• 👋Hello, please SIGN-UP FOR A FREE account and become a member of our community!
    You will then be able to start threads, post comments and send messages to other members. Thanks!
  • IronMag Labs® 25% Off Sale!❤️‍🔥 Hardcore Bodybuilding Supplements💪Use Coupon Code ASF25 💊

Best IGF number ever

IML Gear Cream!
jerseydevil said:
You are correct about testosterone since your body will shut down production of natural test when using supplemental. So you are thinking using GH shuts down your bodies natural production of IGF-1 in a similar fashion?
Click to expand...
Maybe - I do not know the answer. Production of IGF-1 is dependent upon a number of things. Steroids increase it. Insulin increases it. Estrogen increases it (that's right, the use of aromatase inhibitors, aromasin, arimedex, decreases it!). Obviously injecting growth hormone increases it. Injecting growth hormone decreases your body's natural hormone production. I am unclear on how long and that sort of thing - my knowledge ends at the bro science of Hey! Don't inject at night!

I would think at some point injecting hgh would drive your IGF-1 number without respect to whatever it was before you began injecting growth hormone.

I am very open to be educated on this subject, however.
 
One problem in interpreting almost all human studies of IGF-1 has been that, in addition to enhancing insulin action, it also suppresses GH secretion; therefore it has been difficult to determine the relative roles of the direct actions of IGF-1 and those that are mediated by suppression of GH.
Click to expand...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300772/

As expected, there is a negative feedback loop, much like with testosterone. Since IGF-1 stays elevated not just for minutes or hours, but constantly when you are injecting hgh daily (not serum, just IGF-1), then suppression occurs.

This SHOULD mean that the IGF-1 number no longer bears any relationship to what it was before one starting injecting hgh, since the high natural growth hormone production that was driving the high IGF-1 number is being suppressed actively by the higher IGF-1 number resulting from injecting hgh.

I am not claiming to be an authority on this. I just started looking at it.
 
I never said I was an expert on GH/IGF, far from it. You are of the belief baseline is unimportant, I'm of the belief it is. If I didn't do a baseline and saw serum of 221, I would have been disappointed. But I considered it a good result knowing it more then doubled with only 2 iu's a day. So imo there is more to it then just the IGF number. You said yourself there are many factors that increase or decrease IGF-1.

Hopefully someone more knowledgable on the subject will chime in.
 
jerseydevil said:
You are of the belief baseline is unimportant
Click to expand...
Not really. I just do not think it determines what your IGF number is going to be 30 days later when you have been injecting hgh daily. 2 iu daily doubled your number and put you up where a young, healthy male should be. That is about right for 2 iu, don't you think? This is why we tell 22 year olds not to bother with injecting 2 iu a day if that is all their budget can handle.


Your baseline number would be very important for many reasons. Had your baseline been 280, then you would know that injecting 2 iu would be a complete waste of money for you.


P.S. I am not sure we really disagree with each other.
 
There are a couple types of igf-1 as well, the liver has a role in releasing one of them...... age could be a factor there to..... taking the same doses of hgh a 20 year old and 60 year olds livers may produce it at different rates. I know it falls off rather quickly after stopping. I had a blood test sprung on me for trt and igf happened to be tested this time, 2 weeks or a little less off and my number dropped from that 425 to around 260
 
With a baseline of 282 , 2iu ed would still increase total igf-1 serum levels thus giving the added benefits such as faster healing and recovery along with fat loss. Hgh is not suppressive so can not be compared to a testosterone study . There are way too many variables in each individual to have a certain " standard " for all to follow . This is why your baseline is important in determining if it's worth your money ..
In my opinion , there are no where near enough studies done on hgh use in the way we use it as a bodybuilding tool. I am sure if you ask 30 guys who use hgh you will get 30 different opinions on how and when to pin to what to eat and not eat before and after ..
lab work and testing done on yourself , and not others , is the only true way to know .
Keep in mind that more risk comes with igf-1 levels highly elevated out of range for long periods .. look at how everyone is commenting on the Mr.O this year ..
that's just my thoughts as I try to navigate this Tapatalk B.S.
 
