[S.C.]

Hey guys,

I have never considered the use of HGH, or even serious in-depth research untill very recently. While I was researching methods of increasing collagen synthesis with AAS, I came across the supposed collagen synthesis properties of HGH. As this attribute is very important to me, it suddenly attracted my attention to a substance which I was somewhat fearful of for a while.

As a disclaimer to readers, my confusion is not due to laziness. I have went through almost all HGH threads in this forum within the last two days. I have also researched wherever else I could, but unfortunately I do not know of many forums with much post flow about HGH.

My worries are a few. I am primarily considered about cancer growth and internal organ growth. I have read that some belief the "GH gut" to be caused by insulin, while others believe it is fat between organs, and while others finally belief it is simply the doing of GH. Additionally, I am worried about random growth like jaw growth.

I have some specific questions also:

1. What exactly does HGH do to the bones of adult males? Can I expect further bone density from HGH use?

2. If anyone has taken HGH here, please tell me what your personal reasons for taking it were, if possible.

Basically, I am trying to get some advice. I am lost between the cost-benefit ratio. The research I have read on collagen synthesis with HGH are incredible (along with such things as help in memory, etc.). At the same time, the side effects I have read of are frightening, and the price is high.

Thanks for any help,

S.C.

[MorganKane]

My reason for taking HGH is more of an anti ageing or overall feeling good reason.
Been on it for about 5 months.
between 2-4iu 5days on and 2 off.
I feel better, sleep better, skin is better, hair is fuller. My stress level has been sky high but I am dealing with it better then ever. But then again I am 40 years old.
Cost is not bad at all.
At the 2iu dosage its about $90 for 4 weeks.

The only side effects for me is CTS.
While on AAS and holding water it became really bad from time to time but off cycle its been no big deal.

[S.C.]

Thanks for your reply. I am very curious about CTS because HGH is supposed to be helping tendons/ligaments/cartilage with type I collagen synthesis...so I cannot understand how CTS is caused. Does anyone have any research on it?

This is the problem I'm having. Much of the research is not definitive on the side effects or benefits.

[Matthew D]

CTS is caused by the water retention that most users of GH experience. With that said there are some that don't experience it at all

[max-rot98]

I am primarily considered about cancer growth

This is my main concern as well. Still plan on using it next winter but I just can't help but be a little nervous about this.

[S.C.]

Originally Posted by max-rot98

This is my main concern as well. Still plan on using it next winter but I just can't help but be a little nervous about this.

I think if regular check ups are done it shouldn't be bad. It can only increase the speed of the cancer growth, not create it (obviously). So as long as no cancer is there it should be okay.

[whale]

To my knowledge there has not been any relation to cancer and GH as is with most problems with cancer no one as of yet can determin how it got there nor can they figure out why it is growing slow or fast. As with all drugs there are risks it appears that you have assesed those risks and have looked at the bad and the good. In my opinion GH is not all that it is cracked up to be. I was on it for 8 months and I had insane pain in the hands and arms for that matter. Went off and they went away. For the money it was just not worth it. I actually got a doctor to prescribe it for me. It was kind of research (mine) over his non research. So I beat him out, this is very rare by the way I studied for hours to get it down. I even got him to prescribe it without a blood test even more rare now days. The trick was geting the insurance to cover it did that as well through the omsbudsman or what ever he or she is called. But even for free it was not worth the growth I got out of it. I would say that if you are planning hard earned money on it try everything else prior. As for aging I think it might be one of the best benefactors but that does not seem to be your case. Good luck maybe you will have better luck than me.

Whale

[CROWLER]

I have not seen any studies showing that GH withOUT steroids increases muscle mass in healthy males.

Anyone ever seen one?


CROWLER

[S.C.]

Originally Posted by CROWLER

I have not seen any studies showing that GH withOUT steroids increases muscle mass in healthy males.

Anyone ever seen one?


CROWLER

No, that does not exist. People talk about the increase in new muscle cells but frankly I have not noticed any proof of this, or proof that it is substantial enough to be noticed.

Since I posted this thread I have done a lot of research. The increases in bone mass from HGH use, collagen synthesis, and some other random benefits are very appealing to me. I have also found some articles that say HGH use, due to the resultant IGF-1 increase, can actually increase a persons risks of developing cancer (not speed it up). Apparently, according to some sources, it may increase the risk of breast cancer up to 7 times.

