how much growth hormone is effective

**gottibme** · 06-29-2007, 08:58 PM

to see really good results how much growth hormone should be taken?

**Lexed** · 06-29-2007, 08:58 PM

for muscle?

**gottibme** · 06-29-2007, 08:59 PM

im thinking about including growth hormone in my next cycle and wanted to know.

**Lexed** · 06-29-2007, 09:00 PM

your not answering the question though lol is it for muscle increase ,fat loss?

**plzr8** · 06-29-2007, 09:02 PM

should post this in HGH forum bro, get more responses.....

IMO....hgh is a great addition to any cycle with numerous benefits including recovery, endurance, ability to increase calories while maintaining bf%, ability to retain more gains post cycle, etc...

**gottibme** · 06-29-2007, 09:13 PM

for muscle and any other benefits it has

**inheritmylife** · 06-29-2007, 09:23 PM

I'm in my late 20s and 4ius per day is enough keep bodyfat at bay and help gains. I'm by no means a monster. I do not want to be huge. I have not used AAS in a long time. It gets me to my goals, but will not neccesarily help you with yours.

**gooer** · 06-29-2007, 10:49 PM

depends on how old you are and if you want to lose fat or gain muscle. if you are young and/or want to gain muscle you gotta take a high dose for really good results like 10 iu a day (and i've heard of a lot higher), if you are older and/or just want to shed fat or maintain muscle lower dosages of 2-4 iu's can be taken.

you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt.

**ginkobulloba** · 06-29-2007, 11:13 PM

^^^
Why do you say you shouldn't take hgh unless you've got a decent amount of cycles under your belt? For cost effectiveness, I agree. Hgh can be expensive for the muscular gains compared to test and dbol for example.

I'm 26 with only one cycle of test under my belt and got on hgh a few months ago. With dosages at 4iu per day I am noticing a lot of what was said above...the ability to eat more calories without increasing bf%, better recovery, mood enhancement. I've put on about 6 lbs in two months with a decrease in bf%. Not steroid like gains or anything, but I and others have said that I look better than they have ever seen me.

**redrocket86** · 06-30-2007, 07:13 AM

my mate was taking gh at 20 years old and dont know at what dose but he looked like a monster and he said to me he wasnt bothered about the risks

**BOUNCER 01** · 06-30-2007, 09:38 AM

For actual muscle gain from GH you would have to run over something like 10iu's ed, maybe even more.

**NotSmall** · 06-30-2007, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by gooer

you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt.

LMAO - Why?

**kynetguy** · 06-30-2007, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by gooer

you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt.

LOL, Yes, I too am curious as to why hgh mandates cycle expirience. Never heard of anyone causing any problems using HGH.

There is like zero bad sides, won't shut down anything. . .but maybe I am missing something. So please, by all means, explain the mysteries of this omnipotent super powerful, handle with care and dangerous compound.

**gooer** · 06-30-2007, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by kynetguy

LOL, Yes, I too am curious as to why hgh mandates cycle expirience. Never heard of anyone causing any problems using HGH.

There is like zero bad sides, won't shut down anything. . .but maybe I am missing something. So please, by all means, explain the mysteries of this omnipotent super powerful, handle with care and dangerous compound.

wow i didn't realize my comment would get so much questionable response, for what i thought was fairly obvious.

for $$ to muscle ratio hgh just doesn't make as much sense as AAS. you can put on 20 pounds with your first cycle of test for dirt cheap. hgh is gonna cost you a used car for that.

i guess if you are a billionaire and money's not an issue, go ahead and do hgh right off the bat.

besides at high enough dosages to get the same gains from hgh as you would an AAS there are risks of some side effects such as numbness, enlargement of the forehead hands feet jaw, GH gut etc.

also a lot of people like to look at bodybuilding in the long run. you should try and work up to near your natural potential before you juice, then you take steroids , and when you stop getting gains from the steroids, it's a good time to try GH. if you do everything at once, sure you'll get big but not as big as you would be in the long run. this changes if you are older.

i find it interesting you are extremely sarcastic about hgh and make it like i'm an idiot and that it's as safe as cheerios in the morning when in REALITY there have been numerous medical studies recently linking hgh to cancer and premature tumor growth in people who's families are predisposed to cancer. NOT that juice is safe, but your phrase was "explain the mysteries of this omnipotent super powerful, handle with care and dangerous compound."

and you do have to handle it with care - it's hgh

so yeah wtf bro. i made a simple comment trying to help someone out with what really was somewhat logical thought out advice.