jerseydevil said:
I never said I was an expert on GH/IGF, far from it. You are of the belief baseline is unimportant, I'm of the belief it is. If I didn't do a baseline and saw serum of 221, I would have been disappointed. But I considered it a good result knowing it more then doubled with only 2 iu's a day. So imo there is more to it then just the IGF number. You said yourself there are many factors that increase or decrease IGF-1. Hopefully someone more knowledgable on the subject will chime in.
Click to expand...
This was my feeling with Somatozine. Like you, I more than doubled my number (107 to 228) and consider that a considerable move in the right direction. Those numbers put me in the middle of the range listed by Quest. But given my age and baseline I see it as a good thing. I tested 60 days after starting and took the capsules each night before bed.
 
This is from back in 2011 and imo very relevant to this discussion. Dr Cranton is a well respected physician who graduated from the Harvard School of Medicine and who is a GH user himself.


From Elmer Cranton, M.D.

Re: IGF-1 interpretation
The following must be considered when relying on IGF-1 reports:

1. I have found that laboratories are not always accurate in testing IGF-1 (sometimes called somatomedin-C). Different methods are used by different labs and the results are not always comparable. It is a mistake to believe that clinical laboratory reports are always reliable. IGF-1 is a very specialized test. Unless a lab is large enough to have a substantial volume for that special test, calibration and standardization may not be accurate. I have found that Smith Kline Lab, LabCorp Lab, and King James OmegaTech Lab are the most reliable. That doesn't mean that others may not also be good. But be suspicious of reports if they don't make sense clinically.

2. IGF-1 is not HGH It is a metabolic breakdown product made from HGH by the liver. IGF-1 has some hormone activity by itself but HGH in its pure form has much broader activity. Because HGH remains in the blood for only a few minutes before attaching to cell receptors, IGF-1 is used as an easily obtained but partial indicator. IGF-1 stays in the blood for a day or more. IGF-1 seems to be reliable as a guideline for internal pituitary production, which is pulsitile over many hours. But people differ widely in the amount of IGF-1 produced from HGH by injection. I have seen patients with only mild increases in IGF-1 from injected HGH respond quite dramatically, out of proportion to IGF-1 figures.

3. The fact is that 1 unit of HGH equals the total daily pituitary production for a healthy young adult. Therefore one unit of HGH daily is a total replacement dose in old age, regardless of the IGF-1 followup. It is possible that more of the HGH taken by injection (once or at most twice daily) attaches to cells receptors in the body, perhaps more effective ones, and that less goes to the liver to be broken down to IGF-1.

4. I do not do routine follow-up IGF-1 blood tests in my patients for the above reasons. Those measurements have not correlated with replacement doses and vary widely from person to person. There is a wide variation in how much IGF-1 increases from person to person. This seems to have no significance to long-term benefit seen in my clinical practice.
THE DEGREE OF INCREASE IN IGF-1 DOES NOT SEEM TO CORRELATE WITH CLINICAL BENEFIT. BUT THE LEVEL OF BASELINE IGF-1, BEFORE INJECTIONS BEGIN, AS A PRODUCT OF SLOW AND CONTINUOUS PITUITARY RELEASE, DOES SEEM TO BE A RELIABLE INDICATOR OF HOW DEFICIENT A PERSON IS TO BEGIN WITH.

5. I know that for myself personally, each unit of HGH by injection raises my IGF-1 by 100 nanograms/milliliter (ng/ml). That is my own consistent measurement if the HGH is real and not counterfeit. Someone else may have a different reading, more or less, with no significance to benefit. I am 67 years old and my baseline IGF-1 without replacement is approximately 100. Every time I get a new lot number of HGH for my patients I take one unit daily for one week and test my IGF-1. It should be about 200. I then take 2 units daily for several days and test again. It should be about 300.
That is the only way I can be sure of getting the real thing. Over the past 2 years I have twice received counterfeit HGH, properly labeled and otherwise indistinguishable from the real thing. When I tested my IGF-1, it remained at baseline.
I now use Lilly Humatrope in my practice. It has a foreign label but is made in France in the same factory as the USA product. It has consistently been the best in my own testing. IGF-1 measurements will also vary by 10% to 20% from day to day normally. And if a single blood specimen is split into two test tubes and sent to the same laboratory, the results may differ by 20%. The test method is only that accurate. Variations between different labs may be even greater. That fact must be considered in interpretation.

