Guest viewing is limited

Study - Enhanced Anabolic Effects when GH and IGF-1 are used simultaneously

Bobaslaw

Member
Here is an interesting study depicting the increased anabolic effects of GH and IGF-1, when used simultaneously.

Full Study :

Invalid Link Removed

Abstract:

Enhancement of the anabolic effects of growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor I by use of both agents simultaneously.

S R Kupfer, L E Underwood, R C Baxter, and D R Clemmons
Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill 27599.

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Abstract:

The use of growth hormone (GH) as an anabolic agent is limited by its tendency to cause hyperglycemia and by its inability to reverse nitrogen wasting in some catabolic conditions. In a previous study comparing the anabolic actions of GH and IGF-I (insulin-like growth factor I), we observed that intravenous infusions of IGF-I (12 micrograms/kg ideal body wt [IBW]/h) attenuated nitrogen wasting to a degree comparable to GH given subcutaneously at a standard dose of 0.05 mg/kg IBW per d. IGF-I, however, had a tendency to cause hypoglycemia. In the present study, we treated seven calorically restricted (20 kcal/kg IBW per d) normal volunteers with a combination of GH and IGF-I (using the same doses as in the previous study) and compared its effects on anabolism and carbohydrate metabolism to treatment with IGF-I alone. The GH/IGF-I combination caused significantly greater nitrogen retention (262 +/- 43 mmol/d, mean +/- SD) compared to IGF-I alone (108 +/- 29 mmol/d; P < 0.001). GH/IGF-I treatment resulted in substantial urinary potassium conservation (34 +/- 3 mmol/d, mean +/- SE; P < 0.001), suggesting that most protein accretion occurred in muscle and connective tissue. GH attenuated the hypoglycemia induced by IGF-I as indicated by fewer hypoglycemic episodes and higher capillary blood glucose concentrations on GH/IGF-I (4.3 +/- 1.0 mmol/liter, mean +/- SD) compared to IGF-I alone (3.8 +/- 0.8 mmol/liter; P < 0.001). IGF-I caused a marked decline in C-peptide (1,165 +/- 341 pmol/liter; mean +/- SD) compared to the GH/IGF-I combination (2,280 +/- 612 pmol/liter; P < 0.001), suggesting maintenance of normal carbohydrate metabolism with the latter regimen. GH/IGF-I produced higher serum IGF-I concentrations (1,854 +/- 708 micrograms/liter; mean +/- SD) compared to IGF-I only treatment (1,092 +/- 503 micrograms/liter; P < 0.001). This observation was associated with increased concentrations of IGF binding protein 3 and acid-labile subunit on GH/IGF-I treatment and decreased concentrations on IGF-I alone. These results suggest that the combination of GH and IGF-I treatment is substantially more anabolic than either IGF-I or GH alone. GH/IGF-I treatment also attenuates the hypoglycemia caused by IGF-I alone. GH/IGF-I treatment could have important applications in diseases associated with catabolism.
Click to expand...
 
Any idea what doses this translates to?
I mean, if we use a full dose of GH and full dose of LR3, then it's kind of a no-brainer. But if it's half and half, that makes it worthwhile. Any ideas?
 
Hello?
What's the point to posting this study stuff (as most of this board does for some reason) if there's no functional information?
 
papapumpsd said:
What do you mean? SCIENTIFIC STUDIES = KNOWLEDGE
Click to expand...
Pfft. Only on the rare ones that are legit (unbiased studies are far and few between nowadays) and on the ones that actually pan out in real life. Stick around a few years and watch. There's always studies for things that don't even end up being effective to any worthwhile degree. And it's always the 180lb "smart guys" who are into the studies, but it isn't working for them.

Now how does this one translate into reality? I'd like to put the proper doses together.
 
Cal said:
Pfft. Only on the rare ones that are legit (unbiased studies are far and few between nowadays) and on the ones that actually pan out in real life. Stick around a few years and watch. There's always studies for things that don't even end up being effective to any worthwhile degree. And it's always the 180lb "smart guys" who are into the studies, but it isn't working for them.

Now how does this one translate into reality? I'd like to put the proper doses together.
Click to expand...

Cal, we read scientific studies for the anecdotal evidence reagarding a specific chemical and/or therapy. These peptides are not perscription drugs. This means that clinical trials (Phase I, II, III) have NOT been performed on them. And this means that human data specific to YOUR need(s) is NOT available. So, to somehow generate a cause-and-effect relationship relevant to peptides, we can piece together scientific data on non-human animal models to hopefully come up with a strategy that will safely work in humans.

Regarding "legit" studies, I am not sure why PhDs and MDs would produce bunk studies. While I have not published scientific studies, the research I have been involved with (microbiological and molec. bio.) have been 100% honest. We have no need nor desire to produce misleading data. It's truly 100% pointless.

And the 180lb. "smartguys" are A-OK in my book.....I don't judge the intelligence of a person by their weight. MD/PhD researchers are doing research right now on peptides, and I'll bet they don't use them personally. They have animals to test.

Hope this helps.

-Papa!-
 
papapumpsd said:
Cal, we read scientific studies for the anecdotal evidence reagarding a specific chemical and/or therapy. These peptides are not perscription drugs. This means that clinical trials (Phase I, II, III) have NOT been performed on them. And this means that human data specific to YOUR need(s) is NOT available. So, to somehow generate a cause-and-effect relationship relevant to peptides, we can piece together scientific data on non-human animal models to hopefully come up with a strategy that will safely work in humans.

Regarding "legit" studies, I am not sure why PhDs and MDs would produce bunk studies. While I have not published scientific studies, the research I have been involved with (microbiological and molec. bio.) have been 100% honest. We have no need nor desire to produce misleading data. It's truly 100% pointless.

And the 180lb. "smartguys" are A-OK in my book.....I don't judge the intelligence of a person by their weight. MD/PhD researchers are doing research right now on peptides, and I'll bet they don't use them personally. They have animals to test.

Hope this helps.

-Papa!-
Click to expand...
This little arguing is cute, but serves no purpose. Do you have any ideas on translating this into human dosages?
 
Cal said:
Pfft. Only on the rare ones that are legit (unbiased studies are far and few between nowadays) and on the ones that actually pan out in real life. Stick around a few years and watch. There's always studies for things that don't even end up being effective to any worthwhile degree. And it's always the 180lb "smart guys" who are into the studies, but it isn't working for them.

Now how does this one translate into reality? I'd like to put the proper doses together.
Click to expand...

I'm 5'9" and 240lbs and 10% bf.

I'm the geekiest guy around here.
 
Cal said:
Pfft. Only on the rare ones that are legit (unbiased studies are far and few between nowadays) and on the ones that actually pan out in real life. Stick around a few years and watch. There's always studies for things that don't even end up being effective to any worthwhile degree. And it's always the 180lb "smart guys" who are into the studies, but it isn't working for them.

Now how does this one translate into reality? I'd like to put the proper doses together.
Click to expand...

I have done HGH and IGF together many times and can tell you from personal experience that they are definitely synergistic. I know of many others that will say the same.
 
papapumpsd said:
5'9", 240, 10%....LOL, you are a monstrosity! My 12 month goal is to be 5'8", 200lbs 6-7%! you are beastly Grunt.
Click to expand...

Many people have been saying that about me lately, I wonder why? I look at my stats on paper and go, whoa, that looks pretty good, then look in the mirror and see a frail, fat old guy. WTF? :rant:
 
we observed that intravenous infusions of IGF-I (12 micrograms/kg ideal body wt [IBW]/h) attenuated nitrogen wasting to a degree comparable to GH given subcutaneously at a standard dose of 0.05 mg/kg IBW per d.
Click to expand...

For a 220lb man, this would translate into 1.2mg per hour infusions, or 28.8mg a day. GH would translate to 5mg a day or roughly 15iu.
 
Cal said:
Okay so nobody has yet translated the study to human dosages and thereby relevance.
Click to expand...
you need to chill, you'll live longer.

the synergy is proven....that's pretty relevant to most of us guinea pigs here who recognize the inexact nature of our experiments.

you want hard numbers? follow your own sig's advice and try it yourself. and sweet jesus, please lose the 'tude.
 
