My take on IGF-1

[ss01]

Yes well this is not the be-all, end-all board on the 'Net and boards aren't the be-all, end-all of endocrinology, so... This is a tiny pond, Anthony. One of many many small ponds, and there is a big sea out there... And some of us need to protect their true identity. Who knows, maybe I am published, but prefer to post anonymously for the benefit of those with enough ability to discern well dressed-up BS from true, even reference-free, science.

[The Natural]

If you think he "manhandled" me, then you need a bit of a reality check, buddy. That being said, your results are another example of how long it can take to see the full effects from IGF-1. So, what if gut growth is real but takes a couple years to show up? All the guys doing the 200mcg thing are going to be unhappy ... eventually. Hey and by then they will be able to blame anything at all.

I did only 50mcg ED, and I don't think I am gonna do any more than 80...
I also shot in my shoulders (forgot to mention that... sorry).
And when I think about it, I actually didn't get any stronger/bigger there, compared to the other bodyparts. Hmmmm...

The reason I think he "manhandled" you, is as RoadToRecovery said:

Im sorry, but even a high school research paper needs references... and not only that, references show that you have a foundation of your theorys... other wise like Mr. Roberts said... youll just become another guy on the net.

Bottom line is... if you dont have references and claim you dont need any... than you wind up sounding like a crack pot.

Hey, bro. I didn't mean to disrespect you. But we need something to back up your info.

[Property of Steroid.com]

Yes well this is not the be-all, end-all board on the 'Net and boards aren't the be-all, end-all of endocrinology, so... This is a tiny pond, Anthony. One of many many small ponds, and there is a big sea out there... And some of us need to protect their true identity. Who knows, maybe I am published, but prefer to post anonymously for the benefit of those with enough ability to discern well dressed-up BS from true, even reference-free, science.

Yes...some people need to protect their identity. I can not, however...think of one industry leader (as you claimed you are) who needs to protect their identity.

How can you lead an industry anonymously?

All hail our anonymous leader and his unreferenced and unsupported claims!

[MrNice]

Yes...some people need to protect their identity. I can not, however...think of one industry leader (as you claimed you are) who needs to protect their identity.

How can you lead an industry anonymously?

All hail our anonymous leader and his unreferenced and unsupported claims!

He could use a bunch of random references which really have very little to do with anything and then present it as a referenced and supported work couldn't he?


like this piece for example

Anabolic Review Profile: DNP (2,4-dinitrophenol)

2,4-Dinitrophenol pharmacologically promotes retinal detachment in rabbits
(thanks to Conciliator for pointing this out recently)

Or indeed, referencing the same study twice to pad out your references

19. Energy substrate requirements for survival of rat retinal cells in culture: the importance of glucose and monocarboxylates.J Neurochem. 2005 May;93(3):686-97.
22. Energy substrate requirements for survival of rat retinal cells in culture: the importance of glucose and monocarboxylates.
J Neurochem. 2005 May;93(3):686-97

Are you listening SS01?

This is how you support and reference a work ok?

[Property of Steroid.com]

He could use a bunch of random references which really have very little to do with anything and then present it as a referenced and supported work couldn't he?


like this piece for example

Anabolic Review Profile: DNP (2,4-dinitrophenol)

2,4-Dinitrophenol pharmacologically promotes retinal detachment in rabbits
(thanks to Conciliator for pointing this out recently)

Or indeed, referencing the same study twice to pad out your references

19. Energy substrate requirements for survival of rat retinal cells in culture: the importance of glucose and monocarboxylates.J Neurochem. 2005 May;93(3):686-97.
22. Energy substrate requirements for survival of rat retinal cells in culture: the importance of glucose and monocarboxylates.
J Neurochem. 2005 May;93(3):686-97

Are you listening SS01?

This is how you support and reference a work ok?

I used the same reference 2x and listed it 2x. It was a mistake, and the editor didn't catch it. My bad. Remember, I wrote that book over 2 years ago, and listed several references out of order or more than once, though I actually listed them...which is different than saying something without a single reference.

