# Starting gh ?



## Mikel123 (Feb 14, 2015)

Really quick

I'm 16 weeks out .

never run GH before ,

is there point in starting now ?


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Mikel123 said:


> Really quick
> 
> *I'm 16 weeks out .*
> 
> ...


 From a show?

GH is a year round used drug, which can cause water retention as one side effect.

Why not save it until after the show to avoid any complications.


----------



## Mikel123 (Feb 14, 2015)

Yeah that's what I thought from the research id done about it but you know , when prepping

you mind dosent understand how to be sensible anymore lol

I keep on thinking I wanna drop my kals now , add more drugs haha


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Mikel123 said:


> Yeah that's what I thought from the research id done about it but you know , when prepping
> 
> you mind dosent understand how to be sensible anymore lol
> 
> I keep on thinking I wanna drop my kals now , add more drugs haha


 I would safely say If you haven't used it before you won't notice much change if you were to use it for the 16 weeks dieting down.

GH needs to be use a minimum of 6 months to a year to see positive results and even at that its not a game changer like some people think it is.

The length of time on GH is just as important as the dosages used basically.


----------



## Mikel123 (Feb 14, 2015)

Colin said:


> I would safely say If you haven't used it before you won't notice much change if you were to use it for the 16 weeks dieting down.
> 
> GH needs to be use a minimum of 6 months to a year to see positive results and even at that its not a game changer like some people think it is.
> 
> The length of time on GH is just as important as the dosages used basically.


 Cheers mate

yeah I do know all that

it's just me over thinking things lol


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> I would safely say If you haven't used it before you won't notice much change if you were to use it for the 16 weeks dieting down.
> 
> *GH needs to be use a minimum of 6 months to a year to see positive results and even at that its not a game changer like some people think it is.*
> 
> The length of time on GH is just as important as the dosages used basically.


 this is not true, there is a study at the top of this forum that challenged that actual way of thinking, using 8iu M/W/F for 6 weeks the study showed a mean increase in lean tissue of 1-2kg and a mean drop in bodtyfay of 1-2% (actual numbers can be seen in the study) the subjects where trained individuals.

16 weeks out is a good time to add GH if need be it will assist with fatness and keep you full but it is not essential when dieting


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> this is not true, there is a study at the top of this forum that challenged that actual way of thinking, using 8iu M/W/F for 6 weeks the study showed a mean increase in lean tissue of 1-2kg and a mean drop in bodtyfay of 1-2% (actual numbers can be seen in the study) the subjects where trained individuals.
> 
> 16 weeks out is a good time to add GH if need be it will assist with fatness and keep you full but it is not essential when dieting


 3 Months is what mine should of read instead of 6.

I still stand by smaller doses over a longer period of time are beneficial. Its a misnomer that you must take over 6IU a day to grow, majority will just feel bloated and watery. The liver can only put out so much IGF-1and above that it won't produce anymore no matter what dosage of HGH used. Fair enough it might burn more fat but also leave you more bloated.

This is what I took from Dave and Chris Basically speaking from anecdotal experience.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> 3 Months is what mine should of read instead of 6.
> 
> I still stand by smaller doses over a longer period of time are beneficial. Its a misnomer that you must take over 6IU a day to grow, majority will just feel bloated and watery. The liver can only put out so much IGF-1and above that it won't produce anymore no matter what dosage of HGH used. Fair enough it might burn more fat but also leave you more bloated.
> 
> This is what I took from Dave and Chris Basically speaking from anecdotal experience.


 who is dave and chris?

it is true that large amounts do not equal large results but you should not look at the acute dose (daily) but the weekly/monthly dose as IGF-1 is not essentially an acute reaction as we have IGFin both the liver and the muscle, and the liver can produce far more than many assume (thats even if they actual have stats on the limit which i count the do) all you need to do is look at the data on using CJC1295 DAC and the effect it has on IGF levels over a week and you then understand the limit many speak of is not as small as many think, 3-6mg of CJC DAC produced a 6-10fold increase on basal IGF levels if there was a limit then the number would essentially not increase from 6 fold to 10 fold..

Small daily shots of synthetic GH is has a larger negative effect on the whole body as a dose as little as 2iu with shut down natural production for 24hrs the iGF conversion for that and any dose to be fair only peaks after 4hrs so again not an acute response.

the better way to use GH is in fact the way the study showed and that is M/W/F or EOD giving the body a break from shutting down its natural production.....

i have used GH for over 15yrs in pretty much every way you can use it and EOD or M/W/F is certainly the best way i have used it.

the study clearly shows that you can attain a good deal or results in 6 weeks the main reason people do not see these results is either they are using crap GH or they rely on drugs for results not as a tool combined with Nutrition/Training and recovery....


