IGF-2 vs. Lit-Up vs. HGH Up vs. Free Test

[50Carbs]

Hello,

My current goal is to gain muscle mass.

I have tried TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium. I cannot say that I have noticed any dramatic changes while I was on these supplements. The libido was up, but other than that, I have not noticed anything else.

I have tried Black Cats and I like it, a lot. It gives me a smooth, lasting energy boost without a crash. So I thought maybe other products from AN would also work for me. The problem is, IGF-2, Free Test, GHG Up and Lit-Up all sound similar in terms of their claims regarding gaining muscle mass and testosterone boost, but which one is the "best," if you will?

Again, my goal is to gain as much muscle mass as possible, but I am looking for real results (muscle gains), not an increased libido.

Thanks.

[Rosie Chee]

Hello,

My current goal is to gain muscle mass.

I have tried TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium. I cannot say that I have noticed any dramatic changes while I was on these supplements. The libido was up, but other than that, I have not noticed anything else.

I have tried Black Cats and I like it, a lot. It gives me a smooth, lasting energy boost without a crash. So I thought maybe other products from AN would also work for me. The problem is, IGF-2, Free Test, GHG Up and Lit-Up all sound similar in terms of their claims regarding gaining muscle mass and testosterone boost, but which one is the "best," if you will?

Again, my goal is to gain as much muscle mass as possible, but I am looking for real results (muscle gains), not an increased libido.

Thanks.

IGF-2, FREE TEST, HGHup, and LIT UP are not similar products at all - I recommend that you take the time to read up on each one.

IGF-2 is a natural Growth Hormone (and Testosterone) booster.

FREE TEST is a natural Testosterone booster with AI and cortisol controlling properties.

HGHup is a natural Growth Hormone (and Testosterone) booster, and even though in the same "product category" as IGF-2, is a complete DIFFERENT product altogether.

LIT UP is a preworkout product.

As far as muscle gains, personally, IGF-2 stacked with FREE TEST is a great stack - some use HGHup instead of IGF-2 and that works as well, but my personal favourite is IGF-2.

Be aware that whether or not you gain muscle mass is NOT going to depend on what supplements you use, but primarily on your NUTRITION AND TRAINING, so you had best make sure that those two important factors are set up optimally for YOU re gains before looking at what supplements to add to COMPLIMENT them!

~Rosie~

[50Carbs]

IGF-2, FREE TEST, HGHup, and LIT UP are not similar products at all - I recommend that you take the time to read up on each one.

IGF-2 is a natural Growth Hormone (and Testosterone) booster.

FREE TEST is a natural Testosterone booster with AI and cortisol controlling properties.

HGHup is a natural Growth Hormone (and Testosterone) booster, and even though in the same "product category" as IGF-2, is a complete DIFFERENT product altogether.

LIT UP is a preworkout product.

Well, it is confusing - i.e., they are not similar at all (as you said), and yet in each description of their function/purpose you have listed "testosterone booster." By the way, LIT UP is a pre-workout product, but it contains a full dose of D-Aspartic Acid, which is a testosterone booster.

As far as muscle gains, personally, IGF-2 stacked with FREE TEST is a great stack - some use HGHup instead of IGF-2 and that works as well, but my personal favourite is IGF-2.

So you personal favorite is IGF-2 alone or stacked with FREE TEST?

Be aware that whether or not you gain muscle mass is NOT going to depend on what supplements you use, but primarily on your NUTRITION AND TRAINING, so you had best make sure that those two important factors are set up optimally for YOU re gains before looking at what supplements to add to COMPLIMENT them!

I am not trying to be a smart aleck here, but why do I need, say, IGF-2, or any other supplement for that matter, if my diet and training are the the deciding factors? That is the thing, I have been steadily gaining between 1-to-2 pounds of muscle mass each week prior to taking TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium. And while I was on them, nothing has changed, same gains. So my conclusion was that they did nothing in terms of muscle gains for me.

So the question is: assuming my diet and training are dialed in (I believe they are), can I expect extra muscle gains on IGF-2?

