Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: GH vs AAS

  1. #1
    ByGtYmEr is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    ask me
    Posts
    5

    GH vs AAS

    hey guys new to the site..think its awosme...
    ive done 2 cycles of AAS and iam thinkin of trying a GH cycle tell me is there a big differance between the two???

    i know there is a huge differance in price so i assume a huge differance in gains... is this true???

    and lastly how do i get started? what do i nee dto buy???

    thanks for you help

    newbe

  2. #2
    oldman's Avatar
    oldman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,607
    Two different things altogether. You are not going to get gains from GH unless you use High doses and then the sides suck. I personally think that using GH in combo with AAS is your best bet.. If you are looking for just gains stick with the cheaper AAS (Basic Test and whatnot)


    Oldman

  3. #3
    ByGtYmEr is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    ask me
    Posts
    5
    well doesnt everybody want gains..why wouldnt everybody just do AAS????
    thanks for input

  4. #4
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    Yes ...there is a big difference between anabolic steroids and HGH.The difference being,you'll grow on anabolics,whereas you won't on growth hormone ?Surprised by my answer?I advise you to research before you even think about using HGH(especially if you think it makes you grow muscle tissue).

    To answer your question on how you get started.That's easy...RESEARCH!

    You need not buy anything.The information on this site is free.I urge you to take advantage of that.As you are in dire need of this.


    ~Pinnacle~

  5. #5
    oldman's Avatar
    oldman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,607
    Quote Originally Posted by ByGtYmEr
    well doesnt everybody want gains..why wouldnt everybody just do AAS????
    thanks for input

    I think Pinn is more of an expert on this than me but what I want to gain from using GH in addition to AAS is the synergy effect 1+1=3. I don't know if GH is having a profound effect on my fatloss at my low doses but I do know i feel better overall and I get much better rest than before starting GH. Of course it does take much longer to notice GH benefits (at least 3 months) to notice benefits from my understanding and then 6 months for them to really come into full effect.

    Oldman

  6. #6
    ByGtYmEr is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    ask me
    Posts
    5
    thanks for your input guys...i have read the articles posted about gh but i guess iam still unaware of what it really does if it doesnt porduce muscle gain and weight loss...i appreciate your input and your info...
    however i still dont understand why gh is so great and so expensive then....iam a pro athlete and i have read that a lot of pro athletes take this and i was curious to why..a lot of my teamates and friends have said it is great and i see great gains with them..

  7. #7
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2005 Apr;62(4):449-57. Related Articles, Links


    Supraphysiological growth hormone : less fat, more extracellular fluid but uncertain effects on muscles in healthy, active young adults.

    Ehrnborg C, Ellegard L, Bosaeus I, Bengtsson BA, Rosen T.

    Research Centre for Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden.

    Summary Objectives To study the effects on body composition after 1 month's administration of supraphysiological doses of growth hormone (GH) in healthy, active young adults with normal GH-IGF-I axis. Subjects and methods Thirty healthy, physically active volunteers (15 men and 15 women), mean age 25.9 years (range 18-35), participated in this study, designed as a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study with three groups (n = 10: five men and five women in each group). The groups comprised the following: placebo (P), GH 0.1 IU/kg/day [0.033 mg/kg/day] (GH 0.1) and GH 0.2 IU/kg/day [0.067 mg/kg/day] (GH 0.2). Results In the pooled group with active GH treatment (n = 20) the results showed significant increases: IGF-I increased by 134% (baseline vs. after 1 month), body weight by 2.7%, fat free mass by 5.3%, total body water by 6.5% and extracellular water (ECW) by 9.6%. Body fat decreased significantly by 6.6%. No significant change in intracellular water was detected. The observed increase in fat free mass by 5.3% was explained by the ECW increase, indicating limited anabolic effects of the supraphysiological GH doses. Changes were noticeable in both genders, although more prominent in the male subjects. Fluid retention symptoms occurred in the majority of individuals. Conclusions This is, to our knowledge, the first placebo-controlled trial to show the effects of supraphysiological GH doses on body composition and IGF-I levels in physically active and healthy individuals of both genders; the results indicate limited anabolic effects of GH with these supraphysiological doses. The role of GH as an effective anabolic doping agent is questioned.

    PMID: 15807876 [PubMed - in process]

  8. #8
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    You know who Nandi is,right?

    Here's what he once said in a post..


    quote: Is HGH the pinnacle of Anabolism?

    You're joking, right?


    __________________
    nandi12@cyber-rights.net

  9. #9
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558

  10. #10
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    You want more?I can direct you to tons of info showing HGH doesn't cause hyper-plasma....let me know.


    ~Pinnacle~

  11. #11
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    Here's another great thread my Nandi......

    http://www.cuttingedgemuscle.com/For...growth+hormone

  12. #12
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    .................

