Can you elaborate on "potential issues"?
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
MALDI-TOF-MS/HPLC-UV-VIS rHGH results
- Thread starter mands
- Start date
Totolino
New Member
I have some doubts too when it comes to the concentration.
That´s the reason I send it to Simec.
Of course I´ll keep you updated with the results.
Now Sir, With those Labs posted i have more intrest and a better understanding.
The Study I posted Greatly conflict with the labs you provided.
So I will try and duplicate your findings.
Just a few questions;
If IGF-1 levels react this fast would xogenous HGH timing administration be critical when going for a IGF-1 draw? would smaller more frequent injections be more beneficial?
When I go in for a IGF-1 baseline, If 3 hours previously I had a Endogenous HGH pulse wouldnt there be some elevation or false reading. understanding these are considerably less.
Peace
muscle96ss
Subscriber
Let me address the issue of the claims of one GH subq injection doubling IGF-1 levels. First let me lay out what we already know are the facts or believe to be true.
1.) IGF-1 levels are relatively stable throughout the day. This is the reason that the medical field uses this test to monitor the effectiveness of GH treatment on its patients. By doing IGF-1 tests, they can then see the individuals response to the treatment and adjust the dosage accordingly.
2.) Rule of 100's - The rule of 100's is a rough estimate of what effect the GH will have on someones IGF-1 levels with 1iu resulting in a 100 point increase in IGF-1 levels. In other words, someone taking 2iu's should reasonably expect a 200 point increase in IGF-1 levels while someone taking 4iu you could expect a 400 point increase. This is a very rough estimate and obviously there are individual differences.
3.) Once injected, the GH needs to be absorbed into the blood and processed by the liver to be converted to IGF-1. Based on Tanaka et al., the peak IGF-1 is roughly 18-24 hours post injection.
So, now lets look at what Prof X did. He claims he injected 5mg, which is 15iu and his IGF-1 went up a few hours later over 100 points. Well, based on the rule of 100's; at 15iu per day, his IGF-1 is going to raise a total of 1500(note: we have seen that the increase with high dosages doesn't seem to be linear, so I will say on 15iu per day his IGF-1's are eventually going to peak at around 1000). So, after a few hours, yes his IGF-1 has gone up 100 points. But that is because he has saturated his blood with such an excess of GH that while only a fraction of the GH has been absorbed, it is enough to raise it 100 points.
What makes this deceiving is that the normal range of IGF-1 for most people can vary from 100-425 or so depending on age. So because Prof X has such a low baseline and he has flooded his system with a huge amount of GH, yes his IGF-1 has doubled. But that doesn't mean that everyone's is going to double. For example someone who starts out at 300 and it raises it 100 points to 400, it is only raising it 33%. In addition, as Prof X pointed out, this will not work for someone who is already on GH. So in order to even do this test, you must come completely off GH and establish a baseline. So, how is this test even useful in what we are doing. Its definitely not more reliable than a serum test. It also is much more expensive and a pain in the ass because you have to come off and establish a baseline.
Also, one last thing. All the IGF-1 tests that we have been performing via Labcorp are done via ICMA and not by RIA. RIA is the gold standard and more expensive. ICMA is prone to error and not that reliable. This factor further complicates people relying on IGF-1's.
Sorry if there are any typos or run-on sentences but I am in a hurry to get back out to my 11 y/o sons baseball tournament; but wanted to get this posted as I promised I would last night.
1.) IGF-1 levels are relatively stable throughout the day. This is the reason that the medical field uses this test to monitor the effectiveness of GH treatment on its patients. By doing IGF-1 tests, they can then see the individuals response to the treatment and adjust the dosage accordingly.
2.) Rule of 100's - The rule of 100's is a rough estimate of what effect the GH will have on someones IGF-1 levels with 1iu resulting in a 100 point increase in IGF-1 levels. In other words, someone taking 2iu's should reasonably expect a 200 point increase in IGF-1 levels while someone taking 4iu you could expect a 400 point increase. This is a very rough estimate and obviously there are individual differences.
