Des (1-3) Igf-1

Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0

    Des (1-3) Igf-1


    Any one every try this?

    DES (1-3) IGF-1 (NOT THE SAME AS IGF-1)

    Most athletes have heard of IGF-1 (Insulin like growth factor-1) and the amazing anabolic effects it has been reported to have upon protein based tissue such as muscle. Des (1-3) IGF-1 is over 10 times (1000%) more anabolic than IGF-1. Now that is amazing!!

    IGF-1 is actually produced from both Insulin and growth hormone in the liver and other tissues. IGF-1 is made up of 70 amino acids in a chain. Well, when a clever chemist removes the last 3 amino acids in the IGF-1 chain (the N-terminal tri-peptide) it becomes Des (1-3) IGF-1 and 1000% plus more anabolic. Why? IGF-1 circulates through our blood stream and tissue 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Unfortunately, most of the IGF-1 is inactive because it is bound by another protein called (get this) IGF-1 Binding Protein-3, or IGF-1-BP-3 for short. Since bound hormones can not fit into and trigger a receptor-site, the majority of circulating and muscle IGF-1 can not trigger an anabolic stimulus. Like tons of cellulite in a porno movie (who watches those?) there is little good stuff happening. However, when IGF-1 is altered and becomes Des (1-3) IGF-1 the binding protein IGF-1-BP-3 can not bind to it and it is totally active. Another reason Des (1-3) IGF-1 is so potent is its unique ability to fit into lactic acid altered IGF-1 receptor sites. (YUP) When we train we burn carbohydrates as a fuel to make cellular ATP. When cells switch to this ATP pathway, the by-product is Lactic Acid. This is of course the cause of most of the burn we feel during intense or higher rep sets. Well, the lactic acid build-up is called acidosis, and it destroys the shape of some receptor-sites for period of time. Therefore some anabolic/anti-catabolic hormones have difficulty merging with their respective receptor- site and triggering a response (such as even unbound IGF-1). Not so with Des (1-3) IGF- 1, the super growth factor. It fits into the IGF-1 receptor-site even after acidosis. Des (1- 3) IGF-1 is unbound, over 10 times more potent than IGF-1, and it picks receptor-site locks. Too bad it has only a few minute active-life.

    Did you know that our body's make Des (1-3) IGF-1 naturally? Most un-informed individuals claim other wise, but it is true. When an athlete trains lactic acid builds up in muscle tissue. As we know, there is always IGF-1 / GH present in the blood stream and tissues (including muscle) from prior work-outs and other metabolic factors. That lactic acid burn triggers IGF-1/GH secretion from both prior and present work-outs. Unfortunately, lactic acid destroys some of the IGF-1 present in muscles being trained. But wait, this is good too!

    Lactic acid also cuts (truncates) the last 3 amino acids off the 70 amino acid chain of "some" of the surviving IGF-1 and creates Des (I-3) IGF-1. So acidosis increases GH/IGF-1 production in the liver, "unbinds" IGF-1 locally in the muscle being trained (burned), destroys some of the IGF-1, and converts some IGF-1 into Des (I-3) IGF-1. Huh, good deal. And the synthetic form of this super anabolic stuff is beginning to show up on the black market more frequently.

  2. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    i am confused about this type of IGF-1. looked all over for user feedback but couldnt. i have seen it for sale at a couple of places. i might just roll the dice and try it out. I may just use my lr3 igf-1 and enjoy those results.
  3. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    I am curious my self I have only write ups but no user feed back. In theory looks like its awesome. Maybe even a stack with peg mgf and ghrp6
    •   
       