6. HGH replacement therapy means replacement therapy for deficiency with aging. Young people produce plenty of their own and young adults also respond much more briskly to precursors (various amino acids). When reading claims for precursors of any type, it is necessary to know if IGF-1 was deficient to begin with. I would ask to see results for a series of 10 patients over 70 years old (whose IGF-1 will be around 100, plus or minus) and then get before and after readings. They must be 10 sequential patients, not the best 10 responders out of 100, as may be deceptively done. On the average I have only seen about 25% increase of IGF-1 with amino acids in such patients. And to get that increase it is necessary to have an empty stomach, no food for several hours before and 2 hours after taking that product. Food competes with the amino acids for absorption. It is necessary for amino acids to go in fast without interference from other foods to boost HGH release. Young people who do not need HGH and who will not benefit from more will increase much more with the amino acids than old people who really need it.

7. It is well known that HGH releasers (peptides, amino acids, releasing hormone, etc.) lose there effect over time. The pituitary becomes tolerant to them and releases less and less HGH over several months. They work best short term, best in young people who don't need the benefit and lose their effect with time.

Elmer M. Cranton, M.D.

 
Get Shredded!
This is very interesting as well.




From: "Elmer Cranton, M.D."
Subject: IGF-1 Laboratory Tests
I did a comparison study of IGF-1 test results by sending split specimens to several large, very reputable reference laboratories.

I took a single blood specimen, I split it into two tubes and sent them to two different laboratories. Theoretically the results should have been the same. There was a correlation but also large differences.

The results follow:

The two test results are on the same, identical blood specimens.

The laboratories are large, highly reputable, fully licensed labs, approved, and regularly inspected by the government. This cost me some money as each test cost more than $60. But I felt it was necessary to correctly interpret my patients' results.

When you see IGF-1 figures used in marketing, you should keep the below results in mind. Any such figures mean nothing unless the standard deviation of the method used is known and enough tests are done to get a statistically significant difference. A you can see, differences of 25% to 50% are within the error of the method and can be quite meaningless.

It is also easy for a marketer to select the most favorable numbers and discard those that do not favor a product. How can one be sure this is not done? Unless the research is done independently, by a researcher with nothing to gain or lose form the results, such studies are always suspect in my mind. If a marketing company pays for research, will the researcher bite the hand that feeds him/her???


IGF-1 on same specimen, ng/ml

LAB
A 		LAB B
140 186
236 301
97 124
124 125
98 131
215 284
250 406
97 124
126 169
67 89
180 331
200 379
66 133
261 143
424 546
103 159
175 215
 
Mansir39 said:
Hgh is not suppressive so can not be compared to a testosterone study
Click to expand...
Mansir, while I respect your opinion, I posted a study and the quote from it earlier in the thread that directly contradicts your claim. I don't know one way or the other, as I have never studied the issue myself.
 
Wow, JD, those are some big variations.

I am going to keep the thread going, however, as this is the only real way we have to measure the effectiveness of our HGH, regardless of any shortcomings, wouldn't you agree?


Anybody else have results they would like me to add to the list?

- - - Updated - - -

So far:
555 heavyiron, puretropin, 5 iu daily for a while

497 Mighty-Mouse, meditrope, 4 iu daily

425 Ryu7, pharamtropin, 4 iu daily in am for a month

307 Gmanzx11, Puretropin, 2 iu daily

278 velociraptor44, nuttin’ at all . . .​
 
Oddly, they all seem to be a trend, regardless of brand. The highest goes to the 5 iu a day pinner, 4 iu a day turned in roughly similar numbers, and 2 iu a day less, and no iu a day still a respectable baseline, but lower than the 2 iu.

So, this gives us a rough idea of where we would fall.

