NattyBeast
Member
- Awards
- 1
IGF 1 LR3 Results & Info on IGF 2 LR3
Hi guys!
Has anyone of you ran a cycle of IGF 1 LR3? Preferably standalone
What were the results? I keep searching the internet and there are guys that igf did nothing to them and others that swear by this stuff. What's your stand on that one? Tuere could be posaibly bunks, but still, there could be some that are underdosed or people who aren't responding to it.
There are people on forums talking about solid but steady muscle gains and shirt-tearing pumps with a bit of added leanness, while others nothing.
There was an interesting post in a forum which i dont remember the name, but he claimed that igf1 LR3 in particular, because of the "Long" part of it, the same thing that enables it to circulate for many hours in the bloodstream, is the same thing that causes it not to work. Because of the low binding affinity to proteins in the bloodstream and in turn to the receptors of igf. Is this correct? I would really want to know.
I also heard of IGF2 LR3 today, and some guys talk about pinning them along igf1 because they have a synergistic effect.
On Wikipedia i read this though:
"Insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF-2) is one of three protein hormones that share structural similarity to insulin. The MeSH definition reads: "A well-characterized neutral peptide believed to be secreted by the liver and to circulate in the blood. It has growth-regulating, insulin-like and mitogenic activities. The growth factor has a major, but not absolute, dependence on somatotropin. It is believed to be a major fetal growth factor in contrast to Insulin-like growth factor 1, which is a major growth factor in adults"
So IGF 2 has mitogenic properties, and since mitosis is the way most cells multiply (for example muscle cells), perhaps could have synergistic effects with igf 1 since they bind in different receptors[1] but have some of the same properties.
But if you read the bottom line it says: "It is believed to be a major fetal growth factor in contrast to Insulin-like growth factor 1, which is a major growth factor in adults"
So could it be less effective in adults?
[1] "IGF-1 is closely related to a second protein called "IGF-2". IGF-2 also binds the IGF-1 receptor. However, IGF-2 alone binds a receptor called the "IGF-2 receptor" (also called the mannose-6 phosphate receptor). The insulin-like growth factor-II receptor (IGF2R) lacks signal transduction capacity, and its main role is to act as a sink for IGF-2 and make less IGF-2 available for binding with IGF-1R."
So they do bind to different receptors, but they just act solely as a way for igf2 to not bind to igf1's receptors and actually do nothing more, or am i wrong?
For IGF 1 on the other hand it says this:
"IGF-1 is a hormone similar in molecular structure to insulin. It plays an important role in childhood growth and continues to have anabolic effects in adults."
Also:
"IGF-1 is one of the most potent natural activators of the AKT signaling pathway, a stimulator of cell growth and proliferation, and a potent inhibitor of programmed cell death .[...] Like the insulin receptor, the IGF-1 receptor is a receptor tyrosine kinase – meaning it signals by causing the addition of a phosphate molecule on particular tyrosines. IGF-1 activates the insulin receptor at approximately 0.1 times the potency of insulin."
So the Anabolic effects on adults have been clinically observed, and perhaps the nutrient particioning properties , in contrast to IGF 2.
Note that all the above quotes refer to PURE IGF1. Not synthetic modified counterparts such as DES or LR3, so that is what made me think about them not working as efficient maybe (the des and lr3 parts not the actual hormone).
Im natty (im under 25 so im not touching roids until then) but after my cut i want to bulk up and gain as much solid muscle as possible, or to be exact, atleast slightly increase the rate of my muscle building, thats the reason ill be using igf1. Im thinking of stacking 12.5-25mcg T3 for staying leaner during the bulk, but also a nutrient particioning agent (which i don't know if its beneficial in such a cycle due to the fact that igf1 is one, or i might be wrong)
Thinking of something like a 4 to 6 week run with 100-120mcg Intramuscular bilat ed.
Would anyone recommend DES over LR3 and why? DES is said to be 10 times stronger but with a 20 minute half life compared to the 24 or 30-something hour half life of LR3.
What is your opinion in all these?
P.S This is really a wonderful community, ive learned a lot during my time here, and always everyone is eager to help each other! Keep up the good work guys!
