muscle96ss
Subscriber
Its done on purpose, so its not really overdosed. For example, TP tells you that its being tested out at 5mg. So even though its being sold as 10iu, you know that its really 15 iu; its not some secret.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
MALDI-TOF-MS/HPLC-UV-VIS rHGH results
- Thread starter mands
- Start date
Its done on purpose, so its not really overdosed. For example, TP tells you that its being tested out at 5mg. So even though its being sold as 10iu, you know that its really 15 iu; its not some secret.
That's fine as long as he communicates it
muscle96ss
Subscriber
I looked at that post and here is what I see. I see IGF-1's that are on the same dosage for 4 straight weeks and in each set of 4 there is so much variability and really no patterns at all. Why that is, I have no idea. So, yes I agree, that data tells me nothing and kind of goes against what a lot of people are saying when they say IGF-1 shows biological activity and is what you are after. In this case, there obviously was something else other than the GH that was effecting his IGF-1 in some manner and skewing the results.
So why does it have to be that something is effecting or skewing these results and not that the results themselves are suspect? To me this puts a negative connotation on this as the tester was at fault or did something off. If we put any product in the body human there is always a influence so some variance should be xpected and accounted for, but since its not predictable in this case and has a huge range of margin we're right back to where we started. A crapshoot as far as how to read these results.
I appreciate you viewed these, the reason I pointed it out is that I think alot of people miss the value and how much info can be simply gained by real world data. I hope all view these tests and evaluate as ya do Sir......
TP brings a Good point but we will cover that soon...
Peace
muscle96ss
Subscriber
I'm not implying any negative connotation on the tester; at least that's not my intention. I think we can agree that the literature states that IGF-1 should be relatively stable and that is what the medical community uses to monitor dosage. So, if RP's IGF-1 is varying/fluctuating in the manner that the data represents; then I would say that there are only a few possibilities that could explain it:
1. Tester error in amounts of injection.
2. Lab error in measuring IGF-1.
3. Inconsistent GH that varies in dosage from vial to vial.
4. Changes in lifestyle that are effecting the way the tester is processing the GH
I highly doubt that there was any error in the injection amounts or numerous lab errors. I also think the possibility that all those GH's are that inconsistent is not very likely. So it really comes down to the human factor and how our bodies are processing the GH. I don't believe that RP did anything knowingly or intentionally nor do I cast any blame on him. But there is some unforeseen variable that we are not taking into account. That's really the only logical explanation I have. I am curious what you analysis is.
On a side note, I am really looking forward to the lab testing we are doing as I think it will help us understand some of these things. Although it could possibly only confuse us more.
I would much rather have this discussion in another place but here goes Sir.
I dont think that it is unforseen that the human body differs from week to week day to day hour to hour. we have to and do take that into account. so when we duplicate everything to the best of are ability and results vary it is RP's ,Yours, Mine, fault that we are human and not predictable. So we have to Blame the tester for being what he is, Human. And if the margin of variability is to great than we have to discount these results or at least acknowledge them with consideration.
For the serums I had much more faith in these then I do recently and always didnt give much weight to these IGF-1 tests for alot of reasons one in particular was the 1 xplained by you a few posts ago that you conveyed much better than I could ever communicate it. . Its always stated that these IGF-1 tests are far better, Better indicator of HGH. . I review all the data Mine and all posted and since this view on these IGF-1 tests are so strong it compels me to look into why people believe this.
As I see what tests and Info i can on it I see not much difference from The Serum to the IGF-1 tests as far as getting a good indicator. In fact the way I see it there are far more variables that effect the IGF-1's outcome than effect the Simple Serum. Gear use, Peps,Thyroid, Liver Condition, Alc. Use, OTC Meds,Not Linear,ect.ect. so b/c these IGF-1 tests are touted so highly and repeated and repeated many start to believe this as fact rather than test for themselves , Look at facts and results unbiasedly.
Any of This In no way is pointed in yr direction.
If results are not what is xpected or differ from a preconceived notion or vary from someones opinion. sometimes they are dismissed, ignored, discounted , picked apart in order to make them right in there head. People can be very strong in their beliefs and will not change them even when new facts are right in front of there faces.