Aside from that, the gut is still a significant worry.

Finally, I am quite sensitive to estrogen. In most of my AAS cycles I have to use nolvadex throughout the cycle. Recently, many people have been complaining of gynecomastia being caused by HGH use. I believe that this must be because the HGH is either making a slight gynecomastia case (the gland itself) grow, or is increasing aromatization between test and estro. Eitherway, I know I cannot be on nolvadex for a year straight. Nolvadex is harder on the liver than most think.

Basically: I am now really confused.

[Matthew D]

I would like to see your source for the 7 time increase in the chance. From most of the sources I saw, there was an increase in the amount of IGF-1 present with individuals with cancer but not what you stated

[buckler]

Originally Posted by CROWLER

I have not seen any studies showing that GH withOUT steroids increases muscle mass in healthy males.

Anyone ever seen one?


CROWLER

It's in the Serano PI. Increases lean mass. Lean mass defined as muscle , bone and ligiment

[CROWLER]

Originally Posted by buckler

It's in the Serano PI. Increases lean mass. Lean mass defined as muscle , bone and ligiment

Go ahead and link us to it or post it here.


CROWLER

[glenihan]

i'm truly of the belief that gh is fairly useless without AAS and possibly slin in terms of muscle growth

from what i've read most of the LBM increases come from water retention and organ growth .. not muscle growth

i do believe if you are over say 35 2iu's of gh eod would be an excellent way to enhance one's overall quality of life

[buckler]

Originally Posted by CROWLER

Go ahead and link us to it or post it here.


CROWLER

I'll try and find it on line and post the link. I have the actual PI. I get my Serano kits from a friend that gets it through a doc for wasting syndrom. He only uses a fraction of it and trades a couple kits each month for gear. sweet deal for me

[whale]

OK the skinny no there is no proof of HGH causing cancer. Never will be they can not even truly say cigarettes cause cancer. I know this because I have taken and researched HGH to the maximum look at the first post. Next it will not cause estrogen build up either. As it does not work in the same biochemical range what so ever? I will say that water retention on it is significant. And with saying that water can build up in breast tissue as you can see with other types of biochemical problems (not HGH use) in both males and females. This is not gyno but because typically people that use HGH are users or at the least muscle builders and of the recent and not so recent publicity of gyno; to them it is gyno Which it is not, appears to be, but not the same Cyst formation. People that truly have gyno have cyst on there breast which in some cases can turn to tumors. Not water retention which I can say without a doubt that it is what is causing it if they are truly doing a GH only cycle. Biochemistry in the body is very specific it does not cross lines, and the compound of HGH will not convert to estrogen. A great point of this is the fact that bone density is increased which you alluded to already. If estrogen was higher that would counter act the bone density issue. Sorry to get so long winded but I want you to make your choice according to science not what he said she said. I hope you understand.

Whale

[S.C.]

Originally Posted by Matthew D

I would like to see your source for the 7 time increase in the chance. From most of the sources I saw, there was an increase in the amount of IGF-1 present with individuals with cancer but not what you stated

I told you I have heard that, but I am not sure of it. It's an article - no references, so I don't take it as fact. Also, obviously it depends on dosages. Heres the article:

Genetically Engineered Anti-Aging Medication (HGH) Poses Undisclosed Cancer Risks,
Warns Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.

Use of the genetically engineered human growth hormone (HGH) for anti-aging medication has become a major growth industry. Suppliers of HGH, including those offering mail order prescriptions, are proliferating on websites and the Internet. The Chicago-based seven-year-old American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, with over 8000 members, promotes injectable HGH in programs claiming to stop or even reverse aging, including decreasing body fat, and increasing muscle mass and bone density. However, practitioners of this burgeoning "health" industry are either ignorant of or suppress well-documented information on the grave cancer risks of HGH medication.

