# 5iu EOD Pharma HGH or Pharma Peptides?



## J.Smith (Jul 7, 2011)

As above guys, both work out to be a similar price.

Its either 5iu eod Pharma hgh, or 100-200mcg ghrp2 and 100mcg mod-grf 3times a day?


----------



## tprice (Aug 28, 2011)

some expensive peptides if that works out the same cost!

hgh for me personally mate


----------



## J.Smith (Jul 7, 2011)

Their clinical grade pharma peptides..so not just generic chinese peps


----------



## tprice (Aug 28, 2011)

nice! never tried them before!

still hgh for me mate


----------



## weeman (Sep 6, 2007)

even so mate thats some waaaaaay expensive pharma peps if your comparing with legit pharma hgh!


----------



## adpolice (Oct 27, 2011)

I don't think the optimal combination of the best quality peptides can rival phgrade gh..no way..


----------



## Wevans2303 (Feb 18, 2010)

GH GH GH GH

GH!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

If your clinical peptides and pharmacy GH cost the same one of two things is happening.....

Your peptides are to much

Or

Your GH is not pharma GH

We cannot talk about prices for GH but we can for peptides and clinical peptides cost roughly around the $40 per vial......

I have both clinical grade peptides and Genotropin (Kabi pens) at the moment for me if using saturation dose at least 3 x day of clinical peptides then the return is better than pharma GH........I know hard to believe 

Guys if you are not getting good results with peptides then don't buy them from that source again.......

Plus remember each time you inject the GHRP/GHRH you release a pulse of GH so frequency is much more important than dose for peptides, to get the same type of pulse with synthetic GH the dose should be no more than 2-3iu each jab any more and the pulse is more prolonged more like GH bleed not pulse........

So after me rambling on for me clinical peptides every time............although saturation dose peptides followed by 2iu GH 10-15 min later is even better


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

adpolice said:


> I don't think the optimal combination of the best quality peptides can rival phgrade gh..no way..


What pharma GH have you used?



Wevans2303 said:


> GH GH GH GH
> 
> GH!


Why??


----------



## stone14 (Mar 24, 2005)

cant beat your own hgh if you have a good pep cycle to produce it, prod cycling peps and inj hgh would prob be best???


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

stone14 said:


> *cant beat your own hgh if you have a good pep *cycle to produce it, prod cycling peps and inj hgh would prob be best???


Bang on mate i am confused so many do not get this......you are correct the ultimate is peps followed by small doses of GH...


----------



## dt36 (Jun 3, 2005)

Pscarb said:


> Bang on mate i am confused so many do not get this......you are correct the ultimate is peps followed by small doses of GH...


Can't agree more with this protocol Paul. I have now run out of Peps, so am only running GH on its own at the moment. However, I will be putting an order in this week and will very shortly be back on this mix.

Got a blood test next week, and all should be ok as my last count was down to normal. If this is still the same, then am also considering a mild course of test to go with it.


----------



## Dezw (May 13, 2009)

I personally think most peps are ****e and only marketed as being good by the people who sell and re-sell.

Proper GH any day of the week.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Dezw said:


> I personally think most peps are ****e and only marketed as being good by the people who sell and re-sell.
> 
> Proper GH any day of the week.


your entitled to your opinion Dez but your wrong mate if you have decent peptides they are better than GH.....


----------



## Dezw (May 13, 2009)

Pscarb said:


> your entitled to your opinion Dez but your wrong mate if you have decent peptides they are better than GH.....


I've tried pharma hgh, and also peptides purchased from a good source, and just found the gh better.

You've got more experience I'm sure than me on this matter though mate.


----------



## jedibrat (Mar 20, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> your entitled to your opinion Dez but your wrong mate if you have decent peptides they are better than GH.....


Personal experience is one thing, but plenty of people would like to see this backed up by clinical trials.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Dezw said:


> I've tried pharma hgh, and also peptides purchased from a good source, and just found the gh better.
> 
> You've got more experience I'm sure than me on this matter though mate.


i use Pharma GH all the time as well as clinical peptides and clinical peptides are better but they would be as peptides release human GH that is your GH.......the problem is that many buy either crap or non clinical peptides and are left dissapointed.



jedibrat said:


> Personal experience is one thing, but plenty of people would like to see this backed up by clinical trials.


without a doubt studies should be available to lead the way and for peptides such as GHRP/GHRH there are hundreds out there i will reference just a fe for you what you have to remember is that in studies clinical grade peptides are used not junk from china........

this is where i would throw the question back to you to show me the studies to back up the use of synthetic GH........

common sense should dictate this.......HGH pharma or not is synthetic and contains the 191aa which is 22kDa human GH your own GH hat transformed you from a baby to a man contains both 22kDa and 20kDa where as 20kDa is much less and only is made up of 15 amino's it is still important and has a role......so back to the common sense thing we as humans will always grow better on substances we produce ourselves so COMMON SENSE would dictate that being able to release pulse after pulse of natural GH is better than injecting synthetic........

1 - Laron Z, Frenkel J, Deghenghi R, Anin S, Klinger B & Sibergeld A 1995 Intranasal administration of the GHRP hexarelin accelerates growth in short children. Clinical Endocrinology 43 631-635

2 - Mericq V, Cassorla F, Salazar T, Avila A, Iniguez G, Bowers C & Merriam G 1998 E?ects of eight months treatment with graded doses of a growth hormone (GH)-releasing peptide in GH-de?cient children. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 83 2355-2360.

3 - Smith R, Van Der Ploeg L, Howard A, Feighner S, Cheng K, Hickey G, Wyvratt MJ, Fischer M, NargundR&Patchett A 1998 Peptidomimetic regulation of growth hormone secretion. Endocrine Reviews 18 621-645

4 Oscarsson J, Johannsson G, Johansson J-O, Lundberg P-A, Lindstedt G & Bengtsson B-Å 1997 Diurnal variation in serum insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF binding protein-3 concentrations during daily subcutaneous injections of recombinant human growth hormone in GH-de?cient adults. Clinical Endocrinology 46 63-68

5 - Svensson J, The GH secretagogues ipamorelin and GH-releasing peptide-6 increase bone mineral content in adult female rats, Journal of Endocrinology (2000) 165, 569-577

Last edited by DatBtrue; 2nd November 2009 at 06:54 PM.


----------



## ukmonster (Apr 29, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> Bang on mate i am confused so many do not get this......you are correct the ultimate is peps followed by small doses of GH...