SOLARUS said:
you need to chill, you'll live longer.

the synergy is proven....that's pretty relevant to most of us guinea pigs here who recognize the inexact nature of our experiments.

you want hard numbers? follow your own sig's advice and try it yourself. and sweet jesus, please lose the 'tude.
Click to expand...

He does have quite the ******* attitude, doesn't he?
 
That's not showing yourself as much better. But despite your hypocracy, i am sorry. I didn't mean to let my frustrations with study followers come off so rudely.
Thanks for the clarification of sorts, guys.
 
Cal said:
Hello?
What's the point to posting this study stuff (as most of this board does for some reason) if there's no functional information?
Click to expand...

Thats a fair comment I guess.

Grunt, Bob, Sol, Papa, Pum, Mat... these guys have used these compounds. They also are very capable of reading studies & picking them apart.

If any "functional" information can be gleened from their experiences and/or research they are happy to share it with others ...and they have and they do...

I DO really understand your frustration at trying to figure out how to run these compounds...really I do. But you do understand that attempting to use these things the way you want is at best "off label" and in the end contrary to U.S. law.

The appropriate answer to your question is "no human being should use any of these compounds until they are deemed safe by the appropriate agency for human use...and then they will be prescribed by a physician to treat an illness not build muscle in normal men ...at a dose far lower than you will ever be happy with..."

There are answers to your questions out there ...so many people have fumbled in the dark before you... most of us are still fumbling...
 
yes Dat exactly and the fumbling is the fun part. anyway as we are all different with very different numbers of receptors and sensitivities you need to find what works for you.

run a few cycles of GH with IGF and add in some insulin. try various dosages and protocols. I know what works for me but you need to find your own 'comfort zone'.

just remember, life is too short to be small. ;)



datBtrue said:
Thats a fair comment I guess.

Grunt, Bob, Sol, Papa, Pum, Mat... these guys have used these compounds. They also are very capable of reading studies & picking them apart.

If any "functional" information can be gleened from their experiences and/or research they are happy to share it with others ...and they have and they do...

I DO really understand your frustration at trying to figure out how to run these compounds...really I do. But you do understand that attempting to use these things the way you want is at best "off label" and in the end contrary to U.S. law.

The appropriate answer to your question is "no human being should use any of these compounds until they are deemed safe by the appropriate agency for human use...and then they will be prescribed by a physician to treat an illness not build muscle in normal men ...at a dose far lower than you will ever be happy with..."

There are answers to your questions out there ...so many people have fumbled in the dark before you... most of us are still fumbling...
Click to expand...
 
Oh I'm aware and have been in the lr3 game since before this board's "gurus" knew what it was. I just get sick of studies being looked at as if they matter when it is only one study and there's not much correlation to our use. But I agree. The fun is in the trying.
 
Cal said:
It was just speaking factually. No need to get offended.
Click to expand...

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

OK smart guy, please recite each date at which this board's "gurus" started studying/using IGF-1 and the date at which you did.

Factually? Please. Someone do something with this clown.
 
Grunt76 said:
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

OK smart guy, please recite each date at which this board's "gurus" started studying/using IGF-1 and the date at which you did.

Factually? Please. Someone do something with this clown.
Click to expand...

didnt want to be offensive but when he said that i was going to question why if he is so experienced with IGF then why a puny 218lbs at 5ft10? :p
 
pumbertot said:
didnt want to be offensive but when he said that i was going to question why if he is so experienced with IGF then why a puny 218lbs at 5ft10? :p
Click to expand...

I think if he changed his handle to "offensive" we wouldn't notice at this point. You are just too nice brother.
 
pumbertot said:
didnt want to be offensive but when he said that i was going to question why if he is so experienced with IGF then why a puny 218lbs at 5ft10? :p
Click to expand...
So you stall me so much that you know my goals, genetics, injuries, and professional needs that would dictate my weight? How very sweet of you.
But there's still no need to be offended. Nobody attacked you.
 
