Best way to dose 4iu HGH?
Right now its 2iu PWO and 2iu before bed.
Opinions please?
Thanks.
What’s goal bud
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Assuming the P stands for pre, I think that's the best way to do it.Best way to dose 4iu HGH?
Right now its 2iu PWO and 2iu before bed.
Opinions please?
Thanks.
Muscle growth... And fat loss
Really? I'm not aware of any research that shows GH builds muscle with any kind of dosing scheme. Nor have I seen any research that would suggest eod dosing schemes have any benefit whatsoever. So please share.8iu 3 x a week on training days show either pre gym or pre bed in my opinion will give more of a swing to muscle building with fat loss. There is science to show this to
If wanting a more even split muscle gain to fat loss 6iu training days pre gym or ore bed presuming you train 5 days a week
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
in terms of IGF-1 levels it may not make a big difference. But GH also has direct effects on adipocytes, tenocytes (By increasing local MGF levels), etc. Given the decreasing marginal returns of GH bolus dosing, the relatively short-lived effect of GH on fat tissue, and the acute nature of MGF response post exercise, I would argue that more frequent (i.e. daily or twice daily) GH dosing is superior in terms of 'fat burning' and tendon health.I've seen probably 5 different GH protocols and timings from some very smart and accomplished guys in the industry.
All I could conclude at the end of the day is that as long as you get it in, and get it in consistently to keep those igf levels elevated, you're good. The rest of the stuff is cannon fodder.
I know Dorian found the EOD protocol better and JM does the PostWO protocol (more for insulin resistance reasons). But I don't think any of their physiques would look any different at the end of the day had they done it differently.
A bolus dose a few times a week like hilly stated has the best advantage of convenience imo which after you've been doing it for a while becomes more important than the other stuff lol; it'll also keep you more insulin sensitive to a degree.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Really? I'm not aware of any research that shows GH builds muscle with any kind of dosing scheme. Nor have I seen any research that would suggest eod dosing schemes have any benefit whatsoever. So please share.
in terms of IGF-1 levels it may not make a big difference. But GH also has direct effects on adipocytes, tenocytes (By increasing local MGF levels), etc. Given the decreasing marginal returns of GH bolus dosing, the relatively short-lived effect of GH on fat tissue, and the acute nature of MGF response post exercise, I would argue that more frequent (i.e. daily or twice daily) GH dosing is superior in terms of 'fat burning' and tendon health.
Though I would agree that the more frequent the GH dosing, the more likely are issues with insulin resistance. So for those who struggle with keeping fasted blood glucose (or more relaibly, HbA1c) down while on GH, and are unable to control it with diet, supps, cardio, etc., less frequent dosing may indeed be preferred. As pointed out above, in terms of 'muscle building', based on theory there is no reason to expect that less frequent dosing is superior, nor is there any empirical evidence to this effect.
Really? I'm not aware of any research that shows GH builds muscle with any kind of dosing scheme. Nor have I seen any research that would suggest eod dosing schemes have any benefit whatsoever. So please share.
Could not find it. It's important to note though that increases in FFM do not mean muscle growth. Instead, it reflects increases in water retention and increases in connective tissue mass (and in medium-term, organ weight). SeeThere is a study done showing a dose of 7-8iu GH MWF inverses FFM and reduced BF over a 8-10 week period in males aged 20-40 I think. Not sure on age.
Google will show you it I’m sure [emoji3]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Could not find it. It's important to note though that increases in FFM do not mean muscle growth. Instead, it reflects increases in water retention and increases in connective tissue mass (and in medium-term, organ weight). See
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2439518/
I'm not saying that GH has no positive effects on muscle growth at high doses in combination with AAS and heavy resistance exercise. What I am saying is that there is zero evidence to this effect from scientific studies.
Also, even if the changes in FFM were reflective of muscle growth, there are no studies to show that FFM increases more with alternate day dosing than with every day dosing. Furthermore, the few studies that do compare dosing schedules do not find significant differences in serum IGF-1 levels. Hence, this (potential) mechanism could not explain differing effects on muscle growth either.
So again, there is absolutely 0 evidence for your claim that alternate day dosing will lead to more muscle growth. If you wanna report anecdotal evidence about the subjective experience of your buddies, that's fine. Just don't pretend that there's 'science' behind your claim when it barely qualifies as broscience.
Could not find it. It's important to note though that increases in FFM do not mean muscle growth. Instead, it reflects increases in water retention and increases in connective tissue mass (and in medium-term, organ weight). See
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2439518/
I'm not saying that GH has no positive effects on muscle growth at high doses in combination with AAS and heavy resistance exercise. What I am saying is that there is zero evidence to this effect from scientific studies.