Because I have heard the synthetic hgh overkills the peps


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ukmonster said:


> Because I have heard the synthetic hgh overkills the peps


you have heard wrong....guys do not think of them as peps but as something that releases natural GH, the synthetic GH you inject piggy backs the natural release it does not kill it to be honest that is the most stupidest thing i have heard in a long time (no dig at you)


----------



## ukmonster (Apr 29, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> you have heard wrong....guys do not think of them as peps but as something that releases natural GH, the synthetic GH you inject piggy backs the natural release it does not kill it to be honest that is the most stupidest thing i have heard in a long time (no dig at you)


Just what others have said. I have had fantastic results with ghrp-6 last couple of months. But lookin to add the gh ! But I fear my body has built up tolerance ? How long do u think u can stay on ghrp+ ghrh before u build up a tolerece as such? And can u add 2 iu's of gh to all three shot per day? Do u think this method beats doing say 6 iu of pharma gh everyday?


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

Do you build up a tolerance to Peptides? Coz I sometimes think that the peps I use, don't seem to give me as much as a 'flush' as they did in the first few weeks. Is this because they are not clinical/pharma peps, ( I use Labpe), or coz I'm imagining it?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ukmonster said:


> Just what others have said. I have had fantastic results with ghrp-6 last couple of months. But lookin to add the gh ! But I fear my body has built up tolerance ? How long do u think u can stay on ghrp+ ghrh before u build up a tolerece as such? And can u add 2 iu's of gh to all three shot per day? Do u think this method beats doing say 6 iu of pharma gh everyday?


you need to do some reading mate as i have stated many times about following the peptides with small amounts of Gh, as for tolerance your body does not build up a tolerance to GHRP/GHRH peptides there use does not effect the natural pulses of Gh through the day...


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

Pscarb said:


> If your clinical peptides and pharmacy GH cost the same one of two things is happening.....
> 
> Your peptides are to much
> 
> ...


As you say paul it is good,every day i see more results in many ways from this protocol,i can only use this at mo,no AAs or t3/t4 is possible as i have poss heart mumur,so i can gauge this honestly.I will keep you all updated.


----------



## ukmonster (Apr 29, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> you need to do some reading mate as i have stated many times about following the peptides with small amounts of Gh, as for tolerance your body does not build up a tolerance to GHRP/GHRH peptides there use does not effect the natural pulses of Gh through the day...


i have done lot of research ... and there rnt many studis useing this protocol. yeh you have said do this lots of times ( i'd be sick of telling people lol ) but no one else even knows of this protocol that i've spoken to. Even veteren bodybuilders from my gym didnt now how to run them together . not sayin it hasnt worked for you , but for an evrday guy its expensive to run 2iu of growth 3x a day and it you wont see fat loss? strength ? better hair skin and nails no muscle loss?


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

ukmonster said:


> i have done lot of research ... and there rnt many studis useing this protocol. yeh you have said do this lots of times ( i'd be sick of telling people lol ) but no one else even knows of this protocol that i've spoken to. Even veteren bodybuilders from my gym didnt now how to run them together . not sayin it hasnt worked for you , but for an evrday guy its expensive to run 2iu of growth 3x a day and it you wont see fat loss? strength ? better hair skin and nails no muscle loss?


Mate i have been training 33years,i had no clue on this,it seems good to me , we will see,are you asking those questions or are they retorical?


----------



## dt36 (Jun 3, 2005)

I have posted before that i was running 2iu of GH after my peptides, and that I found it worked well together. Did this last year and had decent results, considering I do very little actual injectable steroids with it. Many of the posts were on this board last year, with plenty of comments from other members,including Paul, Ausbuilt, et al

I am currently running 2iu of GH 20 minutes after my morning peps with the addition of 50mg of Testogel and 1 Proviron tab. Then I take another round of peps before bed.

I have recently come down 1 belt hole with no additional change to my diet or cardio using this method.


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

dt36 said:


> I have posted before that i was running 2iu of GH after my peptides, and that I found it worked well together. Did this last year and had decent results, considering I do very little actual injectable steroids with it. Many of the posts were on this board last year, with plenty of comments from other members,including Paul, Ausbuilt, et al
> 
> I am currently running 2iu of GH 20 minutes after my morning peps with the addition of 50mg of Testogel and 1 Proviron tab. Then I take another round of peps before bed.
> 
> I have recently come down 1 belt hole with no additional change to my diet or cardio using this method.


Testogel as trt?Prov to up the effect,harden?My next step,after some tests for heart murmur!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ukmonster said:


> i have done lot of research ... and there rnt many studis useing this protocol. yeh you have said do this lots of times ( i'd be sick of telling people lol ) but no one else even knows of this protocol that i've spoken to. Even veteren bodybuilders from my gym didnt now how to run them together . not sayin it hasnt worked for you , but for an evrday guy its expensive to run 2iu of growth 3x a day and it you wont see fat loss? strength ? better hair skin and nails no muscle loss?


firstly who said you wont see fat loss?

So the "Veterans" in your gym have not heard of it so that means what it does not exist?

BB evolves everyday because of this so does the training we do and the way we use the drugs......

if you feel running GH in this way is to costly then don't do it if this is a problem for you maybe GH is not for you.......

Peptides create a pulse of GH the most important thing about peptides is frequency of injections not dose so you could do 50mcg of each a GHRP/GHRH 3 times a day and you would get better results than doing 100mcg once a day. to take this to the next level you can piggy back this GH pulse with synthetic GH by doing 2iu small GH shots.......

you say there is no studies out there there are a huge amount on peptide dosing and the one below is for the use of GH pulsing over one big shot.....maybe you should print it out and take it to those Veterans in your gym 

*Originally posted by DatBtrue on his site so all credit goes to his hardwork in sharing his knowledge*

Growth, GHBP, and GH Receptors Are Differentially Regulated by Peak and Trough Components of the GH Secretory Pattern

This study underscores that pulsed GH is a more effective means to increasing growth then continuous or mixed continuous/pulsed patterns. In addition the expression of binding protein and GH-receptors in the liver is increased more in the continuous pattern then the pulsed pattern. Yet growth is superior in the pulsed pattern.

Although not discussed this underscores the understanding that growth effects stem mostly from local production and use of growth factors in target peripheral tissue more then from central derived (i.e. liver) circulating systemic factors.

In addition this study is the first to pick up on the depth of the trough as important for conveying a meaningful signal... this is in addition to the sexier (or more oft examined) meaning conveyed by the amplitude.

From the study..."The results clearly show that addition of considerable amounts of GH to fill in the troughs in a pulsatile infusion had little effect on growth. This underscores the importance of GH pulsatility and pulse amplitude, rather than total GH dose for growth stimulation in the rat."

