Well, your first mistake is listening to anything that luki says with respect to health.
The notion that "bio-identical" hormones are healthier than their synthetic counterparts is patently false.
Fundamentally, if you or I had any interest in respecting nature's tightly regulated endocrine system with respect to our health we wouldn't insult that regulatory system (e.g., IGF-I declines with age probably because it promotes lifespan, that is, we need to stop growing after the pubertal growth spurt, or we'll die from diseases like cancers more quickly). Note that all of these drugs increase IGF-I (testosterone, rhGH, rhI, rhIGF-I).
Of course Test, GH, slin, IGF-I, are all highly potent anabolic agents, because growth & metabolism are some of their primary evolutionary functions. Testosterone is anabolic particularly in skeletal muscle & sex organs; GH (of which there are 2 primary endogenous isoforms in adult men, 20K & 22K -GH, while in isolation it acts generally as a catabolic or energy-releasing compound, in vivo it serves complementary functions a la IGF-I that include longitudinal & total body growth, with IGF-I existing in its various forms (not many of which are free or unbound IGF-I, but rather exist in various complexes with binding proteins & the ALS, that variously both stimulate and inhibit uptake into certain tissues).
And yet, pharmacopeia derives fantastic profits, not to mind people that use modified forms of these drugs derive fantastic benefits from, chemical modifications to these hormones that exist endogenously.
To tease out a bit the absurdity of the "bio-identical" dogma among many bros, let's look at the case of "slin" (injectable recombinant human insulin preparations). Virtually everybody seems to think "slin" is bioidentical, but only Regular Human Insulin preparations (synonymous with neutral or soluble insulin) can be fairly described as "bio-identical" with respect to chemical structure, but actually it is not "bio-identical" in its biological effects because neither its pharmacokinetics nor pharmacokinetics are exactly the same as pancreatically-secreted insulin, because injections alter its time-course in blood, affect its distribution, etc. The broader universe of "slin," i.e., rhI preparations, are modified forms of regular insulin; modified to derive greater efficacy and provide for use cases where regular human insulin are inappropriate (e.g., stably-controlled blood glucose with a once-daily injection, as with Insulin glargine or Lantus [the glargine modification reduces insulin's solubility in extracellular fluid, delaying absorption into the systemic circulation]).
Injectable testosterone formulations provide prodrugs to testosterone, only testosterone aqueous suspensions come close to being arguably "bio-identical" (but is actually not even that close, because of its bimodal pharmacokinetics due to distinct pharmacokinetic profiles inherent to the dissolution from residual solid material); RhGH provides the more anabolic of the primary GH isoforms, and not the other, or third in the case of pregnant women (there is also a placentally-secreted GH isoform); RhIGF-I is bound up by various binary, ternary, IGFBP complexes, etc, altering its biological effects (its non-naturally occurring LR3 analogue is a more anabolically potent form, but not superior per se).
I could go on... Anyway, I am really looking forward to the ruffled responses to things that I never said.
.gif "IP Gear")
