IGF-1 in Hormone Replacement Therapy

[BBC3]

I understand that many wellness and TRT docs consider IGF-1 as a treatment in their protocols. I have heard that levels under 100 may merit replacement. Is anyone here using IGF-1 this way as directed by ther doctor, or at their own discretion. What is it supposed to do?. What do you think is actually does benefit wise? What is the usual dosage for this purpose? Is it prescibed? Do you get it at your pharmacy if so? OR are peptides of this nature legal without prescription? What are the risks?

 

[Michael Scally MD]

I understand that many wellness and TRT docs consider IGF-1 as a treatment in their protocols. I have heard that levels under 100 may merit replacement. Is anyone here using IGF-1 this way as directed by ther doctor, or at their own discretion. What is it supposed to do?. What do you think is actually does benefit wise? What is the usual dosage for this purpose? Is it prescibed? Do you get it at your pharmacy if so? OR are peptides of this nature legal without prescription? What are the risks?

IGF-1 is not a FDA approved product.

 

[BBC3]

So, I can assume with that also comes that it is not regulated by them either........ If Big Business cant make $$, no need to regulated right?? I would like to see the process at which they determine what is determined illegal, for the good of the people...... I guess it must start with complaints, prompting investigation. Considering $$, that must take some serious complaining.!!

 

[Michael Scally MD]

IGF-1 is not a FDA approved product.

Mea Culpa!!!

INCRELEX® (mecasermin [rDNA origin] injection) is an aqueous solution for injection containing human insulin-like growth factor-1 (rhIGF-1) produced by recombinant DNA technology. IGF-1 consists of 70 amino acids in a single chain with three intramolecular disulfide bridges and a molecular weight of 7649 daltons. The amino acid sequence of the product is identical to that of endogenous human IGF-1. The rhIGF-1 protein is synthesized in bacteria (E. coli) that have been modified by the addition of the gene for human IGF-1.

 

[BBC3]

I did happen to notice that it appears to by "synthesized" in E. coli. What a nice word for CULTURED. or GROWN.. Really kinda makes you think you want to pick you IGF-1 manufacturer carefully. Wasn't that the issue with L-Trytophan supplements back in the 90's? so I am guessing that eating a contaminated tryptophan tab is not quites as risky as injecting it in around the digestive system. I may have a fact of two corrupted, but makes you think....

Mea Culpa!!!

INCRELEX® (mecasermin [rDNA origin] injection) is an aqueous solution for injection containing human insulin-like growth factor-1 (rhIGF-1) produced by recombinant DNA technology. IGF-1 consists of 70 amino acids in a single chain with three intramolecular disulfide bridges and a molecular weight of 7649 daltons. The amino acid sequence of the product is identical to that of endogenous human IGF-1. The rhIGF-1 protein is synthesized in bacteria (E. coli) that have been modified by the addition of the gene for human IGF-1.

 

[2yung4this]

from my understanding, tht is how most if not all recombinant human hormones are made. If i remember right, up until the 80s HGH was made from the pituitaries of cows...this led to the human variant of mad cow disease...i think the acronym is CJD. Once scientists figured out that by gene manipulation, the could get bacteria ( e coli) which multiplies very fast to pump out specific human hormones instead of toxins a new industry was born lol. this technique is also why drug companies can justify the outrageous cost for these drugs....

 

[Krazy Kracker]

I'm using igf-1 lr3 and have gotten more mass with less fat almost overnight. I use only 40 mcg -60 mcg a day split up in two shots. it has helped my elbows from feeling like they are about to explode and got rid of my should pain. it is not legal but many site in us to buy it. It is very light and temp sensitive after mixed with citric acid. keep in fridge out of light. check out gopeptides.com

 

[BBC3]

thanks for the reply. Regarding the legality. Dr. Scally pointed out that is was not "regulated" by FDA. That sounds to me like they have not approved for medical use, nor has there yet been a reason to "ban" it. I kinda thought that most or all, of the peptides and the like were legal on that basis. Are you sure it is not legal?

