Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
intex
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
boslabs1
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
monster210x65
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
DeFiant
UGFREAK-banner-PM
STADAPM
yms-GIF-210x65-SB
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
wuhan2
dpharma
marathon
zzsttmy
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
azteca
crewguru
advertise1x
advertise1x
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

GH and Tumor/cancer growth

Nssca

Active member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 5, 2002
Messages
1,570
will usage of HGH cause an increase in tumor growth or cancer advancing.
A friend asked me this question...he had a tumor removed a few years ago and was worried that it would cause more growth if all the tumor was not removed...
Thanks.
 
My doctor told me that taking GH will not cause cancer, HOWEVER, if you already have a pre-cancerous tumor it could cause it to become cancerous much more quickly. Also it will cause an already existing tumor to grow much faster...........

MIke
 
will usage of HGH cause an increase in tumor growth or cancer advancing.
A friend asked me this question...he had a tumor removed a few years ago and was worried that it would cause more growth if all the tumor was not removed...
Thanks.

In my opinion if I had a previous tumor I would not administer growth factors.
 
In my opinion if I had a previous tumor I would not administer growth factors.

I'm glad that I read this thread, but here is another question, I am asking for a reason too.

What if the person had a tumor over 40 years ago, about the size of a jumbo egg removed from their brain stem, but went through all the treatments, and had several CAT scans done after that, etc.

Would this still apply, or would that be a pretty safe amount of time to wait? This is someone that I know personally looking to get hGH treatment from a longevity clinic, but that issue didn't even come up with them.
 
I wouldnt take the risk,for what?-to get leaner?,you can use AAS without that worrie and with a good diet you can get as close to your goal as you would with GH.Unless you are trying to turn pro and have the genetics to do it.
 
I wouldnt take the risk,for what?-to get leaner?,you can use AAS without that worrie and with a good diet you can get as close to your goal as you would with GH.Unless you are trying to turn pro and have the genetics to do it.

First of all, nobody's turning pro here, I was simply asking about a person that is close to 50, and a woman at that. She has arthritis problems and wants the anti-aging benefits.

I would think that GH is A LOT more safe than AAS, in that scenerio, don't you?

Second of all, I just don't see what it is about gh that people think is such big deal?

Everyone thinks that it's such a big risk and whenever they talk about an up and comming national level guy, they always have to throw in how they've never even touched gh and act is if they are Fucking Ghandi because of that.

I think that AAS make a much more substantial and noticeable change in the physique and in a much shorter amount of time than gh does.

About the only risk that GH has over AAS is that of going broke.

I really don't see what the risks are about, maybe I'm missing something or maybe you're still thinking about the old gh that was extracted from the pituitary glands of cadavers.

I may be way off on this, but that's my opinion and don't mean any disrespect, so I hope this post doesn't come across as such.
 
cancer is rapidly deviding cells.

GH enduces hyperplasia...cell dividing.

hmmmm, If she has cancer NO WAY. IF she had it and had been treated and all is clear...I would have to say very tough call...I would not play that game with my life.

Had blood work done and no signs of cancer...had CT scans and MRI's, and all look good, and never had cancer...sure.
 
It is just easier to say that if I had cancer previously I'd be wary.

Some doctors may be willing to prescribe a replacement level of GH to older patients if they have been completely cancer free for 5 years.

Forty years is a long time to be cancer free. So these types of things are something that can not be answered and definitive advise should not be offered.

There is a journal write-up or case study where anti-aging doses of GH in an aged male were directly attributable to his development of prostate cancer.

Designbuilt, I can tell by your response that you do need a deep education on this subject and I am too tired to give it to you. But I'll try a little bit.

Certain tumors hi-jack the cellular machinery and secrete GH or IGF-1 and use it to grow and break existing boundaries into other tissue. The cutting edge research is in antagonists for GH, for GHRH, for IGF-1.

What they found is that designing highly specific ligands that bind to GH-receptors in the cancerous tissue in such a way as to block them, results in tumor shrinkage. They are taking away the tumors ability to grow...

Often the tumor shrinks to such a degree that chemotherapy can then be used to eliminate the cancer. These two therapies have proven very effective in all types of cancers even hard to reach lung & brain. The trick is in making delivery vehicles that will target the cancerous region rather then all the other tissue in the body.

The best clinical studies were breast cancer studies which demonstrated total remissions after the use of both therapies. This of course was for the types of cancers that behave as described herein.

Life extension studies using calorie restriction or EOD fasting has demonstrated (so many things) but one is that such states reduce circulating IGF-1. You see the part that is deadly ...the part that reduces life span ...the part that can result in cancers is the intracelluar events that slowly accumulate damage. A fuller explanation & illustrations can be found in my thread at: A complete understanding of IGF-1 & its potential influence on cancer & longevity

I see so many times a post where someone states "IGF-1 can not cause cancer it can only make it grow if it already exists". It makes people feel better to say such things I suppose...

...but a statement like that hints not one bit at understanding that their are states know as pre-cancerous states occurring routinely in our bodies. Many times a tumor suppressor such as P53 will be able to act and shutdown the cell before such states become cancerous. There are a great many factors that operate in our body...

...one theory is that cancers happen fairly routinely and our body often destroys them before they become serious.

Flooding the body with high levels of IGF-1 could conceivably give enough early fuel to these states so as to overwhelm our routine defenses.

Anyway...

IGF-1 LR3 is obviously risky....there are no concurrent binding protein checks.

IGF-1 created naturally (from GH's effects) also comes with an increase in binding proteins which will control how IGF-1 is to be used that is less risky.

Large amounts of GH which sustain high levels of IGF-1 are more dangerous then low "youthful replacement" doses. In fact high levels of circulating IGF-1 is positively correlated with cancer incidence.

Probably, natural pulse creation or increase in tone (i.e. release profile) from GHRPs & GHRH will be the least dangerous at low/mod doses.

People have to make their own decisions DS. If I had been cancer free for 40 years and was suffering from low levels of GH, I'd consider a youthful restoration for myself.

If I had a tumor within a few years & had a beautiful wife, then no I would not risk it but if my wife weren't too pretty, weren't too friendly and just plain weren't... I might consider huge doses of EVERYTHING. :foo:-smil

* Ooops I just read mikeheavypecs post which said some of what I just said. Sorry Mike... good post. I wish I could learn to answer questions in two lines. :D
 
Very good information and it gave me a lot to think about.
I will pass this on to my friend. But yes, we are talking 1-2 IU's or whatever the longevity clinics prescribe, besides, if she brings this up, it would probably make them aware and perhaps they would keep their eyes open for any sign of this type of reaction if that's even possible.

I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my question, and to the original poster, I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but I think that my question was within the scope of the original question.

Thanks again
 

Staff online

  • Big A
    IFBB PRO/NPC JUDGE/Administrator

Forum statistics

Total page views
576,032,160
Threads
138,438
Messages
2,856,743
Members
161,439
Latest member
aufnass
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
yourdailyvitamins
Prowrist straps store banner
yourrawmaterials
3
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
aqpharma
yms-GIF-210x131-Banne-B
hulabs
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
volartek
Keytech banner
thc
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
YMS-210x131-V02
Back
Top