Also, even if the changes in FFM were reflective of muscle growth, there are no studies to show that FFM increases more with alternate day dosing than with every day dosing. Furthermore, the few studies that do compare dosing schedules do not find significant differences in serum IGF-1 levels. Hence, this (potential) mechanism could not explain differing effects on muscle growth either.
So again, there is absolutely 0 evidence for your claim that alternate day dosing will lead to more muscle growth. If you wanna report anecdotal evidence about the subjective experience of your buddies, that's fine. Just don't pretend that there's 'science' behind your claim when it barely qualifies as broscience.
I saw that, and it doesn't imply what you think it does. As I explained, the increase in LBM is not reflective of muscle growth. Read the 2 articles I posted.Errrmmmm
Please see the above review [emoji3]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I saw that, and it doesn't imply what you think it does. As I explained, the increase in LBM is not reflective of muscle growth. Read the 2 articles I posted.
EDIT: Jesus Christ, it's like talking to a wall. I'm gonna stop posting here before I get banned again :banghead:
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. READ THE 2 STUDIES I POSTED. YOUR REASONING MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.I believe the wall is your lack of ability to state ‘we just don’t know
LBM includes skeletal muscle bud. This is just fact.
If a resistance exercise study showed increase in LBM you would conclude it meant some form of skeletal muscle.
I don’t no why you want to debate this lol. There is evidence to suggest it increases all tissue including muscle.
That’s simply it. Nothing more nothing less lol
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100The results of studies of muscle protein synthesis, body composition, and strength in healthy young to middle aged humans tell a different tale: so far, no robust, credible study has been able to show clear effects of either medium to long term rhGH administration, alone or in combination with a variety of training protocols or anabolic steroids, on muscle protein synthesis, mass, or strength.
There are a number of ways in which an effect of GH on muscle growth may be detected. These include measurement of lean body mass by densitometry or by dual x ray absorptiometry. As the rate of muscle protein turnover is relatively slow, it is relatively difficult to detect increases in muscle mass per se over periods shorter than three months using such static techniques, even if the rate of muscle growth is doubled. Measuring the rate of protein synthesis as the rate of incorporation of amino acids labelled with stable isotopes into muscle rather than simply the changes in muscle mass between two points is a much more sensitive method for determining the response of muscle. When this has been done in young healthy adults, no effect on muscle protein synthesis (or indeed on muscle mass measured by other means) has been detected.50 Furthermore, no effect has been detected in body builders and weightlifters.51,52 Thus, at the very least, it appears that the evidence for a sustained anabolic effect of rhGH on muscle mass in normal healthy young men, trained or untrained, is extremely slim.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100It is possible that some workers have confused decreases in fat mass with increases in lean body mass, or have assumed muscle and lean body mass are equivalent. It may also be that rhGH administration causes increases in body water and connective tissue, which are registered as alterations in lean body mass.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100Despite the observations of an effect of GH and IGF-I on protein synthesis, the fact remains that gains in muscle mass are not observed in healthy subjects after long-term GH administration so any benefits are unlikely to be due to muscle mass gains. In the GH plus exercise groups, circulating IGF-I levels and fat-free mass were consistently increased in comparison to placebo groups. Thus, it is possible to extrapolate that increasing circulating IGF-I would also be without consequence for muscle mass in healthy humans. Administration of IGF-I acutely activates muscle protein synthesis (Fryburg et al., 1995), but similarly to GH a 1-year administration did not result in increased lean body mass (Friedlander et al., 2001). The effects of GH on fat-free mass may be due to water retention, which is a known side effect of GH administration, or to an increase in soft tissue due to the stimulatory effects of GH on collagen synthesis.
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. READ THE 2 STUDIES I POSTED. YOUR REASONING MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/37/2/100
I even quoted the relevant sections of the articles to show you that this is not the case. Are you really unable to understand this very simple point? Do you know what the word evidence means? How can you be this ignorant about your own ignorance? if you think that I am babbling, then apparently you really don't have the intellectual capacity to understand my argumentation. And whether or not your protocol makes sense depends on the validity of your assumption that eod dosing leads to more muscle growth. Which I have shown to you is not the case.Yawwwnnn
No wonder you go banned.
The studies show a clear significant increase in lean body mass. This includes muscle. There is the evidence you asked for.
Most top amateur and pro utilise GH for muscle building benefits which it can occur through different pathways.
Here we are just discussing protocol.
Your babbling on about nothing mate. Arguing over nothing.
Again was this why you were banned before ?? Seems like you just like to argue.
You should try to just have a discussion. State your thoughts n opinions and why like I have done in a genuine manner. Then move on. It’s an online forum no one is here to go tit for tat lol
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk