does the body eventually alter or rid the lr3 part?

[flexshack]

i know the long r3 version allows it to remain free and active, but is it eventually destroyed or broken down by the body allowing it to bind to igfbp?
if so, then this might explain at least one reason why the igf-1lr3 seems to become less effective after the 4th or 5th week mark. maybe the body becomes more adept at breaking down or altering the analog lr3 after that amount of time?

[einstein1905]

i know the long r3 version allows it to remain free and active, but is it eventually destroyed or broken down by the body allowing it to bind to igfbp?
if so, then this might explain at least one reason why the igf-1lr3 seems to become less effective after the 4th or 5th week mark. maybe the body becomes more adept at breaking down or altering the analog lr3 after that amount of time?

I see what you're getting at, but the degradation of the "L" region is just going to be by normal generalized proteases/protein degradation mechanisms. If there were to be an adaptive response, it would be immune system-mediated, which is an all or none action, so subsequent "cycles" would be ineffective due to immune memory. I think receptor downregulation is the most likely explanation.

[flexshack]

I see what you're getting at, but the degradation of the "L" region is just going to be by normal generalized proteases/protein degradation mechanisms. If there were to be an adaptive response, it would be immune system-mediated, which is an all or none action, so subsequent "cycles" would be ineffective due to immune memory. I think receptor downregulation is the most likely explanation.

i see. btw, if the cause is downregulation, which sounds very reasonable, how does one feel when finally ending the cycle? if all the igf-1 receptor sites are downregulated, wouldn't the person feel like garbage upon cessation or even go through a little crash until the body normalizes?