Elbows, interesting, that would be nice. If I ever work out again, they really need LONG warm up these days for skull crushers. I really hurt them at one point in my life. It is my understanding that igf-1 is just a part of the full GH protien strand. I am assuming that it has similar effects on a lighter scale??? I would like to use GH one day if I ever have a serious injury, but my chin is big enough!!! :drooling: So I am savin that one..

Do you, or does anybody know if it also causes an insulin like reaction? Should it only be taken with food, etc..? I just had it tested for first time but dont have results yet.

I'm using igf-1 lr3 and have gotten more mass with less fat almost overnight. I use only 40 mcg -60 mcg a day split up in two shots. it has helped my elbows from feeling like they are about to explode and got rid of my should pain. it is not legal but many site in us to buy it. It is very light and temp sensitive after mixed with citric acid. keep in fridge out of light. check out gopeptides.com

 

[Michael Scally MD]

thanks for the reply. Regarding the legality. Dr. Scally pointed out that is was not "regulated" by FDA. That sounds to me like they have not approved for medical use, nor has there yet been a reason to "ban" it. I kinda thought that most or all, of the peptides and the like were legal on that basis. Are you sure it is not legal?

Didn't you read my mea culpa? IGF-1 is a FDA approved drug (see above post). However, the following might give pause to the use of long-term hGH or IGF-1. This is a continuing controversial area.

Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 Linked to Cancer Mortality in Older Men
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/716904?src=mp&spon=22&uac=75054AJ

From Reuters Health Information
By Will Boggs, MD

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Feb 11 - Serum levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) are associated with cancer mortality risk in older men, according to a January 15th online report in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.

"This is the first study to show an association of higher levels of circulating IGF-1 with increased risk of cancer mortality over a long follow-up," Dr. Gail A. Laughlin from the University of California, San Diego in La Jolla told Reuters Health in an email.

"If confirmed in several other studies, IGF-1 measurements might be useful in cancer screening, but assays will need to be standardized and cutpoints established," Dr. Laughlin said. "Much research remains to be done."

In the meantime, she and her coauthors say, "These results suggest caution in the use of IGF-1-enhancing therapies to slow the adverse effects of aging."

Dr. Laughlin and her colleagues examined the association of serum IGF-1 levels with cancer mortality in 633 men over 50 years old (mean age, 73 years). From their baseline clinic visits in 1988-1991 through 2006, 368 men died, including 74 (20%) who died of cancer.

Median baseline IGF-1 levels were significantly higher in men who died of cancer (109 ng/mL) than in those who did not (95 ng/mL), the authors report.

IGF-1 levels showed a significant quadratic (nonlinear) association with cancer mortality, and multivariate analyses revealed a significant association of higher levels of IGF-1 with a progressively higher risk of cancer death after adjustment for body-mass index, IGF binding protein-I, waist-to-hip ratio, physical exercise, current smoking, and previous cancer.

The adjusted risk of cancer death ranged from 1.61-fold higher for IGF-1 levels from 120-159 ng/mL to 2.61-fold higher for levels from 200-239 ng/mL, compared with levels below 120 ng/mL.

Similarly, the risk of cancer death was 82% higher for the 46% of men whose IGF-1 level was at or above 100 ng/mL than for those with lower IGF-1 levels.


Major JM, Laughlin GA, Kritz-Silverstein D, Wingard DL, Barrett-Connor E. Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I and Cancer Mortality in Older Men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab:jc.2009-1378.

Context: Although numerous studies have explored the relation of IGF-I with cancer incidence, few have investigated the association between IGF-I and cancer mortality.

Objective: This study examined the association of serum IGF-I levels with cancer mortality in older community-dwelling men.

Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a prospective, population-based study of 633 men aged 50 yr and older (mean = 73) who attended a 1988-1991 research clinic visit when blood was obtained for measurement of IGF-I. Participants were followed for vital status through July 2006.Main Outcome Measure: All-cancer mortality was assessed.

Results: Median IGF-I was 96 ng/ml. During the 18-yr follow-up, 368 deaths occurred; 74 (20%) were due to cancer. Cox regression analyses showed a significant quadratic association between IGF-I and all-cancer mortality (P = 0.039). Higher levels of IGF-I were associated with progressively higher risk of cancer death after adjusting for age, IGF-binding protein-1, adiposity, exercise, current smoking, and previous cancer. The adjusted risk of cancer death was statistically significant for IGF-I levels above 120 ng/ml, with magnitudes of effect ranging from 1.61 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.28-2.02] to 2.61 (95% CI = 1.46-4.64). For the 46% of men with IGF-I above 100 ng/ml, the risk of fatal cancer was 1.82 (95% CI = 1.11-2.96) compared to the risk with lower levels.