  4. Registered User
    papapumpsd's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  216 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,733
    Answers
    0
  5. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    Cool. Read that. Neat info. Hopefully someone trys and compares it.
  6. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    what dosage would use with des igf1 how many injects per week.
  7. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    Well looks so new that no one has really logged it to see a proper protocol. If any thing I would stack that with peg mgf and ghrp6. I am assuming this is IM not Sub Q. I am talking to few friends that I may do a future cycle with for 6 months or till money runs out. Which ever comes 1st. Again it looks new no logs yet so I don't know. I will keep searching to better find my answer.
  8. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    I am asking around currently and people I have spoke to said do a protocol it like regular igf1 and even dose it a bit less since its 10x more than regular igf1.
  9. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    now when u say reg igf 1 u mean lr3 igf1 right? I am thinking 20 mcg ed. for 50 days. sound good or no?
  10. Registered User
    papapumpsd's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  216 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,733
    Answers
    0


    If this IGF variant is so "good", then why aren't more people using it? I think answering that question would be very helpful from efficacy, safety, and cost standpoints.

    -Papa!-
  11. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    is it cuz it is a new peptide? or maybe it is just now reaching us in terms of availability. i am ready to try it.
  12. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    It is most likely a new peptide as far as the compound goes there for research is still fresh off the pocket. I think once cost comes down more people are going to try it out. It does sound promising but how would this compare to igf2. Yes I am referring to lr3 igf1 which is what most people would be using any way right compared to regular igf1?
  13. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    **** man if it is xxxx per cent more anabolic that would be crazy. I love lr3 igf1 but if this is better I can justify paying more. I might run this in november/december. 50 days 20 mcgs per day ed. I will adjust the dose if needed
  14. Registered User
    papapumpsd's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  216 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,733
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by djbombsquad View Post
    It is most likely a new peptide as far as the compound goes there for research is still fresh off the pocket. I think once cost comes down more people are going to try it out. It does sound promising but how would this compare to igf2. Yes I am referring to lr3 igf1 which is what most people would be using any way right compared to regular igf1?
    Yes, most run LR3 variant of IGF-1.
  15. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    That is what I was thinking. I mean its not like technology has stopped. What about this des igf1 stacked with mgf and ghrp6?

    How crazy would that be.
  16. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    How does this compare to igf2?
  17. Registered User
    papapumpsd's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  216 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,733
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by djbombsquad View Post
    That is what I was thinking. I mean its not like technology has stopped. What about this des igf1 stacked with mgf and ghrp6?

    How crazy would that be.
    With all of Dat's data and convo on GH releasers, why would you run GHRP-6 w/o CJC-1295? And why would you run IGF-1 along with GH releasers? I may be mistaken, but Dat's thread has info saying there could be negative feedback at hand if administering exog. IGF-1.

    Remember, GH results in IGF-1 release.
  18. Registered User
    pumbertot's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    520
    Answers
    0


    hate to bring it up but dj you need to run a "eat to get big" food cycle followed by some heavy weights cycle and a few good old fashioned AAS cycles before you should be thinking about tinkering with peptides.

    igf2 has already been discussed. it has been concluded that in fully grown adults there are very few igf2 receptors, and they are found mainly in the intestines.
  19. Registered User
    BLACK747's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  231 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    470
    Answers
    0


    im actually on igf-1 [des] right know have been for about 2 weeks and for me it gives excellent pumps for me it works well
    taking preworkout because of the extremely short half life
  20. Registered User
    pumbertot's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    520
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by BLACK747 View Post
    im actually on igf-1 [des] right know have been for about 2 weeks and for me it gives excellent pumps for me it works well
    taking preworkout because of the extremely short half life
    shows promise but of course we dont care about pumps, which is the insulin like effect of the peptide. we want crazy hyperplasia so keep us updated. hey why not run a log? you do them best.

    so i guess we need an equivalent of an LR3 version to increase the half-life. that said I thought it was supposed to remain unbound for much longer than rIGF-1?
  21. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    Log would be awesome.
  22. Registered User
    BLACK747's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  231 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    470
    Answers
    0


    I will keep everyone posted on my progress
    Last edited by BLACK747; 10-09-2008 at 02:23 AM. Reason: mispelled word
  23. Board Supporter
    xtraflossy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,930
    Answers
    0


    I have seen posts on this here before, at least a year or two ago. Same story then as now I'd assume as to why it's not really being run..