Peace
I stand by my original hypothesis, in the world of generic hgh, Serum tests are meaningless without corresponding igf level testing, it is just a marketing gimmicks used to sell hgh. There's way to much "WOW, what great serums, I'm going to back up the truck and load up" . It's a great example of bro science run amok. As far as the two labs being overdosed, that needs to be spelled out more clearly in the thread, I have followed it every day and never spotted that, it's just another way to crank up serums and sell more hgh.. Those two points make that thread very suspicious. The other point where people said purity wasn't important is just beyond comprehension, and should be corrected
By the way, TP destroyed himself in my eyes with his arguing yesterday, he looked like an idiot. I thought Karl made a pretty good case and attacked no one. And to remind everyone, I could give a rats ass about karl, the only thing that thread is doing for me is telling me to stick with pharma.
Not sure why many dont comment if there beliefs and convictions are solid.
if Yr a Member there in good standing with the required amount of posts and follow the thread everyday. all are welcomed to post and discuss as the more views the better. that thread is for the Members to discuss and contribute thoughts, test results and opinions on HGH, there testing test methods and anything connected to that.
over dosed vials are talked about and admitted to. There is lab tests done that I refer to often that show this as fact. tests whether Serum, IGF-1, or Lab analyzation will always be used as a marketing gimmick there are flaws to all of them its best to know them and their limitations.....
Peace
I don't have the 50 posts required to post, and I don't go out of my way to make up stuff to post to get to the 50. Maybe the overdosed vials are talked about in other threads or I missed it, but I've only watched the lab testing thread, where it should be spelled out very time a serum test is run on those vials
I wish people with more knowledge could expand on the purity issue. If the gh is 90% pure, what are the remaining 10% and what are the effects on our body.
from one of the posts at pm
"Indeed, but even more - full analysis will show the quality/purity which is a crucial factor as well, and helps to asses the clinical effect, and certainly the side effects, which many experience much more with the generics, after all and correct me if I'm wrong - the Riptropin was tested for 88% purity, and I think any user would never like to inject 12% foreign http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/redirect-to/?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.synthetek.com%2Fproducts%2Fsynthepure-whey-protein-isolate%2F/other-junk which shouldn't be there, and worst may cause a possibly immediate and most probably long run autoimmune response"
"Indeed, but even more - full analysis will show the quality/purity which is a crucial factor as well, and helps to asses the clinical effect, and certainly the side effects, which many experience much more with the generics, after all and correct me if I'm wrong - the Riptropin was tested for 88% purity, and I think any user would never like to inject 12% foreign http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/redirect-to/?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.synthetek.com%2Fproducts%2Fsynthepure-whey-protein-isolate%2F/other-junk which shouldn't be there, and worst may cause a possibly immediate and most probably long run autoimmune response"
and muscle, you completely lost me on this one, you have no justification other than cost to say that is low risk
"I understand where you are coming from. I obviously would like to have the product be as pure as possible. And if money was no object or I had some health issues where purity was a necessity then obviously I am going to get the purist product. But with the example posted by Raj, with a 90% pure product, that 10% seems like it is low risk to me. If it were say 75% then I would probably rethink things. I have no factual basis to where I draw the line; but I just don't see 90% being an issue for a normal person at a normal dosage. Put it this way, someone taking 20iu per day of a 98% pure product is getting the same amount of "impurities" of a person take 4iu of a 90% pure product."
"I understand where you are coming from. I obviously would like to have the product be as pure as possible. And if money was no object or I had some health issues where purity was a necessity then obviously I am going to get the purist product. But with the example posted by Raj, with a 90% pure product, that 10% seems like it is low risk to me. If it were say 75% then I would probably rethink things. I have no factual basis to where I draw the line; but I just don't see 90% being an issue for a normal person at a normal dosage. Put it this way, someone taking 20iu per day of a 98% pure product is getting the same amount of "impurities" of a person take 4iu of a 90% pure product."
Karl had some good points but he was out of line. I don't have a problem with the gist of Karl's argument but you can't go after a mans country and product and not expect to catch some heat.
It's against the rules and as a competing source he knows that.
So you don't think it's a problem that Karl want's his serums posted when they test high but not when they test results are low? Then he proceeds to argue about IGF tests being more reliable than gh serum tests.
It's who he(karl the source) is and how he did it. I don't necessarily disagree with Karl's position, it's how he went about presenting it that I have a problem with.
muscle96ss
Subscriber
Show me the science. These so called impurities are simply part of the purification process. The same impurities are in pharm grade just in smaller amount. As I pointed out in the thread, someone taking 20iu of 98% pure Serostim is getting the same impurities as someone taking 4iu 90% pure generic GH. If those impurities taken at those dosages were dangerous then the product would never have reached FDA approval considering AIDS patients are told to take 1 vial a day of Serostim.
So talk about broscience, where is the real science showing 88% purity Rips causes autoimmune response?
Are these the "leftover proteins" that are in the gh vials?
Similar threads
