posted Sat, 11/22/2014 - 17:58
2790
igf levels
ad
What igf range is considered anabolic? Is there a chart of different igf ranges that describe effects at those ranges? No one really ever talks about this, just how many iu of what. Is there a certain igf range that is considered anabolic?
- Bookmark
- 0
- 0
IGF-1 / IGFBP-3 / NEFA
These must be tested to confirm effectiveness (bioavailability) rhGH
IGF-1 is the standard for BioPharmaceuticals that have ALREADY been determined bioactive.
And yes, there is a standard used for dosing/elevated iGF-1 (etc) levels
Treadnontren has some useful info on that.
So, by pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic standards....it would seem all our IGF-1 testing is null n void for legitimacy of Internet GH. :(
Something about increased IGF-1 levels. When prescribed for aGHD, close monitoring is done to maintain "normal" levels. Some studies suggest prolonged increased IGF-1 levels can have a list of potential adverse effects. Anti-aging claims shouldn't be looked at as solid medical information. Now this info is cool. Although IGF-1 levels are used to monitor the effects of the rhGH dosage for aGHD, there are other test that are needed to conclude the effectiveness of the "analyte" being prescribed. So in other words, doctors are prescribing a known Bioidentical Pharmaceutical drug. Using IGF-1 to judge the authenticity of your UGL HGH is flawed according to pharmacodynamic profiles. Also, doing GH serum testing could be pointless. I need to read up more on all this. But it's interesting. Any other useful information is appreciated. Still waiting on those GH test results.
I see you guys are continuing to drum the its "peps" or ghrh/ghrp in generics tune. There hasn't been a single shred of evidence in these claims. Every god damn hplc or mass ever done either shows the stuff to be gh (whether it's 191/192aa is debatable, bioavailability again debateble) or just bunk The pulse/pituitary dump from ghrh/ghrp is different then the serum peak from Inj rhgh! Every lab we see on legit generics shows serum >19 at 3.5 hrs post injection AND Igf levels that are above reference range. YOU CANNOT PRODUCE THESE GH SERUM LEVELS WITH GHRP/GHRH at the 3.5 hr mark the bloods are drawn. On top of that No one is reporting any sides that are common with "peps"! Why do you guys keep repeating this falsehood ???
hotdog23X 1000 wat he said. I justed posted this in another thread. Serum GH testing will show GH present BUT will not show bioavailability/activity which could be NIL even if they are testing high serums. This is why pharm grade elevates IGF from much lower doses than generics. Higher quantity of "functioning" GH molecules
What's up killea here something a nother brother showed me http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/threads/190275-GHRP-2-CJC-1295-Without...
Damn peptides raised his gh serum to 30. I wish he would have waited 3.5 hours to see what it was then.
Yea I know we got a bro on here that be dropping some test soon .
If you're referring to my posts, maybe I wasn't clear (sometimes my posts aren't clear to me either). I'm referring to using rhGH or GHRP. Not Chinese GH being peps. But, the low cost, easy accessible Chinese GH being sold is not quality. (low purity, bioactive). Now that's fact. 191aa and bioavailability is not debatable. Not what I'm wanting to use but seems it's been a hot seller for some time. That's cool. But, a little digging and you'll see that Trade Companies are selling these products produced at actual BioPharms....but produced cheaply so the final stages are not done for a pure, Bioidentical product. Maybe another thread for that topic. I'd like to see more replies on elevated IGF-1 and what is it's importance.
Yes, more replies on elevated IGF-1 and it's importance haha
Not you brother! But I see iron alluding to it and I see it all over this forum and others. TP/HK of Riptropin fame have these gray tops direct from China, that were recently independently tested by two different labs by different end users ... No bait and switches ... One in Canada and one in Colorado ... The Colorado test showed purity at 98%, countless guys getting serum at high 20s, low 30s. These kits are being sold for around $1.6 per IU
I'm not trying to source or anything just reportjng what I see and trying to prove that cheaply made chinese gh can be and is real based on blood work and a analysis
Here is one of the hplc tests https://imageshack.com/i/iqCKwFoMj
I'm all about the info. So here's some....2012 a new BioPharm opened up right down the road from the "supposed" BioHygene. They produced such recombinants for outsource purposes. Whatever "standard" you prefer. So a simple HPLC is just the tip. How do I know, I'm having some testing done myself. There's a list of additional testing to confirm bioavailability. This is the key to it's effectiveness. This is why I want more info on IGF-1 elevation. Receptor usability, etc. Shits interesting but I think more complicated than just elevated IGF-1. All this "deep digging" I've done isn't just to post up like some GH Guru. That I am not. Winters here and it's time to put ass to grass and test this out in the Gym.
hotdog23x2
From hence forward thou shalt defer to HailRazor for all things rhgh. For he knows
IMO opinion. IGF is the endgame for hgh. It is produced by us for us (bufu). No question of bioavailability or activity and I know of no way it can be manipulated for testing
Well over the long term gh in theory causes hyperplasia so overtime the newly developed muscle cells will mature and become visible, so this will happen with any dose but it wont be very noticeable with small doses. They usually say 8ius+ ed is the muscle building range and typically this would put your igf-1 levels over 800 if not more. They usually say 2ius for anti aging, 4-6 for fat loss and 8+ for muscle building, but all gh will help to some small degree. Think if it like testosterone, sure you can build some muscle on 150mgs ew, but it wont be as noticeable as 400+. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks bro. That's what I figured, but no one ever discusses what igf range is ideal for muscle growth. It's obviously not linear, but the more growth you use the more hyperplasia that will occur, and 800 is a minimum ish for noticeable hyperplasia. Would 3 or 4 months of an igf at 800 be more favorable than a year or two at say in the 400-500 range?