From the study "the lowest pulsatile dose tested (36 ug/day) resulted in a response that required a 5-fold higher dose given continuously." ...this is of significant interest.

The study asked an interesting question "What is the significance of a system in which baseline GH levels increase GHR and GHBP, whereas intermittent exposure to much higher GH levels has no effect?"

Although there is no clear answer one conjecture is "Increased GHBP production could trap GH (26,27) and so protect tissues from continuous exposure to GH that might not be beneficial."

Although (as seen in other studies continuous GH results in fetus growth and very early childhood growth (boys & girls), in the long-term older male children grow when pulsation increases.

The study concludes by recognizing a difference between rats and man, namely rats make GHBP but human GHBP comes from GH-receptors breaking away from the cell surface. The differences in male vs. female growth patterns are similar between men and women however.

Perhaps this line best sums it all up concerning humans... "Arguments have been advanced to suggest that the GH pattern is important for growth in man because increasing the frequency of GH therapy to daily injections improves its growth promoting effect..."

Growth, Growth Hormone (GH)-Binding Protein, and GH Receptors Are Differentially Regulated by Peak and Trough Components of the GH Secretory Pattern in the Rat, Evelien F. Gevers, Endocrinology 137: 1013-1018, 1996

ABSTRACT

Body growth, GH secretory pattern, hepatic GH receptor (GHR), and plasma GH-binding protein (GHBP) levels are all sexually dimorphic in the rat. Male rats grow faster than females, and in GH-deficient animals, GH therapy is more effective when given in a pulsatile pattern rather than a continuous infusion.

This contrasts with GHBP and hepatic GHR levels, which are lower in males than in females and raised by continuous but not pulsatile GH therapy.

One possible explanation is that growth is primarily regulated by GH pulses, whereas GHR and GHBP are regulated mostly by the trough levels rough levels (which are lower in males than in females). To test this hypothesis directly, GH-deficient dwarf rats were given patterned iv infusions of hGH in which the relative contributions of the peak and trough components of the GH pattern were systematically varied, independently of dose, and their effects on weight and length gain, plasma GHBP, and hepatic GHR binding were measured.

We found that the dose-response curves for GH given by pulsatile vs. continuous infusion were significantly nonparallel, and that growth was primarily stimulated by the pulsatile component of a mixed GH infusion pattern; doubling the GH dose by adding a continuous © infusion to a series of pulses (p) neither enhanced nor inhibited weight gain (36 ug hGHday pulses (36p) vs. 36 ug hGH/day pulses + 36 ug hGH/day continuously (36p + 36c): 0.9 2 0.2 g/day vs. 1.1 2 0.2 g/day), whereas doubling the GH dose by adding a pulsatile component significantly enhanced growth (72p: 2.1 % 0.2 g/day, P < 0.01).

Conversely, hepatic GHR and plasma GHBP levels were highly sensitive to the continuous element of the mixed infusion pattern and were totally unaffected by varying the pulsatile component over a wide range of doses. These results strongly suggest that growth and hepatic GHR/plasma GHBP respond differentially to the peak and trough components of the GH secretion pattern in the rat.

THE GH secretory pattern, hepatic GH receptors (GHR), and circulating GH-binding protein (GHBP) levels are closely interrelated in the rat (l-4). In the rat, the growth response is particularly dependent on the pattern of GH exposure (5, 6). Male rats secrete GH in large intermittent pulses, with very low trough GH levels between the secretory bursts (7, 8), whereas females show a more continuous GH secretion with frequent, irregular pulses superimposed on high baseline levels, which rarely fall to undetectable levels (8). Male rats grow faster than females, and GH stimulates growth more effectively when given in pulses rather than as a continuous infusion (5, 9).

The mechanism of this dependence of the growth response or the pattern of GH is puzzling. Although GH receptors and plasma GHBP levels are also sensitive to the pattern of GH exposure in the rat, the effects are opposite to those seen on growth. Both hepatic GH receptors and plasma GHBP levels are lower in males than in females (10-12) and are upregulated markedly by continuous, but not by intermittent, GH exposure, despite the effectiveness of the latter pattern in stimulating growth (l-4).

In considering the differences between GH secretory patterns, most studies have focused on the GH peaks as the primary signaling component. However, an equally significant difference is seen in the trough levels, and this difference in baseline GH levels could also represent an important signaling element of the GH secretory pattern (13, 14). This is the first study in which the relative contributions of the peak and trough components of a GH pulsatile pattern have been examined directly. Separate computer-controlled infusion pumps were used to vary systematically the baseline and peak components of a pattern of GH delivery to GH-deficient dwarf rats. The results clearly show that growth and GH receptor regulation are separately controlled by these different components of the GH secretory pattern. Some of these results have been presented in preliminary form (15).

....

Results

Growth

Dose-response curves were compared for dwarf rats receiving hGH by continuous or pulsatile infusion (Fig. 1a). As expected, pulsatile infusion increased weight gain more than a continuous infusion (P < 0.01) and this was apparent over the entire range of doses tested. The dose-response curves were nonparallel; whereas the response to pulsatile hGH infusions started to flatten at doses above 72 ug/day, the response for continuous infusions was still increasing at 200 ug / day hGH. Body growth, measured by nose-anus length gain, was also more effectively stimulated by pulsatile infusions (P = 0.014), but the difference between the two patterns was not as marked as for weight gain (Fig. 1b).

The effects of varying the proportion between baseline GH infusion and GH pulse height were examined separately over two different dose ranges, namely 36-72 ug / day and 144-200 ug/day. In the lower dose-range, a combined infusion of 36 pg/ day pulsatile (36p) and 36 ug / day continuous (36c) was compared with separate infusions of 36c or 36p or 72c or 72p alone (Fig. 2a). The 36p + 36c combined infusion was much more effective than 36c alone (P < 0.01) but not significantly better than 36p alone. Thus, adding a pulsatile component to a continuous dose markedly increased weight gain, whereas adding the equivalent continuous dose to a pulsatile infusion has little effect on growth. Note also that the combined treatment (36c + 36p) was more effective than the same dose all given continuously (72c) but less effective (P < 0.05) than the same dose all given in pulses (72 p) (Fig. 2a).

