Difference in good generic HGH and the expensive stuff

[Matsuo Munefusa]

whats you igfLR3 and gh pinning timing like around training. I love the combo as well, but always interested in others protocols

I don’t recommend lr3 at all. I used to like it but to be honest I’ve seen better results long term with GH.

But when I did it I would just inject everything in the morning at same time to make sure I didn’t miss a dose of either. I think it does not matter when you take it. But missing a dose definitely has a negative impact on a run. Slight negative.

 

[Performance Based]

I run Omnitrope at 2IU per day, and pharma grade igf-1 at 20mcg per day.

I am not able to utilize UGL items due to work and personal reasons so have no comparison. My endo has me on

200mg test per week, 200mg nandralone per week, 2IU of HGH daily and 20IU of IGF-1 daily

I hate to say it but the whole if its' dosed properly arguement it doesn't matter if its' UGL or pharma doesn't seem right. I am on a pretty high carb diet and can definitely feel hypo from 20IU of IGF if I don't time my meal properly. In regards to the GH to be frank it really isn't worth the cost, I have a non profit that covers it though so why not...

It is 2,600 for a two month supply. I have leaned up maybe 2-3% since I started taking it but it seems to be more correlated to the IGF than the GH.

That being said, GH has been shown to do wonders for TBI and joint issues so that is my main cause for taking.

Sorry for the un-organized post, multi tasking poorly at the moment.

 

[F350]

That's interesting. I've believe it's the first time I've read that opinion. If I may ask, how do you use it (dose, situation) and for long before taking a break?

not sure if your talking about Lr3 or GH so Ill answer what I do. I have tried a bunch of dif ways and honestly i cant tell a huge dif when it comes to GH dosing times but IGF I get crazy pumps from so here is what I do:
1.5IU GH in am
80mcg LR3 pre workout. No idea if bilateral actaully makes a dif but I do it based on the small chance it does.
3 IU GH in the evening.
I have done my GH all in one dose, pre workout, all at night etc etc and I cant tell a dif though I can tell its legit from a well know provider on here.

MY IGF comes from USA compound pharmacies. Not research sites.

 

[F350]

I don’t recommend lr3 at all. I used to like it but to be honest I’ve seen better results long term with GH.

But when I did it I would just inject everything in the morning at same time to make sure I didn’t miss a dose of either. I think it does not matter when you take it. But missing a dose definitely has a negative impact on a run. Slight negative.

thats surprising. Im exactly the opposite. I notice good LR3 in 2-3 days max. GH I just take because its good for you and plenty of science backing it.

 

[F350]

I'd rather become a vegan and do yoga instead of lifting than inj IGF-1 LR3/DES =) Kidding.
Lr3/DES are not bioidentical hormones, with no clinical data, everything we know about the use of this chemicals in vivo is bro-science, these peptides have been always marketed for lab use (petri-dish studies etc). Whoever say the peptides perform better vs Recombinant Human IGF-1 can't back it up with any REAL clinical/scientific data. There's no info what receptor LR3/DES bind to, it's safety, will LR3/DES trigger immunogenicity (antibodies) etc. HGH or Recombinant Human IGF-1 have been on the market and scientific scene for many years and their side effects and mechanism of action is known.
We all do whatever we want with our body as at the end of the day we are the ones who deal with the consequences. Just my thoughts.

RS

Your entitled to your opinion and I dont have time to sit here all day and go back and forth but there is LR3 you can buy from the pharmacy's in the USA with prescription. There is alot of info on binding (my buddy ran the research studies of LR3/Insulin etc at a large university and wrote a 600 page dissertation on it- not bro science. He has his PhD).
You are right. There is alot more data on GH and studies because it has big pharmas backing to perform them. Its in there best interest to put out data.

There is a brand of IGF (i dont recall if its des or what) for dwarfism in the USA and its $10,000 per mg lol. I have seen it with my own eyes in the pharmacy portal of available meds.
At the end of the day the goal is to boost IGF levels, heal, increase lean muscle, lower BF etc. Both meds do it. Lr3 is much faster to notice and imo has a more anabolic effect. However, GH has more long term data backing its safety so we can sit here all day debating (which I dont have time to do) but as you said it all is based on risk to reward. Used in remotely reasonable moderation both are fantastic options and if money is not of concern go for brand so you do know what you are getting.
We dont have enough evidence and studies to compare facts on generic versus brand GH so it will essentially boil down to opinion over evidence - my answer to the OP.