HAPPY GAINZ
P.S 2 God I wish i had money for a cycle with Increlex
Hi guys!
Has anyone of you ran a cycle of IGF 1 LR3? Preferably standalone
What were the results? I keep searching the internet and there are guys that igf did nothing to them and others that swear by this stuff. What's your stand on that one? Tuere could be posaibly bunks, but still, there could be some that are underdosed or people who aren't responding to it.
There are people on forums talking about solid but steady muscle gains and shirt-tearing pumps with a bit of added leanness, while others nothing.
There was an interesting post in a forum which i dont remember the name, but he claimed that igf1 LR3 in particular, because of the "Long" part of it, the same thing that enables it to circulate for many hours in the bloodstream, is the same thing that causes it not to work. Because of the low binding affinity to proteins in the bloodstream and in turn to the receptors of igf. Is this correct? I would really want to know.
I also heard of IGF2 LR3 today, and some guys talk about pinning them along igf1 because they have a synergistic effect.
On Wikipedia i read this though:
"Insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF-2) is one of three protein hormones that share structural similarity to insulin. The MeSH definition reads: "A well-characterized neutral peptide believed to be secreted by the liver and to circulate in the blood. It has growth-regulating, insulin-like and mitogenic activities. The growth factor has a major, but not absolute, dependence on somatotropin. It is believed to be a major fetal growth factor in contrast to Insulin-like growth factor 1, which is a major growth factor in adults"
So IGF 2 has mitogenic properties, and since mitosis is the way most cells multiply (for example muscle cells), perhaps could have synergistic effects with igf 1 since they bind in different receptors[1] but have some of the same properties.
But if you read the bottom line it says: "It is believed to be a major fetal growth factor in contrast to Insulin-like growth factor 1, which is a major growth factor in adults"
So could it be less effective in adults?
[1] "IGF-1 is closely related to a second protein called "IGF-2". IGF-2 also binds the IGF-1 receptor. However, IGF-2 alone binds a receptor called the "IGF-2 receptor" (also called the mannose-6 phosphate receptor). The insulin-like growth factor-II receptor (IGF2R) lacks signal transduction capacity, and its main role is to act as a sink for IGF-2 and make less IGF-2 available for binding with IGF-1R."
So they do bind to different receptors, but they just act solely as a way for igf2 to not bind to igf1's receptors and actually do nothing more, or am i wrong?
For IGF 1 on the other hand it says this:
"IGF-1 is a hormone similar in molecular structure to insulin. It plays an important role in childhood growth and continues to have anabolic effects in adults."
Also:
"IGF-1 is one of the most potent natural activators of the AKT signaling pathway, a stimulator of cell growth and proliferation, and a potent inhibitor of programmed cell death .[...] Like the insulin receptor, the IGF-1 receptor is a receptor tyrosine kinase – meaning it signals by causing the addition of a phosphate molecule on particular tyrosines. IGF-1 activates the insulin receptor at approximately 0.1 times the potency of insulin."
So the Anabolic effects on adults have been clinically observed, and perhaps the nutrient particioning properties , in contrast to IGF 2.
Note that all the above quotes refer to PURE IGF1. Not synthetic modified counterparts such as DES or LR3, so that is what made me think about them not working as efficient maybe (the des and lr3 parts not the actual hormone).
Im natty (im under 25 so im not touching roids until then) but after my cut i want to bulk up and gain as much solid muscle as possible, or to be exact, atleast slightly increase the rate of my muscle building, thats the reason ill be using igf1. Im thinking of stacking 12.5-25mcg T3 for staying leaner during the bulk, but also a nutrient particioning agent (which i don't know if its beneficial in such a cycle due to the fact that igf1 is one, or i might be wrong)
Thinking of something like a 4 to 6 week run with 100-120mcg Intramuscular bilat ed.
Would anyone recommend DES over LR3 and why? DES is said to be 10 times stronger but with a 20 minute half life compared to the 24 or 30-something hour half life of LR3.
What is your opinion in all these?
P.S This is really a wonderful community, ive learned a lot during my time here, and always everyone is eager to help each other! Keep up the good work guys!
HAPPY GAINZ
P.S 2 God I wish i had money for a cycle with Increlex
