Study: LR3IGF-I causes growth in pigs

[datBtrue]

All you IGF-1 LR3 users may be interested in the following study. This is the first study I've ever seen on the relationship between growth & IGF-1 LR3.

IGF-I and analogues can increase growth in artificially-reared neonatal pigs
F. R. Dunshea*, C. S. Chung, P. C. Owens, F. J. Ballard, and P. E. Walton

Agriculture Victoria, Victorian Institute of Animal Science, Werribee, Australia,
Department of Animal Science, Chungbuk National University, Republic of Korea,
Cooperative Research Centre for Tissue Growth and
Repair, Adelaide, Australia


Exogenous insulin like growth factor-I (IGF-I) has been shown to increase growth rate in neonatal pigs while an analogue of IGF-I, LR3IGF- I, has been shown to be more potent than IGF-I in the rat. Therefore a study was conducted to determine whether IGF-I and LR3IGF-I increase growth in the artificially reared neonatal pig.

Eighteen pigs (2 kg initial weight) pigs were infused with control, IGF-I (8 µg/h) or LR3IGF-I (8 µg/h) via osmotic pumps. After 9 days an additional pump was inserted to increase the infusion rates of each of the growth factors (16 µ/h) for a further 9 days, after which time the pigs were slaughtered. Pigs were offered bovine milk ad libitum.

Neither IGF-I nor LR3IGF-I had any effect upon daily gain over the first 9 days of the study. However, over the second 9 days of the study, daily gain was increased in LR3IGF-I infused pigs (386 v. 457 g/d, P<0.01), and tended to be increased in pigs infused with IGF-I (386 v. 413 g/d, P=0.15). As a result pigs infused with LR3IGF-I were heavier than the control pigs at slaughter. Milk intake was not different during the first 9 days of the study but was significantly greater in pigs infused with growth factors over the second half of the study (2905 v. 3407 g/d, P<0.01). Pigs treated with LR3IGF-I had a larger spleen (18.9 v. 27.5 g, P<0.001) and tended to have a larger liver (286 v. 319g, P=0.078), small intestine (329 v. 383 g, P=0.10) and combined small intestine and liver (614 v. 701 g, P=0.062) weight. Plasma IGFBP3 concentrations were highly corre- lated (R=0.85) with average daily gain over the 3 days preceding blood sampling.

In conclusion, exogenous IGF-I and particularly LR3IGF-I can increase growth rate and visceral development in ad libitum fed artificially-reared pigs. At least part of the cause was an increase in milk consumption of infused piglets​

 

[papapumpsd]

Very interesting.

Here are some %change numbers that may be derived from the above data:

% Change in Daily Weight (grams):
1. IGF-1 vs. Control: +6.54% (IGF-1 lead to daily weight gain that was 6.54% greater than the control's daily weight gain).

2. IGF-lr3 vs. Control: +15.54% (IGF-1lr3 lead to daily weight gain that was 15.54% greater than the control's daily weight gain)

3. IGF-1 vs. IGF-1lr3: +10.56% (IGF-1lr3 lead to daily weight gain that was 10.56% greater than the IGF-1 daily weight gain).

Remember, the above percents are for days 10-18. The 1st 9 days (assumed days 0-9) showed no daily weight difference for either IGF-1 or IGF-1lr3, compared to the control. Also, of primary interest is the "effectiveness" of IGF-1 vs. lr3 variant. It appears that lr3 led to a 10.56% weight gain over IGF-1 (non-lr3). While the starting fat percents (thus, lean body masses) for each subject were not analyzed (to my knowledge), that is not important. What is important is that -lr3 showed marked weight gain improvement vs. non-lr3. INCREASED GROWTH.

What might we expect in human subjects? Certainly NOT 15.54% daily weight gains from -lr3, nor 10.56%! These are infant pigs, thus their natural growth is expected to be significant (just as babies grow like crazy). Something that may be expected is that if adult humans were subjected to IGF-1 and -lr3 variant, those subjects administered the -lr3 may certainly show a 10.56% growth improvement over the IGF-1. This is NOT saying they -lr3 subjects experience 10.56% daily weight gain, simply an improvement of 10.56% over the IGF-1 subjects.

I hope this isn't confusing. For example, if adult human subjects treated with IGF-1 experienced 0.5lbs. daily weight gain, that would mean the -lr3 subjects would expect daily weight gains of 0.5528lbs (a 10.56% increase over standard IGF-1).



Thanks Dat!

 

[Bobaslaw]

Good Study Dat.

BTW, just keep in mind these are neonatal pigs, not fully developed adults. I believe the effects on underdeveloped immature tissues is far greater as they already have more potential for accelerated growth than mature adult tissues.

Thus no direct comparison on weight change can be compared to an adult human here IMO.