Similar results were obtained in other experiments over a higher dose range in which combined infusions of 144p + 56c or 56p + 144c were compared with 144c, 144p, 200c, or 200p given separately (Fig. 2b). This figure includes four groups of rats receiving the same total daily dose of 200 ug/ day, but with a varying pulsatile component. The results clearly show that weight gain increases as more of the total dose is given in pulses.

hGH- and bGH-binding

Pulsatile hGH treatment either had no effect or slightly decreased hepatic hGH binding (P < 0.05 for the 144p group) (Fig. 3a). In contrast, continuous hGH infusions raised hepatic hGH binding in a dose-dependent manner. Figure 3a also shows hepatic hGH binding in groups of animals receiving the same total dose of hGH (200 ug/day) split in varying proportions between pulsatile and continuous delivery. These results clearly show that, in contrast to growth, hGH binding rises in proportion to the continuous component of the treatment.

Figure 3b shows bGH binding, representing total somatogenic receptors, from the same experimental group. Hepatic bGH binding was slightly increased by pulsatile hGH infusions, but this reached statistical significance only in the 144p group. Like human GH binding, bovine GH binding was increased by continuous infusions of hGH in a dose-dependent manner, but the changes were much smaller.

Figure 3b again compares groups of animals all receiving 200 ug hGH/day with varying continuous and pulsatile elements. As for hGH binding, the rise in bGH binding increased in proportion with the continuous hGH component of the infusion.

GHBP

In the same animals, plasma GHBP levels were measured at the end of the experiments. GHBP levels were not changed by any of the pulsatile GH treatments alone but increased dose dependently in response to continuous GH infusions (Fig. 4). In the rats receiving combined infusions at a total dose of 200 ug hGH/ day, plasma GHBP increased dose dependently with the amount of hGH infused continuously.

Discussion

The relationship between peak amplitude, peak frequency, baseline levels of the GH pattern, and growth is far from clear. Most studies have concentrated on the peak height of the GH pulse and pulse frequency as the principle factors governing the growth response. However, trough levels could be as important and clinical evidence rises that baseline secretion may be involved (23).

Hepatic GHR and its related binding protein (GHBP) levels are higher in female rats than in males (12). Pulsatile GH infusions have little or no effect on GH receptor expression, whereas continuous GH exposure, which promotes growth to a lesser extent than pulsatile exposure, leads to increased GH receptor and increased GHBP levels (l-4). One explanation for this could be that different elements of the GH secretory pattern provide separate signals to regulate growth and GH receptors independently and that trough levels of GH are themselves primary regulators of GHR/GHBP expression, just as they regulate other GH sensitive genes in the liver (13, 14, 24). We examined this hypothesis.

As expected, pulsatile iv infusions of GH were more effective in stimulating weight gain and body growth than continuous infusions (5,6,9,18). Previous studies have tested this only over a limited range of doses. We now show that these relationships hold over a wide dose-response range. The lowest pulsatile dose tested (36 ug/day) resulted in a response that required a 5-fold higher dose given continuously. Response to pulsatile infusion reached a plateau maximum that was not reached by continuous infusions. Similar results have recently been obtained in both dwarf and hypophysectomized rats comparing daily injections vs. infusions by the SC route (25).

This is the first study in which combined continuous and pulsatile infusions were mixed in a controlled manner, with continuous GH baseline would affect the growth responses to GH peaks. The results clearly show that addition of considerable amounts of GH to fill in the troughs in a pulsatile infusion had little effect on growth. This underscores the importance of GH pulsatility and pulse amplitude, rather than total GH dose for growth stimulation in the rat. Furthermore, because adding a continuous GH component to a pulsatile infusion did not inhibit growth, the very low troughs of GH between pulses in male rats (7, 8) are not absolutely required for growth stimulation.

This completely contrasted with the effects on GH receptor binding in liver and plasma GHBP levels measured in the same animals. Hepatic GHR and plasma GHBP were clearly dependent primarily on the baseline component of the hGH infusions. This was particularly noticeable in combined infusions in which the introduction of a relatively minor continuous component to a pulsatile infusion raised GH binding and GHBP levels without any effect on growth. A slight increase in hepatic bGH binding was seen by pulsatile treat- another study, SC pulsatile treatment at 60 ug/ day for 1 week revealed no change in total GH receptor levels (1). These results suggest that hepatic GH receptors and GHBP are primarily regulated by the extent to which GH exposure is continuous and are relatively insensitive to GH pulses.

What is the significance of a system in which baseline GH levels increase GHR and GHBP, whereas intermittent exposure to much higher GH levels has no effect? Increased GHBP production could trap GH (26,27) and so protect tissues from continuous exposure to GH that might not be beneficial. On the other hand, increased GHBP could serve as a reservoir to prolong the time of low-level GH exposure (28), and there is some experimental evidence to show that this can occur in vivo without affecting growth (14). An increased number of hepatic GHR could also increase the sensitivity to low concentrations of GH, but in this study, only hepatic GHR were measured. GH receptor expression may well be regulated differently by these GH patterns in other tissues (29-34).

The correlation of brief large GH pulses and growth suggests that peak amplitude may be the primary regulator of growth and that this is achieved without changing GHR or GHBP levels. We propose that the baseline levels of the GH pattern serve a different function than the peaks, which are primarily concerned with growth. Consistent with a separate function for the peaks and troughs in the GH pattern is their separate regulation: the GH releasing factor system generates pulses, whereas somatostatin actively prevents GH secretion between bursts.

Baseline GH levels could be more involved in the metabolic actions of GH because continuous low GH levels are capable of regulating the expression of several GH-sensitive proteins in the rat (13,14,24). This and other data show that hepatic GHR and GHBP also fall into this category in rats (1, 35), and the resulting increased GHBP levels could enhance such low level effects of GH by retaining it in the circulation (28,36). It remains puzzling how the same receptors subserve such different effects depending on the time of exposure to GH, but an increase in receptors after continuous, but not pulsatile GH exposure, could lead to a change in the type of intracellular mediators coupled to GH action, activating different signal transduction mechanisms (37). The length of exposure to GH could also alter the proportion of GH acting at the surface receptors compared to that internalized to intracellular compartments including the nucleus (38).

It remains to be clarified if growth and GHR/GHBP is similarly regulated in man, in whom GHBP arises from GH receptor cleavage (39) and not from alternative splicing of the GHR pre-mRNA as in rodents (40). As in rats, GH baseline levels are higher in women than in men (41-44) although the magnitude is less apparent. Short-term comparisons of continuous vs. pulsatile GH treatment in man have so far revealed only minor differences in metabolic parameters (45, 46), but longer treatment in GH deficient children shows induction of GHBP after continuous but not pulsatile GH treatment (47). Arguments have been advanced to suggest that the GH pattern is important for growth in man because increasing the frequency of GH therapy to daily injections improves its growth promoting effect (48-50), although in the short term, once daily SC injections stimulated growth equally well as continuous SC infusion in GH deficient children (47).

In conclusion, this study demonstrates that, in the rat, growth is most sensitive to pulsatile exposure and peak amplitude, whereas GHBP and hepatic GH receptor levels are separately regulated by the level of continuous GH baseline exposure. Thus, distinct signalling components of the secretory pattern in male and female rats differentially regulate their sexually dimorphic growth and GHR/ GHBP expression. What role baseline GH exposure plays in the rat, and whether a similar differential regulation is operative in man, remains to be elucidated.

References

1. Maiter D, Underwood LE, Maes M, Davenport ML, Ketelslegers JM 1988 Different effects of intermittent and continuous growth hormone (GH) administration on serum somatomedin-C/insulinlike growth factor I and liver GH receptors in hypophysectomized rats. Endocrinology 123:1053-1059

2. Bick T, Amit T, Barkey RJ, Hertz I', Youdim M, Hochberg Z 1990 The interrelationship of growth hormone (GH), liver membrane GH receptor, serum GH-binding protein activity, and insulin-like growth factor 1 in the male rat. Endocrinology 126:1914-1920

3. Maiter D, Waler J, Adam E, Moats-Staats B, Mulumba N, Ketelslegers JM, Underwood L 1992 Differential regulation by growth hormone (GH) of insulin-like growth factor I and GH re- ceptor/binding protein gene expression in rat liver. Endocrinology 130:3257-3264

4. Bick T, Hochberg Z, Amit T, Isaksson OGP, Jansson J-O 1992 Roles of pulsatility and continuity of growth hormone (GH) administration in the regulation of hepatic GH-receptors, and circulating GHbinding protein and insulin-like growth factor-I. Endocrinology 131: 423-429

5. Jansson J-O, Albertsson-Wikland K, Eden S, Thorngren KG, Isaksson OGP 1982 Effect of frequency of growth hormone administration on longtitudinal bone growth and body weight in hypophysectomised rats. Acta Physiol Stand 114:261-265 6. Clark RG, Jansson JO, Isaksson OGP, Robinson ICAF 1985 Intravenous growth hormone: growth responses to patterned infusions. J Endocrinol 104:53-61

7. Tannenbaum GS, Martin JB 1976 Evidence for an endogenous ultradian rhythm governing growth hormone secretion in the rat. Endocrinology 98:562-570

8. EdCn S 1979 Age-, and sex-related differences in episodic growth hormone secretion in the rat. Endocrinology 105:555-560

9. Jansson JO, Albertsson WK, Eden S, Thorngren KG, Isaksson 0 1982 Circumstantial evidence for a role of the secretory pattern of growth hormone in control of body growth. Acta Endocrinol 99: 24-30

10. Herington A, Phillips LC, Daughaday WH 1976 Pituitary rcgulation of human growth hormone binding sites in rat liver membranes. Metabolism 25:341-353

11. Maes M, de Hertogh R, Watrin-Granger P, Ketelslegers JM 1983 Ontogeny of liver somatotropic and lactogenic binding sites in male and female rats. Endocrinology 113:1325-1332

12. Massa G, Mulumba N, Ketelslegers J-M, Maes M 1990 Initial characterization and sexual dimorphism of serum growth hormonebinding protein in adult rats. Endocrinology 126:1976-1980

13. Shapiro BH, Macleod JN, Pampori NA, Morrissey JJ, Lapenson DP, Waxman DJ 1989 Signalling elements in the ultradian rhythm of circulating growth hormone regulating expression of scx-dependent forms of hepatic cytochrome P450. Endocrinology 125:2935- 2944

14. Wells T, Mode A, Floby E, Robinson ICAF 1994 The sensitivity of hepatic CYP2C gene expression to baseline GH bioactivity in dwarf rats: the effects of GH binding <I Io rotein (GHBP) ill vim. Endocrinology 134:2135-2141

15. Gevers EF, Carmignac DF, Wit JM, Robinson ICAF 1995 Differential effects of baseline growth hormone (GH) on growth and GHBP in the rat. Program of the 77th Annual Meeting of The Endocrine Society, Washington DC, 1995 p 343 (Abstract 2-210)

16. Charlton HM, Clark RG, Robinson ICAF, Porter-Goff AE, Cox BS, Bugnon C, Bloch BS 1988 Growth hormone-deficient dwarfism in the rat: a new mutation. J Endocrinol 119:51-58

17. Hughes I', Tanner J 1970 A longitudinal study of the growth of the blackhooded rat: methods of measurement and rates of growth for skull, limbs, pelvis, nose-rump and tail lengths. J Anat 106:349-370

18. Gevers EF, Wit JM, Robinson ICAF 1995 Effect of gonadectomy on growth and GH responsiveness in dwarf rats. J Endocrinol 145: 69-79

19. Maiter D, Underwood LE, Maes M, Ketelslegers JM 1988 Acute down-regulation of the somatogenic receptors in rat liver by a single iniection of growth hormone. Endocrinolorv 122:1291-1296

20. Cgrmignac 6, Robinson ICAF, Enberg B, P;jbrstedt G 1993 Growth hormone receptor regulation in growth hormone-deficient dwarf rats. J Endocrinol 138:267-274

21. Lowry 0, Rosebrough N, Farr A, Randall R 1951 Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:265-275

22. Carmignac DF, Wells T, Carlsson LMS, Clark RG, Robinson ICAF 1992 Growth hormone (GH)-binding protein in normal and GHdeficient dwarf rats. J Endocrinol 135:447-457

23. Matthews DR, Hindmarsh PC, Pringle PJ, Brook CGD 1991 A distribution method for analysing the baseline of pulsatile endocrine signals as exemplified by 24.hour growth hormone profiles. Clin Endocrinol 35:245-252

24. Mode A, Wiersma-Larsson E, Gustaffson J-A 1989 Transcriptional and posttranscriptional regulation of sexually differentiated rat liver cytochrome I'450 by growth hormone. Mol Endocrinol3: 1142-l 147

25. Clark RG, Mortensen D, Carlsson LMS, Carmignac D, Robinson ICAF, Growth responses to patterned GH delivery. Endocrine 31717-724

26. Lim L, Spencer SA, McKay P, Waters MJ 1990 Regulation of growth hormone (GH) bioactivity bv a recombinant human GH-binding protein. Endocrinology 127'1287-1291

27. Mannor D. Winer LM. Shaw MA, Baumann G 1991 Plasma growth hormone (GH)-binding proteins: effect on GH binding to receptors and GH action. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 73:34-34

28. Baumann G, Amburn K, Buchanan T 1987 The effect of circulating growth hormone-binding protein on metabolic clearance, distribution, and degradation of human growth hormone. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 64:657-660