Also....funny that "Concillator" knows my work on DNP so well that he knows every reference, right? Because he's trying to promote himself as a DNP expert now....an "expert" who just basically reads my work and passes it off as his expertise. I love on BB.com when he passed off Bill Roberts ideas as his own on AR regulation too.

[J-41-sd]

if you were to reconsitute it with bw would it be safe to assume that one could use a slin needle to inject into smaller muscles like bi's tri's and delts and say a 23g on glutes and quads?

[ss01]

I used the same reference 2x and listed it 2x. It was a mistake, and the editor didn't catch it. My bad. Remember, I wrote that book over 2 years ago, and listed several references out of order or more than once, though I actually listed them...which is different than saying something without a single reference.

Also....funny that "Concillator" knows my work on DNP so well that he knows every reference, right? Because he's trying to promote himself as a DNP expert now....an "expert" who just basically reads my work and passes it off as his expertise. I love on BB.com when he passed off Bill Roberts ideas as his own on AR regulation too.

Ah, that is someone we will agree on, AR. He is in your league.

[akrosmegas]

Must be the right pro's reading this thread to comment on this.

FDA approved rhIGF-1, the get-it-by-prescription type (Increlex), is dosed at levels off the charts compared to LR3 IGF. Some medical trials test at 0.05 to 0.10 mg/kg/day for months at a time with no significant side effects. For a 220 pounder, that's 5,000 - 10,000 mcg/day! Maybe 100 to 200 times more than typical LR3IGF doses, no talk about receptor down regulation, sides, etc. Maybe it has to do with purity, or ? . . . . (binding proteins can't explain it all, or maybe not at all)?

But cost! The cheapest LR3IGF I've seen is $95/mg (haven't tried it so don't know if it's any good). Increlex, the presciption IGF, based on approx one year old costs (dated June 5, 2006) was $90 for a 36 mg vial ($2.50/mg). Medical grade regular rhIGF-1 at only $2.50/mg (not a typo) versus $95/mg? Get a presciption.

[fossilfuel7]

Must be the right pro's reading this thread to comment on this.

FDA approved rhIGF-1, the get-it-by-prescription type (Increlex), is dosed at levels off the charts compared to LR3 IGF. Some medical trials test at 0.05 to 0.10 mg/kg/day for months at a time with no significant side effects. For a 220 pounder, that's 5,000 - 10,000 mcg/day! Maybe 100 to 200 times more than typical LR3IGF doses, no talk about receptor down regulation, sides, etc. Maybe it has to do with purity, or ? . . . . (binding proteins can't explain it all, or maybe not at all)?

But cost! The cheapest LR3IGF I've seen is $95/mg (haven't tried it so don't know if it's any good). Increlex, the presciption IGF, based on approx one year old costs (dated June 5, 2006) was $90 for a 36 mg vial ($2.50/mg). Medical grade regular rhIGF-1 at only $2.50/mg (not a typo) versus $95/mg? Get a presciption.

Is this true??...if it is then there is so much hype,thread parroting and BS going on about lr3IGF that these chem sites sell that it sickens me.

This does not surprise me at all. I have used so called IGF at 50 mcg ed, from two different research chem sites and noticed absolutley NOTHING.

My opinion is that the shiznit(IGFlr3) with the blue tops that is supposedly coming out of China that all these chem sites sell is worthless.

The reason you may ask....why of course....because money is the root of all evil

I have personally had it with the chem sites and will never try IGF again unless it is from a pharmacy(fat chance I know).

[NotSmall]

The reason you may ask....why of course....because money is the root of all evil

Actually the love of money is the root of all evil.

[akrosmegas]

Is this true??...

Read this one for cost and even higher dosing (the one yr old, June 2006 data).
http://trca.client.shareholder.com/R...leaseID=199466

Read this one for clinical trial dosing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...&dopt=Abstract

[akrosmegas]

Here's what I found out so far. The $90/36 mg vial was for Iplex, not Increlex. Iplex is a 50/50 blend by weight of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3. So, based on weight of IGF-1 only, it was more like $5.00/mg a yr ago. But by April of this yr it had dropped in price to $72.00/36 mg vial so $4.00/mg for IGF-1. Then, the company that makes Increlex wins a patent infringment lawsuit against Iplex and shuts them down. So now you can only get Increlex which was $562.50 for a 40 mg vial a year ago. $14.00/mg. Still a lot cheaper than the typical $100 and up per mg for LR3 IGF-1.