Thanks.

[R1balla]

IGF 2 + Free Test + Lit Up

and yes, you can expect extra (more) gains with the proper use of supplements long with proper diet and training. but remember, they are only supplements.

[Rosie Chee]

Well, it is confusing - i.e., they are not similar at all (as you said), and yet in each description of their function/purpose you have listed "testosterone booster." By the way, LIT UP is a pre-workout product, but it contains a full dose of D-Aspartic Acid, which is a testosterone booster.

Realize that there are many products out there that boost Testosterone and many products classed as "Tesosterone boosters" - just because theu do this does not make them the same, and in many instances, they are completely different. it's not misleading at all, especially if that is an effect of the product in question. Not all Testosterone boosters do the same thing, even if they boost Testosterone - for example, Drive is a natural Testosterone booster great at improving endurance and speed endurance performances, but you are not going to get those same effects from a Testosterone booster aimed more at improving strength performance.

I am aware that LIT UP contains DAA - therefore, like RPM (another preworkout product by Applied Nutriceuticals), it has Testosterone boosting properties.

So you personal favorite is IGF-2 alone or stacked with FREE TEST?

My personal favourite Applied Nutriceuticals product - and #1 equal product period - is IGF-2. Stacked with FREE TEST, you can get great results.

I am not trying to be a smart aleck here, but why do I need, say, IGF-2, or any other supplement for that matter, if my diet and training are the the deciding factors? That is the thing, I have been steadily gaining between 1-to-2 pounds of muscle mass each week prior to taking TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium. And while I was on them, nothing has changed, same gains. So my conclusion was that they did nothing in terms of muscle gains for me.

So the question is: assuming my diet and training are dialed in (I believe they are), can I expect extra muscle gains on IGF-2?

Thanks.

If you got no gains, then you were not EATING enough for them, period. Supplements are not there to get you results and you can't expect them to work miracles if you don't have the key factors sorted out.

Nutrition and training ARE the primary determining factors in your success - or lack of it - in achieving your body goals, whether they be fat loss, muscle gain, or recomp, yes. However, that is not to say that adding in supplements is not going to be beneficial, especially if you have the key factors dialled in, and, depending on the effects, some products have effects regardless of nutrition or training - for example, IGF-2 is going to give you better recovery, period.

Using supplements other than the basic staples is a personal choice. More experienced trainees and those who need that "extra edge" can definitely benefit from adding them in.

If your nutrition and training are correct for YOU for gaining muscle, then using IGF-2 can definitely help with the process, yes.

~Rosie~

[50Carbs]

If you got no gains, then you were not EATING enough for them, period.

Really? So it is always user's fault? Wow...so there is no possibility that a given supplement simply does not work? But anyway, I did not say that I got no gains. Just the opposite. I got gains, but they were the same gains (1-to-2 pounds a week) that I have gotten without any supplements. So I did not get anything extra by using all these testosterone boosters, which is a reasonable assumption rather than assuming that my diet did not work.

Supplements are not there to get you results and you can't expect them to work miracles if you don't have the key factors sorted out.

Sorry, but this does not make any sense. What is the point of supplements if they do not produce any results? All these testosterone boosters promise pounds of muscle mass and increases in strength. Of course I can gain more weight if I consume more calories, but again, why do I need all these supplements then?

[Rosie Chee]

Really? So it is always user's fault? Wow...so there is no possibility that a given supplement simply does not work? But anyway, I did not say that I got no gains. Just the opposite. I got gains, but they were the same gains (1-to-2 pounds a week) that I have gotten without any supplements. So I did not get anything extra by using all these testosterone boosters, which is a reasonable assumption rather than assuming that my diet did not work.

If one is not getting the results that they want, then yeah, it is their fault, because they are not doing something right re nutrition (not eating enough, eating too much, eating the wrong food, etc.) or training (not training appropriately for their goal, overtraining, lack of recovery, etc.) - fairly common sense that. All factors that the individual can control. Of course, there are times when there is something wrong such as illness, injury, disease, etc., but in the end, they can take measures that take these factors into account if they occur.

