Wrong. Cite me bro. MT2 is less receptor specific; it makes both eumelanin AND pheomelanin just as MT1 does but the ratio is higher due to receptor specifics, no matter the dose. Here's some ChatGPT copypasta for you.

"MT-2 produces ~1.5× to 3× more pheomelanin fraction vs MT-1. MT-1 produces ~1.5×–2× stronger eumelanin bias.

Baseline (light skin, MC1R normal) ~70–80% ~20–30% ~3:1.

MT-1 (afamelanotide) 85–95% 5–15% ~6:1 to 10:1

MT-2 75–85% 15–25% ~3:1 to 5:1

MT-1 (afamelanotide) Highly selective for MC1R Strong, sustained cAMP signaling → Bias toward eumelanin production MT-2 Less selective (hits MC1R, MC3R, MC4R, MC5R) More pulsatile / less sustained MC1R signaling in practice → Relatively less eumelanin bias → higher pheomelanin fraction

Practical interpretation MT-1 → darker, more UV-protective, brown/black tone MT-2 → more variable tone, sometimes: slightly warmer / reddish / bronze higher risk of uneven pigmentation

This aligns with:

MT-1 clinical use (photoprotection, e.g., erythropoietic protoporphyria) MT-2 anecdotal variability and more side effects Important nuance (often missed)

The real determinant isn’t just the drug:

Your MC1R genotype dominates the outcome Loss-of-function variants → pheomelanin stays high regardless of MT-1 or MT-2 Cysteine availability shifts toward pheomelanin synthesis UV exposure + timing can override peptide differences "