[RedBaron]

It is true that at least one brand of huIGF-1 has been approved for human use and is available by prescription ... ONLY for growth deficient children though. They have found it in trials to be a great alternative to growth hormone therapy for many children.

It is also true that you would have to take it in much larger doses than we are used to discussing with LR3, but that has always been the case. That was one of the draws to LR3 ... NOT having to take large doses to see results. I have used huIGF-1 in the past as have many other bodybuilders. The results were pretty much a mixed bag. In the end, it seemed that if you injected a large enough dose into a freshly worked muscle group, you could experience some local growth. It was expensive enough and the results meager enough that it was cast aside as a waste of time and money. While that wasn't really the whole story, it is true that it was a LOT of money for a little gain.

The problem right now at least with the current offerings of huIGF-1 is that there isn't a way for a normal adult to get a prescription. As mentioned, the ONLY approved use right now is for growth deficient children. I haven't heard of any other approved use, and until there is a legal nod to do so, no legitimate doctor would be able to write a prescription for a normal adult.

The prices are cheaper because it is manufactured in quantity. The story behind LR3 prices are based on the fact that there really isn't that much Gropep LR3 IGF-1 floating around. There are tons of Chinese rip-offs of it (and some outright Chinese phoneys of it), but as far as the real deal, it is made in small quantities for use in research. That is why the cost remains high. It wasn't intended for use in humans, and it really doesn't take that much of it to test on a cell culture. If it were a human-grade product made for a large enough segment of society, then the manufacture price would go down. Whether or not the street price would go down would ***end entirely on the greed of all parties along the chain. Drug manufacturers are in the business to make money. If you look at who consistently pulls in the glowing quarterly stock-holder reports, drug companies more times than not are right there at the top. Most of the time, you pay what you pay because they can get away with charging you that much ... it really has little to do with the actual cost of manufacture.

As far as testing and research, huIGF-1 has all kinds of potential benefits ... diabetes, nerve regeneration, etc., etc. for adults. Given the state of medicine and the red tape associated with it though, I wouldn't hold my breath for it to become available for expanded uses anytime soon. Maybe one day we will shake the stigma of using hormones and peptides to enjoy better health longer, increase our life expectancy, and to improve physical performance ... but given the current political and medical climate that we all have to work within, it isn't going to happen now.

[goose]

WoW great to see you post RED.

As always its a great pleasure to read any of your posts.Your a legend.

[akrosmegas]

Thanks RedBaron. The subject continues to interest me though so I'd like to run with it some more, not to be disrespectful, but to talk about it. My interest stems from having had acr*****ly yrs ago (caused by a pituitary tumor), plus a family member has ALS where IGF-1 holds potential as a therapy (which is my main motivation for being on this board in the first place, to learn what people using LR3IGF have to say about it).

You're absolutely correct that short stature in children is the primary use for rhIGF-1, but a doctor can legitimately prescribe it off-label for other indications, assuming such a doctor can be found. And that's the problem - almost a show-stopper, and why we're looking to LR3IGF. rhIGF is used in mega-doses in clinical trials (like I said above, up to 10 mg/day). I read about sides on these boards from people using 100 mcg. So when I think about ramping LR3IGF up to 1 mg/day . . . . . . You get the picture.

As to manufacturing LR3, GroPep is the biggest manufacturer in the world, and they sell it by the bucket load for agricultural uses, as well as for cell culture manufacturing (i.e., like to feed bacteria that make other drugs). GroPep's product is used in the manufacture of other FDA approved drugs. They make far more LR3IGF-1 (by orders of magnitude)than the manufacturer of rhIGF-1 (Increlex who incidentally is the only one approved by the FDA so they make all that's used via the prescription route). So I think LR3 has a greater economy of scale the rhIGF-1 in terms of manufacturing cost. Retail cost for LR3IGF - you hit the nail on the head when you said "you pay what you pay because they can get away with charging you that much".