    Price.
    It's just to damn expensive. And not your couple hundred dollar expensive either. Like $5000 or something for a few weeks at a moderate does. And it just isnt worth the price most likely.
    There was someone in this thread using it, and while It's an interesting compound, he has been on it for a few weeks and hasn't been like "Holy **** batman"! I'm huuuuuuuuuuge
  24. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    if it has such a short half life then what the hell is it good for? maybe this peptide is all hype!
  25. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    yea.
  26. Board Supporter
    xtraflossy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,930
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by ludacris007 View Post
    if it has such a short half life then what the hell is it good for? maybe this peptide is all hype!
    lol- from the look of things the only ones creating hype for this in bodybuilding applications are us.
    Its used in research, and has never promised to make anyone huge.
  27. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    Click to enlarge
    To investigate the role of IGFBPs on survival signaling and IGFBP-independent effects of IGF-1, we examined the survival response induced by LR3 and Des 1,3. LR3 and Des 1,3 rescued pVSMCs in low serum, suggesting that high IGFBP production by pVSMCs is a major factor contributing to the lack of a survival response to IGF-1. However, although IGF-1 and LR3 produced very different levels of protection in pVSMCs, the kinetics and extent of Akt kinase activity in response to LR3 and IGF-1 were similar. This suggests that, although both LR3 and IGF-1 survival responses required PI 3-kinase, LR3 may elicit a survival response downstream of Akt or independent of Akt. Although a number of pathways are involved in growth factor–mediated survival,50 we show that the survival effect of LR3 does not require ERK signaling. However, we have not excluded the possibility that Akt differentially phosphorylates Bad, caspase-9, or FKHRL1 in pVSMCs, resulting in reduced antiapoptotic signaling. Throught he research that was found chempep and growpep have clearly stated the potency of IGF-1 DES is much stronger and efficient. However Lr3 also is showing it's power. DES is very new and a verypotent form of IGF-1. Only some research is out, but it is promising for future medicine.
  28. Registered User
    BLACK747's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  231 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    470
    Answers
    0


    right know its 200 a mg not to bad
  29. Registered User
    papapumpsd's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  216 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,733
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by BLACK747 View Post
    right know its 200 a mg not to bad
    That is relative to the dose (and one's income )? 20mcg bilat? 10mcg? ???
  30. Board Supporter
    xtraflossy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,930
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by BLACK747 View Post
    right know its 200 a mg not to bad
    Well you have to do the math on this one..

    We use LR3 becasue it has a longer half-life then IGF1.
    We used MGF and the half life was too short so we used peg-mgf (as opposed to viral administration of course).

    Why?? Because while at $200 a gram, how many shots would you have to use daily to elicit the desired effect? (lol- you do know that you make this compound naturally right? ,..its cleaved via lactic acid if I recall correctly)

    Anyways, 30-100mcg shots a few times a day,.. you will go through it

    Then when you look at possible gains vs. price (and ease of use) LR3 looks much better.

    Now, should it become bound to something to preserve the halflife, then it will be a different story. But right now, it doesn't look like you can compare it to LR3, simply because the playing field isn't on even ground.
  31. Registered User
    ludacris007's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Age
    32
    Posts
    270
    Answers
    0


    i guess i misunderstood what was being said about this compound. i thought the half life was extended due to the lack of binding to IGFBP. if that is the case then the fact that it is 1000 percent more anabolic is negated right? it doesnt make sense to me right now from what i have read. maybe i should reread this ****. also i read on another board that lr3 igf1 is just a glucose disposal agent only and that the hyperslasia thing is more of a myth than fact. anyone care to comment.
  32. Registered User
    BLACK747's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  231 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    470
    Answers
    0


    i agree luda 100 percent something not adding up either way its seems to be working
  33. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    200 bucks is not bad again that is buying just once. Think buying in bulk. It may drop it by few dollars.
  34. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    I am getting a price this week for a 30 day supply to see how much I can get it for. If its reasonable I will think about it for the future.
  35. Registered User
    Bobaslaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    495
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by djbombsquad View Post
    I am getting a price this week for a 30 day supply to see how much I can get it for. If its reasonable I will think about it for the future.

