# GH, IGF1 and should I combine them ?



## sciroxx (Sep 3, 2016)

I've been asked more then several times if IGF1 should be combined with GH, and why not to take it by itself or instead of GH usage ?
In a nutshell the ideal solution is using GH in combination with IGF1-lr3 and/or IGF1-DES

It's true that the IGF1 is the mediator for most of the anabolic effect of the GH, but we must consider 2 things -

The GH has some direct metabolic effect by itself, both in releasing glucose and fatty acid into the circulation, and by this raising metabolism and releasing available energy for anabolic demands, The GH has also a direct effect on nitrogen balance not through the IGF1 path

The IGF1 itself has a direct suppressing effect on the endogenous GH release - so if u inject exogenous IGF you actually and directly suppress any GH present in the circulation

Further more - many GH users are not aware to the fact that GH decreases insulin sensitivity. IGF1 increases insulin sensitivity, and negates this effect, which leads to optimal metabolic conditions. Some users use insulin in conjunction with GH but using IGF1 is much more effective in retaining optimum insulin sensitivity and much much safer

So the ideal solution is combining them both and by this keep optimal serum GH and IGF1 levels


----------



## mugzy (Sep 3, 2016)

Good post thank you sciroxx.


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Sep 3, 2016)

There's a flaw in your premise though. GH and IGF-1 are not as anabolic as most people believe nor do they build muscle like most believe. Especially IGF-1 on its own. Your age has a great deal to do with how igf1 works and as an adult, the effects are nothing like during the post natal period for example.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 3, 2016)

GH and IGF1 may have various functions, somewhat different, along post natal, puberty and at adolescent. There play a critical role in linear growth in till adolescent, while more responsible on metabolic functions at adolescent. Both have distinct anabolic effects on nitrogen and minerals retention on various body tissues, and also posses anti catabilic properties = reducing protein degradation. The IGF1 has a distinct anti catabolic functions, and it's proven to negate the very pronounced catabolic effect of dexamthazone (highly potent corticosteroid=catabolic hormone.
Both GH and IGf1 levels decline with aging, in a direct correlation BTW, maybe u referred to this ? possibly there is some down regulation of various IGF1 receptors with age, this is not my expertise, maybe u referred to this ?


----------



## PillarofBalance (Sep 3, 2016)

sciroxx said:


> GH and IGF1 may have various functions, somewhat different, along post natal, puberty and at adolescent. There play a critical role in linear growth in till adolescent, while more responsible on metabolic functions at adolescent. Both have distinct anabolic effects on nitrogen and minerals retention on various body tissues, and also posses anti catabilic properties = reducing protein degradation. The IGF1 has a distinct anti catabolic functions, and it's proven to negate the very pronounced catabolic effect of dexamthazone (highly potent corticosteroid=catabolic hormone.
> Both GH and IGf1 levels decline with aging, in a direct correlation BTW, maybe u referred to this ? possibly there is some down regulation of various IGF1 receptors with age, this is not my expertise, maybe u referred to this ?



I think insulin would serve someone better for anticatabolism.  Other problem here is good luck getting real IGF. Shit is crazy expensive if you can even get it.

Welcome to UG btw sciroxx.  Don't recall seeing a new member intro for you. If you haven't feel free to post one and spend some time here.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 4, 2016)

Yes many consider insulin as an anabolic hormone, and not aware to its anti catabolic major effects. I will post later on some clinical refernces to show th edistinct anti catabolic effects of IGF1, which are very valuable to any athlete, especially under stressful conditions or caloric restriction

Since you mentioned it we happen to produce IGF1-lr3 , we guarantee same purity (tested by chemical assay tests) and potency (tested by biological assay tests) as the patented IGf1-lr3 by Repligen Swiss. I may post full lab tests if permitted. And yes indeed, rare to find quality REAL IGF1


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 4, 2016)