    Quote Originally Posted by HUNGRY,Nov 24 2003, 01:54 AM
    Is this the correct path for Muscle fiber Hyperplasia (simplified)=
    muscle fiber hypertrophy -->
    satellite cell proliferation -->
    myogenesis (via-- growth factor (FGF), the insulin -like growth factors (IGF-I and -II), and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta)-->
    new muscle fiber.
    Does hyperplasia occur in postnatal phase of humans, and are stem cells still present during the postnatal phase? Answers---
    What causes satellite cell proliferation exactly? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...5&dopt=Abstract
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...8&dopt=Abstract
    Anyone believe muscle fiber hyperplasia can occur in humans? How? -Answers--
    Meta-analysis paper on hyperplasia in animals--
    http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full...date=11/30/2003

    DISCUSSION
    This meta-analysis attempted to quantify the magnitude of change in muscle (particularly muscle fiber number) as a result of mechanical overload. Across all designs and categories, mechanical overload resulted in increases in muscle mass, muscle fiber area (hypertrophy), and muscle fiber number (hyperplasia). Not surprisingly, increases in fiber area were approximately twice as great as increases in fiber number. It appears that hyperplasia in animals is greatest when certain types of mechanical overload, particularly stretch, are applied. The results of this investigation are similar to a recent narrative review that concluded that muscle fiber hyperplasia 1) consistently occurs as a result of chronic stretch, 2) rarely occurs with overload in the form of compensatory hypertrophy, and 3) has produced mixed results when overload in the form of exercise is employed (8). Although it is well established that mechanical-overload training results in increased fiber area (hypertrophy), and thus increases in muscle mass, the contribution of increased fiber number (hyperplasia) to increases in muscle mass has been more controversial. However, there now exists quantitative evidence to support the fact that certain types of overload, particularly stretch, result in increases in muscle fiber number. Unfortunately, it is beyond the scope of this investigation to examine the processes (satellite cell proliferation and longitudinal fiber splitting) responsible for such changes.
    http://www.jhc.org/cgi/content/abstract/50/8/1097
    Testosterone inject/ satellite cell proliferation
    http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/...ract/285/1/E197
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...8&dopt=Abstract
    Math problem:
    They gave 0.25 mg/100 g body weight of testosterone to this rat, which would be how much test for a 200lb male?
    [snapback]94204[/snapback]
    Last edited by Pinnacle; 12-18-2005 at 09:17 PM.

  13. #13
    goose is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    England...
    Posts
    2,857
    pinn-your on top form 2nite.Plus bygt your in your 20`s,not for you.Save your money on protein.

    goose4.........

  14. #14
    JAMIE720 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    53
    I personally have experianced the ability to eat more food without putting on much of any fat while combining aas and gh.I feel theres definiately a synergy going on when combining gh with other compounds that nets more muscle than the other componds used alone,specifically aas.I was using just aas for 6 years and had plateaued until adding gh for the last 5 months and have gained 15 solid pounds.I think gh and lr3 are useful for those who have reached sticking points.

  15. #15
    oswaldosalcedo's Avatar
    oswaldosalcedo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,102
    Quote Originally Posted by ByGtYmEr
    well doesnt everybody want gains..why wouldnt everybody just do AAS????
    thanks for input

    expectations.........................

  16. #16
    oswaldosalcedo's Avatar
    oswaldosalcedo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,102
    [quote=Pinnacle]You know who Nandi is,right?

    Here's what he once said in a post..


    quote: Is HGH the pinnacle of Anabolism?
    You're joking, right?



    great pinn !

    welcome to the kingdom of the skepticism.................

  17. #17
    JohnnyB's Avatar
    JohnnyB is offline AR-Hall of Famer / Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Califas
    Posts
    9,265
    HGH isn't what the hype makes it out to be, I like LR3 better then HGH, but for muscle gains, AAS hands down

    JohnnyB

  18. #18
    Pinnacle's Avatar
    Pinnacle is offline AR-Hall of Famer ~ Cocky motherF*cker!
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yes,those are my legs
    Posts
    4,558
    [quote=oswaldosalcedo]
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinnacle
    You know who Nandi is,right?

    Here's what he once said in a post..


    quote: Is HGH the pinnacle of Anabolism?
    You're joking, right?



    great pinn !

    welcome to the kingdom of the skepticism.................
    More like realism Ossie.The wild claims ppl make in regards to HGH and IGF have me going crazy.Nothing you can do about that though.Except debunk there claims.Or request clinical evidence.Which in most cases they can't produce.Particularly the claims made with LR3 IGF-1.Muscle growth?HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    ~Pinnacle~

  19. #19
    oswaldosalcedo's Avatar
    oswaldosalcedo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,102
    [quote=Pinnacle]
    Quote Originally Posted by oswaldosalcedo

    More like realism Ossie.The wild claims ppl make in regards to HGH and IGF have me going crazy.Nothing you can do about that though.Except debunk there claims.Or request clinical evidence.Which in most cases they can't produce.Particularly the claims made with LR3 IGF-1.Muscle growth?HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    ~Pinnacle~
    critical realism .............lol.....................

  20. #20
    Vegas67 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyB
    HGH isn't what the hype makes it out to be, I like LR3 better then HGH, but for muscle gains, AAS hands down

    JohnnyB
    I completely agree with this...been on GH for the better part of 2 years. I am 2 weeks into IGF and see way more potential for gains and bf losses. Going to be interesting to see after a couple of cycles how IGF and slin+gh work together with AAS.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •