sub-q igf-1

**jdog55** · 10-09-2006, 11:05 PM

is there anything wrong with injecting igf1 lr3 into the stomach area? Thats about the only place I have fat. My butt is used for other substances

**Gassy** · 10-10-2006, 12:51 PM

From what I've read and been told sub-q leads to more of the IGF being absorbed by the receptors in the intestines instead of the receptors in the muscles.

**rodge** · 10-10-2006, 01:17 PM

IM is the way to go with lr3 imo.

but from others that tried subq. it seems to lead to more fatloss over IM so they say.

-rodge

**C_Bino** · 10-10-2006, 01:33 PM

I have tried both ways. Cant really say I noticed any significant differences. I would do it IM from now on though.

**RedBaron** · 10-10-2006, 04:53 PM

There is really nothing WRONG with it, but it depends somewhat on the dilutent you are using.

The reason we suggest IM is because for the most part, we are reconstituting LR3 with 100mM Acetic Acid solution. If you inject that subQ, then you are going to get a nice sting and a red irritation at the injection site for many days.

For some purposes (nerve regrowth, children with growth deficiencies), there are times that huIGF-1 is injected subQ (albeit using a different dilutent) ... but for our purposes and the dilutent we are using (Acetic Acid or BA), the easiest and least painful way to go is IM. As LR3 is resistant to binding proteins and has a LONG active life, it is going to work systemically either way you inject.

**jdog55** · 10-10-2006, 06:04 PM

mine came from s-p...i think he used the acid because it seperated itself in the syrine from the water by a solid line. I mix it with sterile water and it stings a little but not much