Here - 
==============================
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10571453
-----------results and conclusions
RESULTS:
Administration of IGF-I, but not GH, attenuates dexamethasone-induced protein catabolism and increases insulin sensitivity. Simultaneous treatment with GH and IGF-I additively increases the serum concentration of IGF-I, whole-body anabolism, and lipid oxidation. GH or IGF-I when given alone produces similar increases in the serum concentration of IGF-I. However, GH selectively increases skeletal muscle mass whereas IGF-I selectively attenuates the intestinal atrophy and abnormal intestinal ion transport induced by TPN. These tissue-selective anabolic effects of GH and IGF-I are associated with differential increases in protein synthesis in skeletal muscle and jejunum, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS:
Simultaneous treatment with GH and IGF-I may offer the greatest clinical efficacy because of improved nitrogen retention in association with enhanced lipid oxidation and stimulation of protein synthesis in multiple tissue types.
==============================
As experimented here a highly potent catabolic hormone effect was completely negated by IGF1. We may discuss more on the other beneficial metabolic and anabolic effects of the IGF1 mentioned here, but first wanted to show clinical based prove for the IGF1 anti catabolic effect


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Sep 4, 2016)

Despite the observations of an effect of GH and IGF-I on protein synthesis, the fact remains that gains in muscle mass are not observed in healthy subjects after long-term GH administration so any benefits are unlikely to be due to muscle mass gains. In the GH plus exercise groups, circulating IGF-I levels and fat-free mass were consistently increased in comparison to placebo groups. Thus, it is possible to extrapolate that increasing circulating IGF-I would also be without consequence for muscle mass in healthy humans. Administration of IGF-I acutely activates muscle protein synthesis (Fryburg et al., 1995), but similarly to GH a 1-year administration did not result in increased lean body mass (Friedlander et al., 2001). The effects of GH on fat-free mass may be due to water retention, which is a known side effect of GH administration, or to an increase in soft tissue due to the stimulatory effects of GH on collagen synthesis.

In summary, normal GH/IGF-I function does have a role in the development and maintenance of muscle mass, as gathered from evidence in GH-deficient patients, burn patients, hypophysectomized animals, and animal models in which GH receptor and IGF-IR activity are lacking. GH or IGF-I administration have, however, no proven benefits for muscle mass in healthy subjects in whom GH function is normal (Figure 3). In most animal studies, GH is administered while the animals are still growing and this may confound the results in comparison to administration in fully grown animals. In addition, the species differences between rodents and humans in the functioning of the GH/IGF-I axis must be taken into account. Studies with transgenic and knockout animals are also complicated by the fact that the embryonic development of the tissue can be affected and this can have different consequences to altering gene expression once the animal has reached maturity.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2439518/#!po=15.3061


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 4, 2016)

Very interested data. However there are multiple parameters that are not accounted here, and are critical to consider - 

- We discuss here on athletes who trains vigorously, I may show other relevant articles that present data by which Anabolic steroids doesn't offer increase in muscle mess when taken by healthy person, which is of course far away from the case with athletes and above all Bodybuilders

- The GH is the discussed article is taken by itself, and not in conjunction with Anabolic steroids like mostly most users do. There is a known synergistic effect between anabolic steroids and GH, just as a practical example - we may observe this phenomenon in the puberty growth spurt when muscle mess increased so rapidly - this is where GH, testosterone as well as IGF1 are at their peak levels, so distinct and obvious synergistic effect between GH and testosterone.

