Pharmacom Store


GH Myth Busting

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: GH Myth Busting

  1. #1
    Senior Member

    TheShadow's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northampton, England
    Posts
    2,180

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    95
    Thanked in
    75 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    GH Myth Busting

    BODYBUILDING MYTH: GROWTH HORMONE NEEDS TO BE RAN FOR LONG TIMES TO SEE ANY BENEFIT

    In this research, highly conditioned athletes were given 8iu of GH 3x/week (M/W/F).

    No other exogenous hormones were used, and diet was set at maintenance calories, with a protein intake of 2g/kg.

    In just 6 weeks, these participants made significant increases in LBM, and decreases in total fat mass. In other words, they added muscle and lost fat.

    Take-away points being for us as physique athletes...
    1) GH does not need to be ran for extended periods of time to cause any benefit
    2) GH absolutely does not need to be ran alongside AAS to produce results
    3) GH can within itself cause significant changes in body composition
    4) GH does not need to be ran at ridiculous dosages
    5) Protein intake must be sufficient to produce increases in LBM

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3170408/


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #2
    Junior Member


    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Rep Points
    200100

    That's good to know. I've always heard mixed info on the subject


    Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Board Rep
    BOARD REP

    GGG's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    8,867

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,220
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,252
    Thanked in
    891 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Thanks for sharing

  4. #4
    Senior Member

    jdwaca's Avatar


    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    137

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    20
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    14
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Rep Points
    1310131

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShadow View Post
    BODYBUILDING MYTH: GROWTH HORMONE NEEDS TO BE RAN FOR LONG TIMES TO SEE ANY BENEFIT

    In this research, highly conditioned athletes were given 8iu of GH 3x/week (M/W/F).

    No other exogenous hormones were used, and diet was set at maintenance calories, with a protein intake of 2g/kg.

    In just 6 weeks, these participants made significant increases in LBM, and decreases in total fat mass. In other words, they added muscle and lost fat.

    Take-away points being for us as physique athletes...
    1) GH does not need to be ran for extended periods of time to cause any benefit
    2) GH absolutely does not need to be ran alongside AAS to produce results
    3) GH can within itself cause significant changes in body composition
    4) GH does not need to be ran at ridiculous dosages
    5) Protein intake must be sufficient to produce increases in LBM

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3170408/


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Good info! And interesting. I would be curious to know what the diets of these individuals were prior to the study. For example, if they were only eating day...<1g/kg previously, or if diet lacked in other macros etc. it would be natural, and makes sense for these individuals to increase muscle mass from diet alone. Things like that can skew study results.

    It reminds me of the HMB studies back in the day. Helped increase muscle mass on subjects, sure, but the people they used for the study were relatively unexperienced lifters. Now it's realized that HMB will typically work better on untrained individuals, and those that have not previously experimented with other performance enhancing drugs.

    Idk....just some thoughts.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Senior Member

    TheShadow's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northampton, England
    Posts
    2,180

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    95
    Thanked in
    75 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by jdwaca View Post
    Good info! And interesting. I would be curious to know what the diets of these individuals were prior to the study. For example, if they were only eating day...<1g/kg previously, or if diet lacked in other macros etc. it would be natural, and makes sense for these individuals to increase muscle mass from diet alone. Things like that can skew study results.

    It reminds me of the HMB studies back in the day. Helped increase muscle mass on subjects, sure, but the people they used for the study were relatively unexperienced lifters. Now it's realized that HMB will typically work better on untrained individuals, and those that have not previously experimented with other performance enhancing drugs.

    Idk....just some thoughts.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    They are high performance athletes, so diet was likely largely unchanged. Anyhow, check out the actual study to see the body composition change. Nobody is gaining that much muscle and losing fat at the same time from a calorie or macro change.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Super duper mod


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    way down
    Posts
    8,178

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,367
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,385
    Thanked in
    1,361 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    It would be nice to see what the difference would be in these people same dosage seven days a week compared to the three days

  7. #7
    Senior Member

    GarlicChicken's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    10,928

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    6,318
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,711
    Thanked in
    2,534 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    I agree. I saw changes within two weeks running 4iu a day, fat loss and mittens stayed more full

  8. #8
    Senior Member

    TheShadow's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northampton, England
    Posts
    2,180

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    95
    Thanked in
    75 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by frank zazz View Post
    It would be nice to see what the difference would be in these people same dosage seven days a week compared to the three days
    Initially it would be the same, but over long periods would be worse due to insulin resistance setting in with ED dosing


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Senior Member

    jdwaca's Avatar


    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    137

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    20
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    14
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Rep Points
    1310131

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShadow View Post
    They are high performance athletes, so diet was likely largely unchanged. Anyhow, check out the actual study to see the body composition change. Nobody is gaining that much muscle and losing fat at the same time from a calorie or macro change.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'll check it out. Thanks for sharing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    738

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    112
    Thanked in
    93 Posts
    Rep Points
    652636507

    I would have liked them to elaborate more on this.