    DJ, I think you suffer from peptide ADD syndrome.
  36. Registered User
    djbombsquad's Avatar
    Stats
    5'5"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    6,828
    Answers
    0


    I have a friend that will do a cycle with me. I am currently logging cre 02 so I can't do any thing but once I am done I may do cre 02 and some peptides.
  37. Registered User
    pumbertot's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    520
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by Bobaslaw View Post
    DJ, I think you suffer from peptide ADD syndrome.
    i was thinking more of 'pipe dreams' syndrome.
  38. Registered User
    pumbertot's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    520
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by ludacris007 View Post
    i guess i misunderstood what was being said about this compound. i thought the half life was extended due to the lack of binding to IGFBP. if that is the case then the fact that it is 1000 percent more anabolic is negated right? it doesnt make sense to me right now from what i have read. maybe i should reread this ****. also i read on another board that lr3 igf1 is just a glucose disposal agent only and that the hyperslasia thing is more of a myth than fact. anyone care to comment.
    its not a myth, the research literature proves that igf causes hyperplasia and there is anecdotal evidence that lr3 can to a lesser degree mimic the body's own igf.
  39. Registered User
    kbtoy31's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Age
    38
    Posts
    255
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by pumbertot View Post
    its not a myth, the research literature proves that igf causes hyperplasia and there is anecdotal evidence that lr3 can to a lesser degree mimic the body's own igf.

    I'm not saying you're wrong however theres a debate going on about that very question on another forum I belong to. I'm not sure it was who first wrote it but they are saying once you alter the protein chain that makes it the Lr3 version it's not the exacvt same compound and it's no longer useful as a bb'ing supplement. What heres the post I found on my other forum not saying I believe it or not. I'm willing to give anything a try once. I may react differently.

    After many years of making countless posts on LR3 IGF-1, I've finally tired of the topic.
    This will be my last post ever on LR3 IGF-1.

    1) Gropep,who invented LR3 IGF-1, altered the protein chain for prolonged lab experiments. Once the protein chain was altered, IGF-1 lost it's muscle building properties once converted to LR3 IGF-1

    2)Yes, some legit research has shown that IGF can multiply muscle fiber, but there is ZERO research on LR3 IGF-1, nor will there ever be. It was meant for lab cultures only

    3) Should you get IGF-1, it is rendered useless by using acetic acid, since you need the correct pH and ionic environment for the peptide chains to unwind. HCL is what's needed.

    4)The bulk of the response to IGF comes from it's ability to act as a sensational glucose disposal agent. This is the part where IGF's name, "Insulinlike", comes to the fore.

    5) I'm convinced any weight gain on LR3 IGF-1 is an uptick in glycogen/ water retention.

    6) Myself, along with several friends ,conducted studies on ourselves running LR3 IGF-1 at 3 different doses. Since LR3 IGF-1 is touted as some miracle mass builder, we never used steroids in our experiments. At 100 mcg, 150 mcg, and 200 mcg no one experienced muscle gains after 4 weeks on. Yes, we had hydrostatic testing done before during and after each experiment.

    I think you get my point ....no more LR3 IGF-1 debate for me. You want to piss your money away, go for it.


    ~RR
  40. Registered User
    kbtoy31's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Age
    38
    Posts
    255
    Answers
    0


    Also if they pegylated the (des) wouldn't that give it a longer half-life as well. I'd like to see that. B/c if it's just astronomically expensive and has a half life of a few minutes. That wouldn't have me buying it any time soon.
  •   

      
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in