I would love to hear from some more of you, especially if you are running 10, 15, 20 or more.
 
malfeasance said:
Mansir, while I respect your opinion, I posted a study and the quote from it earlier in the thread that directly contradicts your claim. I don't know one way or the other, as I have never studied the issue myself.
Click to expand...
You ignored (well not completely :)) the post I made from a respected GH doctor about how important baseline numbers are before starting a regimen of GH, which was my initial point. The only numbers that matters are yours. Not what Heavy or MM got on a certain brand, dose and protocol. I can guarantee with some certainly that if I ran the exact same procotol, brands and doses as Heavy did my IGF-1 would be way lower. So what exactly does that prove? MM on the other hand getting a low score on Pharmacom, but a high one on Meditropes with the same 4 iu's ED is a completely valid comparison because that is what is normal for him.
 
Last edited:
jerseydevil said:
You ignored (well not completely :)) the post I made from a respected GH doctor about how important baseline numbers are before starting a regimen of GH, which was my initial point. The only numbers that matters are yours. Not what Heavy or MM got on a certain brand, dose and protocol. I can guarantee with some certainly that if I ran the exact same procotol, brands and doses as Heavy did my IGF-1 would be way lower. So what exactly does that prove? MM on the other hand getting a low score on Pharmacom, but a high one on Meditropes with the same 4 iu's ED is a completely valid comparison because that is what is normal for him.
Click to expand...

You reminded me. Guess I'm getting old and forgetful or busy and not giving a fuck lol

Here is my pharmacom test
First is a 3 hr serum second is 30 day later igf test
a2b4016c25706f67a59f3a8bb2905718.png
6b01d54d5ad51c848dd34e120fa1e0c0.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Now compare that to fuck ass shitty ass piece of trash ass IA

They can suck my small dick!

All of em Marcus on down to XS

3 hr serum test I threw the shit away after this

9f93347fea5a5fca64a4c2d0b0f02813.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
malfeasance said:
Oddly, they all seem to be a trend, regardless of brand. The highest goes to the 5 iu a day pinner, 4 iu a day turned in roughly similar numbers, and 2 iu a day less, and no iu a day still a respectable baseline, but lower than the 2 iu.

So, this gives us a rough idea of where we would fall.

I would love to hear from some more of you, especially if you are running 10, 15, 20 or more.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind I'm 50 years old. GH did nothing for me when I was younger. Now its like night and day.
 
IGF-1 raises over time. I would say a guy would need to be on the same dose of GH for at least 6 weeks to have an apples to apples comparison.
 
anyone remember Bushmaster? i think he had around 1200 on hjs igf numbers on 20 iu ed. not sure whjch gh maybe Riptropins??
 
IML Gear Cream!
malfeasance said:
Mansir, while I respect your opinion, I posted a study and the quote from it earlier in the thread that directly contradicts your claim. I don't know one way or the other, as I have never studied the issue myself.
Click to expand...

I can't find anywhere in that study where it says exogenous rHgh injections causes natural suppression of hgh .. maybe I am misunderstanding
 
heavyiron said:
IGF-1 raises over time. I would say a guy would need to be on the same dose of GH for at least 6 weeks to have an apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...

I agree . This is more individualistic than testosterone and can not be studied the same .. And after long durations it is not uncommon to see these igf-1 #s drop ..
as I stated before , we are trying to reference studies done on different test subject under different conditions, some of which mimic medical conditions , and doses than what we use this compound for .. hard to use a study of an animal given an intentional deficiency to prove what a healthy adult male should expect ..
89a54cedfba5be2c95bf62f5b048329e.jpg
 
Last edited:
jerseydevil said:
You ignored (well not completely :)) the post I made from a respected GH doctor about how important baseline numbers are before starting a regimen of GH, which was my initial point.
Click to expand...
No, I did not. Well, I kind of did. I do not think it directly addresses what we are discussing. It could be you and I are talking about two different things.
I can guarantee with some certainly that if I ran the exact same procotol, brands and doses as Heavy did my IGF-1 would be way lower.
Click to expand...
I do not think you can guarantee that at all, much less with certainty. Try it. 6 weeks. 5 iu daily. Then 10 iu and test three hours later.
 