Conclusions: Higher serum IGF-I in older men is associated with increased risk of cancer death, independent of age, adiposity, lifestyle, and cancer history. These results suggest caution in the use of IGF-I-enhancing therapies to slow the adverse effects of aging.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

The story unfolds for IGF factors. Are these before or after the fact?

Liou J-M, Shun C-T, Liang J-T, et al. Plasma Insulin-Like Growth Factor-Binding Protein-2 Levels as Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker of Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab:jc.2009-668.

Context: Overexpression of IGF-II and IGF-binding protein (IGFBP)-2 has been reported in several cancers.

Objective: We aimed to assess the roles of plasma IGF-II and IGFBP-2 levels as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers and the impact of loss of imprinting (LOI) of IGF-II on the survival of colorectal cancer (CRC).Design: We conducted a case control and prospective cohort study for diagnostic and prognostic values, respectively.

Patients and Setting: Plasma levels of IGF-II and IGFBP-2 were measured in 162 patients with CRC before surgery, in paired 15 patients after curative surgery, in 24 patients with advanced colon polyps, and in 114 healthy controls between 2003 and 2006 in National Taiwan University Hospital.

Results: The area under the curve values of using IGFBP-2 as a diagnostic marker for advanced colon polyp and CRC were 0.654 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.547-0.76; P = 0.017] and 0.815 (95% CI = 0.766-0.864; P < 0.001), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing CRC were 80.2 and 64%, respectively, if the cutoff value of IGFBP-2 was 377 ng/ml. In the multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model, higher IGFBP-2 levels were associated with increased risk of mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.46; P = 0.017], whereas higher IGF-II levels were associated with reduced risk of mortality (HR = 0.42; P = 0.044). LOI of IGF-II was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR = 7.91; P = 0.014) in patients with stage IV disease.

Conclusions: IGFBP-2 is a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker of CRC. LOI of IGF-II is significantly associated with poor prognosis in patients with stage IV disease.

 

[zkt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1

Anyone considering using this should examine their cancer risk factors especially as to family history.
One of the reasons we get old is because we produce less and less stem cells as we age. The reason for that is because apotosis increases with age. IGF-1 reduces apotosis in stem cells, therefor they are available to repair the damage of wear and tear as in youth, rather than replace the damaged tissue with scar tissue as happens increasingly with age. Hence the great benefit.
This is the most interesting area of study that I have encountered.
Anyone hoping to fully understand it has the of the entire immune system functioning as prerequisite knowledge.
This brings me back to the question of stickies. I still contend that as interesting, informative and important as the info contained in this thread is, that in time it will get buried in the mass ignorance and confusion.
We gotta fix that.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1

 

[BBC3]

So then I am guessing it is CRITICAL to start that one at a young enough age that serious DNA damage has not already occurred, as it might feed a sick beast creating a monster. With consideration of the average healthy person, it would be interesting to track the decline of natural igf-1 levels and see if there is a substantial decrease at any one time, or at what mark in a steady normal decline, health starts to fai and how it relates to which diseases. Perhaps it could be a good drug against prostate cancer as a preventative if early enough.?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1

Anyone considering using this should examine their cancer risk factors especially as to family history.
One of the reasons we get old is because we produce less and less stem cells as we age. The reason for that is because apotosis increases with age. IGF-1 reduces apotosis in stem cells, therefor they are available to repair the damage of wear and tear as in youth, rather than replace the damaged tissue with scar tissue as happens increasingly with age. Hence the great benefit.
This is the most interesting area of study that I have encountered.
Anyone hoping to fully understand it has the of the entire immune system functioning as prerequisite knowledge.
This brings me back to the question of stickies. I still contend that as interesting, informative and important as the info contained in this thread is, that in time it will get buried in the mass ignorance and confusion.
We gotta fix that.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1

 

[HeadDoc]

it may be that not only igf-1 but igfbp-3 may need to be evaluated to predict some cancers.

