Can't shake the feeling that HGH is a waste of money

**Furious.George** · 12-15-2011, 05:26 AM

If it weren't for the anecdotes and lore, I could never imagine myself spending hundreds on a substance with such equivocal-at-best evidence for efficacy.

This study is the one that bothers me most: Claims for the anabolic effects of growth hormone : a case of the Emperor’s new clothes?

I've never seen a good response to it on any forum.

I've crossed referenced many of the citations myself, and yes I do see that many of the studies referenced are less than perfect. They are often short, and they often use low doses.

However, the authors make some good points about the complaints of the AAS community. We say "you have to use it for longer", "you have to use more", "you have to use it with T", etc, seemingly in an effort to set up a situation that could never be ethically tested by researchers.

Does anyone know of any research on HGH wherein it at least 15IU per week (assuming maybe 0.2IU/kg/week for average weight guys) for at least 24 weeks was compared to placebo?

I'm not trying to piss anyone off. I'll still buy another 300IU. I'm just trying to be unbiased about this.

**Razor** · 12-15-2011, 01:14 PM

In English?

**spywizard** · 12-15-2011, 01:20 PM

I've seen the effects 1st hand

and when the director (doctor/endo/surgeon ) makes a comment about baseball players using gh as the best way to effect physical gains and recover from injury..

those 2 opinions are my 1st hand observations, but you can follow a document, we know if it's on the internet.. it must be true.

**Furious.George** · 12-15-2011, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by Razr.

In English?

'ello, Govna!

Originally Posted by spywizard

I've seen the effects 1st hand

This anecdote you mention: was anything else used with GH? Can you go into a little more detail?

Originally Posted by spywizard

and when the director (doctor/endo/surgeon ) makes a comment about baseball players using gh as the best way to effect physical gains and recover from injury..

The injury thing I believe because the effects if gh on connective tissue are never disputed. It's the anabolic effect that I have my doubts about, and also the fat burning to some extent. Specifically, I fear the former may be next to non-existent, and that the latter may be over-hyped.

Originally Posted by spywizard

those 2 opinions are my 1st hand observations, but you can follow a document, we know if it's on the internet.. it must be true.

I don't think that's fair. It's not as if we're talking about a post on a forum from as guy who knows a guy. That's what your response to me was.

We're talking about peer-reviewed research, which I'm actually not following, or if I was I wouldn't be getting more gh.

Like I said, I've never seen a good response to that study I've linked to, and all I'm doing is hoping to get one without pissing people off.

So far, no luck.

**Sgt. Hartman** · 12-15-2011, 09:36 PM

I have also seen the effects of GH firsthand but I'm sure you've read enough of the "bro" stories on this forum and others.

The article you linked was written in 2003 and most of the studies cited were from the 1990's and some as far back as the 1970's. I'm not gonna try to discredit the article (yes, all it is is an article) because it's old and outdated, but think about the advances that have been made in technology since the time that these studies were done. Advances in the medical community grow at an exponential rate just like technology IMO.

Also, you should keep in mind that this is one man's opinion, not fact. He does support his opinion with research and studies very well but it is still his opinion. Anyone with enough intellect and time could write an article on the same subject with the opposite opinion and back it up with an equal amount of supporting research and studies. One of the main studies he bases his article on was done on a total of sixteen men, only seven of which were receiving GH supplementation, and they only took it for 12 weeks. I don't think anyone claims that a low dose of GH causes a drastic increase in LBM in 12 weeks especially without AAS. Hell, the medical community doesn't even have an understanding of the exact mechanism by which elevated IGF-1 levels increase muscle mass but I don't think anyone would try to argue that there is a direct link between IGF and LBM gain. Just because the "experts" of the medical community don't understand the intricacies of the exact way by which GH increases anabolism doesn't make it less real.

All you can do is try it for yourself and see what kind of results you get. If you're looking for quick LBM gain then I would say AAS is the way to go. Or if you can afford to run 8iu or 10iu of pharm grade GH with an AAS cycle I guarantee you it will change your mind about it and you will have no doubt about the anabolic effects of GH.

**Furious.George** · 12-15-2011, 11:11 PM

When you say "article" it sounds like the source in question appeared in Newsweek or something. It's a lit review from a peer-reviewed journal. Still, good response.

Thanks, I feel a bit better now.