Last edited:
Mansir39 said:
I can't find anywhere in that study where it says exogenous rHgh injections causes natural suppression of hgh .. maybe I am misunderstanding
Click to expand...
See post #32, Mansir39. I quoted it and even put it in red so it would stand out as emphasized.

- - - Updated - - -

Swiper said:
anyone remember Bushmaster? i think he had around 1200 on hjs igf numbers on 20 iu ed. not sure whjch gh maybe Riptropins??
Click to expand...
I hope Bushmaster is ok. I understand it was some bad news.

- - - Updated - - -

Anybody else have results they would like me to add to the list?

So far:
555 heavyiron, puretropin, 5 iu daily for a while

497 Mighty-Mouse, meditrope, 4 iu daily

425 Ryu7, pharamtropin, 4 iu daily in am for a month

307 Gmanzx11, Puretropin, 2 iu daily

278 velociraptor44, nuttin’ at all . . .

165 Mighty Mouse, pharmacom, 4 iu daily for a month​
 
Last edited:
heavyiron said:
IGF-1 raises over time. I would say a guy would need to be on the same dose of GH for at least 6 weeks to have an apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...
I have been careful to add the dosage and length of time to each entry, heavyiron.
 
So much negativity, people. :D If you think this might have any usefulness, provide your protocol, like above, and I will add it to the list. If you do not think it is useful, provide it anyway. Then you can read this thread for a laugh.

Nobody on this web site is on truly high doses? 5 iu is it?
 
I believe somewhere in this thread someone said IGF numbers do not correlate like testosterone numbers and I am in full agreement.

I have seen guys that consistently score higher or lower on GH serum and IGF.

For me I score between 38-46 on GH serum with generics, higher than most.

And as I previously mentioned my IGF is usually between 230-280 when running 10ius GH per week.

But when I run GH for extended periods of time or on blast my IGF numbers will start to drop, possibly due to liver stress. There are too many variables to try and draw conclusions based on how people respond to GH, it is very individualistic and there are variables that can drive the number up or down.

And full disclaimer, my GH and IGF numbers and fluctuating IGF levels are my experience, yours might be different.
 
malfeasance said:
See post #32, Mansir39. I quoted it and even put it in red so it would stand out as emphasized.

- - - Updated - - -


I hope Bushmaster is ok. I understand it was some bad news.

- - - Updated - - -

Anybody else have results they would like me to add to the list?

So far:
555 heavyiron, puretropin, 5 iu daily for a while

497 Mighty-Mouse, meditrope, 4 iu daily

425 Ryu7, pharamtropin, 4 iu daily in am for a month

307 Gmanzx11, Puretropin, 2 iu daily

278 velociraptor44, nuttin’ at all . . .

165 Mighty Mouse, pharmacom, 4 iu daily for a month​
Click to expand...

And I did .. it states IGF-1 can cause suppression .. maybe I am not seeing it but we were talking about rHgh not igf-1 ..that discusses the effects of igf-1 on natural gh secretion not the effects of injecting rHgh (r being a big factor ) on igf-1 levels ..
There is no pct for rHgh use as far as I am aware of .. maybe I am wrong and misinformed..
 
Last edited:
malfeasance said:
No, I did not. Well, I kind of did. I do not think it directly addresses what we are discussing. It could be you and I are talking about two different things.
I do not think you can guarantee that at all, much less with certainty. Try it. 6 weeks. 5 iu daily. Then 10 iu and test three hours later.
Click to expand...
I have never run a protocol like that but I was close to what MM was running with the exact same Meditrope's, except 3.3 iu's instead of 4 iu. My IGF-1 was still in the low 200's, yet his was 497. So that I can say with certainty... his was more then double with the same product
 
malfeasance said:
No, I did not. Well, I kind of did. I do not think it directly addresses what we are discussing. It could be you and I are talking about two different things.
I do not think you can guarantee that at all, much less with certainty. Try it. 6 weeks. 5 iu daily. Then 10 iu and test three hours later.
Click to expand...

I think I may be misunderstanding also ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top