 

[papapumpsd]

QUOTE=Bobaslaw;1390856]Good Study Dat.

BTW, just keep in mind these are neonatal pigs, not fully developed adults. I believe the effects on underdeveloped immature tissues is far greater as they already have more potential for accelerated growth than mature adult tissues.

Thus no direct comparison on weight change can be compared to an adult human here.[/QUOTE]

:goodpost: Absolutely correct!

 

[datBtrue]

Good thoughts guys.

The nice thing about studies like this is that they show that the altered form of IGF-1 LR3 is capable of creating growth...no different from (or better than) IGF-1.

I'm one of those guys that has benifited medically from IGF-1 LR3 but as far as muscle growth...I've stated I just didn't see it. I can see the insulin-like effects but I never willingly attributed muscle growth to my IGF-1 LR3 usage.

Its nice to find evidence otherwise and really nice to find something that shuts me (the know it all) the hell up and puts me in my anecdotal place.

 

[papapumpsd]

Good thoughts guys.

The nice thing about studies like this is that they show that the altered form of IGF-1 LR3 is capable of creating growth...no different from (or better than) IGF-1.

I'm one of those guys that has benifited medically from IGF-1 LR3 but as far as muscle growth...I've stated I just didn't see it. I can see the insulin-like effects but I never willingly attributed muscle growth to my IGF-1 LR3 usage.

Its nice to find evidence otherwise and really nice to find something that shuts me (the know it all) the hell up and puts me in my anecdotal place.

Dat, you don't think the data suggests that -lr3 yielded significant improved growth over std IGF-1?

Comparing the two peptides' percent daily weigh change in the immature pigs, it appears as thought the -lr3 variant yielded +10% greater gains.

Your thoughts?

 

[datBtrue]

Dat, you don't think the data suggests that -lr3 yielded significant improved growth over std IGF-1?

Comparing the two peptides' percent daily weigh change in the immature pigs, it appears as thought the -lr3 variant yielded +10% greater gains.

Your thoughts?

I do Papa. You misunderstood... I am "on record" in Grunts thread as arguing that IGF-1 LR3's sole contribution to muscle gains (as far as I was concerned) was its awesome capability to act like insulin.

I also kinda of thought that Gropep's alteration of rIGF-1 somehow made it less effective at building muscle... in other words something was lost. Perhaps pinning rIGF-1 4 or 5 times a day would be better then IGF-1 LR3...

But I was wrong to generalize based on my experience. This study clearly shows that IGF-1 LR3 is capable of building mass. This study also administers both forms by infusion so dosing is not an issue and IGF-1 LR3 was shown to be superior.

I don't disagree with you my man! You were converted and have been singing the gospel for a while now so THIS study comes as no surprise. But for me...I've just entered the church and sat in the pew and when I listen to you sing I now nod and say "amen brother."

Then I leave and pin my GHRPs & never think about IGF-1 again.

 

[papapumpsd]

I do Papa. You misunderstood... I am "on record" in Grunts thread as arguing that IGF-1 LR3's sole contribution to muscle gains (as far as I was concerned) was its awesome capability to act like insulin.

I also kinda of thought that Gropep's alteration of rIGF-1 somehow made it less effective at building muscle... in other words something was lost. Perhaps pinning rIGF-1 4 or 5 times a day would be better then IGF-1 LR3...

But I was wrong to generalize based on my experience. This study clearly shows that IGF-1 LR3 is capable of building mass. This study also administers both forms by infusion so dosing is not an issue and IGF-1 LR3 was shown to be superior.

I don't disagree with you my man! You were converted and have been singing the gospel for a while now so THIS study comes as no surprise. But for me...I've just entered the church and sat in the pew and when I listen to you sing I now nod and say "amen brother."

Then I leave and pin my GHRPs & never think about IGF-1 again.

LOL, ok dood. I was just checking with u for clarification purposes.

So, you're a strong proponent of GHRPs, just not so much lr3IGF-1 for new muscle growth? Or has the above study peaked a new interest in you and you are now more interested in IGF?

 

[BLACK747]

excellent read fellows

 

[SOLARUS]

i dont get it.

nowhere was hypertrophy shown, only organ growth and weight gain, the latter being at least in part driven by the appetite increase / insulinemic effects.

it's interesting, but far from proof that LR3-IGF-1 builds muscle.

that said, i love LR3, and i personally think it does

 

[pistonpump]

i dont get it.

nowhere was hypertrophy shown, only organ growth and weight gain, the latter being at least in part driven by the appetite increase / insulinemic effects.

it's interesting, but far from proof that LR3-IGF-1 builds muscle.

that said, i love LR3, and i personally think it does

:goodpost:

 

[king1033]

interesting