PubMed
Des(1-3)IGF-I: a truncated form of insulin-like growth factor-I
Ballard et al., 1996
des(1-3)IGF-1 / Truncated IGF-1
IGF-1 DES (des(1-3)IGF-1) is a truncated 67-amino-acid analog of insulin-like growth factor-1 missing the N-terminal Gly-Pro-Glu tripeptide. Reduced IGF-binding protein affinity leaves more free peptide for IGF-1 receptor activation, yielding roughly 2–10× potency vs native IGF-1 in preclinical assays — but a very short ~20–30 minute half-life. Evidence is almost entirely animal/cell literature; not FDA-approved.
Overall check-ins
Trackers & reports
Overview
IGF-1 DES (des(1-3)IGF-1) is a truncated 67-amino-acid analog of insulin-like growth factor-1 missing the N-terminal Gly-Pro-Glu tripeptide. Reduced IGF-binding protein affinity leaves more free peptide for IGF-1 receptor activation, yielding roughly 2–10× potency vs native IGF-1 in preclinical assays — but a very short ~20–30 minute half-life. Evidence is almost entirely animal/cell literature; not FDA-approved.
Community
From check-in ratings — separate from side effects logged below. Side effects are logged separately from overall experience. A favorable check-in can still include nausea, fatigue, or injection-site reactions.
Favorable 51% · Mixed 32% · Unfavorable overall 17%
Benefits users selected when logging a favorable or mixed check-in.
Side effects are logged separately from overall experience. A favorable check-in can still include nausea, fatigue, or injection-site reactions.
Median bucket: 0.4–0.6 mg · Most common: 0.2–0.4 mg
Reports span 0.05–2 mg
Anonymized self-reports from PeptIQ users — not prescribing guidance. Buckets group similar logged amounts; open-ended top buckets mean “at least” that dose.
Among repeat reporters, 61% said they felt similar to their last entry, 43% more positive, and 21% more negative.
Overall, repeat reporters leaned more positive than their previous entry.
Median gap between entries: 23 days · Based on 514 repeat reporters
Community charts use modeled aggregates when live Supabase snapshots are unavailable.
Research
PubMed
Ballard et al., 1996
PubMed
Gillespie et al., 1990
PubMed
Walton et al., 1995
PubMed
Tomas et al., 1997
PubMed
Read et al., 1992
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov, 2024
Tools
More ways to learn about IGF-1 DES from observational PeptIQ data.
Compare with
Related peptides
Help
This page summarizes 2,337 anonymized self-reports from PeptIQ users who track IGF-1 DES, including commonly reported effects and co-tracked peptides. These are observational patterns, not clinical outcomes.
PeptIQ separates overall check-in ratings (favorable, mixed, or unfavorable) from logged side effects like nausea or fatigue. Users often report benefits and side effects in the same check-in — a high experience score does not mean zero side effects were noted.
6 sources are linked on this page, including PubMed articles, clinical trial registries, and FDA labels where applicable. Citations describe published research — not recommendations.
This wiki does not assess safety or recommend use. IGF-1 DES is listed as Research Only — Preclinical Evidence. Consult a licensed clinician for personal medical decisions.
Research, primarily in animal models, suggests IGF-1 DES may have a wide range of therapeutic potentials due to its ability to promote angiogenesis (formation of new blood vessels), stimulate collagen synthesis, and modulate inflammatory responses.
SourceIGF-1 DES is not approved by the FDA for any human use. There is no legal basis for selling it as a drug, food, or dietary supplement in the United States. The FDA has classified IGF-1 DES as a Category 2 bulk drug substance, which explicitly prohibits licensed compounding pharmacies from using it in compounded medications.
SourceThe safety and effectiveness of IGF-1 DES have not been thoroughly evaluated in humans through rigorous clinical trials. This lack of human data means that safe dosages, short-term side effects, and long-term health consequences are largely unknown.
SourceWhile there are over 200 published studies on IGF-1 DES, the vast majority are animal or in vitro (cell) studies. These preclinical studies consistently show positive results across various tissue types. However, there is a significant lack of comprehensive human clinical trial data.
Source