- The article itself reviews some clinical evidences, among them such that support is effective anabolic and performance enhancing effect of GH - for indstance - "The effects on fuel metabolism, VO2max and ventilatory threshold may be of consequence to athletes seeking to improve endurance (Woodhouse et al., 2006; Gibney et al., 2007). A combination of testosterone and GH led to improved body composition and VO2max in elderly men, suggesting that GH does have a performance-enhancing effect (Giannoulis et al., 2006). GH also improves aerobic performance in those who have a history of androgenic anabolic steroid use (Graham et al., 2007)." 
Anyhow not enough real life clinical experience with athlets, if any, is reviewed in the article, and it's clearly mentioned that the dosages taken by athletes may not even be approved for clinical trials in order to draw relevant conclusions


- So much empirical and practical real life experience shows so distinctively the enormous effect of GH on bodybuilders appearance, along with other athletic performance that is simply impossible to ignore. Some experts  will even attribute the gigantic leap forward in bodybuilder's mess from the 70s to these days mostly to GH and IGF1,


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Sep 4, 2016)

sciroxx said:


> Very interested data. However there are multiple parameters that are not accounted here, and are critical to consider -
> 
> - We discuss here on athletes who trains vigorously, I may show other relevant articles that present data by which Anabolic steroids doesn't offer increase in muscle mess when taken by healthy person, which is of course far away from the case with athletes and above all Bodybuilders



That's older evidence. There's more current evidence showing growth from AAS even without lifting although lifting amplifies the affect.  



> - The GH is the discussed article is taken by itself, and not in conjunction with Anabolic steroids like mostly most users do. There is a known synergistic effect between anabolic steroids and GH, just as a practical example - we may observe this phenomenon in the puberty growth spurt when muscle mess increased so rapidly - this is where GH, testosterone as well as IGF1 are at their peak levels, so distinct and obvious synergistic effect between GH and testosterone.



Correct, GH and insulin are synergistic with AAS and alone aren't that effective at all. But a good deal of IGF-1s abilities come from GH derived pathways. Meaning using igf1 as a stand alone or with AAS still won't have the same effect as GH-mediated igf1 elevations. 



> - The article itself reviews some clinical evidences, among them such that support is effective anabolic and performance enhancing effect of GH - for indstance - "The effects on fuel metabolism, VO2max and ventilatory threshold may be of consequence to athletes seeking to improve endurance (Woodhouse et al., 2006; Gibney et al., 2007). A combination of testosterone and GH led to improved body composition and VO2max in elderly men, suggesting that GH does have a performance-enhancing effect (Giannoulis et al., 2006). GH also improves aerobic performance in those who have a history of androgenic anabolic steroid use (Graham et al., 2007)."



Performance enhancing doesn't add muscle mass directly. Increased aerobic performance isn't packing on the muscle mass. 




> So much empirical and practical real life experience shows so distinctively the enormous effect of GH on bodybuilders appearance, along with other athletic performance that is simply impossible to ignore. Some experts  will even attribute the gigantic leap forward in bodybuilder's mess from the 70s to these days mostly to GH and IGF1,



I wouldn't say enormous effects of GH. I'd say the greater dosages of AAS along with insulin and GH has enormous effects.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 4, 2016)

I have to clearly say that I don't believe in GH as a stand alone ergogenic aid, certainly for muscle gains, in conjunctions with anabolic steroids, as well as IGF1 it has a great effect. I agree with the majority of the points you raised, in previous posts I simply tried to touch and explain some of the points in the article you mentioned

I would like emphasize and base a couple of things u mentioned.

- Like u said GH by itself doesn't have the expected anabolic effect, in order to achieve and capitalize on the multi paths anabolic impact of GH  proper amount of anabolic steroids in necessary in the circulation. For example - women have much higher serum GH levels then men, but "surprisingly" they have much less muscle mess, it's the synergistic effect between androgens and GH which brings the muscles, in this case 1+1=5. I speculate that the androgens highly potentiate the GH paracrine secretion of growth factors in muscle tissue, I may show relevant in vitro medical literature. 

