What did @mk5uper actually say?
The creator ran MK-677 and enclomiphene for roughly two months, then cycled off for about a month before filming. He went from 210 to 230 pounds on the stack, then settled around 215, claiming "five pounds of muscle" as a net gain. He hit 315 on bench press, developed stretch marks on his arms, and noticed significant water retention with facial puffiness. He describes enclomiphene's effect on strength as uncertain since he "didn't do any blood work." He rates the whole stack a six out of ten, largely because the expected body recomposition didn't materialize the way he anticipated. He also tossed in peptabol (likely BPC-157 or a similar peptide) at the end but dismissed its effect due to higher body fat levels.
Does the science back this up?
The water retention and strength gains he describes are consistent with what MK-677 actually does in the literature. The enclomiphene piece is harder to validate without bloodwork, which he acknowledges. The "five pounds of muscle" claim after subtracting water weight is plausible but unverified.
MK-677 is a ghrelin receptor agonist that stimulates growth hormone and IGF-1 secretion. A randomized controlled trial by Murphy et al. (1998, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism) found MK-677 significantly increased IGF-1 levels and lean mass in healthy adults, but also caused notable fluid retention, which matches his experience exactly. A later study by Svensson et al. (1998, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism) confirmed the water retention issue was dose-dependent and consistent across subjects.
Enclomiphene is a selective estrogen receptor modulator used off-label to raise LH and FSH, which can stimulate endogenous testosterone production. A study by Kim et al. (2015, BJU International) found enclomiphene increased testosterone levels in hypogonadal men, but the strength effects in otherwise healthy young males are not well-established. Without bloodwork, there is simply no way to know if it did anything for him.
What did they get wrong (or right)?
He got the water retention narrative right. He got the "I didn't do bloodwork so I can't confirm anything" part right too, which is actually a more honest disclaimer than most fitness creators offer. What he got wrong is the framing around body composition.
Claiming "five pounds of muscle" after a water-weight-heavy cycle without DEXA or any body composition measurement is a stretch. Going from 210 to 215 after shedding 15 pounds of apparent water weight could represent far less lean tissue than he thinks, or it could represent more. There is no way to know from scale weight alone. The stretch marks are real evidence of rapid tissue growth, but stretch marks can also appear with rapid fat gain or water expansion under the skin.
His assertion that MK-677 is "not even a SARM" is technically correct. MK-677 is not a selective androgen receptor modulator. It is a growth hormone secretagogue. This distinction matters because the risk profiles differ significantly. He gets credit for making that distinction on a platform where most creators blur it entirely.
What should you actually know?
MK-677 and enclomiphene are not the same category of compound, and stacking them without medical supervision and baseline bloodwork is a meaningful risk. Here is what the evidence actually says.
- MK-677 elevates blood glucose and insulin resistance. A study by Copinschi et al. (1996, Sleep) noted increased fasting glucose in subjects using MK-677, which is relevant for anyone metabolically predisposed to issues.
- Enclomiphene requires a prescription in the United States. Using it without a confirmed testosterone deficiency diagnosis and physician oversight means you are taking a fertility-adjacent drug with no clinical rationale established for your specific case.
- The water retention he experienced is not a side effect to dismiss aesthetically. Chronic fluid retention from elevated GH and IGF-1 can contribute to carpal tunnel symptoms and joint discomfort, documented in clinical GH therapy literature (Bramnert et al., 2003, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism).
- Rating a compound stack as six out of ten based on aesthetic outcomes ignores the metabolic and hormonal variables that matter more for long-term health. Without bloodwork before, during, and after, this is essentially an anecdote with photos.
The bottom line on this stack
He is being more honest than average. No outrageous claims, he acknowledged the lack of bloodwork, and he correctly categorized MK-677 as a non-SARM. But the casual framing of a two-compound hormonal stack as a "natty plus" experiment with no medical oversight deserves real scrutiny. These are not supplements. MK-677 meaningfully alters GH and IGF-1 signaling. Enclomiphene acts on the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. Running both without baseline labs is flying blind, and 83,000 viewers watching this without that context is a problem worth naming plainly.