That i cant tell you. Id have to try it myself first. My guess is worthless without experience trying both. But I'm a member of another forum where its basically all serious bodybuilders and they do things different there with gh, they "prime" the body with gh for a few months and then take it out and up the doses of gear to grow these new muscle fibers. They dont say you have to run it for 6-12 months mimumum etc like alot of people think. Also they only use pharma grade gh which according to them you start noticing effects in 10 days or less. I think most of the 6-12 months comes from the fact that everyones using generics which are mainly just peptides or at best severely underdosed gh if thats the case its gonna take a long time to start noticing the effects. And they also say you have a 3-6 month " window of opportunity" after you take the gh out to continue to benefit from it.
Bottom line is idk, you'd have to try both and see.
Whether you have pharma or generic, shouldn't igf levels be what matters? If my igf is 800 from either, shouldn't I benefit the same theoretically?
rhGH vs Mimic rhGH. Plenty of solid info on that subject. I know where I stand with that. The highest IGf-1 wins? Maybe look into natural GH pulse release and rhGH constant absorption. Timing of dosage. Pep(GHRP) or exo(rhGH). Blasting 10ius of GH(ish) vs a thought out rhGH - GHRP protocol? Just a thought.
Actually no. I was reading a some info from an anti agining clinic last week and they stated a lot of benefits from gh we look for a due to the presence of real gh in the blood and it's not all about igf-1 numbers. Maybe not the hyperplasia but the fat loss. And this makes perfect sense. We can easily duplicate the igf-1 levels of pharm grade gh with generics but we still don't get the results. And this is because most generics do not contain gh, just peps. So if you found some real generic gh then ya it will work.
So what you're saying is the gh in the blood is what burns fat, and the igf level is what is anabolic still?
According to what i was reading form this anti aging clinic. aNd it makes sense because alot of times we can get the same igf-1 levels with generic as pharma but get nowhere near the results.
Yea in theory ... But you will always find a bro scientist that will claim Igf In the 800s from generics is somehow different then if you reached with pharma. Since there has been no real scientific review of these claims nor any real studies on gh / AAS for bodybuilding, you'll have to either rely on some assholes opinion and experience ... Or chart your own course and see what works for you... After years of reading forums and talking to people, I follow a single rule ... I o only believe a claimif it's backed up by real scientific proof. Everything else is as suspect as a blue top from China or just parroted bullshit from forum to forum.
It is different man. Talk to guys who have had 500 igf-1 levels from nords and 500 from hyges and ask if the results are anywhere near the same, and they're not. Hell even ask guys who had 550+ on hyges and 300s on nords and ask if the results were the same and once again they're gonna say no. I've seen it first hand there's no comparison.
I understand where you're coming from, but the quality of the gh should only matter in how much it raises the igf right? The purity, dosing, and bioavailability of the gh should only matter in how much your igf is raised. Maybe it's the difference between igf 1 and 2? Do the tests just test for total igf, and maybe pharma gh gives a more ideal ratio? Because igf is a hormone, so if a test reads 500 from genetics and 500 from pharma it shouldn't really matter because your liver produced it. When guys measure test levels everyone argues the amount, not my number is from pharma so it is better, and that is just exogenous test not something we take to raise our test as is the case when we take gh for our bodies to produce igf.
This is an en excellent topic. Sounds like you've done some research. This is what I want some actual understanding myself. I do know that bioavailability/bioactive, production plays a big part. What i want to understand now is exo vs endogenous GH. GHIH...how does GH injected vs stimulating natural GH (pituitary) effect this. 191 is not the only GH released naturally. So Anti-aging wants lower IGF-1/muscle building higher? Long term (GH suppression) maybe Injected GH for GHD and natural GH stimulating peps for muscle building? Information overload. And yes, way too misinformation. Everyone thinking Hyge was Pharma, and BioHygene is a legit website is just the tip of it. I want to learn more about effects and correct usage, but theres just so much conflicting info. Bioidentical Test vs Synthetic Test? Natural GH vs rhGH(Bioidentical)?
I've done my share, and it's just conflicting information all over. We need a scientific peer reviewed anabolic journal. Too bad that'll never happen. I am honestly confused over what matters, and what doesn't.
Dammit. I thought you would have all the answers.
Problem is no solid long-term info. Only solid info if from GHD. But that doesn't really help in what we are looking for. Anti-aging has some info, but it's not solid...it's prescribed in the "grey" area and doesn't have to back it's claims. I do think more solid information is coming. Xhina is going to lead the way.