----------



## 19072 (Aug 11, 2010)

Pscarb said:


> who is dave and chris?
> 
> it is true that large amounts do not equal large results but you should not look at the acute dose (daily) but the weekly/monthly dose as IGF-1 is not essentially an acute reaction as we have IGFin both the liver and the muscle, and the liver can produce far more than many assume (thats even if they actual have stats on the limit which i count the do) all you need to do is look at the data on using CJC1295 DAC and the effect it has on IGF levels over a week and you then understand the limit many speak of is not as small as many think, 3-6mg of CJC DAC produced a 6-10fold increase on basal IGF levels if there was a limit then the number would essentially not increase from 6 fold to 10 fold..
> 
> ...


 Paul - How would split your dosage. I am hoping to run ansomone soon. Would you run 4iu AM and 4iu pre bed?


----------



## shadow4509 (Jan 27, 2010)

herc said:


> Paul - How would split your dosage. I am hoping to run ansomone soon. Would you run 4iu AM and 4iu pre bed?


 Thats the point mate, you don't split the dose. One larger dose M/W/F


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> *who is dave and chris?*
> 
> it is true that large amounts do not equal large results but you should not look at the acute dose (daily) but the weekly/monthly dose as IGF-1 is not essentially an acute reaction as we have IGFin both the liver and the muscle, and the liver can produce far more than many assume (thats even if they actual have stats on the limit which i count the do) all you need to do is look at the data on using CJC1295 DAC and the effect it has on IGF levels over a week and you then understand the limit many speak of is not as small as many think, 3-6mg of CJC DAC produced a 6-10fold increase on basal IGF levels if there was a limit then the number would essentially not increase from 6 fold to 10 fold..
> 
> ...


 Dave Palumbo and Chris Aceto.

They were speaking from anecdotal experience and from experience on all their athletes that the best way is to use it every day.

Since you are speaking in studies you have where does it show in the study you posted that M/W/F is the best way to use it in terms of results in comparison to Every day? Because at the end of the day thats why people use it for results like in the studies you have shown.


----------



## Heavyassweights (Jan 18, 2014)

I am Dave but ppl call me Chris


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> Dave Palumbo and Chris Aceto.
> 
> They were speaking from anecdotal experience and from experience on all their athletes that the best way is to use it every day.
> 
> Since you are speaking in studies you have where does it show in the study you posted that M/W/F is the best way to use it in terms of results in comparison to Every day? Because at the end of the day thats why people use it for results like in the studies you have shown.


 granted it does not compare against every day use but the data is available to show the long term negative effects of everyday use.

i am not speaking in studies by the way i am speaking in the way of experience from using GH for over 15yrs its just that the way that i consider the most optimal has the only study carried out on humans to back it up.

if you want to talk studies your initial claim that you need to use GH for 3 months (after your corrected it) to see any results what study was that taken from?

Using GH ed will bring results but the shutdown of the PG and the increase in insulin resistance that comes along with that does not make it the most optimal way, using it EOD or M/W/F allows for the body to break from a synthetic form of GH the PG is not hit as hard and the increase in insulin resistance is not as severe.....that is me speaking from anecdotal experience.

what is your experience with GH have you used it M/W/F or EOD or even E3D to compare it to everyday use? if you have how long did you run it and what comparison did you make


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

shadow4509 said:


> Thats the point mate, you don't split the dose. One larger dose M/W/F


 no you can split the dose but because you are using M/W/F the suppression is 24hrs so it doesn't matter, i prefer all before bed but have just started to split it PWO and Bed just to see if there is any difference


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> granted it does not compare against every day use but the data is available to show the long term negative effects of everyday use.
> 
> i am not speaking in studies by the way i am speaking in the way of experience from using GH for over 15yrs its just that the way that i consider the most optimal has the only study carried out on humans to back it up.
> 
> ...


 No I don't want to talk studies far, far from it, the likes of these are to be taken with a huge pinch of salt as does this one as well as quite a few more..

At least we have cleared up in terms of results there is no benefit in running it M/W/F over Every day from "studies" just your anecdotal experience.

Do you have the "study" to show its not as optimal every day in comparison to using it M/W/F? As well as how bad it affects insulin resistance by how much if any? I doubt it, and it might not make a tap of difference in the real world.

My statement of "seeing results" might be interpreted by someone else differently. I.e i might get a 1% difference reduction in body-fat but not see results. Yes there was results in 6 weeks but you could take a batch of another 8 and results be a lot different.

No I haven't run it EOD or MWF as was advised by two world class coaches this was not the best way to run it as I've stated previously.

But what I have started to do in the last 2 weeks is to run their IGF-LR3 Protocol for muscle building purposes..


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> No I don't want to talk studies far, far from it, the likes of these are to be taken with a huge pinch of salt as does this one as well as quite a few more..
> 
> At least we have cleared up in terms of results there is no benefit in running it M/W/F over Every day from "studies" just your anecdotal experience.
> 
> ...


 your questions lead me to think you never read my post correctly as i said there is no study to show ED use of GH so this cannot be compared study for study and i agree studies in general are to be taken with a pinch of salt but studies such as this one that i mention can form the base of a protocol to work from as it is carried on humans, and clearly dispels the Bro science myth of needing months and months to see results.

whats confusing to me is that you will accept anecdotal experience as a form of truth (as i will to some degree) but when i say that after using GH in many way for over 15yrs the M/W/F protocol is better based on my anecdotal experience so you only take anecdotal experience from Chris and Dave....which is fine but very limiting to be fair....as you say use different subjects get different results.....

Listen you seem to be happy with how you have used GH and thats cool, i have done many protocols in my time and have concluded that when comparing results between every day use and the M/W/F protocol the latter comes out on top, this was just backed up by this study it didn't define the reason why i used the protocol it just backed it up, then when you read into the actions of Gh in the body and how even a small dose as 2iu will shutdown the natural release and the health implications this has over time on things such as Insulin resistance which is a documented action of consistent GH use the M/W/F protocol becomes more logical.

The problem here is that you have no basis for comparison you have taken it as gospel that the ED protocol is best yet openly admit that if you carried out the study i mentioned on 8 different subjects the results could be different which sort of doesn't make sense to your reasoning really.....

Now i cannot show a study to make a comparison between ED and M/W/F protocol, i can compare real world experience between ED use and M/W/F protocols and have found the latter to be better, i am surprised given your reliance on anecdotal opinion you cannot accept this?

can i ask did you ask both Dave and Chris about EOD or M/W/F protocol and they actually said it was not the best way to run GH? i would be interested in knowing the reasoning behind that opinion did they say? i speak a lot with one of Chris's main clients and he has never said this when we have talked about GH in depth so i would be keen to here the reasoning for when i next speak to him.

as for the insulin resistance point of view this is a factual action of synthetic use of GH and just like anything else that effects insulin resistance like high amount of carbs if you take a break then the impact is much less, if you feel that insulin resistance has no validity in the real world then you really should do some research into it.


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> your questions lead me to think you never read my post correctly as i said there is no study to show ED use of GH so this cannot be compared study for study and i agree studies in general are to be taken with a pinch of salt but studies such as this one that i mention can form the base of a protocol to work from as it is carried on humans, and clearly dispels the Bro science myth of needing months and months to see results.
> 
> *My point was that the study/post is being interpreted by people as being the best way to run it. Hence why half the board using HGH now are running it M/W/F when there is no comparison to using it every day. Dose it get you results? Sure. Is it better to the masses to run it M/W/F? Not proven. *
> 
> ...


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> *It was Dave on the M/W/F as well as GHRP/GHRH taking saturation doses 3x per day being equivalent to taking a dose of Pharma GH in the morning, which he disagreed with (I do have emails on) as well as IGF-1LR3 being useless building muscle (In your eyes) this was both Chris and Dave.*


 how do you mean be equal to a dose of Pharma GH?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> *My point was that the study/post is being interpreted by people as being the best way to run it. Hence why half the board using HGH now are running it M/W/F when there is no comparison to using it every day. Dose it get you results? Sure. Is it better to the masses to run it M/W/F? Not proven*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 but the members are taking my opinion based on both myself using this protocol and many of my clients, very much like yourself who is taking the opinion of Dave and Chris based on anecdotal experience (granted with many more clients than i have worked with) but still it is essentially taken on the same belief.


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> how do you mean be equal to a dose of Pharma GH?


 Taken From Datbtrues Forum, which I believe is where you got your info on.

Is there anywhere below in that statement that GHRH/GHRP can be the equivalent to a certain amount of HGH?

_"In comparison to synthetic GH administration we find that:

22iu of synthetic GH results in 495 - 585 ng/ml
Saturation doses i.e 100mg of each of GHRH &amp; GHRP results in 130 - 170 ng/ml

These results indicate that 22iu is between 3.8 and 3.4 more efficacious then a single administration of GHRH &amp; GHRP which means that a single dose of GHRH &amp; GHRP has the potential to produce better then the equivalent of 5iu of GH in plasma.

A dosing protocol of GHRH + GHRP at saturation dose, administered 3 times per day has the potential to exceed the equivalent of 15iu.

Note though that using this methodology GHRP-6 at a saturation dose by itself may add the equivalent of 1.4 to 1.8 iu per administration... or 4.2 to 5.4 iu per day if administered three times."_


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> Taken From Datbtrues Forum, which I believe is where you got your info on.
> 
> Is there anywhere below in that statement that GHRH/GHRP can be the equivalent to a certain amount of HGH?
> 
> ...


 it is where i initially got my info from but i do not believe this statement and that is based on my experiences with using amounts as high and higher than 15u of Synthetic GH and no peptide protocol comes even close.

There is another study on there that shows saturation dose of clinical grade (this is key) of both GHRP/GHRH releases 1.13iu of GH which given the standard 3 x day protocol will equal a max of 3.4iu which makes a lot more sense and does run with how i feel it gives.


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> it is where i initially got my info from but i do not believe this statement and that is based on my experiences with using amounts as high and higher than 15u of Synthetic GH and no peptide protocol comes even close.
> 
> There is another study on there that shows saturation dose of clinical grade (this is key) of both GHRP/GHRH releases 1.13iu of GH which given *the standard 3 x day protocol will equal a max of 3.4iu* which makes a lot more sense and does run with how i feel it gives.


 Yes think this was his dispute, but he did say GHRP/GHRH will give some benefit. But I can't comment on peptides as never used personally.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Colin said:


> Yes think this was his dispute, but he did say GHRP/GHRH will give some benefit. But I can't comment on peptides as never used personally.


 peptides are not a new thing (many believe they are) they have been used in the medical field for decades and are used widely in the states for HRT (Semorelin) they are new to bodybuilding but as usual bodybuilders think that just because they have not heard of them before then they did not exist lol

there is a huge amount of data to support their use when it comes to releasing natty GH, but as with all things be that Synthetic GH, IGF-1 etc you will get clinical grade (the grade used in studies) then you will get the cheap knock offs, unfortunately many will buy cheap then expect the same results as what is detailed in any study or in the case of peptides the same as what you get with synthetic GH (which you will if you dose equally and use clinical grade)


----------



## Mikel123 (Feb 14, 2015)

Wow lots of info ...

thank you so much guys

so just for the sake of this post

would either of you see it as a 'game changer' so to speak , in the sense that il be stepping on stage in 15 weeks ?


----------



## S123 (Jun 14, 2013)

HGH is a game changer the look it gives you is something amazing, yeah you get water but just drop it out a couple of weeks from your show? I'd start at 4-6iu of gh ED, pharma grade, kind of irritates me when people say it takes 6 months to see benefits in gh, YE IF YOU'RE INJECTING MR CHINA MANS BUNK ASS s**t


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Mikel123 said:


> Wow lots of info ...
> 
> thank you so much guys
> 
> ...


 its only a game changer if you have a good base to work with in the first place, it will give you a fuller look and contribute to fatness etc but if you have not got a decent foundation in my opinion its not for you.

think of it as the "Icing on the cake" rather than the cake itself....


----------



## Mikel123 (Feb 14, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> its only a game changer if you have a good base to work with in the first place, it will give you a fuller look and contribute to fatness etc but if you have not got a decent foundation in my opinion its not for you.
> 
> think of it as the "Icing on the cake" rather than the cake itself....


 Thanks

I feel Iv got a decent base to build on

I'm under no illusion I'm any way near to my full potential, but I think I'm doing ok lol

i feel from what you have said I'd benifit quite well from running gh

thanks again


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Mikel123 said:


> Thanks
> 
> I feel Iv got a decent base to build on
> 
> ...


 Agreed its the icing on the cake, and will help along the way and will no doubt help in aid fat loss.

Just remember make sure what your getting is proper stuff even if your paying more from it from a reputable source, it will be worth it. Some people are more realistic with its results whereas others think its an absolute game changer and will yield major, major gains, it is those who will be left disappointed to an extent.


----------



## Plate (May 14, 2015)

Colin said:


> Agreed its the icing on the cake, and will help along the way and will no doubt help in aid fat loss.
> 
> Just remember make sure what your getting is proper stuff even if your paying more from it from a reputable source, it will be worth it. Some people are more realistic with its results whereas others think its an absolute game changer and will yield major, major gains, it is those who will be left disappointed to an extent.


 How taxing on the liver and kidneys is hgh?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Plate said:


> How taxing on the liver and kidneys is hgh?


 if used consistently for long periods you could have issues with size of these organs but this is rare, some studies have shown a weight increase to the liver and spleen from 6 months of use.....but i have to point out these are rare


----------



## Plate (May 14, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> if used consistently for long periods you could have issues with size of these organs but this is rare, some studies have shown a weight increase to the liver and spleen from 6 months of use.....but i have to point out these are rare


 Cheers


----------