**ata1979** · 12-16-2011, 11:17 AM

I'm living the results. I lost a good amount of body fat on 3-4 ius. Now I'm at 5ius and I am beggining to fill out nicely and record some strength gains. My endurance is great, I feel great I can workout 6 days a week without any fatigue, my body recovers incredibly fast. I thought GH was OK at 3ius, I liked it at 4 but I'm lovin it at 5. If I can swing the funds I wanna try 6.
Oh, BTW I'm using norditropin 10mg pens.

**Furious.George** · 12-16-2011, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by ata1979

I'm living the results. I lost a good amount of body fat on 3-4 ius. Now I'm at 5ius and I am beggining to fill out nicely and record some strength gains. My endurance is great, I feel great I can workout 6 days a week without any fatigue, my body recovers incredibly fast. I thought GH was OK at 3ius, I liked it at 4 but I'm lovin it at 5. If I can swing the funds I wanna try 6.
Oh, BTW I'm using norditropin 10mg pens.

With or without AAS, though?

If it's with, wouldn't that make it hard to tell what's from what?

**ata1979** · 12-17-2011, 02:09 AM

Originally Posted by Furious.George

With or without AAS, though?

If it's with, wouldn't that make it hard to tell what's from what?

Norditropin and T3/T4 mix. No juice. I finished an Anavar cycle around August 27th. Did a very mild PCT into mid September. Then jumped on HGH in mid October.

**ata1979** · 12-17-2011, 02:12 AM

To be honest with you, I'm contemplating never doing AAS again. I'll just run this stuff for 6-8 months every year instead. Yeah its obviously much more expensive but the benefits are much greater and the sides are next to nothing.

**ScotchGuard02** · 12-18-2011, 11:39 AM

I'm on my 4th year of HGH 5iu/ed. I've also read a lot of stuff about HGH before I started. I can tell you that when I'm on HGH I feel awesome and my body fat is under check no matter what I eat. I'm 51 and most people mistake me for mid 30's. You just gotta try it and make up your own mind.

**ata1979** · 12-18-2011, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by ScotchGuard02

I'm on my 4th year of HGH 5iu/ed. I've also read a lot of stuff about HGH before I started. I can tell you that when I'm on HGH I feel awesome and my body fat is under check no matter what I eat. I'm 51 and most people mistake me for mid 30's. You just gotta try it and make up your own mind.

Im almost 33 people mistake me for 25. my skin looks incredible. I look younger than my wife who is 27. Just make sure you go pharma. I know its more expensive but its worth it.

**ata1979** · 12-18-2011, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by ata1979

Im almost 33 people mistake me for 25. my skin looks incredible. I look younger than my wife who is 27. Just make sure you go pharma. I know its more expensive but its worth it.

Oh and also 4-5 ius a day, anything less is a waste of time and money. You might say I cant afford to do 4-5 ius a day when in reality if your gonna do HGH you cant afford to do less then 4-5 ius cause its a waste. Save up cause its quite an investment

**M302_Imola** · 12-19-2011, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by ata1979

Oh and also 4-5 ius a day, anything less is a waste of time and money. You might say I cant afford to do 4-5 ius a day when in reality if your gonna do HGH you cant afford to do less then 4-5 ius cause its a waste. Save up cause its quite an investment

Although I agree with you for the most part, I'm only running 2IU of pharma grade GH right now and seeing some nice results. I will note that I'm running the GH in conjunction with peptides so in reality I'm taking in well over 2IU's GH with the combo. I feel like GH + peptides is a much more economical way to get more bang for your buck.

**DesPr8** · 12-20-2011, 11:53 PM

I've been running 5ius of blue tops and as far as I can tell it hasn't really changed much but it made me hungry, horny and hairy. I had all the side effects and I know that a lot of the Chinese stuff mimic the side effects. Hgh for me at the moment is out my price range, and even the cheaper Asian hgh is costing too much at 5iu's a day. I would like to try pharm grade at some point but for now i'm going to do my very first cycle of test E. I choose hgh in fear of side effects because there next to nothing compared to AAS. But after much thought I decided HGH was not gonna give me what I wanted in a short time frame because hgh is about being consistent with it daily for months. So instead I'm going for a clen cycle followed by a 12 week cycle of test to get the results I want. All I wanted was to lose as much fat as possible and gain strength and from what I can tell the hgh was helping my knee injury but not giving me any extra strength.