**juiceinthehood** · 06-30-2007, 06:57 PM

I believe 4iu ed is the norm..

**taiboxa** · 06-30-2007, 07:17 PM

GH is over rated..
sure its great for OTHER THINGS but for actual MUSCLE growth ur looking at a minimum of 12iu

at 16iu ed i saw very minimal improvement in my lbm growth..
btw wrong forum

**juiceinthehood** · 06-30-2007, 07:21 PM

wow that high of dose...I must have read wrong..I read typical dose was 4iu...maybe not for muscle...I also read that one of the sides is deformity..

Originally Posted by taiboxa

GH is over rated..
sure its great for OTHER THINGS but for actual MUSCLE growth ur looking at a minimum of 12iu

at 16iu ed i saw very minimal improvement in my lbm growth..
btw wrong forum

**taiboxa** · 06-30-2007, 07:22 PM

Originally Posted by juiceinthehood

wow that high of dose...I must have read wrong..I read typical dose was 4iu...maybe not for muscle...I also read that one of the sides is deformity..

4iu is for HRT thus people who are DEFFICIENT IN THEM..
i have read that teens can produce 12-20+iu of endogenous GH on some days thus if u really think about it.. 4iu is just enuff to keep ur lipolytic rate up.

**juiceinthehood** · 06-30-2007, 07:27 PM

Good to know thanks bro

Originally Posted by taiboxa

4iu is for HRT thus people who are DEFFICIENT IN THEM..
i have read that teens can produce 12-20+iu of endogenous GH on some days thus if u really think about it.. 4iu is just enuff to keep ur lipolytic rate up.

**kynetguy** · 06-30-2007, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by gooer

so yeah wtf bro. i made a simple comment trying to help someone out with what really was somewhat logical thought out advice.

Well, I do not disagree with you at all. However when you say "you shouldnt until you have a lot of cycles under your belt" that really leaves one hanging for a reason.

I do not think that you have to run any AAS before you run HGH.

A lot is age dependant. You think about the average bodybuilder that has 6,8..even 12 cycles under his belt. This would probably be "a lot of cycles" I would think. This person is likely to be in their 30's. Where the presence of naturally occuring GH is deminished if not gone.

So considering timing and age, you are spot on. Of course if you are at peak or high natural HGH levels you are not going to see as much of a benefit. And if you inject enough to go beyond those natural levels, you are putting yourself at risk of side effects. The same with any AAS.

Price, you are right there. It is not cheap at all to run HGH. Especially to run it for extended periods of time which you need to do to see real results.

I wasn't saying you were wrong, but you didn't back your blanket statement up with any facts or reasons. So honestly, you have to admit, that came off as a very parrot-like statement backed by nothing except the fact you read it somewhere.

Oh the sarcasm...its one of my many free services. Don't take it personal.

**gooer** · 06-30-2007, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by kynetguy

Well, I do not disagree with you at all. However when you say "you shouldnt until you have a lot of cycles under your belt" that really leaves one hanging for a reason.

I do not think that you have to run any AAS before you run HGH.

A lot is age dependant. You think about the average bodybuilder that has 6,8..even 12 cycles under his belt. This would probably be "a lot of cycles" I would think. This person is likely to be in their 30's. Where the presence of naturally occuring GH is deminished if not gone.

So considering timing and age, you are spot on. Of course if you are at peak or high natural HGH levels you are not going to see as much of a benefit. And if you inject enough to go beyond those natural levels, you are putting yourself at risk of side effects. The same with any AAS.

Price, you are right there. It is not cheap at all to run HGH. Especially to run it for extended periods of time which you need to do to see real results.

I wasn't saying you were wrong, but you didn't back your blanket statement up with any facts or reasons. So honestly, you have to admit, that came off as a very parrot-like statement backed by nothing except the fact you read it somewhere.

Oh the sarcasm...its one of my many free services. Don't take it personal.

i agree with you, we're saying the same things. i just wanted to clear my name after all the skeptical posts and show the logic behind my statements.

**kynetguy** · 06-30-2007, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by gooer

i agree with you, we're saying the same things. i just wanted to clear my name after all the skeptical posts and show the logic behind my statements.

It's all good. You are cleared as far as I am concerned.

Not that anyone gives a rats bottom about my opinion. . .

**NotSmall** · 07-01-2007, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by gooer

wow i didn't realize my comment would get so much questionable response, for what i thought was fairly obvious.

for $$ to muscle ratio hgh just doesn't make as much sense as AAS. you can put on 20 pounds with your first cycle of test for dirt cheap. hgh is gonna cost you a used car for that.

i guess if you are a billionaire and money's not an issue, go ahead and do hgh right off the bat.

besides at high enough dosages to get the same gains from hgh as you would an AAS there are risks of some side effects such as numbness, enlargement of the forehead hands feet jaw, GH gut etc.

also a lot of people like to look at bodybuilding in the long run. you should try and work up to near your natural potential before you juice, then you take steroids , and when you stop getting gains from the steroids, it's a good time to try GH. if you do everything at once, sure you'll get big but not as big as you would be in the long run. this changes if you are older.

i find it interesting you are extremely sarcastic about hgh and make it like i'm an idiot and that it's as safe as cheerios in the morning when in REALITY there have been numerous medical studies recently linking hgh to cancer and premature tumor growth in people who's families are predisposed to cancer. NOT that juice is safe, but your phrase was "explain the mysteries of this omnipotent super powerful, handle with care and dangerous compound."

and you do have to handle it with care - it's hgh

so yeah wtf bro. i made a simple comment trying to help someone out with what really was somewhat logical thought out advice.

Blah, blah, blah - you said...

Originally Posted by gooer

you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt.

...and nothing in the long winded post above justifies that statement IMO, it just says that GH is expensive and that AAS is more effective at building muscle tissue. (Hardly ground breaking news)

There is no reason not to use GH as soon as you start to use AAS, or even before, no you don't need to but there is also no reason not to IMO, GH is actually arguably safer than AAS, also if it is true that GH use causes hyperplasia then to me it makes sense to use it as early in your anabolic career as possible so that subsequent AAS cycles can mature your new muscle cells.

What you call "somewhat logical thought out advice" I call parrotry.

**vitor** · 07-01-2007, 01:30 AM

GH can do what no AAS can. Create hyperplasmia, (new muscle cells) so you can go beyond the genetics your parent gave you. It has never been proven in studies(that I have seen atleast, that steroids can cause hyperplasmia).

If you reach your natrual potential, take AAS and gain 15 more pounds, those gains will eventually be lost if you stay natrual long enough.

**Gear** · 07-01-2007, 01:33 AM

I'm going to move this to the GH forum.

-Gear

**gooer** · 07-01-2007, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by NotSmall

Blah, blah, blah - you said...

...and nothing in the long winded post above justifies that statement IMO, it just says that GH is expensive and that AAS is more effective at building muscle tissue. (Hardly ground breaking news)

you're just being difficult for the sake of being difficult and arguing semantics.

if you want to bold that i said "shouldn't" you should also note that i said "really shouldn't". i backed up what i said and explained it in depth.

if you want to justify your lack of attention span with calling my post "long winded," well thats your perogative.

Originally Posted by NotSmall

There is no reason not to use GH as soon as you start to use AAS, or even before, no you don't need to but there is also no reason not to IMO, GH is actually arguably safer than AAS, also if it is true that GH use causes hyperplasia then to me it makes sense to use it as early in your anabolic career as possible so that subsequent AAS cycles can mature your new muscle cells.

Blah, blah blah.

Originally Posted by NotSmall

What you call "somewhat logical thought out advice" I call parrotry.

parrotry means saying something with no reason to back it up.

I backed it up with many points.

COULD you go ahead and do GH before AAS? yes.

SHOULD the completely uniformed person who started the thread? No, they REALLY SHOULDN'T.

i know i'm probably wasting my energy since you don't have the attention span to read this.

**NotSmall** · 07-01-2007, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by gooer

you're just being difficult for the sake of being difficult and arguing semantics.

if you want to bold that i said "shouldn't" you should also note that i said "really shouldn't". i backed up what i said and explained it in depth.

if you want to justify your lack of attention span with calling my post "long winded," well thats your perogative.

Blah, blah blah.

parrotry means saying something with no reason to back it up.

I backed it up with many points.

COULD you go ahead and do GH before AAS? yes.

SHOULD the completely uniformed person who started the thread? No, they REALLY SHOULDN'T.

i know i'm probably wasting my energy since you don't have the attention span to read this.

Bottom line, we agree. You thought what I said was parroted, now you don't want to admit you were wrong when I backed it up and are resorting to childish techniques to prove your point (blah blah blah, "long winded") and call me names (a parrot). It's cool bro, i get it.

LMFAO - OK I'll keep it simple, nothing you posted backs up the statement "you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt." - this is just the parrotted idea that GH is something you can only graduate to after doing several AAS cycles.

My calling your post "long winded" doesn't highlight any shortcomings on my part other than the fact that I don't like to wade through waffle.

Bottom line - we don't agree, oh and how do you know that the thread starter wears a uniform?

**gooer** · 07-01-2007, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by NotSmall

LMFAO - OK I'll keep it simple, nothing you posted backs up the statement "you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt." - this is just the parrotted idea that GH is something you can only graduate to after doing several AAS cycles.

My calling your post "long winded" doesn't highlight any shortcomings on my part other than the fact that I don't like to wade through waffle.

Bottom line - we don't agree, oh and how do you know that the thread starter wears a uniform?

alright you want to play it like that.

what you're saying: you CAN start with gh sometimes!

what i'm saying: in most situations you really shouldn't start with GH

that's the same thing

yeah it's possible, but usually not. so don't call me a parrot, because you read things into what i said (you change my statement every time you make a point).

**NotSmall** · 07-01-2007, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by gooer

alright you want to play it like that.

what you're saying: you CAN start with gh sometimes!

what i'm saying: in most situations you really shouldn't start with GH

that's the same thing

yeah it's possible, but usually not. so don't call me a parrot, because you read things into what i said (you change my statement every time you make a point).

How have I changed your statement every time I made a point? - I quoted you word for word!

It is you who has changed your statement from:

"you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt."

to:

"in most situations you really shouldn't start with GH"

Your sqwawking is really boring me now.....

**Booz** · 07-01-2007, 01:28 PM

cut the crap out boys..............................
Tiny am i gonna have to pull that leash nice and tight??
gooer drop it please.........................
play nice.......................

**NotSmall** · 07-01-2007, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by Booz

cut the crap out boys..............................
Tiny am i gonna have to pull that leash nice and tight??
gooer drop it please.........................
play nice.......................

**Titleist** · 07-01-2007, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by NotSmall

How have I changed your statement every time I made a point? - I quoted you word for word!

It is you who has changed your statement from:

"you really shouldn't take hgh until you have a decent amount of cycles under your belt."

to:

"in most situations you really shouldn't start with GH"

Your sqwawking is really boring me now.....

**jerseyboy** · 07-01-2007, 07:22 PM

I agree with Tai that GH is overrated unless you can afford larger doses like 10-20iu's a day for muscle growth. For less money you can get more results from AAS. For someone just looking for fat loss the same results are obtainable with clean diet and cardio for alot less money. My unique position allows me to afford to run just about anything I want within reason. I like GH for it's help with recovery among other things. I'm 36 and people tell me I look 26. I don't really think it's all due to genetics. I don't agree that you need a bunch of AAS cycles under your belt. Although GH isn't without side effects I do feel it is safer than AAS unless of course you do have a pre-existing tumor or cancer cells which as previously said, can be caused to grow by using growth hormone . I've never read anything that said GH causes cancer or tumors.