IGF-site growth?

**hocoathlete** · 04-06-2007, 05:33 PM

can IGF significantly increase site growth?

***SPIKE*** · 04-07-2007, 01:19 AM

This is a long debated subject but IMO no it does not. It is a systematic peptide therefore I do not see any logical reason why it would cause any site specific growth.

***perfectbeast2001*** · 04-07-2007, 03:59 AM

I shoit it in my quads for 4 weeks and over the next few months they grew like weeds (Very hardcore leg workouts and 100% consistent diet). IMO it does cause site growth. It is not a magic pill, everything else has to be 100% right to get results.

**goose** · 04-07-2007, 04:07 AM

huIGF will give local growth,this is not the long form.

**hocoathlete** · 04-07-2007, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by perfectbeast2001

I shoit it in my quads for 4 weeks and over the next few months they grew like weeds (Very hardcore leg workouts and 100% consistent diet). IMO it does cause site growth. It is not a magic pill, everything else has to be 100% right to get results.

true that! but yeah i want to find something that will hlp bring up my rear delts faster with perfect diet and trainin

thanks bro

**plzr8** · 04-07-2007, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by perfectbeast2001

I shoit it in my quads for 4 weeks and over the next few months they grew like weeds (Very hardcore leg workouts and 100% consistent diet). IMO it does cause site growth. It is not a magic pill, everything else has to be 100% right to get results.

off topic: PB wheels lookin great bro! i know you've been killing your legs for awhile now, def paid off

***SPIKE*** · 04-07-2007, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by goose4

huIGF will give local growth,this is not the long form.

As far as I've read, huIGF can cause some kind of Site specific growth but not LR3.

I've used more LR3 then probably anyone else out there, lol. I can't say that I've noticed any site specific growth whatsoever.

**goose** · 04-07-2007, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by Jayhova

As far as I've read, huIGF can cause some kind of Site specific growth but not LR3.

I've used more LR3 then probably anyone else out there, lol. I can't say that I've noticed any site specific growth whatsoever.

I agree dude.Pinn told me he used huIGF a few times and managed to get a few pounds from local growth and thats it.Apart from that I dont know anyone who has used it.

**hocoathlete** · 04-07-2007, 10:46 AM

is huIGF common to get? all ive seen is the long version.

**goose** · 04-07-2007, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by hocoathlete

is huIGF common to get? all ive seen is the long version.

No it`s not common.I only know one place that has it.It appears only the very elite will give it a try.Guys fighting to put a few pounds in a local spot.

**Logan13** · 04-07-2007, 03:01 PM

IMO, no waterbased injectable will stay around the area of injection long enough to promote localized growth.

**hocoathlete** · 04-07-2007, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by goose4

No it`s not common.I only know one place that has it.It appears only the very elite will give it a try.Guys fighting to put a few pounds in a local spot.

oh is it cheaper than long IGF?

ill have to find it and get some

***SPIKE*** · 04-07-2007, 05:19 PM

^^^^^^^^ If it's legit huIGF then it is much more expensive then LR3.

**Ironman5151** · 04-07-2007, 08:05 PM

IMO, it helps

***SPIKE*** · 04-08-2007, 12:54 AM

^^^^^^^^^^What help? As far as what? What are your experiences?

**Titan1** · 04-18-2007, 03:11 PM

No IGF-1 gives site growth not L3r or rhigf-1 read this its from the post "my take on igf-1":

If you want to use IGF for localization growth get some rhIGF-1. It binds to the wound only and does not go into the bloodstream. This helps repair the injection wound and makes new cells in that area only. While Long R3 IGF binds somewhat to the would then makes its way to the blood stream causing growth throughout the body..

This is false.

The difference between rhIGF-1 and Long R3 is that the Long R3 does not get bound by binding protein and thus is 100% active whereas you do lose a great % of whatever amount of rhIGF-1 you inject to IGFBP3.

While technically it is true that if you inject a large amount of the rhIGF-1 it will have almost only localized effect, it is so because the "excess" that does not bind to cells in the muscle in which it is injected is rapidly bound up by IGFBP3 and thus rendered unusable by cells elsewhere. It would be much much better in such a case to inject a smaller amount and not have ANY excess that gets bound up by IGFBP's.

And while technically it is true that if you inject a large amount of Long R3 IGF-1 in a muscle, it will first bind to the nearest available receptor, and spread, binding to more and more receptors and not be bound up and neutralized by IGFBP's, meaning that it will travel all through your body and grow all kinds of tissue. This is called the systemic effect of IGF-1. Therein lies the only distinction in terms of BOTH half-life and localized/systemic effect between the Long and the human varieties.

What does all this mean?

It means that technically, for the part of the muscle in which you inject, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN rhIGF-1 and Long R3 IGF-1. They both have the EXACT SAME LOCAL EFFECT. But rhIGF-1 gets neutralized quick, whereas Long R3 gets to float around until it finds a receptor.

What does all this tell us?

It tells us many things. Let's start with what we want, then see where that leads us. What do we want? Bigger muscles. More muscle cells that we will later grow with exercise and gear. A pump? Fatloss? Yeah, right. You can get a pump with a good "pump" product for a quarter of the price of IGF-1. Fatloss? Clen /Alb and T3/T4 will give it to you again at a fraction of the price of IGF-1. More muscle cells, you can ONLY get with IGF-1 (and MGF too). Nothing else will give it to you and if you are using IGF-1 for anything else, you are misusing it. More muscle cells is CLEARLY the best use for IGF-1.

**NotSmall** · 04-19-2007, 12:46 AM

Originally Posted by Titan1

No IGF-1 gives site growth not L3r or rhigf-1 read this its from the post "my take on igf-1":

Erm, 2 things:

Did you read it before you copied and pasted it? - He is actually saying that both do cause some site growth!
This is just an opinion of another member, albeit a highly respected member on alot of boards and one whose opinion I value, yet you have quoted him as if what he says is fact.

**Titan1** · 04-19-2007, 11:22 AM

Well ask people and you´ll see that 9 out of 10 people will say that they didnt get site growth and neither did i all the times i´ve used it and clearly you dont know how IGF-1 and Lr3igf-1 works ,the problem with rhigf-1 is that when you inject it your body produces IGFBP3 and diactivates the igf-1 thats why lr3 is better

**NotSmall** · 04-19-2007, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Titan1

Well ask people and you´ll see that 9 out of 10 people will say that they didnt get site growth and neither did i all the times i´ve used it

LMAO - So why did you post a quote from one of the guys that believes you can get site growth from LR3?

Originally Posted by Titan1

and clearly you dont know how IGF-1 and Lr3igf-1 works ,the problem with rhigf-1 is that when you inject it your body produces IGFBP3 and diactivates the igf-1 thats why lr3 is better

Erm, how is that evident from what I posted? - I understand the difference between the two just fine thanks!