As far as using a product and not getting the effects you expect - that happens. Not everything works for everyone, and because everyone is different, not everyone is going to have the same experience as someone else with the same product. Creatine is a good example re non-responders - the same with NO products, etc.

Sometimes when a product does not work, it is not because of the product either, or the individual being a non-responder, but because they are not using it optimally re dosing/timing, or perhaps using something that counters the effects of it, etc. There are many things to take into consideration when a product does not work, rather than just assuming that it does "not work".

If you were making gains with just the basic staples (which you can), then realize that every time you make gains, your Maintenance calories also change, so you should be adjusting your nutrition on a weekly basis dependent on your results from that week, IMO.

Adding in supplements does not mean that you are always going to get better or faster results.

~Rosie~

[50Carbs]

If one is not getting the results that they want, then yeah, it is their fault, because they are not doing something right - fairly common sense that.

Wow, really? That is so not common sense. So again, there is no possibility that the supplement is useless? Have you ever heard of drugs not not working during clinical trials. Or do they always work in your mind?

[Rosie Chee]

Wow, really? That is so not common sense. So again, there is no possibility that the supplement is useless? Have you ever heard of drugs not not working during clinical trials. Or do they always work in your mind?

I never said that there was no possibility that the supplement was useless - did you actually READ my posts? And yes, if one is a responder to the product/compound, then it is common sense that if it's "not doing anything" that they are either doing something wrong - OR they do not know their body and cannot tell if it is having an effect or not.

Of course some drugs are not going to work in clinical trials; that is the purpose of trials - to test them and see if they are effective. Then you have the fact that some drugs work well enough, just not for what they may be trialling them for. But that is not the point of your initial queries.

As for the three products you listed in your initial post - TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium - I'm surprised if you think all they did was enhance your libido. Then again, you know your body, and it seems you are determined to think they are useless, when the majority of feedback on them says otherwise. As I said in my last response: "As far as using a product and not getting the effects you expect - that happens. Not everything works for everyone, and because everyone is different, not everyone is going to have the same experience as someone else with the same product."

Just another note that if you are 18-21 (give or take a year or so) years old (you do not have an age listed, so if this is indeed the case re age) and using natural Testosterone boosters, then you may not see any difference between using them and not, because your natural Testosterone levels will already be high, therefore there being no point in you using such products.

If you're trying to start an argument, I suggest that you take it elsewhere. As it is, I answered your initial queries and are not interested in those trying to instigate petty internet squabbles, so I am done here.

~Rosie~

[50Carbs]

I never said that there was no possibility that the supplement was useless - did you actually READ my posts? And yes, if one is a responder to the product/compound, then it is common sense that if it's "not doing anything" that they are either doing something wrong - OR they do not know their body and cannot tell if it is having an effect or not.

Or a product is useless...I did read your posts. You never said there was no possibility, you just never mentioned it and instead went on to blame the user, which makes you sound pretty biased. In fact you said that it is always user's fault if one did not get results.

As for the three products you listed in your initial post - TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium - I'm surprised if you think all they did was enhance your libido. Then again, you know your body, and it seems you are determined to think they are useless, when the majority of feedback on them says otherwise.

The majority of feedback I have seen is pretty close to my experience. Most people say that it increased their libido, but not much else. I have not seen people raving about incredible muscle gains on these products, which is their purpose.

If you're trying to start an argument, I suggest that you take it elsewhere.

Not at all. I am just trying to find a product that works.

As it is, I answered your initial queries and are not interested in those trying to instigate petty internet squabbles, so I am done here.

Thanks, but yeah, do not bother. I was looking for a knowledgeable feedback and objectivity, not something like "it is always your fault if some supplement did not work for you."

[R1balla]

U can't expect huge gains from a single supplement. Proper diet for a week vs supplements for a week...the diet week will see better gains

[50Carbs]

U can't expect huge gains from a single supplement. Proper diet for a week vs supplements for a week...the diet week will see better gains

Well, it sounds like one does not need supplements. What exactly can I expect? Can I expect significant gains? Look, it is really simple. Either some supplement works or it does not. Sure, there are some exceptions, but if it really works, it should work most of the time for the majority of people, not the other way around.