- I agree with you and indeed GH has a superior effect to IGF1, as GH has the ability to cause paracrine secretion of IGF1 and other growth factors in muscle mess, it's additive to the anabolic (and anti catabolic) effect of the circulation IGF1. However there is a distinct synergistic effect as I showed - both anabolic, anti catabolic and metabolic between IGF1 and GH, and based on my experience you give too much credit to insulin usage in BBs and too less to IGF1. Here again - 
======================
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10571453

RESULTS:
Administration of IGF-I, but not GH, attenuates dexamethasone-induced protein catabolism and increases insulin sensitivity. Simultaneous treatment with GH and IGF-I additively increases the serum concentration of IGF-I, whole-body anabolism, and lipid oxidation. GH or IGF-I when given alone produces similar increases in the serum concentration of IGF-I. However, GH selectively increases skeletal muscle mass whereas IGF-I selectively attenuates the intestinal atrophy and abnormal intestinal ion transport induced by TPN. These tissue-selective anabolic effects of GH and IGF-I are associated with differential increases in protein synthesis in skeletal muscle and jejunum, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS:
Simultaneous treatment with GH and IGF-I may offer the greatest clinical efficacy because of improved nitrogen retention in association with enhanced lipid oxidation and stimulation of protein synthesis in multiple tissue types.
========================
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9129466

GH and IGF-I combined further enhanced fat oxidation while reducing protein catabolism. Serum insulin concentrations were significantly increased by GH but decreased by IGF-I. GH significantly decreased serum total triiodothyronine concentrations and IGF-I significantly decreased serum corticosterone concentrations.


----------



## BiologicalChemist (Sep 5, 2016)

Good convo going on in there...So GH + IGF-1 is the best combo...although are expensive and hard to come by, especially IGF-1..? So the most realistic yet also effective option is to run higher doses of AAS alongside GH only (unless u can find/afford legit IGF-1)?

Out of curiosity...what would you recommend the lowest effective dose of GH be run and how long must it be run to see results? Would it still be effective for a 25 year old BB on AAS? ...I've been told 4-6iu min. for at least 1 year to see results


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Sep 5, 2016)

sciroxx said:


> I have to clearly say that I don't believe in GH as a stand alone ergogenic aid, certainly for muscle gains, in conjunctions with anabolic steroids, as well as IGF1 it has a great effect. I agree with the majority of the points you raised, in previous posts I simply tried to touch and explain some of the points in the article you mentioned
> 
> I would like emphasize and base a couple of things u mentioned.
> 
> ...



The study I referenced earlier touched upon this a little as well. I'll admit the evidence is far from conclusive but (from the same study):

A subsequent study was performed to compare IGF-I treatment alone and in combination with GH (Kupfer et al., 1993). The protocols were identical as were the effects of IGF-I on its own, but the combination of IGF-I and GH was much more effective resulting in a positive nitrogen balance within 2 days of initiation of treatment. Muscle protein synthesis was not measured, so it remains to be established whether these effects apply to muscle or other tissues. The effects of GH in combination with IGF-I on protein synthesis and the applicability for the treatment of diseases associated with catabolism, particularly those for which GH treatment on its own has proven ineffective, remain to be determined.

Combined IGF-I/IGFBP3 injection also seems to be very effective in increasing net protein balance across the leg in burn patients who are catabolic but was not effective in non-catabolic patients (Herndon et al., 1999). It has been shown in endurance-trained athletes, that 1 and 4 weeks GH administration reduced leucine oxidation during exercise by 50%, and increased the rate of non-oxidative leucine disposal at rest (a measure of protein synthesis) and during exercise (Healy et al., 2003). This may be of benefit for protein sparing in endurance athletes, but a muscle-specific effect was not determined.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 5, 2016)

BiologicalChemist said:


> Good convo going on in there...So GH + IGF-1 is the best combo...although are expensive and hard to come by, especially IGF-1..? So the most realistic yet also effective option is to run higher doses of AAS alongside GH only (unless u can find/afford legit IGF-1)?
> 
> Out of curiosity...what would you recommend the lowest effective dose of GH be run and how long must it be run to see results? Would it still be effective for a 25 year old BB on AAS? ...I've been told 4-6iu min. for at least 1 year to see results