Cal said:
So you stall me so much that you know my goals, genetics, injuries, and professional needs that would dictate my weight? How very sweet of you.
But there's still no need to be offended. Nobody attacked you.
Click to expand...

my bad i was out of line. its the frustration of being immobilised in this swaithe sling post pec repair coming out. i apologise. i think we are all getting off on the wrong foot and need to chill out and respect each other. there is enough bashing by the lay public, us brothers of the iron should stick together.:dl:
 
pumbertot said:
my bad i was out of line. its the frustration of being immobilised in this swaithe sling post pec repair coming out. i apologise. i think we are all getting off on the wrong foot and need to chill out and respect each other. there is enough bashing by the lay public, us brothers of the iron should stick together.:dl:
Click to expand...

That is too true. So Cal, just recite the dates when each of us started studying IGF-1 and yourself, so we can move on.
 
Grunt76 said:
That is too true. So Cal, just recite the dates when each of us started studying IGF-1 and yourself, so we can move on.
Click to expand...
I see you don't realize that your request means nothing. Others are being cool. You should try it sometime. Otherwise, you can cite your lips to my butt. Haha.

I know how many were using it when I started. Yes thete wrre only a handful. And I know you weren't in the scene until a year or more later when it got popular. Heck I remember you posting info back when that article was out that confused long and short chained igf, and you posting its info as if it was correct. Since then you've come a long way, and I commend you for that.

Now let's go to our own corners:
wannabe gurus in one
nut swingers of said gurus in another
frustrated members in another
and there is always the annoying thorn in the side corner
Everyone can decide what corner to put himself into so nobody can be offended by the typical message board roles.

Haha for God's sake laugh at the stupidity of this and the attitudes coming out. Its pathetic to get upset over something so trivial. Its not making any of us rich or famous (unless internet rep matters to you like a newbie).
Smile. Life is good if you are blessed enough to have the freedom and health to even participate in such discussion.
 
pumbertot said:
my bad i was out of line. its the frustration of being immobilised in this swaithe sling post pec repair coming out. i apologise. i think we are all getting off on the wrong foot and need to chill out and respect each other. there is enough bashing by the lay public, us brothers of the iron should stick together.:dl:
Click to expand...
Thanks. Much respect. Best wishes for a smooth recovery.
 
Cal said:
I see you don't realize that your request means nothing. Others are being cool. You should try it sometime. Otherwise, you can cite your lips to my butt. Haha.

I know how many were using it when I started. Yes thete wrre only a handful. And I know you weren't in the scene until a year or more later when it got popular. Heck I remember you posting info back when that article was out that confused long and short chained igf, and you posting its info as if it was correct. Since then you've come a long way, and I commend you for that.

Now let's go to our own corners:
wannabe gurus in one
nut swingers of said gurus in another
frustrated members in another
and there is always the annoying thorn in the side corner
Everyone can decide what corner to put himself into so nobody can be offended by the typical message board roles.

Haha for God's sake laugh at the stupidity of this and the attitudes coming out. Its pathetic to get upset over something so trivial. Its not making any of us rich or famous (unless internet rep matters to you like a newbie).
Smile. Life is good if you are blessed enough to have the freedom and health to even participate in such discussion
Click to expand...

"I know this, I know that" WHOA. So impressive. :clap2:
 
datBtrue said:
Thats a fair comment I guess.

Grunt, Bob, Sol, Papa, Pum, Mat... these guys have used these compounds. They also are very capable of reading studies & picking them apart.

If any "functional" information can be gleened from their experiences and/or research they are happy to share it with others ...and they have and they do...

There are answers to your questions out there ...so many people have fumbled in the dark before you... most of us are still fumbling...
Click to expand...
this is the most meaningful post in this thread.

Cal - nobody has been fed the perfect protocol, unfortunately. we all make educated guesses based on others' experiences (and other factors like cost, availability, sides, etc and various inferences and inductions); we're mostly guessing, trying, revising...and in our off-time, living our lives :)

do you have any specific questions or comments that you'd like to discuss? i'm sure if anyone here has any insight derived from their own experiments, they'll share it...and maybe some of it will be of use...
 
I think this thread is done now. Nothing useful is left at this point. Just a buncha call-outs and hairpulling and $hit.

BUB-BYE!!

-Papa!-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top