If it only "works" if I eat more, than it does not work, because anyone can gain weight by eating more.

The unique ingredients in IGF-2 have been scientifically proven to significantly increase testosterone and human growth hormone (HGH) levels, providing the user with more lean muscle, strength, and fullness than ever before possible from an OTC product.

Bold claims. So, does this stuff really work? Because significant increases in testosterone and HGH (if they are real) usually produce significant increases in muscle mass. That is why steroids work.

[50Carbs]

I cannot post a link until I have 50 posts, but yesterday AppNut posted a link on Twitter to a stack that claims pretty significant gains.

Has anyone tried the Triple Threat Stack? HGHup, Free Test, and LIT-UP are AMAZING together!

The promo claims that the above stack produces gains of 6-10 pounds of lean body mass and up to 15 pounds in some cases. So is this true? It says nothing about eating more. By the way, it is a total broscience claim to say that you need to eat more for a muscle gain supplement to work.

In case you do not know, when real scientific studies are conducted, they never ask participants to eat more to see if some supplement increases muscle mass. Both groups consume equal amount of calories and macros, one is given placebo, the other is given a supplement. The training program is also the same. If the supplement works, people in the supplement group should have more muscle mass, but this number must be statistically significant. If they do not have that, the supplement does not work. It is as simple as that.

[R1balla]

dude, take Rosie's advice or leave it and stop arguing. certain supplements dont work with all people. and yes, the triple threat stack is capable of producing those gains. ive experienced it, but my diet and training is also where it needs to be. if u dont want to listen, then why are you posting asking questions? it seems like no matter what advice we give, you argue. the stuff we say is not from the blue...its facts.

[50Carbs]

dude, take Rosie's advice or leave it and stop arguing.

Rosie's advice is a joke. Here is what it boils down to.

If you got no gains, then you were not EATING enough for them, period...If one is not getting the results that they want, then yeah, it is their fault, because they are not doing something right re nutrition (not eating enough, eating too much, eating the wrong food, etc.) or training (not training appropriately for their goal, overtraining, lack of recovery, etc.)...

It is always user's fault. Yeah, real great advice there.

if u dont want to listen, then why are you posting asking questions? it seems like no matter what advice we give, you argue. the stuff we say is not from the blue...its facts.

Yeah, I do not want to listen to broscience. It is a joke. Facts? Please. The fact is, as I have already explained, is that a muscle gain supplement should work on its own. If it works only when you consume more calories, you obviously gain weight because of extra calories, not some supplement. If you do not understand this simple fact, that is fine, but do not bs me, I am not a newbie.

[R1balla]

if u listen u will understand. sure it works on its own...but if u arent eating ur not going to maintain the new growth.


reading one of your last statements, you answered your own question. a supplement should build muscle on its own...


lets say u want to cut or recomp and u bought HGHup. if you dont have the proper diet and training for a cut/recomp, HGHup will not get you to the potential results it could have if your diet and training were in place. sure it will help, but near as much as if ur stuff was in check.

just keep on trollin

[rms80]

Hello,

My current goal is to gain muscle mass.

I have tried TestoPro, Erase and Adamantium. I cannot say that I have noticed any dramatic changes while I was on these supplements. The libido was up, but other than that, I have not noticed anything else.

I have tried Black Cats and I like it, a lot. It gives me a smooth, lasting energy boost without a crash. So I thought maybe other products from AN would also work for me. The problem is, IGF-2, Free Test, GHG Up and Lit-Up all sound similar in terms of their claims regarding gaining muscle mass and testosterone boost, but which one is the "best," if you will?

Again, my goal is to gain as much muscle mass as possible, but I am looking for real results (muscle gains), not an increased libido.

Thanks.

Lit-Up/HGH-Up/Free Test is your best bet to acheive your goals- I formulated the three products to go together in terms of giving users the ability to gain muscle mass through enhancement of testosterone, GH, and IGF-1 levels without the need for PCT. From what I have seen from most users, the gains are very similar to a mild PH....