Based on my experience, and just as u mentioned, proper basic GH usage will include a year round usage of 4-6iu, along with proper cycling of AAS, it'll do the trick for 25 year old BB same as for 50 years actually, of course the potential of 25 years old on AAS only is bigger then 50 years old, so may be wise to take full advantage on it before getting to the GH expensive pool


----------



## Cobra Strike (Sep 6, 2016)

I have a hard time believing that you have real IGF1. I ordered 5g of IGF1-LR3 from sigma-Aldrich through a doc that had to develop his own in-vitro study (which was fake) and was thoroughly investigated before the purchase could even be made. This stuff came from a world renowned reagent protein manufacturer. It did absolutely nothing in the 6 months I took it at 100mcg every day, with GH, with AAS, and with Insulin. It was very expensive. There were no claimed massive pumps or pumps that hurt so bad couldn't lift 20lbs nor was there any other effect that is so often stated with the use of IGF1. We all know who Rich Piana is lol 

Either way the thread is a great read but I just cant believe that anyone has real IFG1.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 6, 2016)

You raised some interesting claims, this reply will concern to the IGF1-lr3's effect which is the topic - 

First I assume you got 5mg and not 5gr ? just a typo error obviously ?

Second I haven't came here, nor anyone on this thread, to claim IGf1-lr3 is a miracle .. u refer and quote some (BS) promotion of "peptides companies" I assume.

I may clearly state from my vast experience that REAL IGF1-lr3 does carry a dramatic effect, an effect that is also easy to recognize quite fast. I may show numerous links to respected vets and also several pros to testify, all experienced our product (Somedin), but this is no news, and just claims I make of course

There are no clinical data (obviously) on IGF1 usage in athletes, there is barely if any clinical data on AAS is superpharmacological dosages (like athletes uses) on athletes so is for GH as we've seen here.

so all left to do in order to contribute to this debate is to show some clinical data on the anbaolic/anti catabilic and metabolic effects of IGF1 in real life (in vivo) on patient who are prescribed for anabolic aids, this is the closet application for our puposes.
Simple search on medical literature will show dozens of articles, the most practical I found in a brief search is this one which I showed already above- 
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10571453

Here is another comprehensive review based on multiple medical experiment and data posted by a team of endocrinologist experts - 
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8853443
===================================

GH may exert metabolic effects either directly or indirectly through increased production of IGF-I. GH administration increases circulating IGF-I levels via stimulation of hepatic synthesis and secretion of IGF-I; it may also enhance local IGF-I synthesis, which exerts paracrine or autocrine effects. Figure 2 summarizes the metabolic effects of GH and IGF-I. Administration of GH and IGF-I in adult humans has been demonstrated to enhance protein anabolism. Combined administration of GH and IGF-I was observed to be more anabolic than either IGF-I or GH alone. Evidence is presented that protein accretion results mainly from direct effects of GH on tissues; additional indirect effects via IGF-I production are also likely. Administration of GH has been reported to produce carbohydrate intolerance with elevated plasma insulin levels, resulting from insulin resistance. in contrast, insulin sensitivity increased during administration of IGF-I, which exerts hypoglycaemic effects even with concomitant suppression of insulin secretion. A major direct metabolic effect of GH is to increase fat mobilization and oxidation, and thereby to reduce total body fat; there is no evidence that IGF-I acts directly on adipose tissue in vivo. GH administration results in sodium retention via stimulation of Na-K-ATPase. It is suggested that part of the effects of GH on tubular function (e.g. phosphate reabsorption) are mediated via IGF-I. Energy expenditure may be increased by administration of either GH or relatively high doses of IGF-I. One of the reasons for this phenomenon is an increase in lean body mass; GH may increase energy expenditure additionally be enhancing the production of T3 and by increasing lipid oxidation
===================================

So the IGF1 offers unique anabolic metabolic and above all anti-catabolic properties tested and proved, and advised by the team of professors for dvanced critical anabolic therapy.

