybe 30-40 of these visible on the right temple, maybe 20-25 on the left. my part line looks legitimately better. I cannot claim with any certainty that this is dramatic or spectacular regrowth - it is not. it is modest and early. but it is something and after years of watching my hair get thinner something is a lot.

I have not done a full shed count but I have noticed subjectively that my shower drain and brush are collecting less hair than they were 4 months ago. I am cautious about this observation because it's highly subjective and I know my perception is motivated.

a few other notes:

I experimented briefly with adding PTD-DBM to the protocol based on some reading about Wnt signaling and hair follicle activation. I dropped this after three weeks because I couldn't isolate the variables and I'm a control freak about this stuff. running clean GHK-Cu only for now and will add other variables later in a deliberate way.

the second supplier - the one I'm currently using - produces a powder that reconstitutes much more cleanly and has that characteristic slight blue-green tinge that GHK-Cu should have. the first supplier's product was essentially clear after reconstitution which concerns me in retrospect. I'm not making accusations about what was in it but I am saying that the color difference is real and matters and if you are buying GHK-Cu and your solution is completely colorless that is worth investigating.

I'm going to continue through week 24 before making any real conclusions. my loose hypothesis going in was that 6 months of consistent use would be the minimum meaningful evaluation window. I'm sticking to that. I'll do another update then.

also yes I've had people ask if I'm concerned about systemic copper levels from topical use. I did check serum copper at baseline and at week 8 - both within normal range. topical absorption of a peptide this size through intact scalp is probably limited but I wanted the data point anyway.

if anyone has questions about the protocol specifics or the dilution math I'm happy to go through it. I actually enjoy that kind of stuff which is probably the most revealing thing I've said in this entire post lol.

quantified_karen_lol wrote:the second supplier - the one I'm currently using - produces a powder that reconstitutes much more cleanly and has that characteristic slight blue-green tinge that GHK-Cu should have. the first supplier's product was essentially clear after reconstitution which concerns me in retrospect.

I've said this in other threads and I'll say it again - the color check is one of the most basic QA steps you can do with GHK-Cu and people still skip it. The copper coordination is literally what gives it the blue-green appearance. Clear solution is a red flag. End of discussion.

Now on the DMSO thing - I'm not going to pile on because you already acknowledged it, but I do want to defend the underlying logic here for anyone else reading this. DMSO on scalp is not inherently wrong. You just have to be careful about a few things:

- Start at 5% or lower for scalp applications, period
- The scalp is vascular and has a lot of surface area relative to what you're treating
- Follicular penetration pathways on scalp are actually pretty efficient WITHOUT aggressive carriers
- Higher DMSO concentrations increase transdermal delivery of everything - including anything you don't want driven in

Your 5% landing spot is probably close to optimal honestly. Enough to assist penetration, not enough to cause irritation that disrupts the protocol and adds noise to your results.

The photo protocol you settled on at week 5 is exactly right. 5000K daylight bulb, consistent angle, consistent parting. I've told people this a hundred times. Before and after photos taken in different lighting are essentially useless. The number of guys who come here saying their hairline "improved" based on two photos taken in different rooms with different lighting... it's maddening.

One thing I'd add for your remaining weeks - consider also tracking at a specific post-shed window. Meaning note where you are in your cycle if you track that, because natural shedding cycles can affect your counts and make week 22 look worse than week 16 for reasons completely unrelated to the peptide.

Your approach here is solid. Better methodology than 90% of what gets posted on these forums. Keep the variables locked down through week 24 before you start stacking anything else.

quantified_karen_lol wrote:I'm now fairly confident this is new growth and not breakage. the hairs at the temple are now long enough that the base of them - the root end that was growing in - was clearly fine and tapered which is characteristic of new anagen hairs and not broken hair ends.

OKAY I have been lurking this thread since you posted and I cannot hold it in anymore I have to reply because this is genuinely one of the most well-documented self-experiments I have seen on this forum in a long time and I have been here for a while lol.

First - the tapered anagen hair observation is exactly the thing people miss when they're trying to figure out new growth vs breakage. Broken hairs have blunt or ragged ends. New anagen hairs are fine and tapered at the base almost like a little paintbrush tip. The fact that you knew to look for that tells me you've done your homework and aren't just hoping your way through this protocol. That distinction matters so much and I feel like it doesn't get talked about enough.

