VipRoids
Active member
Everyone quotes the same talking point about this compound, that it is dramatically more potent than BDNF at promoting dendritic spine growth and neuronal connectivity. That finding came out of university research on an angiotensin IV analog, originally explored for memory impairment in Alzheimer models. It sounds like a miracle in a vial.
Now here is the sentence the sales threads never paste. The same hepatocyte growth factor and c-MET signaling that makes it so powerful at forming new connections is a pathway deeply implicated in tumor growth, invasion and metastasis across multiple cancer types. Growth and connection are not selective about what tissue they accelerate. A synaptogenic compound that turbocharges a pathway cancers exploit is not automatically carcinogenic, that is not what I am claiming, but it means nobody on earth knows the risk profile of chronic recreational use. There are no human trials. There are no long term animal carcinogenicity studies in the public record. The people selling it have no idea either.
Yet I watch it get recommended casually in stacks alongside caffeine-tier commentary. So let me ask the veterans here the question the market avoids. Would you run a compound with this kind of unknown attached to it daily, weekly, or not at all. And if you already have, does knowing the pathway involved change anything retroactively, or do we all just decide the paper risk is somebody else's risk.
Now here is the sentence the sales threads never paste. The same hepatocyte growth factor and c-MET signaling that makes it so powerful at forming new connections is a pathway deeply implicated in tumor growth, invasion and metastasis across multiple cancer types. Growth and connection are not selective about what tissue they accelerate. A synaptogenic compound that turbocharges a pathway cancers exploit is not automatically carcinogenic, that is not what I am claiming, but it means nobody on earth knows the risk profile of chronic recreational use. There are no human trials. There are no long term animal carcinogenicity studies in the public record. The people selling it have no idea either.
Yet I watch it get recommended casually in stacks alongside caffeine-tier commentary. So let me ask the veterans here the question the market avoids. Would you run a compound with this kind of unknown attached to it daily, weekly, or not at all. And if you already have, does knowing the pathway involved change anything retroactively, or do we all just decide the paper risk is somebody else's risk.