More ever - IGF1 offers a distinct synergistic effect with GH. I add that IGF1 has also multiple paths synergistic effect in conjunction with anabolic steroids, and may show in vitro explanations, for instance and in a nutshell the androgens potentiate receptors affinity (possible receptors number as well) of IGF1 in muscle cells,


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 6, 2016)

To your other claim concerning the IGF1 we offer - Somedin - 

Sigma Aldrich market the (former) patented IGF1-lr3 by Repligen Swiss. I state here clearly that the Somedin is Identical (meaning adhering to the same standards precisely) as the Repligen's product. This includes purity (chemical assay) and potency (tested by biological assay - actual activation of the receptor activation). 
I may post here independent lab tests to confirm this, but of course anyone may make a print of anything. 
So I'm here to offer - lets test my statements - offer any means and I'll cooperate, just as an example - Cobra Strike may talk to his chemist friend and he may make full tests to a product which is randomly purchased from me.


----------



## Cobra Strike (Sep 7, 2016)

Im just going to pm you

and yes 5mg...typo.



sciroxx said:


> To your other claim concerning the IGF1 we offer - Somedin -
> 
> Sigma Aldrich market the (former) patented IGF1-lr3 by Repligen Swiss. I state here clearly that the Somedin is Identical (meaning adhering to the same standards precisely) as the Repligen's product. This includes purity (chemical assay) and potency (tested by biological assay - actual activation of the receptor activation).
> I may post here independent lab tests to confirm this, but of course anyone may make a print of anything.
> So I'm here to offer - lets test my statements - offer any means and I'll cooperate, just as an example - Cobra Strike may talk to his chemist friend and he may make full tests to a product which is randomly purchased from me.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 7, 2016)

If someone may enable me to PM it'll help .....

I read your PM, simply can't reply, to make it interesting for our community u may talk to me here, and sure we'll make this experiment with your help

To satisfy my curiosity - show us if possible what IGF1 u used - picture ? link ?


----------



## ToolSteel (Sep 7, 2016)

sciroxx said:


> If someone may enable me to PM it'll help .....
> 
> I read your PM, simply can't reply, to make it interesting for our community u may talk to me here, and sure we'll make this experiment with your help
> 
> To satisfy my curiosity - show us if possible what IGF1 u used - picture ? link ?


What part of "25 posts" didn't you understand? Calm the **** down.


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 7, 2016)

ToolSteel said:


> What part of "25 posts" didn't you understand? Calm the **** down.



No worries, I was told earlier by the admin that I may PM, maybe I misunderstood, no complaints

Anyhow I may reply here, or on my e-mail as shown on my profile to any question

Tks for the patient with a newbie like me .....


----------



## ToolSteel (Sep 7, 2016)

Ok maybe that was a bit much. "Calm your tits"


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 7, 2016)

I'm following your advise, good that you spend the time talking to me, soon enough we'll be at 25 posts


----------



## Cobra Strike (Sep 8, 2016)

It has been a year since I ran the sigma bro. I don't have a pic of that vial. But I will shoot you an email. Basically since Ive tried a ton of igf1 with no success on finding anything that could even be considered real and spent many thousands and thousand of dollars in my hunt - I may as well try yours as well and get it out of the way to. I will email you so we can chat about this venture and see what we can come up with and see if your claims have grit


----------



## sciroxx (Sep 8, 2016)

Cobra Strike said:


> It has been a year since I ran the sigma bro. I don't have a pic of that vial. But I will shoot you an email. Basically since Ive tried a ton of igf1 with no success on finding anything that could even be considered real and spent many thousands and thousand of dollars in my hunt - I may as well try yours as well and get it out of the way to. I will email you so we can chat about this venture and see what we can come up with and see if your claims have grit



Sure I'm happy to meet this challenge, lets trial and learn


----------



## Fsuphisig (Sep 8, 2016)

Should be interesting to hear about this one ^^


----------

