E2 came back at 15 so I was expecting IGF to be a touch lower based off my initial understanding of E2 and IGF conversion. But this is interesting info, I’ll have to dig into this a little more. Thanks!
It'll be a frustrating exercise.
In the BB world, the mistaken understanding still dominates.
In the world of medical research, you'll most often see references to oral estrogen via contraceptives crushing GH to IGF conversion, which is true. Some take that to mean only oral estrogen inhibits conversion, which is not true. It's just that since most GH to IGF conversion takes place in the liver, and oral estrogen only has around 10% bioavailability, oral estrogen pills have 10x the dose intended to enter the bloodstream. The rest gets processed, you guessed it, in the liver. So even a small dose in contraceptives saturates the liver with the other 90% of e2 completely crushing GH to IGF conversion. This is why women with acromegaly used to be treated with oral birth control pills.
E2 delivered via patches, and endogenous e2 (in men from aromatase and women from ovaries), bypasses liver metabolism, so while the effect isn't nearly as strong, they also inhibit conversion, and the more e2 there is the more that process of conversion is blunted.
Things get even more confusing by the fact that if estrogen is pushed close to 0, other processes in the liver shut down, and because of that IGF conversion drops.
I'm glad in the online video discussions between Lee and others regarding rHGH at least it's sometimes said ".... but we know there's a lot we don't know about this stuff and it's an ongoing process to understand".
There's also GH to IGF conversion directly in muscle, which is likely more
important for anabolic effects than the systemic IGF we're checking in blood tests that comes from the liver. How e2 effects internal muscle GH to IGF conversion isn't clear, because you basically have to extract a little muscle tissue to check levels, which isn't very pleasant. But in rodents at least, e2 suppresses IGF conversion there as well.
I like to think of these processes from an evolutionary perspective. Most of the time, if things don't serve a biological purpose they don't exist. It makes some sense that for females, at least while they're fertile and have high e2, lower IGF leaves more GH to make skin look better, hair, nails, less "central adiposity" aka belly fat (don't want them looking pregnant), basically all the "youthful" signs that make females attractive for mating, while males benefit from the anabolic effects of higher IGF, ie, bigger muscles, masculine facial features etc.