29. Carlsson B, Billig H, Rymo L, Isaksson 0 1990 Expression of the growth hormone-binding protein messenger-RNA in the liver and extrahepatic tissues in the rat - coexpression with the growthhormone receptor. Mol Cell Endocrinol 73:Rl-R6

30. Frick GP, Leonard JL, Goodman HM 1990 Effect of hypophysectomy on growth-hormone receptor gene-expression in rat-tissues. Endocrinology 126:3076-3082

31. Walker JL, Moatsstaats BM, Stiles AD, Underwood LE 1992 Tissuespecific developmental regulation of the messenger ribonucleicacids encoding the growth-hormone receptor and the growthhormone binding-protein in rat fetal and postnatal tissues. Pediatr Res 31:335-339

32. Carlsson B, Nilsson A, Isaksson 0, Billig H 1993 Growth hormonereceptor messenger RNA in the rat ovary: regulation and localization. Mol Cell Endocrinol 95:59-66

33. Menon RK, Stephan DA, Rao RH, Shen-Orr 2, Downs Jr LS, Roberts Jr CT, LeRoith D, Sperling MA 1994 Tissue-specific regulation of the growth hormone receptor gene in streptozocin-induced diabetes in the rat. J Endocrinol 142:453-462

34. Southard JN, Barrett BA, Bikbulatova L, Ilkbahar Y, Wu K, Talamantes F 1995 Growth hormone (GH) receptor and GH-binding protein messenger ribonucleic acids with alternative 5'-untranslated regions are differentially expressed in mouse liver and placenta. Endocrinology 136:2913-2921

35. Baumbach WR, Bingham B 1995 One class of growth hormone (GH) receptor and binding protein messenger ribonucleic acid in rat liver, GHR,, is sexually dimorphic and regulated by GH. Endocrinology 136:749-760

36. Fairhall KM, Carmignac DF, Robinson ICAF 1992 Growth hormone (GH) binding protein and GH interaction in viuo in the guinea pig. Endocrinology 131:1963-1969

37. Waxman DJ, Ram PA, Park SH, Choi HK 1995 Intermittent plasma growth hormone triggers tyrosine phosphorylation and nuclear translocation of a liver-expressed, Stat 5-related DNA binding protein. J Biol Chem 270:13262-13270

38. Lobie PE, Mertani H, Morel G, Morales-Bustos 0, Norstedt G, Waters MJ 1994 Receptor-mediated nuclear translocation of growth hormone. J Biol Chem 269:21330-21339

39. Trivedi B, Daughaday WH 1988 Release of growth hormone binding protein from IM-9 lymphocytes by endopeptidase is dependent on sulphydryl group inactivation. Endocrinology 123:2201-2206

40. Baumbach WR, Horner DL, Logan JS 1989 The growth hormonebinding protein in rat serum is an alternatively spliced form of the rat growth hormone receptor. Genes Dev 3:1199-1205

41. Winer LM, Shaw MA, Baumann G 1990 Basal plasma growth hormone levels in man: new evidence for rhythmicity of growth hormone secretion. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 70:1678-1686

42. Van den Berg G, Frolich M, Veldhuis JD, Roelfsema F 1994 Growth hormone secretion in recently operated acromegalic patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 79:1706-1715

43. Chapman IM, Hartman ML, Straume M, Johnson ML, Veldhuis JD, Thorner MO 1994 Enhanced sensitivity growth hormone (GH) chemiluminescence assay reveals lower postglucose nadir GH concentrations in men than women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 78:1312- 1319

44. Jaffe CA, Ocampo-Lim BN, Sugahara DT, Mauger DT, DeMott- Friberg R, Barkan AL 1995 Sexual dimorphism of growth hormone secretion in humans. Program of the 77th Annual Meeting of The Endocrine Society, Washington DC, 1995 p 155 (Abstract l-170)

45. Jorgensen J, Moller J, Alberti K, Schmitz 0, Christiansen JS, Orskov H, Moller N 1993 Marked effects of sustained low growth hormone (GH) levels on day-to-day fuel metabolism: studies in GH-deficient patients and healthy untreated subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 77:1589-1596

46. Laursen T, Jorgensen JOL, Jakobsen G, Hansen BL, Christiansen JS 1995 Continuous infusion vs. daily injections of growth hormone (GH) for four weeks in GH-deficient patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:2410-2418

47. Tauber MT, Du Portal H, SallerinCaute B, Rochiccioli P, Bastide R 1993 Differential regulation of serum growth hormone (GH)- binding protein during continuous infusion vs. daily injection of recombinant human GH in GH-deficient children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 76:1135-1139

48. Albertsson-Wikland K 1987 The effect of human growth hormone injection frequency on linear growth rate. Acta Paed Stand [suppl] 337~110-116

49. Boersma B, Rikken B, Wit JM, Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group 1995 Catch-up growth in early treated patients with growth hormone deficiency. Arch Dis Child 72:472-431

50. Brook CGD, Hindmarsh PC, Stanhope R 1988 Growth and growth hormone secretion. J Endocrinol 119:179-184


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

Dat is sure an informed and intelligent person!! Thanks for posting paul.


----------



## SteamRod (Oct 1, 2007)

latblaster said:


> Dat is sure an informed and intelligent person!! Thanks for posting paul.


bull**** baffles brains.


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

SteamRod said:


> bull**** baffles brains.


apparently,i await your next useful post with nervous anticipation!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

SteamRod said:


> bull**** baffles brains.


how about you put across a more intelligent response to counter the GH pulse method (one that is natural in men) rather than that useless pointless drivle you have posted, give us the benefit of your non bulls1t brains on the subject


----------



## totalwar (Jan 19, 2011)




----------



## dt36 (Jun 3, 2005)

biglbs said:


> Testogel as trt?Prov to up the effect,harden?My next step,after some tests for heart murmur!


I find this combination of Peps, GH, Gel and proviron works well for me at my age Mate. Maybe for a younger guy looking to pile it on, this would not be strong enough, but that's not my goal anyway.

You could probably tap your GP for the gel, as you'll find many sources can't really get their hands on it, due to it being prescription only. I think this is the reason why it's underated by many.

Tried a course of Cyp and Deca recently, but had a constant cough all the way through. The only way I can describe it was that it was the same as a Tren cough, but always there constantly irritating me. I actually thought it was the one of the mixes doing it as I have had the same symptoms in the past, so I cut the course short. Lo and behold, two weeks after my last injection (drug half life) the cough stopped.