[rms80]

Well, it sounds like one does not need supplements. What exactly can I expect? Can I expect significant gains? Look, it is really simple. Either some supplement works or it does not. Sure, there are some exceptions, but if it really works, it should work most of the time for the majority of people, not the other way around.

If it only "works" if I eat more, than it does not work, because anyone can gain weight by eating more.



Bold claims. So, does this stuff really work? Because significant increases in testosterone and HGH (if they are real) usually produce significant increases in muscle mass. That is why steroids work.

This is kind of a tricky statement- yes, steroids work, but they work much, much better if proper nutrition, rest, and training are applied along with them. Apples for apples, something that directly binds the AR (PHs and steroids) is going to work better than something that raises testosterone through alternative means (aromatase inhibition). However, you can't stay on steroids for long periods of time w/o altering certain things significantly, and when you come off of them, you have to have proper nutrition, rest, and training, or you will lose your gains.

Will the stack work without proper diet, rest, and nutrition? I think it will have some positive effects, and if you underwent pre- and post- blood work, you will see T, GH, and IGF-1 levels increase, just like with injectible GH, ph, and steroids. We have run blood tests pre-release on each of these products, so we have an idea directionally of what the stack does- check out the pilot studies on our website. The increase won't be as much as with AAS or PH, but you also don't have to do a PCT with our products.

There are some good studies linking hormone levels with nutrition and resistance exercise, and the necessity for some levels of each parameter in gaining muscle mass:

J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Dec;23(6 Suppl):601S-609S.
Protein nutrition, exercise and aging.
Evans WJ.
SourceNutrition, Metabolism, and Exercise Laboratory, Donald W. Reynolds Center on Aging, Slot 806, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA. evanswilliamj@uams.edu

Abstract
Aging is associated with remarkable changes in body composition. Loss of skeletal muscle, a process called sarcopenia, is a prominent feature of these changes. In addition, gains in total body fat and visceral fat content continue into late life. The cause of sarcopenia is likely a result of a number of changes that also occur with aging. These include reduced levels of physical activity, changing endocrine function (reduced testosterone, growth hormone, and estrogen levels), insulin resistance, and increased dietary protein needs. Healthy free-living elderly men and women have been shown to accommodate to the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for protein of 0.8 g . kg(-1) . d(-1) with a continued decrease in urinary nitrogen excretion and reduced muscle mass. While many elderly people consume adequate amounts of protein, many older people have a reduced appetite and consume less than the protein RDA, likely resulting in an accelerated rate of sarcopenia. One important strategy that counters sarcopenia is strength conditioning. Strength conditioning will result in an increase in muscle size and this increase in size is largely the result of increased contractile proteins. The mechanisms by which the mechanical events stimulate an increase in RNA synthesis and subsequent protein synthesis are not well understood. Lifting weight requires that a muscle shorten as it produces force (concentric contraction). Lowering the weight, on the other hand, forces the muscle to lengthen as it produces force (eccentric contraction). These lengthening muscle contractions have been shown to produce ultrastructural damage (microscopic tears in contractile proteins muscle cells) that may stimulate increased muscle protein turnover. This muscle damage produces a cascade of metabolic events which is similar to an acute phase response and includes complement activation, mobilization of neutrophils, increased circulating an skeletal muscle interleukin-1, macro****e accumulation in muscle, and an increase in muscle protein synthesis and degradation. While endurance exercise increases the oxidation of essential amino acids and increases the requirement for dietary protein, resistance exercise results in a decrease in nitrogen excretion, lowering dietary protein needs. This increased efficiency of protein use may be important for wasting diseases such as HIV infection and cancer and particularly in elderly people suffering from sarcopenia. Research has indicated that increased dietary protein intake (up to 1.6 g protein . kg(-1) . d(-1)) may enhance the hypertrophic response to resistance exercise. It has also been demonstrated that in very old men and women the use of a protein-calorie supplement was associated with greater strength and muscle mass gains than did the use of placebo.