 

[F350]

With the Big pharm. HGH you are confident they know how to produce quality HGH, with "generic" HGH you expect them to know that.
Some info on what to look for when you choose your HGH from a not "FDA" approved laboratory

Qore Pharm laboratory :: News :: How to Produce the World’s Best Human Growth Hormone

qorepharm.com

Holy shit. Your the first person I have ever seen that knows about gene folding and it coming back from testing effective though its worthless when that happens. My post about my Doctor buddy who ran the testing at a university on IGF/Insulin explained that to me years ago and it made alot of sense. How can something come back testing essentially perfect but in reality its about as effective as drywall dust? This happens all the time with both GH/peptides he tested from all over the place.

Oh, I forgot to mention he did synthesize GH and Insulin for pfizer. He told me about all the GH theyd throw in the incinerator if it didnt come back spot on during testing. It brought a tear to my eye to hear but that right there is the #1 difference between Generic GH and Brand (my opinion only). Generic would have it boxed and ready for shipping most of the time because 1 they dont have access to the proper testing (or did not in the past) and 2 many (not all) are all about the dollar.

Very glad you shared that.

 

[F350]

There is a sponsor on here who sells brands (genos, omni, norditropin etc) and Im wondering if anyone has actually tried them for themselves? GH is so highly counter fitted that anytime a brand of GH pops up and the price is too good to be true its always scared me away. Just wondering if anyone has ordered and can verify legitmacy assuming you know who im speaking of?

 

[roidsource]

Your entitled to your opinion and I dont have time to sit here all day and go back and forth but there is LR3 you can buy from the pharmacy's in the USA with prescription. There is alot of info on binding (my buddy ran the research studies of LR3/Insulin etc at a large university and wrote a 600 page dissertation on it- not bro science. He has his PhD).
You are right. There is alot more data on GH and studies because it has big pharmas backing to perform them. Its in there best interest to put out data.

There is a brand of IGF (i dont recall if its des or what) for dwarfism in the USA and its $10,000 per mg lol. I have seen it with my own eyes in the pharmacy portal of available meds.
At the end of the day the goal is to boost IGF levels, heal, increase lean muscle, lower BF etc. Both meds do it. Lr3 is much faster to notice and imo has a more anabolic effect. However, GH has more long term data backing its safety so we can sit here all day debating (which I dont have time to do) but as you said it all is based on risk to reward. Used in remotely reasonable moderation both are fantastic options and if money is not of concern go for brand so you do know what you are getting.
We dont have enough evidence and studies to compare facts on generic versus brand GH so it will essentially boil down to opinion over evidence - my answer to the OP.

There're peptides for lab studies : Lr3/Des and there're Recombinant Human IGF-1 that you can get from the pharmacy : Increlex, Iplex. 2 very different things, I believe when you said you can buy Lr3 from the pharmacy, you meant RH IGF-1 (Increlex or Iplex) as Lr3 can't be prescribed and there's no Lr3/Des Rx med. This is a common mistake, people simply believe Lr3/Des peptides is just a more affordable or "more potent" version of the RH IGF-1, this myth has been around for years and you can often see peptide vendors referring to clinical data done on Recombinant Human IGF-1 in their write-ups to Lr3/Des.
At the end of the day our health matters the most and injecting something that can make your body to produce antibodies will never outweigh a good pump in the gym. I'm talking about the LR3/Des right now.

 

[F350]

There're peptides for lab studies : Lr3/Des and there're Recombinant Human IGF-1 that you can get from the pharmacy : Increlex, Iplex. 2 very different things, I believe when you said you can buy Lr3 from the pharmacy, you meant RH IGF-1 (Increlex or Iplex) as Lr3 can't be prescribed and there's no Lr3/Des Rx med. This is a common mistake, people simply believe Lr3/Des peptides is just a more affordable or "more potent" version of the RH IGF-1, this myth has been around for years and you can often see peptide vendors referring to clinical data done on Recombinant Human IGF-1 in their write-ups to Lr3/Des.
At the end of the day our health matters the most and injecting something that can make your body to produce antibodies will never outweigh a good pump in the gym. I'm talking about the LR3/Des right now.

Increlex is correct. That is the name I could not recall that was $10k/mg.
What I get from the pharmacy is compounded LR3-IGF1. I cant justify Increlex's cost no matter how good it is at this moment.
So if LR3 is potentially danagerous because its a foreign substance (IGF with a long chain making its half life drastically longer) then why is Test cyp ok for example? Test cyp is a foreign substance because our body does not create that cypionate ester when we produce testosterone? Essentially we are taking one bio identical hormone/molecule and adding to it in order to increase its half life in our blood stream. You cant say one is ok but the other is not.
The problem is we can debate this all day and no one will win. Im just trying to view both sides of the puzzle here.
You are correct what we put in our bodies is very important for long term health. I do fully agree with you on that.

 

[roidsource]

"Thought thrives on conflict" I'm not here to prove my point, I'm learning just like many of us here.
Increlex is expensive compared to HGH, it may be cheaper in EU though, but definitely not 10k/mg, I believe a few k for 40 mg (that's if you have a prescription).

Can we view LR3/Des as we view esterified testosterone? Absolutely not. How much do we know about this particular Test ester? A lot, it's been on the market for 60 + years, it's FDA approved and prescribed to TRT patients etc. Scientists know what receptors it binds to, it's half life and potential side effects. On the opposite side, is there're ANY clinical data available for LR3/Des? No. It's mechanism of action in the human body? Unknown.
"LONG®R3 IGF-I GMP Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing" Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing - That's Sigma Aldrich Brochure on Repligen (LR3).

"What I get from the pharmacy is compounded LR3-IGF1" So you basically saying there's an American doc who prescribed you LR3 and there's a pharmacy that carries it? Interesting, as LR3 was never approved for human use.

RS

 

[F350]

"Thought thrives on conflict" I'm not here to prove my point, I'm learning just like many of us here.
Increlex is expensive compared to HGH, it may be cheaper in EU though, but definitely not 10k/mg, I believe a few k for 40 mg (that's if you have a prescription).

Can we view LR3/Des as we view esterified testosterone? Absolutely not. How much do we know about this particular Test ester? A lot, it's been on the market for 60 + years, it's FDA approved and prescribed to TRT patients etc. Scientists know what receptors it binds to, it's half life and potential side effects. On the opposite side, is there're ANY clinical data available for LR3/Des? No. It's mechanism of action in the human body? Unknown.
"LONG®R3 IGF-I GMP Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing" Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing - That's Sigma Aldrich Brochure on Repligen (LR3).

"What I get from the pharmacy is compounded LR3-IGF1" So you basically saying there's an American doc who prescribed you LR3 and there's a pharmacy that carries it? Interesting, as LR3 was never approved for human use.

RS

Yea, quite a few docs who will RX it actually and I can name no less than 4 pharms off the top of my head that sell RX LR3-IGF1. I dont want to openly post the names but if curious I can show you.

 

[F350]

"Thought thrives on conflict" I'm not here to prove my point, I'm learning just like many of us here.
Increlex is expensive compared to HGH, it may be cheaper in EU though, but definitely not 10k/mg, I believe a few k for 40 mg (that's if you have a prescription).

Can we view LR3/Des as we view esterified testosterone? Absolutely not. How much do we know about this particular Test ester? A lot, it's been on the market for 60 + years, it's FDA approved and prescribed to TRT patients etc. Scientists know what receptors it binds to, it's half life and potential side effects. On the opposite side, is there're ANY clinical data available for LR3/Des? No. It's mechanism of action in the human body? Unknown.
"LONG®R3 IGF-I GMP Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing" Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing - That's Sigma Aldrich Brochure on Repligen (LR3).

"What I get from the pharmacy is compounded LR3-IGF1" So you basically saying there's an American doc who prescribed you LR3 and there's a pharmacy that carries it? Interesting, as LR3 was never approved for human use.

RS

I forgot to touch on the point I dont think the FDA's approval is worth the paper its printed on. How many drugs do they approve that are horrendous for people? Its about money for them. Shit, they let oxy be produced and advertised/labeled as "Less addictive".

I cant answer all of your questions above re the receptors etc though I do believe (evidence based not opinion and i will look for the info) that it attaches to the same receptors as IGF1.
If I can get my buddy to send me some info when he has spare time I will regarding some of the above "unknowns". It may be a bit until he has time.

 

[F350]

"Thought thrives on conflict" I'm not here to prove my point, I'm learning just like many of us here.
Increlex is expensive compared to HGH, it may be cheaper in EU though, but definitely not 10k/mg, I believe a few k for 40 mg (that's if you have a prescription).

Can we view LR3/Des as we view esterified testosterone? Absolutely not. How much do we know about this particular Test ester? A lot, it's been on the market for 60 + years, it's FDA approved and prescribed to TRT patients etc. Scientists know what receptors it binds to, it's half life and potential side effects. On the opposite side, is there're ANY clinical data available for LR3/Des? No. It's mechanism of action in the human body? Unknown.
"LONG®R3 IGF-I GMP Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing" Growth Factor Additive for Cell Culture Manufacturing - That's Sigma Aldrich Brochure on Repligen (LR3).

"What I get from the pharmacy is compounded LR3-IGF1" So you basically saying there's an American doc who prescribed you LR3 and there's a pharmacy that carries it? Interesting, as LR3 was never approved for human use.

RS

I just checked with the pharmacy. The Increlex price I had was incorrect however not exactly cheap at the same time:
$51,228.14 for 40ML. 10mg/ml. Thats cash pay. I have no idea how it would work with insurance. I dont work with them nor do I know if theyd even cover it.

 

[roidsource]

I just checked with the pharmacy. The Increlex price I had was incorrect however not exactly cheap at the same time:
$51,228.14 for 40ML. 10mg/ml. Thats cash pay. I have no idea how it would work with insurance. I dont work with them nor do I know if theyd even cover it.

40 ml = 400 mg? which is $120/mg? Not cheap for sure, but it's not 10k/mg either.

 

[roidsource]

I forgot to touch on the point I dont think the FDA's approval is worth the paper its printed on. How many drugs do they approve that are horrendous for people? Its about money for them. Shit, they let oxy be produced and advertised/labeled as "Less addictive".

I cant answer all of your questions above re the receptors etc though I do believe (evidence based not opinion and i will look for the info) that it attaches to the same receptors as IGF1.
If I can get my buddy to send me some info when he has spare time I will regarding some of the above "unknowns". It may be a bit until he has time.

I think FDA is good, at least we have a regulator protecting patients from pseudoscientific medications.
I googled LR3 FDA, this link was on the 1st page

Tailor Made Compounding LLC - 594743 - 04/01/2020

Compounding Pharmacy/Adulterated Drug Products

www.fda.gov

"For example, the investigators noted that your firm compounded drug products using Follistatin, GHRP-2, GHRP-6, Endurobal, AOD 9604, BPC 157, Bremelanotide (PT-141), Cerebrolysin, DSIP, Epitalon, GHK-Cu, IGF1-LR3, Ipamorelin, LL-37, Melanotan II, PEG-MGF, Selank, Semax, CJC 1295, SARMS, LGD-4033, and MK 677. Drug products compounded using these bulk drug substances are not eligible for the exemptions provided by section 503A(a) because they are not the subject of an applicable USP or NF monograph, are not a component of an FDA-approved human drug, and do not appear on the 503A bulks list."

And when I hear that there's a doc who used his provider # to prescribe something that can't be prescribed, it makes me really curious. FDA clearly says : "LR3 isn't a component of an FDA approved human drug".

 

[roidsource]

IGF-1 is bound to six IGF binding proteins, with > 80% bound as a complex with IGFBP-3 and an acid-labile subunit.

Most studies concerning the effects of IGF-1 derivatives have been carried out in animal models, with little to no data available for humans.

IGF-I variants which bind poorly to IGF-binding proteins show more potent and prolonged hypoglycaemic action than native IGF-I in pigs and marmoset monkeys

(DES - LR3)

https://www.researchgate.net/public...han_native_IGF-I_in_pigs_and_marmoset_monkeys

 

[roidsource]

This is gonna be my last post in the thread related to LR3 reagent

Podcasts | Pandora

Discover your favorite Podcasts from a variety of categories including Daily News, Music, Business, True Crime, Comedy, Politics and more. Listen to Podcasts on Pandora.

www.stitcher.com

Patrick Arnold: I think the biggest waste of money is this IGF LR3.

Tim Ferriss: Mm-hmm. Can you explain what that is?

Patrick Arnold: Well, IGF – Tim Ferriss: It's [inaudible] growth factor, but LR3, I've actually never heard of. I've never heard those three letters.

Patrick Arnold: Okay. Well, I'll make it brief. IGF1 is the most – it's a big anabolic hormone in your body. When you take growth hormone, pretty much all the anabolic activity that's growth hormone manifests itself through is IGF1, that's made in the liver. You take growth hormone, there's growth hormone receptors in the liver. They get turned on. Your liver pumps out IGF1. IGF1 goes out. That's what makes your bones grow, your ligaments grow and whatnot. If you're young enough, maybe your muscles too. Now back in the '90s, there was no IGF1, regular IGF1 available. What was available was this derivative, or this analog of IGF1 that had an amino acid taken off to allow it to not bind to what are known as IGF1 binding proteins. The reason why they did that was because it was meant for petri dish, in vitro studies, and they wanted the IGF1 to be free to do exactly what it had to do, and not worry about binding to stuff, and then it would throw the experiment off or whatever. So this stuff was never meant for humans. But it was available, so people were like, "Oh, it's the best IGF1 because it doesn't bind to binding proteins," and people were taking it. The whole thing is the fact that it doesn't bind to these binding proteins, means that when you shoot it in your body, your body breaks it down almost immediately because the way your body uses IGF1, it actually has to bind to something called IGF1 binding protein 3. Which titrates it, extends its half-life, delivers it to the tissues at the right time and whatnot. So people are still stuck under this illusion that this in vitro version of IGF1, which is cheap, still works. By now, people are not really talking about it because enough people have tried it and seeing it doesn't do anything. But it's still in people's arsenal for some reason.

Tim Ferriss: The IGF LR3?

Patrick Arnold: IGF – yeah, LR3. Yup.


P.S. There's Recombinant Human IGF-1 (bioidentical to Human IGF-1) and LR3/DES. Lr3/DES is not for human use (no clinical data on it's safety nor any scientific data on how it may boost your physical performance).

 

[cmryan]

not sure if your talking about Lr3 or GH so Ill answer what I do. I have tried a bunch of dif ways and honestly i cant tell a huge dif when it comes to GH dosing times but IGF I get crazy pumps from so here is what I do:
1.5IU GH in am
80mcg LR3 pre workout. No idea if bilateral actaully makes a dif but I do it based on the small chance it does.
3 IU GH in the evening.
I have done my GH all in one dose, pre workout, all at night etc etc and I cant tell a dif though I can tell its legit from a well know provider on here.

MY IGF comes from USA compound pharmacies. Not research sites.

Thank you man. I was asking about your use of LR3.

 

[F350]

I think FDA is good, at least we have a regulator protecting patients from pseudoscientific medications.
I googled LR3 FDA, this link was on the 1st page

Tailor Made Compounding LLC - 594743 - 04/01/2020

Compounding Pharmacy/Adulterated Drug Products

www.fda.gov

"For example, the investigators noted that your firm compounded drug products using Follistatin, GHRP-2, GHRP-6, Endurobal, AOD 9604, BPC 157, Bremelanotide (PT-141), Cerebrolysin, DSIP, Epitalon, GHK-Cu, IGF1-LR3, Ipamorelin, LL-37, Melanotan II, PEG-MGF, Selank, Semax, CJC 1295, SARMS, LGD-4033, and MK 677. Drug products compounded using these bulk drug substances are not eligible for the exemptions provided by section 503A(a) because they are not the subject of an applicable USP or NF monograph, are not a component of an FDA-approved human drug, and do not appear on the 503A bulks list."

And when I hear that there's a doc who used his provider # to prescribe something that can't be prescribed, it makes me really curious. FDA clearly says : "LR3 isn't a component of an FDA approved human drug".

That pharmacy will sell anything. There in deep shit right now for a huge horse doping scandal but they did originally sell it before the feds came in and cleaned out most of there inventory. My guess is there will be a large case in the next 2-3 years against them. There is so much stuff they have done well outside the gray area that it will take that long to go through all the docs to build a case.

 

[F350]

I think FDA is good, at least we have a regulator protecting patients from pseudoscientific medications.
I googled LR3 FDA, this link was on the 1st page

Tailor Made Compounding LLC - 594743 - 04/01/2020

Compounding Pharmacy/Adulterated Drug Products

www.fda.gov

"For example, the investigators noted that your firm compounded drug products using Follistatin, GHRP-2, GHRP-6, Endurobal, AOD 9604, BPC 157, Bremelanotide (PT-141), Cerebrolysin, DSIP, Epitalon, GHK-Cu, IGF1-LR3, Ipamorelin, LL-37, Melanotan II, PEG-MGF, Selank, Semax, CJC 1295, SARMS, LGD-4033, and MK 677. Drug products compounded using these bulk drug substances are not eligible for the exemptions provided by section 503A(a) because they are not the subject of an applicable USP or NF monograph, are not a component of an FDA-approved human drug, and do not appear on the 503A bulks list."

And when I hear that there's a doc who used his provider # to prescribe something that can't be prescribed, it makes me really curious. FDA clearly says : "LR3 isn't a component of an FDA approved human drug".

Not all drugs are FDA approved. Right now there is a "do not compound" list which is pretty self explanatory. If its not on that list and the FDA approved raw material supplier sells it then its going on right now all over.
There are tons of peptides out that are not FDA approved but are being prescribed by physicians through compound pharmacies. Here are a few (I cant say all of these are not FDA approved- I need to research which are and are not. Im just saying here is what is coming from pharmacies for human use)
GHRP 6/2
Sermorelin
BPC-157
Thymosin Beta 4
Thymosin Alpha 1
LR3-IGF1
PT-141
IPAM
MK-677
there are tons upon tons more too. I know not everyone one of those is FDA approved (pt-141 I believe just got approved last year) but they are available.
This is my last post on it as well. I didnt mean to redirect the thread off topic from the OP original intent.