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

dt36 said:


> I find this combination of Peps, GH, Gel and proviron works well for me at my age Mate. Maybe for a younger guy looking to pile it on, this would not be strong enough, but that's not my goal anyway.
> 
> You could probably tap your GP for the gel, as you'll find many sources can't really get their hands on it, due to it being prescription only. I think this is the reason why it's underated by many.
> 
> Tried a course of Cyp and Deca recently, but had a constant cough all the way through. The only way I can describe it was that it was the same as a Tren cough, but always there constantly irritating me. I actually thought it was the one of the mixes doing it as I have had the same symptoms in the past, so I cut the course short. Lo and behold, two weeks after my last injection (drug half life) the cough stopped.


Thanks mate i actualy have both waiting for ok from endo/etc lol it was a planned next move after i found out about murmur,lol

How old are you,i am 48 and just want fat loss and sex drive back,i am happy with lean mass!

All this non-pharma worries me i am old fashioned,no dis to it or users though,just me!


----------



## dt36 (Jun 3, 2005)

43 now. Used to hit it hard when I was younger, but don't really feel the need to anymore.

I only use 50mg of the Gel with Peps and find it just right for TRT, sex drive etc. Mate of mine was using 100mg a day and he was constantly chasing his missus like a Benny Hill episode.

I think what you're currently doing with Peps and GH is spot on for your aims. I've been constantly on GH now for 15 months and it definately helps with the anti-aging side of things. When i add the Peps, then the mix is just that more sweeter...


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

Glad you two are 'older' gentlemen, as I'm 46. :thumb:


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

latblaster said:


> Glad you two are 'older' gentlemen, as I'm 46. :thumb:


I am older than you,

but he is younger than you,

i am also taller than you both,

but one of you is taller than the other,

so,,,,,,,,,,,,,TBC!?


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

I am 6' tall, & have too much fvckin fat!


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

bang for buck.....ghrp peptides simple as that.

Used a fair differnet brands of GH, and the ghrp/ipam/cjc for me is working A LOT better.....thats reality not regurgitated ****e off the net.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

SteamRod said:


> bull**** baffles brains.


jesus wept! more brains on't ripper's hammer ffs.


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

latblaster said:


> I am 6' tall, & have too much fvckin fat!


6'5 AND WORSE 392LBS LOL!But that is me lol


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

TBH from reading that post earlier in the thread coming from datbtrue , i can't really see how the studies referred to really conclusively suggest that ghrp peps are more effective for body building purposes than a low/moderate dose of GH ....the studies for one are conducted on rats that no doubt have different metabolisms and internal systems than us...

i mean the only thing i can see in that post really relating to humans says

"Perhaps this line best sums it all up concerning humans... "Arguments have been advanced to suggest that the GH pattern is important for growth in man because increasing the frequency of GH therapy to daily injections improves its growth promoting effect..."

all that tells is that in GH therapy everyday injections leads to more growth than less frequent...

i think at best its a theory , from what is posted of the rat studies earlier in the thread i don't think there is enough from a science point of view for anyone to be claiming it is fact that peps work better in humans than low/moderate dose GH...if that is a personal experience from previous use and results thats fair enough, but i don't think the science that has been put forward here can be said to prove it.

if i am missing something i will gladly stand corrected.


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

goonerton said:


> TBH from reading that post earlier in the thread coming from datbtrue , i can't really see how the studies referred to really conclusively suggest that ghrp peps are more effective for body building purposes than a low/moderate dose of GH ....the studies for one are conducted on rats that no doubt have different metabolisms and internal systems than us...
> 
> i mean the only thing i can see in that post really relating to humans says
> 
> ...


From your post i take it that you have not tried decent ,or perhaps ,any peps,or gh or combinations of the two?


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

biglbs said:


> From your post i take it that you have not tried decent ,or perhaps ,any peps,or gh or combinations of the two?


no i have never used peps couldn't be @rsed with sticking myself as many times as necessary tbh.

but what has that got to do with my post, did i claim that peps were not better than low dose GH?

i stated from the studies that have been put forward i don't personally see how they credibly support that peps work better for our purposes than low/mod dose GH...

btw , you claimed on my thread that you were using some good kigs at the moment do you mind telling us what the batch number on vials is, others may be interested if they are good like you say?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

goonerton said:


> TBH from reading that post earlier in the thread coming from datbtrue , i can't really see how the studies referred to really conclusively suggest that ghrp peps are more effective for body building purposes than a low/moderate dose of GH ....the studies for one are conducted on rats that no doubt have different metabolisms and internal systems than us...
> 
> i mean the only thing i can see in that post really relating to humans says
> 
> ...


The post I put up was to do with using a GH pulse method it was not comparing peps with GH.



> all that tells is that in GH therapy everyday injections leads to more growth than less frequent...


 no it does not?? It tells us multiple daily injections are better than one large injections ?? So again you confuse me to how you have made the above conclusion?

I am confused to how you come the conclusion that at best is is just theory though ? Maybe you could explain what you feel is just theory maybe quote the studies/papers or real life experience you are drawing to make this assumption?

your post highlights a post I made last night about making assumptions about peptides without understanding what they do so let's look at it from your point....

GH like Hyge, Geno etc is synthetic GH so it does not offer all the KdA associated with natural GH plus because it is synthetic it will cause a negative feedback with you pituarity gland and suppress natural release...

Peptides allow the body to release OUR OWN NATURAL GH this does not cause any negative feedback so no suppression so just thinking about that how is synthetic GH better than our natural release for BB purposes?


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

goonerton said:


> no i have never used peps couldn't be @rsed with sticking myself as many times as necessary tbh.
> 
> but what has that got to do with my post, did i claim that peps were not better than low dose GH?
> 
> ...


These are the serial nos,however i take no responsability for other sources,as realy the batch could be faked with new 'good' batch nos printed on them,but these are mine--

20120306 exp2014.02,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, i have been given batch 20110715--can anyone advise on that one?


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

Pscarb said:


> The post I put up was to do with using a GH pulse method it was not comparing peps with GH.
> 
> *yes but was you not using these studies to argue that peps works better than low dose GH?*
> 
> ...


*yeh i have basic grasp of what peps do but not the knowledge to anywhere near your extent ....i just don't think the studies here back your argument very well, if that is actually what you're arguing.*


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

biglbs said:


> These are the serial nos,however i take no responsability for other sources,as realy the batch could be faked with new 'good' batch nos printed on them,but these are mine--
> 
> 20120306 exp2014.02,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, i have been given batch 20110715--can anyone advise on that one?


cheers, i have no idea...but you're the one using them so if you say they're good thats cool.