3.) Once injected, the GH needs to be absorbed into the blood and processed by the liver to be converted to IGF-1. Based on Tanaka et al., the peak IGF-1 is roughly 18-24 hours post injection.
So, now lets look at what Prof X did. He claims he injected 5mg, which is 15iu and his IGF-1 went up a few hours later over 100 points. Well, based on the rule of 100's; at 15iu per day, his IGF-1 is going to raise a total of 1500(note: we have seen that the increase with high dosages doesn't seem to be linear, so I will say on 15iu per day his IGF-1's are eventually going to peak at around 1000). So, after a few hours, yes his IGF-1 has gone up 100 points. But that is because he has saturated his blood with such an excess of GH that while only a fraction of the GH has been absorbed, it is enough to raise it 100 points.
What makes this deceiving is that the normal range of IGF-1 for most people can vary from 100-425 or so depending on age. So because Prof X has such a low baseline and he has flooded his system with a huge amount of GH, yes his IGF-1 has doubled. But that doesn't mean that everyone's is going to double. For example someone who starts out at 300 and it raises it 100 points to 400, it is only raising it 33%. In addition, as Prof X pointed out, this will not work for someone who is already on GH. So in order to even do this test, you must come completely off GH and establish a baseline. So, how is this test even useful in what we are doing. Its definitely not more reliable than a serum test. It also is much more expensive and a pain in the ass because you have to come off and establish a baseline.
Also, one last thing. All the IGF-1 tests that we have been performing via Labcorp are done via ICMA and not by RIA. RIA is the gold standard and more expensive. ICMA is prone to error and not that reliable. This factor further complicates people relying on IGF-1's.
Sorry if there are any typos or run-on sentences but I am in a hurry to get back out to my 11 y/o sons baseball tournament; but wanted to get this posted as I promised I would last night.
Great discussion (PX, RPBB, CBS) that could/would ONLY be permitted, condoned or facilitated on Meso
Incidentally whats the difference bt poorly developed biologics and chemotherapy, NOT MUCH as both are capable of inflicting more harm than good!
Jim
Last edited:
Just check me out on eRoids
(Both BWs posted are from only 6IUs SubQ)
IGF1 is a better indicator for rhGH
LabCorp GH Serum only indicates a GH Protein present
GH Serum "numbers" can be deceiving when used to PROMOTE quality, dose, strength, etc
Last edited:
Excellent point by Jim :
"Assuming equivalent daily dosing, bc the serum half life of GH approximates a couple hours, the rate limiting step of hepatic IGF generation, is much more likely to be a TIME DEPENDENT rather than a DOSE DEPENDENT issue, per say."
Timing is a key factor.
Also:
I Doubled and Tripled by IGF1 using Tested GH (6IU SubQ) very very quickly
The Focus needs to be on IGF1 and not GH Serums.
(I won't even comment on Muscles post. There's just too much to correct)
Last edited:
Yes:
One Sample (Batch):
Elevated GH Serum yet yielded Low-No IGF1 Elevation
Two Samples (Batch):
Welts/Adverse Reaction
muscle96ss
Subscriber
Of course you wont comment. Everytime i prove you wrong, you bail!
muscle96ss
Subscriber
You still don't get it, the focus needs to be on both. The serum are used a sort of a prescreen. Say Source X has a new GH. I can do a serum and tell if its bunk immediately without wasting anytime doing injections and putting who knows what in my body. This is exactly what I did with the Scitropin a couple years back. I had a bad feeling about it and did a serum test and stuck the rest in my fridge until I got the results. When it came back .01 I knew it was bunk and didn't waste any time with it. Now if it came back with a score like 22.3; then I could run it for a few weeks at my normal dosage of 4iu per day and then do an IGF-1 and see how my IGF-1 compares to the others I have done at the same dosage. But your test of doing a subq injection and then an IGF-1 a couple hours later, has no real world value. What information does it give us and at what cost?