T_Ortega_Lifts wrote:The photo protocol you settled on at week 5 is exactly right. 5000K daylight bulb, consistent angle, consistent parting. I've told people this a hundred times. Before and after photos taken in different lighting are essentially useless.

T_Ortega is completely right here and I want to pile on to this point because I made the exact same photography mistake when I was doing my own peptide tracking and I could have cried when I realized how much of my early documentation was basically worthless. I now have a literal checklist on my bathroom mirror. It sounds obsessive but it is the only way. I think it was actually Andrew Huberman who talked about this in the context of tracking any behavioral or physiological intervention - you have to control the measurement conditions or you're just generating noise. Not a direct hair loss reference but the principle is identical.

The DMSO thing - I really appreciate that you shared that mistake because honestly the number of people who go straight to high concentrations thinking more = better penetration = better results is so common and the scalp is just not like the forearm or the back of the hand. The follicular density actually helps with penetration inherently, like T_Ortega said, so you're already getting a somewhat preferential uptake pathway without needing to be aggressive about it. I've seen some of the older GHK-Cu topical literature suggest that even just a basic propylene glycol carrier can be sufficient for meaningful scalp absorption. The DMSO adds something but you have to find that sweet spot where you're helping not irritating.

Also the color point from the reconstitution - this is so important and I'm glad both of you flagged it. I learned this lesson with a different peptide purchase actually and it sent me down a whole rabbit hole about copper coordination chemistry which was honestly fascinating. The blue-green color in GHK-Cu comes from the actual copper ion being chelated properly within the peptide structure. If that coordination hasn't happened correctly or if what you have is something other than the actual copper peptide, you're not going to get that color. Clear solution should absolutely prompt you to question the source.

One thing I want to add that nobody has mentioned yet - have you considered adding any red light or PBMT to the scalp alongside this? I know you said you want to keep variables clean through week 24 which I totally respect as a methodology decision, but for your post-week-24 stacking phase it might be worth looking at. The Joovv and similar devices have some genuinely interesting data on hair follicle stimulation and the proposed mechanism - mitochondrial activation via cytochrome c oxidase - is actually potentially complementary to what GHK-Cu is doing at the ECM and stem cell level. Ben Greenfield has talked about this combo in a couple places. The idea being that you're addressing the energy supply side and the signaling/structural side simultaneously. Just something to put in the hopper for phase two.

Your copper serum testing at week 8 is exactly the kind of responsible thing that more people should be doing and don't. Even topical, even with a large peptide, even with intact skin - checking baseline and periodic levels is just good practice and it gives you data that can reassure you AND is useful for the community.

Week 24 update is going to be required reading. Please don't make us wait as long as you made us wait for this one

okay wow this thread is genuinely making me feel so much better about my own situation because I've been considering GHK-Cu for my scalp for like two months now and I keep talking myself out of it because I don't know what I'm doing lol

quantified_karen_lol wrote:the second supplier - the one I'm currently using - produces a powder that reconstitutes much more cleanly and has that characteristic slight blue-green tinge that GHK-Cu should have. the first supplier's product was essentially clear after reconstitution

okay so this is actually huge for me because I didn't know about the color thing at all and I almost ordered from a supplier that had like zero information about what their product should look like when reconstituted. definitely going to use that as one of my criteria now. not sure if this is dumb but should the blue-green be noticeable at even low concentrations or is it more obvious at higher concentrations? I feel like that's a relevant question but I might be overthinking it.

biohack_bella_87 wrote:Broken hairs have blunt or ragged ends. New anagen hairs are fine and tapered at the base almost like a little paintbrush tip.

I never knew this and I feel like this is the kind of thing I would have spent months confusing myself about without someone spelling it out. so thank you for that honestly.

I also really appreciate that quantified_karen shared the DMSO mistake because I was absolutely going to go in too aggressive with the concentration. I had read somewhere that higher was better for penetration and I just kind of accepted that without questioning it. I'm glad I read this before I started and not after three weeks of irritating my scalp like you described.

the photo protocol stuff is also going on my notes. I would 100% have taken a before photo in my bedroom with bad lighting and then a month later taken one in the bathroom and thought it meant something.

not sure if this is dumb but is 0.5mm dermarolling once a week considered pretty standard alongside a protocol like this or is that on the more aggressive end? I've seen people mention dermarolling for scalp but the frequency seems to vary a lot and I don't want to overdo it before I even understand what I'm doing