At least from this study, it may be that elevated igf-1 in the presence of elevated igfbp3 may not be carcinogenic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16306136?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_SingleItemSupl.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=2&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

 

[Michael Scally MD]

High IGF-1 Levels Associated With Increased Risk Of Cancer Death In Older Men.

HealthDay (3/3, Preidt - http://healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=636560) reported that, according to a study published in the March issue of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, "high levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) are associated with an increased risk of cancer death in older men." After studying "633 men, aged 50 and older, whose IGF-1 levels were measured between 1988 and 1991," researchers found over the course of 18 years that "men whose IGF-1 levels were above 100 nanograms per milliliter at the start of the study were nearly twice as likely to die of cancer as those with lower levels of the hormone." In an Endocrine Society news release, lead author Jacqueline Major stated that the "findings suggest that serum IGF-1 may have potential importance as a biomarker for prognostic testing."

 

[BBC3]

You make an interesting point for me. With that study I am wondering does IGF-1 actually cut the mustard as an aging mitigator.? Meaning that perhaps the IGF1 chain only stimulates certain types growth, and does not stimulate the criteria required for cellular renewal at essential requisite. So perhaps the igf-1 will help with feeling better, and some increased function, but the basic aging process of the cellular DNA is not benefited. ( and I dont know if straight up GH will help stop cell death, or the cellular failure to healthily replicate???) But if so, then the GH may be required to keep the fire healthy, whereas IGF1 can only fuel the current condition of the fire.... Any thoughts there scientifically speaking.??? Doc? Anyone?

Obviously there is always the caviat of the fact that GH will exhibit in the continued growth of the areas the tend to pronouce as related ( nose, chin, extremeties), and the areas that are heavily worked ( heart, organs). So it would seem to me that if GH is truely a good tool for extending healthy youth, the dosage required must remain as minimal as possible. Is there a feedback loop associate that we are messing with? Can GH levels be measure in a laboratory? What is the proper range?

High IGF-1 Levels Associated With Increased Risk Of Cancer Death In Older Men.

HealthDay (3/3, Preidt - http://healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=636560) reported that, according to a study published in the March issue of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, "high levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) are associated with an increased risk of cancer death in older men." After studying "633 men, aged 50 and older, whose IGF-1 levels were measured between 1988 and 1991," researchers found over the course of 18 years that "men whose IGF-1 levels were above 100 nanograms per milliliter at the start of the study were nearly twice as likely to die of cancer as those with lower levels of the hormone." In an Endocrine Society news release, lead author Jacqueline Major stated that the "findings suggest that serum IGF-1 may have potential importance as a biomarker for prognostic testing."

 

[BBC3]

Doc, No Mea's are ever required for me. As I am sure my life should start with that phrase. I saw where all that went now as I finally got time to read the write up on the IGF-1 product you referenced there. That was a good pharmacalogical read by the way the I am sure I would be hard pressed to find.. Thanks for that reference.!

Regarding anti-aging...... Just a basic thought/question prior to any indepth research. ( I fear if I look, I may expedite a try....:drooling I am interested in means to reverse, or mitigate the aging process. So HGH and IGF-1 strike me of course. I am gathering that IGF-1 is a significant growth stimulator of the body as a whole. But this does not really address the issue of REPAIR or PREVENTION. So a quick ignorant question. Could HGH possibly rejuvenate cellular DNA on a long term basis.? I am not sure of all the factors that cause DNA to begin to fail to reproduce properly. BUT I AM THINKING THAT AS WILL MANY THINGS, WITHOUT A SOUND BASE, THERE CAN BE NO APPLICATION AS THE RULES AND PREMISE CHANGE COMPLETELY. Meaning, if I am going to venture HGH or IGF-1 as a means to stay young, I should probably do it young. SLOWING aging would seem more practically possible, than to REVERSE IT>>!!!!!!!! So if I am 40, shit or fall in the pot, right??

Can HGH build a new foundation with what remains, or only temporarily benefit cellular reproduction? Does HGH work on a "genetic" level at all? Or is it just strong fuel for whatever fire is currently burning?