Here's quote from a GroPep paper about LR3IGF-1 in cmparison to rhIGF-1 (http://biopharmaceuticals.novozymes....%c2%aer3igf-i/ and then download their pdf file called "LONG®R3IGF-I Safety Review: Addressing the use of LONG®R3IGF-I in biopharmaceutical manufacture".

When LONG®R3IGF-I is administered into the circulation of experimental animals there is partial retention of the potency ratio seen in cells compared to IGF-I, at the same time as a reduction in the half-life, although in some models of IGF action LONG®R3IGF-I is less potent than IGF-I. The experimental data shows that LONG®R3IGF-I clearance rate in animals is about 10-fold higher than that of IGF-I as a result of low binding to circulating IGF binding proteins. Despite the higher clearance rate LONG®R3IGF-I is more potent than IGF-I in a number of physiological and metabolic responses in animal models. The main response is a transient hypoglycaemia.

The potency difference between LONG®R3IGF-I and IGF-I is lower in vivo compared to cultured cells. This means that the effective dose of LONG®R3IGF-I is similar to that of IGF-I administered in clinical trials and as a therapeutic and that the potential for LONG®R3IGF-I to present a risk to human health must be considered similar to that of IGF-I itself.

GroPep is the gold standard, and if I knew I had their product, I'd worry less. And if we could by it for the prices GroPep's primary customers pay . . . . . I doubt it would be more than rhIGF-1 since the FDA isn't in GroPep's loop.

[fossilfuel7]

It is true that at least one brand of huIGF-1 has been approved for human use and is available by prescription ... ONLY for growth deficient children though. They have found it in trials to be a great alternative to growth hormone therapy for many children.

It is also true that you would have to take it in much larger doses than we are used to discussing with LR3, but that has always been the case. That was one of the draws to LR3 ... NOT having to take large doses to see results. I have used huIGF-1 in the past as have many other bodybuilders. The results were pretty much a mixed bag. In the end, it seemed that if you injected a large enough dose into a freshly worked muscle group, you could experience some local growth. It was expensive enough and the results meager enough that it was cast aside as a waste of time and money. While that wasn't really the whole story, it is true that it was a LOT of money for a little gain.

The problem right now at least with the current offerings of huIGF-1 is that there isn't a way for a normal adult to get a prescription. As mentioned, the ONLY approved use right now is for growth deficient children. I haven't heard of any other approved use, and until there is a legal nod to do so, no legitimate doctor would be able to write a prescription for a normal adult.

The prices are cheaper because it is manufactured in quantity. The story behind LR3 prices are based on the fact that there really isn't that much Gropep LR3 IGF-1 floating around. There are tons of Chinese rip-offs of it (and some outright Chinese phoneys of it), but as far as the real deal, it is made in small quantities for use in research. That is why the cost remains high. It wasn't intended for use in humans, and it really doesn't take that much of it to test on a cell culture. If it were a human-grade product made for a large enough segment of society, then the manufacture price would go down. Whether or not the street price would go down would ***end entirely on the greed of all parties along the chain. Drug manufacturers are in the business to make money. If you look at who consistently pulls in the glowing quarterly stock-holder reports, drug companies more times than not are right there at the top. Most of the time, you pay what you pay because they can get away with charging you that much ... it really has little to do with the actual cost of manufacture.

As far as testing and research, huIGF-1 has all kinds of potential benefits ... diabetes, nerve regeneration, etc., etc. for adults. Given the state of medicine and the red tape associated with it though, I wouldn't hold my breath for it to become available for expanded uses anytime soon. Maybe one day we will shake the stigma of using hormones and peptides to enjoy better health longer, increase our life expectancy, and to improve physical performance ... but given the current political and medical climate that we all have to work within, it isn't going to happen now.

WOW! Now that's what I call insight.

Great to see you posting Redbaron.

[goose]

WOW! Now that's what I call insight.

Great to see you posting Redbaron.

I know!!! Redbaron is my hero He lifts heavy.

[fossilfuel7]

I know!!! Redbaron is my hero He lifts heavy.

