IGF to fix symetry problems?

justreading

justreading

Banned
Like many people here I am sure, I have some asymetries in my physique. Unfortunetly my so called "dominant" side is much smaller in the shoulder and tricep area yet is still odly stronger in both.

I am wondering... Could I do igf NOT bi-laterally to help fix this problem?
 
when i first started using igf,i always shot my left shoulder...didn't know any better at the time,...needless to say my left shoulder is noticable bigger,and i'm right handed...so imo it should help.Thanks to reasearch i now shoot bi-lateral .....
 
Ha dont mean to laugh at you but man that sucks but if it really works then we can both fix the same problem by shooting our right sides ....

I definetly believe in igf but not sure about local growth. Since I ran it before I am up to 220 on this cycle and leaner than I ever have been at this size. With the supply problems that may be coming out of china I am going to wait and use what I have in PCT though
 
most righties have a stronger left side. there are a few theories as to why this is.

LR3-IGF1 goes systemic immediately and has a long half-life. it's not going to correct symmetry problems.
 
same_old said:
most righties have a stronger left side. there are a few theories as to why this is.

LR3-IGF1 goes systemic immediately and has a long half-life. it's not going to correct symmetry problems.
Click to expand...

Would peg-mgf help? If not, is there anything or compound that can be run to fix the problem? I have the same problem... my right pec is much bigger/fuller than my left... and I've tried every type of training technique to get it to grow. It has helped a little, but it will not catch up with the right. Doesn't peg-mgf and lr3-igf-1 increase sattelite muscle cells locally?
 
same_old said:
LR3-IGF1 goes systemic immediately and has a long half-life. it's not going to correct symmetry problems.
Click to expand...

Have you done some conclusive experimenting that backs up your statement?

For I have done some conclusive exprimenting that backs up the contrary of your statement.

How do you know the "half-life" of IGF-1 LR3 in the doses we use it at?

The mere fact that you speak of the "half life" of this peptide shows a great lack of understanding.
 
Grunt76 said:
Have you done some conclusive experimenting that backs up your statement?

For I have done some conclusive exprimenting that backs up the contrary of your statement.

How do you know the "half-life" of IGF-1 LR3 in the doses we use it at?

The mere fact that you speak of the "half life" of this peptide shows a great lack of understanding.
Click to expand...

So grunt, if he's wrong than can lr3-igf1 or peg-mgf help correct my imbalance?
 
it will help correct imbalances. i tore a bicep years ago and had never been able to balance it out. after a few cycles of igf in the damaged bi i am now even.

i don't care if it was just from fascial stretching from the pump or from placebo effect or whatever. it did work though.
 
Yeah I am right handed and my left side is functionally stronger but my right side is stronger in the gym. My left side is much bigger though to the point that I can feel it in my shirts and how they fit.

Grunt.

On days that I would inject uni-laterally would it make more sense to say just inject 20mcg or do the full 40mcg? I am thinking in the shoulder shot I can get away with 40mcg (I am now 220+) but due to how small my right tricep is I should keep it at 20mcg. Am I thinking correctly here?
 
Grunt76 said:
Have you done some conclusive experimenting that backs up your statement?
Click to expand...
yes.

Grunt76 said:
How do you know the "half-life" of IGF-1 LR3 in the doses we use it at?
Click to expand...
you think it does significantly more to the local cells before it is distributed to the bloodstream? that's highly debatable, and really hard to prove...not that my contention isnt also difficult to prove outside a clinical trial.

Grunt76 said:
The mere fact that you speak of the "half life" of this peptide shows a great lack of understanding.
Click to expand...
you just spoke of "half-life" in your previous paragraph. by your logic, you must lack understanding also.
 
same_old said:
yes.


you think it does significantly more to the local cells before it is distributed to the bloodstream? that's highly debatable, and really hard to prove...not that my contention isnt also difficult to prove outside a clinical trial.


you just spoke of "half-life" in your previous paragraph. by your logic, you must lack understanding also.
Click to expand...

Would there be a difference in the local growth vs systemic if one would inject either IM or sub-Q? I would think IM would produce more localized muscle growth...
 
swoody said:
Would there be a difference in the local growth vs systemic if one would inject either IM or sub-Q? I would think IM would produce more localized muscle growth...
Click to expand...
the only thing i know about subQ versus IM injections with respect to water-based chemicals is that subQ tends to distribute slightly more slowly...this is true for HCG and insulin, so i suspect the same is true for IGF (but i cant say for sure)

as for more site growth with either method? no clue. i'd guess IM because subQ never even gets into the muscle below it (in theory)
 
same_old said:
yes.
Click to expand...
Surely not. Please completely describe this experimentation and I will point out the glaring flaws in it.


same_old said:
you think it does significantly more to the local cells before it is distributed to the bloodstream? that's highly debatable, and really hard to prove...not that my contention isnt also difficult to prove outside a clinical trial.
Click to expand...
It is proven that exercise acutely upregulates IGF-1 receptors in the trained muscle. That's why you pin there, and that's how you get the enhanced local response. Two passes: one before it hits the bloodstream and then again from the bloodstream.


same_old said:
you just spoke of "half-life" in your previous paragraph. by your logic, you must lack understanding also.
Click to expand...
No, you did, I put the quotes around it to refer to the illusory concept you are referring to, which of course applies to most DRUGS but not necessarily to quick-acting naturally-occuring substances and their analogues.
 
Grunt76 said:
Surely not. Please completely describe this experimentation and I will point out the glaring flaws in it.
Click to expand...
LOL. why would any sensible person take the time to explain their experience to someone who has already formed an negative opinion about its validity?

you dont believe that several repeated LR3 administration protocols all produced systemic/general and not localized growth? that's your prerogative.
 
Grunt76 said:
Have you done some conclusive experimenting that backs up your statement?

For I have done some conclusive exprimenting that backs up the contrary of your statement.

How do you know the "half-life" of IGF-1 LR3 in the doses we use it at?

The mere fact that you speak of the "half life" of this peptide shows a great lack of understanding.
Click to expand...

thanks grunt
 
grunty, you the man, keep bringing the truth, you are one of the only people on here that the more i learn, the more i realize from stuff you wrote a long time ago that you have done your research and know your $hit
 
same_old said:
LOL. why would any sensible person take the time to explain their experience to someone who has already formed an negative opinion about its validity?

you dont believe that several repeated LR3 administration protocols all produced systemic/general and not localized growth? that's your prerogative.
Click to expand...

Bro you need to chill,Grunt is well respected with peptides,and their effects.check the ibe boards and see for yourself....
 
same_old said:
LOL. why would any sensible person take the time to explain their experience to someone who has already formed an negative opinion about its validity?

you dont believe that several repeated LR3 administration protocols all produced systemic/general and not localized growth? that's your prerogative.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying, and you have a bit of a point. This point does not hold up to the fact that you have some very smart and experienced people reading this forum who would not hesitate ONE SECOND to shoot me down if I were anything but unbiased in my analysis of your experimentation.

No, truly, I am genuinely curious about your experimentation and why you state what you do, but I entertain a huge doubt as to your having tried what works for localized growth. As countless others have done with me in PM's and emails, complaining that they don't get localized results, upon realizing that the correct procedure was not followed, either through ignorance, and it was thus corrected, or by practical measures, and thus the lack of any local effects was easily explained.

I have yet to see one case of someone doing everything right and not getting any local effects. You would be the first and I am genuinely curious.
 
I might try the first couple of shots in my left shoulder. My left delt is lagging behind a bit and it sucks.

Has anyone tried a larger dosage in one side? Like if I was going to do 40mcg bilaterally, would putting 25mcg in one delt and 15mcg in the other delt make sense?

I might not do this if anyone says it's dumb. I'll just make sure to do more laterals on the left side to bring it out more. I sleep in the fetal position on the left side and also took a nasty skateboarding spill, so my left shoulder is a little bunged. :( lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top