----------



## biglbs (Jan 26, 2012)

goonerton said:


> cheers, i have no idea...but you're the one using them so if you say they're good thats cool.


The first are good,the second i have no idea,i did not make that clear.


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

Here's something that may be quite relevant that i found on pubmed about the treatment of children with growth deficiencies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002159/

"Treatment involves growth hormone injections given at home. Patients may receive growth hormone several times a week or once a day."

"The earlier the condition is treated, the better the chance that a child will grow to be a near-normal adult height.

Growth hormone replacement therapy does not work for all children."

So it seems this treatment is pretty hit or miss with whether it works or not on kids, so you would think that if there was conclusive evidence that multiple daily shots works better in growth promotion, that they would instruct parents to do this to give them every possible chance, rather than several times a week or daily...it wouldn't be any more difficult to administer than insulin to a diabetic child that may need a few shots a day.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

goonerton said:


> *yeh i have basic grasp of what peps do but not the knowledge to anywhere near your extent ....i just don't think the studies here back your argument very well, if that is actually what you're arguing.*


You are applying a question of is GH is better than GHRP/GHRH peptides but that is not what the study was discussing so I fail to see why you keep referring to it? The study was to show how pulsile methods would be better for muscle growth than one large shot per day and it does clearly show this in the Rats(same pituarity system so relevant) as mentioned in the text



> From the study..."The results clearly show that addition of considerable amounts of GH to fill in the troughs in a pulsatile infusion had little effect on growth. This underscores the importance of GH pulsatility and pulse amplitude, rather than total GH dose for growth stimulation in the rat."
> 
> From the study "the lowest pulsatile dose tested (36 ug/day) resulted in a response that required a 5-fold higher dose given continuously." ...this is of significant interest.





goonerton said:


> Here's something that may be quite relevant that i found on pubmed about the treatment of children with growth deficiencies.
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002159/
> 
> ...


Jesus if you actually read what you was arguing you would actually learn something, the reason why pulsile GH method works better than one large shot is because it raise muscle IGF-1 levels higher than the continouise GH release which you get from one large shot, you was aware that there are two types of IGF1 release one from the liver and one in the muscle....Yes

You are aware his is of considerable use to BB but not so usefull to children with height deficiencies ?? Plus using your understanding of why not do it with children, I'VE injection of GH is much more effective than either sub-q or IM yet they don't do that with children?

So the study you keep referring back to is about pulsile GH release you know that way we naturally release GH from being a baby to adult and you say that this is just a theory??  yet your initial claim was that in your opinion GH is better than peptides??

You are entitled to your own opinion as is everyone but I have yet to see what your baing that opinion on? For me it is based on over 10yrs of using GH and 5yrs of using peptides plus months and months of reading and understanding both sides to the story..........so I ask again your opinion is based on what? I am all up for a debate on both subjects (1-GH pulsile method, and 2-GH V Peptides) so if you want to debate these topics we can but you need to understand what your debating first mate......


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

I just quoted a load of studies on both subject

GH pulsile method

GH vs peptides

But then thought why bother you have your opinion I have mine it is not down to me to justify my opinion as my results do that for me..

So you continue on your path


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

no disrespect i think you are seeing things that aren't there. when did i say that gh is better than peps?...i have already said i have never used peps.

i'm saying that i don't think the scientific evidence you have put here really supports what you are claiming very well if at all...which is peps are better than low dose GH

the rat study shows that pulsile GH equals better growth in rats then a continuous dose(if i remember rightly)

not sure how that in any way conclusively supports the supposition that peps are more effective than low dose GH??

As i said my mind is open on this, i haven't heard many people saying that they think peps are better than low dose GH but i'm willing to listen if their is credible studies that back this...or lots more people agree.

And i am not in anyway doubting your experience, if you say that in your experience peps are better than gh , fair enough i take that on board, i just don't believe the science you have put forward here really supports that, again not to say it might not be true.

And just one question,

as i posted from pubmed, if there really is conclusive scientific evidence that multiple daily injections are better why do you think they don't use this method for treating people with growth defiencies?EDIT (missed a bit of your post as wouldn't asked this again)


----------



## Conscript (Sep 5, 2010)

Well tbf I don't think most people, especially children, like needles, so the less injections per day/week the better. There has to be a balance that gives all round effectiveness that is easy to live with, BB'ers on the other hand tend to over scrutinise and tailor ped use solely for optimum results and cost.

I prefer to use low dose gh (2-4iu) daily with 3 x sat dose ghrh/ghrp, best of both worlds, keeps costs down, keeps everything firing.


----------



## goonerton (Sep 7, 2009)

sorry just reread your post missed a bit.

in regards why don't they shoot kids IV i suppose if it is actually more effective, since the treatment seems to be done at home , i would imagine shooting into a kids vein may be a little much for most...but i don't see why more shots per today could not be administered...no difference to shooting insulin, painless and very simple.

and are you saying that for height growth in kids pulsile GH treatment is not better?...only better if for muscle growth?

i'm not saying that us releasing gH in pulses is a theory, i never said that, i know that is a fact.

what i'm saying is i believe that the claim that pep use is better than GH...or even that multiple shots vs one daily shot of GH is better...going on the science here, is just a theory.

i'm not saying you are wrong i just doubt the scientific studies are there to really conclusively support it...


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

As said believe what you want, I know the evidence is there because I have read it...you don't believe then that's cool continue to do what you do......


----------



## vigdor (Jun 27, 2011)

Why would one need pharma grade peptides? As long as it is what it is supposed to be, I don't see why 99% purity wouldn't be enough.


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

Good point vigdor. I wonder what is in the 1% though, but it's prolly of no significance. So I've answered my own question. Oh well, it was a thought process.


----------



## Leanmassworking (Feb 19, 2012)

Maybe I miss something here, will like to now the company that makes Pharma Peptides???


----------



## vigdor (Jun 27, 2011)

Usually other peptides. As long as there is no toxin, the purity is not that important. What matters above all it that the product is really what it says it is, which is unfortunately not always the case.


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

vigdor said:


> Usually other peptides. As long as there is no toxin, the purity is not that important. What matters above all it that the product is really what it says it is, which is unfortunately not always the case.


 Got any evidence of this?


----------



## swolesam (May 15, 2015)

i keep seeing pharma grade peptides, pharma grade peps... can someone point some out to me?

I see a bunch of companies, but i think their products are far from pharma!

appreciate feedback!


----------



## wilko1985 (May 17, 2010)

Toms peptides are the only clinical grade peptides that I trust. Do a search for those bud.


----------