    "We conclude that supraphysiological doses of met-hGH will alter body composition in exercising adults in a relative dose-dependent manner and that such treatment may suppress endogenous release of GH in some individuals."

    Was this during or after the hgh? And how long after....

  11. #11
    Senior Member

    TheShadow's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northampton, England
    Posts
    2,180

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    95
    Thanked in
    75 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryu7 View Post
    I would have liked them to elaborate more on this.

    "We conclude that supraphysiological doses of met-hGH will alter body composition in exercising adults in a relative dose-dependent manner and that such treatment may suppress endogenous release of GH in some individuals."

    Was this during or after the hgh? And how long after....
    Post-GH treatment, immediately post 6 weeks of described protocol. Zero prior GH or AAS use. If you check the full text they have graphs demonstrating mean LBM and fat loss differences.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Community Veteran
    ADMINISTRATOR

    heavyiron's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    9,255

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    796
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,804
    Thanked in
    958 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShadow View Post
    BODYBUILDING MYTH: GROWTH HORMONE NEEDS TO BE RAN FOR LONG TIMES TO SEE ANY BENEFIT

    In this research, highly conditioned athletes were given 8iu of GH 3x/week (M/W/F).

    No other exogenous hormones were used, and diet was set at maintenance calories, with a protein intake of 2g/kg.

    In just 6 weeks, these participants made significant increases in LBM, and decreases in total fat mass. In other words, they added muscle and lost fat.

    Take-away points being for us as physique athletes...
    1) GH does not need to be ran for extended periods of time to cause any benefit
    2) GH absolutely does not need to be ran alongside AAS to produce results
    3) GH can within itself cause significant changes in body composition
    4) GH does not need to be ran at ridiculous dosages
    5) Protein intake must be sufficient to produce increases in LBM

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3170408/


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    One mistake guys make when reading studies is they think Fat Free Mass = muscle mass. Depending on the study this can often times be false. Increases in water weight, organ mass and tendon and ligaments would be fat free mass increases

    The study you cited uses this exact language - fat-free weight (FFW) which could mean water weight increases which HGH is known for.

    Its extremely rare to see studies that actually show increases in muscle mass in healthy individuals with HGH alone.

    This study proves the guys added water weight.

  13. #13
    Senior Member

    TheShadow's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northampton, England
    Posts
    2,180

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    95
    Thanked in
    75 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by heavyiron View Post
    One mistake guys make when reading studies is they think Fat Free Mass = muscle mass. Depending on the study this can often times be false. Increases in water weight, organ mass and tendon and ligaments would be fat free mass increases

    The study you cited uses this exact language - fat-free weight (FFW) which could mean water weight increases which HGH is known for.

    Its extremely rare to see studies that actually show increases in muscle mass in healthy individuals with HGH alone.

    This study proves the guys added water weight.
    Look at the mean average graphs, extra-cellular water in any individual cannot summate to that volume. Also, additional intra-cellular fluid retention is something a physique athlete should certainly chase.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    Community Veteran
    ADMINISTRATOR

    heavyiron's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    9,255

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    796
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,804
    Thanked in
    958 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShadow View Post
    Look at the mean average graphs, extra-cellular water in any individual cannot summate to that volume. Also, additional intra-cellular fluid retention is something a physique athlete should certainly chase.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Show me where they gained MUSCLE MASS. This is water weight brother

  15. #15
    Senior Member

    TheShadow's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northampton, England
    Posts
    2,180

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    95
    Thanked in
    75 Posts
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by heavyiron View Post
    Show me where they gained MUSCLE MASS. This is water weight brother
    I'm not disagreeing with you man, I understand what LBM and FMM are determined as physiologically, merely sharing some research into the short-term visual effects of GH. I haven't once used the words skeletal muscle mass, I said LBM


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Similar Threads

  1. roid rage! Is it a myth or...?
    By fatman3000 in forum Anabolic Steroids
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 12-26-2014, 02:40 PM
  2. Liquid cialis and busting a nut
    By bigbal2943 in forum Muscle Central
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-23-2014, 09:44 AM
  3. Unraveling the myth of ‘bad’ chloresterol
    By The Admin in forum Muscle Central
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 04:43 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 04:43 PM
  5. Protein Won’t Make You Fat: Myth #1
    By The Admin in forum Muscle Central
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 04:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Copyright© 2012-2020 Anabolic Steroid Discussion Forums