A quick question for you Jim
We have two samples being tested (red , itchy welt reaction)
Besides "purity %" tested
Can you give me some info on Bacteria Endotoxin testing
Info I can pass on to the lab.
There's been lots of members reporting this reaction from the brand being tested. Maybe "inject IM" isn't the best answer to this issue if we can get a solid test result. (Purity % / Endotoxins)
TY
You don't get it, safety comes first, and go ahead and ask me because you're going to, how do you know what's safe. I probably dont, but don't pretend that you do either
You keep using these doubles peak bullshit arguments, if you don't know what you're talking about, just say so
And start thinkingmore about what you're righting, you're behavior is making you look more and more like a rep
By the way, that thread at pm is just a giant shillfest that has no credibility whatsoever. You've got the sources playing games like altering dosages to jack up serum scores and yelling yippee, gtg bro. But you're too lazy to run igfs, or too afraid the results wouldn't come out in your favor, and you wouldn't be able to sell hgh. I don't know if the hgh they are selling over there is any good or not, but you guys aren't do anything goes to help anybody know if it is, and I would never use it to make a sourcing decision
And yet it took you guys two years to figure that out. Guess it was easier to sell hgh using serum scores.
So stick with this narrative!
I agree with this
But this IS NOT the narrative at PM
You claim to be Chris Angel Mindfreak that can predict the Mg/IU in a vial by the GH Serum results.
You still have GH Sources there ranting on a 30.1 Score lMAO!
Why do you do this....pages and pages here of "Negative Nancy"
You extract information then SPIN IT to create doubt
ALIN from ASHOP tactics
REACT
DISTRACT
REFLECT
You've been nothing but a CANCER here on a thread created to bring some positive information on a product known for issues
Bioequivalence is a term inpharmacokinetics used to assess the expected in vivo biological equivalence of two proprietary preparations of a drug. If two products are said to be bioequivalent it means that they would be expected to be, for all intents and purposes, the same.
IGFBP3
IGF1
Growth Hormone is NOT a generic
Rather a BioSimilar
This is what is used to compare :
Innovator GH Product (Pharma)
BioSimilar/Follow-On/BioIdentical (Generic)
There is NO GH SERUM used in determining Bioequivalence
My Testing Method Mimics this study.
"So in order to even do this test, you must come completely off GH and establish a baseline. So, how is this test even useful in what we are doing. Its definitely not more reliable than a serum test. It also is much more expensive and a pain in the ass because you have to come off and establish a baseline."
EXACTLY! Your testing just runs on and on and on.
Of course no comment on my "medically impossible" blood work posted with dates to show IGF1 elevation you say pages and pages was impossible.
You continue using GH Serums as a marketing tool....not IGF1 because of the correct testing protocol needed.
Just a quick fix to create hype and sales. So sad.
Last edited:
Same thing as I said before, muscle and the boys came here and attacked dr j and his testing program because it didn't agree with his shillfest over at pm. Than when anyone argues, he speaks in doubletalk, asks stupid questions 9ver and over again without answering any that are being asked of him, and makes up math that is beyond comprehension. He's sounding more like a rep all the time
Blah blah blah, what Prof has presented is a very good experimental method. Sorry if it's above your head. I'm still laughing at how long it took you guys to figure out what doubling baseline IGF baseline meant
Ooohhhh! I see now. This thread has been officially dead for awhile....I just didn't get the notice
The PM guys just come back here to circle the wagon around the Scam Testing Protocol to keep GH sales hyped
I really think that RacePics member is being mislead unfortunately
I've seen he has questioned the GH Serums also
Well dang
What Mands/Jim started here was a true asset. Getting GH tested at Accredited Labs is a chore
Oh what could have been.
muscle96ss
Subscriber
Like a rep for who?? You have no clue!! You contribute nothing to this thread. All you do is make off the wall comments, that each time you write, make you look more and more ignorant than you did before. Nothing you say here makes any sense or adds any value. But looking at your others posts here on Meso, it obvious you are just a troll who likes to stir up shit and give everybody a hard time. How about contributing something to the community for a change.
