Subject: Melanotan 1 vs Melanotan 2: Same Starting Point, Very Different Compounds
From: Derek from Peptide Price <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 18:35:41 +0000
List-Id: <derekpruski.substack.com>

View this post on the web at https://derekpruski.substack.com/p/melanotan-1-vs-melanotan-2-same-starting

For research and educational purposes only. Not medical advice.
These two get lumped together constantly. Same name, same origin, similar purpose — so people assume they’re basically the same thing with different numbers. They’re not. Understanding why requires a quick look at what each one is actually doing at the receptor level.
Where They Come From
Both MT1 and MT2 were developed at the University of Arizona as synthetic analogs of alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone — α-MSH — a naturally occurring peptide your body already produces. α-MSH plays a central role in regulating pigmentation, appetite, inflammation, and sexual function by binding to a family of receptors called melanocortin receptors (MC1R through MC5R).
The researchers weren’t trying to create a tanning peptide. They were trying to understand the melanocortin system — and in doing so, built two analogs that interact with it very differently.
The Mechanism: Why Structure Matters
MT1 is a linear peptide, meaning its amino acid chain runs straight. MT2 is cyclic — the chain loops back on itself. That’s not a minor detail. It fundamentally changes which receptors each compound binds to and how strongly.
Your skin contains melanocytes — cells responsible for producing melanin, the pigment that gives skin its color. Those melanocytes express MC1R on their surface. When α-MSH (or a synthetic analog) binds to MC1R, it triggers a signaling cascade that upregulates melanin production. More melanin means darker skin. This is the core tanning mechanism both compounds share.
Where they diverge is receptor selectivity.
MT1 binds primarily to MC1R. That’s largely where its activity begins and ends. The result is targeted melanin stimulation with minimal downstream effects at the other receptors.
MT2 binds to MC1R as well — but it also has meaningful activity at MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R. MC4R in particular is expressed heavily in the hypothalamus and is involved in regulating appetite, energy balance, and sexual function. This is why MT2 produces appetite suppression and sexual effects that MT1 doesn’t. It’s not a bonus — it’s a direct consequence of its broader receptor profile. And that same breadth is what drives the more pronounced side effects.
Think of it this way: MT1 is a targeted signal to your melanocytes. MT2 is a louder, less specific signal that hits multiple systems at once.
What That Looks Like in Practice
MT1 produces a gradual, even tan. Existing freckles and moles will darken — this is expected, since those areas already have higher melanocyte activity. The effect builds over weeks and is dose-dependent. Outside of that, the functional impact is minimal.
MT2 produces the same tanning effect, plus appetite suppression that some research subjects find significant, plus pro-erectile and libido-related effects driven by MC4R activity. You’re essentially getting multiple systems activated from a single compound.
The tradeoff is side effects. Nausea with MT2 is common, particularly during the loading phase, and is tied to MC4R and MC3R activity in the gut and brain. Facial flushing occurs for similar reasons. MT1’s side effect profile is considerably milder — some nausea, occasional flushing, but at much lower rates and severity.
Safety Data
This is where MT1 has a meaningful advantage. It’s been through formal clinical trials and holds regulatory approval in Europe and Australia under the brand name Scenesse, used to treat erythropoietic protoporphyria — a rare disorder that causes severe light sensitivity. That approval doesn’t extend to cosmetic tanning, but it does mean MT1 has documented human safety data that MT2 simply doesn’t have.
The open question for both compounds is long-term melanocyte stimulation and melanoma risk. Activating MC1R repeatedly over time — and by extension, continuously pushing melanocytes to produce melanin — is not something we have definitive long-term data on in healthy individuals using these compounds cosmetically. MT1’s selectivity may theoretically carry a lower risk profile than MT2’s broader activity, but that remains an open question, not a confirmed advantage.
Both require the same baseline precautions: dermatology appointment before starting, photo documentation of existing moles, and regular skin checks going forward.
Dosing
MT1’s shorter half-life means more frequent dosing to sustain the effect.
MT1:
Start: 0.25–0.5mg to assess tolerance
Loading: 0.5–1mg daily for 2–4 weeks
Maintenance: 0.5–1mg 2–3x per week
MT2:
Start: 0.1–0.25mg to assess tolerance
Loading: 0.25–0.5mg daily for 1–3 weeks
Maintenance: 0.5mg 1–2x per week
MT2 achieves a comparable tan at lower doses and less frequent intervals. The convenience advantage is real. Whether it outweighs the side effect profile depends on what you’re optimizing for.
How to Choose
MT1 makes more sense if tanning is your only objective, if you had a rough time tolerating MT2, or if you want the compound with more clinical data behind it. It costs more per dose and requires more frequent administration — those are the real tradeoffs.
MT2 makes more sense if you want the broader effect profile, if dosing convenience matters, or if you’ve used it before and handle it well. It’s also more cost-effective.
Combining them is an option some people use to get the tanning benefit of MT1 while running low-dose MT2 for the other effects — reducing the MT2 dose needed and keeping side effects more manageable. Most people won’t need to go that route, but it’s a legitimate approach for those who know how they respond to each.
On Sun Exposure
Both compounds stimulate melanin production independent of UV exposure, but UV does accelerate and deepen the effect. The mistake is treating that as license to spend more time in direct sun. It isn’t. The goal is achieving color with less UV — not using a peptide as cover for adding more.
Questions below. Keep it research-focused.

Unsubscribe https://substack.com/redirect/2/eyJlIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9kZXJla3BydXNraS5zdWJzdGFjay5jb20vYWN0aW9uL2Rpc2FibGVfZW1haWw_dG9rZW49ZXlKMWMyVnlYMmxrSWpveU56TTJNakl6T1Rnc0luQnZjM1JmYVdRaU9qRTVNVEk0TlRFME55d2lhV0YwSWpveE56Y3pOemN5TlRRM0xDSmxlSEFpT2pFNE1EVXpNRGcxTkRjc0ltbHpjeUk2SW5CMVlpMHpNelkxTXpZM0lpd2ljM1ZpSWpvaVpHbHpZV0pzWlY5bGJXRnBiQ0o5LnpoVlhDNENmXzN0eEdsSWc4d1hTMEotekZPMEx1RTF3ejdSSmtCNUpGZHciLCJwIjoxOTEyODUxNDcsInMiOjMzNjUzNjcsImYiOnRydWUsInUiOjI3MzYyMjM5OCwiaWF0IjoxNzczNzcyNTQ3LCJleHAiOjIwODkzNDg1NDcsImlzcyI6InB1Yi0wIiwic3ViIjoibGluay1yZWRpcmVjdCJ9.ZgCJLG6bhMDT_jpPs2usjU4twYgOwDvu1uNn1p4Idnc?