HGH induces growth promoting and other effects by stimulating the liver to increase production of the natural Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1) whose blood levels normally decline with advancing age. However, there are numerous publications in prestigious peer reviewed scientific journals showing that elevated IGF-1 levels are strongly associated with major excess risks of colon, prostate, and breast cancers; even minor elevations are associated with up to 7-fold increased risks of breast cancer, risks almost as high as those in women carrying genes (BRCA1 and BRCA2) with the strongest hereditary predisposition. Additionally, IGF-1 inhibits the programmed self-destruction (apoptosis) of cancer cells, thus stimulating the growth and invasiveness of small, undiagnosed cancers, besides increasing the resistance of cancers to chemotherapy. For these reasons, anti-aging HGH medication, compounded by failure to explicitly disclose its grave risks, constitutes medical malpractice.

There are also growing concerns on possible risks from the use of HGH nutritional supplements, including oral sprays. It should, however, be recognized that HGH absorption from the mouth and gut is unlikely to be significant, in striking contrast to complete absorption from injectable medication. Nevertheless, nutritional HGH supplements should be phased out until it can be shown that they do not elevate blood IGF-1 levels.

HGH medication should only be used by qualified endocrinologists for highly restricted medical disorders, such as dwarfism due to pituitary gland deficiency, as approved by the FDA in 1985; anti-aging medication has never received such approval.

CONTACT:
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.
Cancer Prevention Coalition
University of Illinois at Chicago
School of Public Health
2121 W. Taylor St., MC 922
Chicago, IL 60612

Props go to bluestrm for PM'ing me this article. I don't know if it has been posted here before (don't think so) but this needs to be discussed.

[S.C.]

Originally Posted by whale

OK the skinny no there is no proof of HGH causing cancer. Never will be they can not even truly say cigarettes cause cancer. I know this because I have taken and researched HGH to the maximum look at the first post. Next it will not cause estrogen build up either. As it does not work in the same biochemical range what so ever? I will say that water retention on it is significant. And with saying that water can build up in breast tissue as you can see with other types of biochemical problems (not HGH use) in both males and females. This is not gyno but because typically people that use HGH are users or at the least muscle builders and of the recent and not so recent publicity of gyno; to them it is gyno Which it is not, appears to be, but not the same Cyst formation. People that truly have gyno have cyst on there breast which in some cases can turn to tumors. Not water retention which I can say without a doubt that it is what is causing it if they are truly doing a GH only cycle. Biochemistry in the body is very specific it does not cross lines, and the compound of HGH will not convert to estrogen. A great point of this is the fact that bone density is increased which you alluded to already. If estrogen was higher that would counter act the bone density issue. Sorry to get so long winded but I want you to make your choice according to science not what he said she said. I hope you understand.

Whale

Good post Whale.

I obviously understand the growth hormone itself cannot aromatize. What I am wondering, though, is whether taking testosterone with HGH (same time) can cause greater aromatization of the testosterone.

Also, please comment on the article I posted. You are saying that even smoking cannot be proven to cause cancer. Thats great, the problem is that it DOES cause cancer. From experience, we know this. Does HGH do the same? Im not talking about speeding up tumours. I will surely, God willing, have bi-yearly check ups for possible cancer tumours, but I need to know whether HGH can actually start tumours.

Aside from that, I am very pleased with the bone density issue. I have researched collagen synthesis with AAS a lot (in fact, I started one of the best of AAS discussion threads over on SSB about collagen synthesis). But, in all my research on collagen synthesis all I read about HGH were haphazard comments that it increases collagen synthesis. I need to know whether it is increasing the more brittle and weak type III collagen (like winstrol does) or the stronger (and more naturally plentiful in tissue) type I collagen synthesis (as EQ, anavar, and deca promote). If it is type I, then I will surely be even more interested in HGH. But complaints of joint pains are worrying me about whether it is really type I, or just type III like winstrol. Comments?

Finally, someone in this thread said HGH without AAS is useless for muscle growth. I understand this, it seems to be the case from experience. We of course are not primarily using it for muscle growth anyway. BUT, I do not think it would help to use HGH WITH AAS rather than just AAS for muscle growth. Why? Well if HGH is indeed significantly increasing the count of muscle cells, then we should see an increase in muscle mass (not lean mass) naturally, and MORE of an increase with AAS. This does not seem to be the case.

I thank you for your comments and help. This is a very good board, I am beginning to wish that I was more active on it. It has been difficult to find people who are truly knowledgable about HGH on the boards. There are many that are knowledgable about AAS, and some that throw around seemingly random comments of the benefits of HGH use, but I have not found many that truly understand what exogenous HGH actually does to ones body in my research.