Can J Appl Physiol. 2001;26 Suppl:S141-52.
Protein nutrition and resistance exercise.
Evans WJ.
SourceNutrition, Metabolism, and Exercise Laboratory, Donald W. Reynolds Center on Aging, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA.

Abstract
Strength conditioning will result in an increase in muscle size and this increase in size is largely the result of increased contractile proteins. The mechanisms by which the mechanical events stimulate an increase in RNA synthesis and subsequent protein synthesis are not well understood. Lifting weight requires that a muscle shorten as it produces force (concentric contraction). Lowering the weight forces the muscle to lengthen as it produces force (eccentric contraction). Eccentric contractions produce ultrastructural damage that may stimulate increased muscle protein turnover and a cascade of metabolic events which is similar to an acute phase response and includes complement activation, mobilization of neutrophils, increased circulating and skeletal muscle interleukin-1 and macro****e accumulation. While endurance exercise increases the oxidation of essential amino acids and increases the requirement for dietary protein, resistance exercise results in a decrease in nitrogen excretion, lowering dietary protein needs. Research has indicated that increased dietary protein intake (up to 1.6 g protein x kg(-1) x d(-1)) may enhance the hypertrophic response to resistance exercise. It has also been demonstrated that in very old men and women the use of a protein-calorie supplement was associated with greater strength and muscle mass gains than did the use of placebo.

J Am Coll Nutr. 2005 Apr;24(2):134S-139S.
Dietary protein to support anabolism with resistance exercise in young men.
Phillips SM, Hartman JW, Wilkinson SB.
SourceExercise Metabolism Research Group, Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 CANADA. phillis@mcmaster.ca

Abstract
Resistance exercise is fundamentally anabolic and as such stimulates the process of skeletal muscle protein synthesis (MPS) in an absolute sense and relative to skeletal muscle protein breakdown (MPB). However, the net effect of resistance exercise is to shift net protein balance (NPB = MPS - MPB) to a more positive value; however, in the absence of feeding NPB remains negative. Feeding stimulates MPS to an extent where NPB becomes positive, for a transient time. When combined, resistance exercise and feeding synergistically interact to result in NPB being greater than with feeding alone. This feeding- and exercise-induced stimulation of NPB is what, albeit slowly, results in muscle hypertrophy. With this rudimentary knowledge we are now at the point where we can manipulate variables within the system to see what impact these interventions have on the processes of MPS, MPB, and NPB and ultimately and perhaps most importantly, muscle hypertrophy and strength. We used established models of skeletal muscle amino acid turnover to examine how protein source (milk versus soy) acutely affects the processes of MPS and MPB after resistance exercise. Our findings revealed that even when balanced quantities of total protein and energy are consumed that milk proteins are more effective in stimulating amino acid uptake and net protein deposition in skeletal muscle after resistance exercise than are hydrolyzed soy proteins. Importantly, the finding of increased amino acid uptake would be independent of the differences in amino acid composition of the two proteins. We propose that the improved net protein deposition with milk protein consumption is also not due to differences in amino acid composition, but is due to a different pattern of amino acid delivery associated with milk versus hydrolyzed soy proteins. If our acute findings are accurate then we hypothesized that chronically the greater net protein deposition associated with milk protein consumption post-resistance exercise would eventually lead to greater net protein accretion (i.e., muscle fiber hypertrophy), over a longer time period. In young men completing 12 weeks of resistance training (5d/wk) we observed a tendency (P = 0.11) for greater gains in whole body lean mass and whole as greater muscle fiber hypertrophy with consumption of milk. While strength gains were not different between the soy and milk-supplemented groups we would argue that the true significance of a greater increase in lean mass that we observed with milk consumption may be more important in groups of persons with lower initial lean mass and strength such as the elderly.


I can post more studies, but the point I am trying to make is that for optimal results from supplements, or steroids, certain parameters must be followed. Yes, the products will work on their own, but not as well in a lower-calorie, lower rest, non-exercising enviorment, as it is catabolic and basically the opposite stimulus of what you are trying to give the body.....