Right on bro!

[ss01]

Always a pleasure to read your posts, RedBaron.

[Property of Steroid.com]

Ah, that is someone we will agree on, AR. He is in your league.

People in my league are people who have written books on this subject. People in my league are people who design original supplements. You and the internet forum regulars and other similar people are in each other's league, not mine.

You don't get into my league writing posts, you get into it by writing books, and you don't get there by writing about supplements, you get there by designing them. You're not in Henry Ford's league because you can drive a car, you're in it when you can invent one.

You're not in my league, he isn't either, and neither of you are even playing the same sport, much less in my league.

[NotSmall]

People in my league are people who have written books on this subject. People in my league are people who design original supplements. You and the internet forum regulars and other similar people are in each other's league, not mine.

You don't get into my league writing posts, you get into it by writing books, and you don't get there by writing about supplements, you get there by designing them. You're not in Henry Ford's league because you can drive a car, you're in it when you can invent one.

You're not in my league, he isn't either, and neither of you are even playing the same sport, much less in my league.

Your self adoration revolts me.

[fossilfuel7]

Your self adoration revolts me.

[MrNice]

People in my league are people who have written books on this subject. People in my league are people who design original supplements. You and the internet forum regulars and other similar people are in each other's league, not mine.

You don't get into my league writing posts, you get into it by writing books, and you don't get there by writing about supplements, you get there by designing them. You're not in Henry Ford's league because you can drive a car, you're in it when you can invent one.

You're not in my league, he isn't either, and neither of you are even playing the same sport, much less in my league.

lol!

You're such a joke

[MrNice]

People in my league are people who have written books on this subject. People in my league are people who design original supplements. You and the internet forum regulars and other similar people are in each other's league, not mine.

You don't get into my league writing posts, you get into it by writing books, and you don't get there by writing about supplements, you get there by designing them. You're not in Henry Ford's league because you can drive a car, you're in it when you can invent one.

You're not in my league, he isn't either, and neither of you are even playing the same sport, much less in my league.

You wrote a book, using google. Not impressive.
You "designed" a supplement, after hearing about the only ingredient from someone else. Not impressive.

You copy people, how does this put you in some sort of super league of internet gurus?

IMO, This dude is in your league.

[rodge]

You wrote a book, using google. Not impressive.
You "designed" a supplement, after hearing about the only ingredient from someone else. Not impressive.

You copy people, how does this put you in some sort of super league of internet gurus?

IMO, This dude is in your league.

-rodge

[fossilfuel7]

You wrote a book, using google. Not impressive.
You "designed" a supplement, after hearing about the only ingredient from someone else. Not impressive.

You copy people, how does this put you in some sort of super league of internet gurus?

IMO, This dude is in your league.

LMAO

[ss01]

You wrote a book, using google. Not impressive.
You "designed" a supplement, after hearing about the only ingredient from someone else. Not impressive.

You copy people, how does this put you in some sort of super league of internet gurus?

IMO, This dude is in your league.

OOOOOH, that is...








SO RIGHT!

[Gear]

Guys, keep it cool. If this thread gets out of hand, I will close it.

-Gear

[Property of Steroid.com]

You wrote a book, using google. Not impressive.
You "designed" a supplement, after hearing about the only ingredient from someone else. Not impressive.

You copy people, how does this put you in some sort of super league of internet gurus?

Funny...only a half dozen people in the world have done what I have. What sets me apart?

Why don't you do 1/2 of the things I have, then ask me the same thing.

If you could do it...you would. But you can't. So you rant.

[MrNice]

Or maybe we have different goals, how about that one genius?

Maybe I've done stuff that less people in the world have done, you know nothing about me. I know enough about you to know what you've accomplished, you got lucky. End of story.

[jerseyboy]

Guys, keep it cool. If this thread gets out of hand, I will close it.

-Gear

Shoulda been closed already. This thread is helping no one.

[Gear]

Shoulda been closed already. This thread is helping no one.

roger that.

-Gear

[Gear]

This thread has gone completely off topic and is now closed due to your immiture arguments.

-Gear