gh injections

bgmke7 · Aug 15, 2002

ok, i need some other input on this.i just read that injecting gh "iv" instead of subq is much better.now is this crazy or is there some truth to this?

Chuck999 · Aug 15, 2002

Been on gh for several years, and thats news to me. Personally I wouldn't try it IV without a lot more info.

Big A · Aug 15, 2002

I only know of one person that did that. He was a druggie, so thaought he would like it more if he shot the GH IV. He said that the veins over his ENTIRE body would burn like hell. He did grow though LOL

bgmke7 · Aug 16, 2002

ok, this is from animals board.i thought it might be some good reading to some of you.i definitly dont like the idea of iv injections but if it works alot better then i might consider it.

Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 1996 Sep;45(3):333-9

Bioavailability and bioactivity of intravenous vs subcutaneous infusion of growth hormone in GH-deficient patients.

Laursen T, Moller J, Jorgensen JO, Orskov H, Christiansen JS.

Medical Department M (Diabetes and Endocrinology), Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.

OBJECTIVE: The bioavailability of GH immunoreactive serum concentrations is reduced following subcutaneous (s.c.) as compared with intravenous (i.v.) administration. Whether this difference also translates into a different biological activity remains to be investigated. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the short-term metabolic effects of GH following i.v. and s.c. delivery. DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS: In a cross-over design 10 GH-deficient patients were randomized to receive GH (0.03 microgram (0.1 mU/kg/min) as a continuous i.v. or s.c. infusion for 39 hours on two different occasions. Preceding each study GH therapy was discontinued for 5 days. Serum profiles of GH, IGF-I, IGF-II, IGF binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), insulin, glucose and non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) were recorded during the studies. Serum GH was measured by a polyclonal radio-immunoassay (RIA) and by a double monoclonal immunofluorimetric assay (DELFIA). RESULTS: Higher mean integrated values (AUC) of serum GH (mU/l) were obtained with i.v. GH delivery [47.4 +/- 5.1 (i.v.), 33.3 +/- 3.0 (s.c.), P < 0.05]. The two GH assays showed qualitatively similar results, but higher mean GH concentrations were measured by RIA following both s.c. (P < 0.001) and i.v. infusion (P < 0.001). Serum IGF-I levels displayed different patterns following i.v. and s.c. GH infusion (P < 0.05 by ANOVA) and mean IGF-I levels (micrograms/l) were lower following s.c. GH infusion [159.5 +/- 21.8 (s.c.), 185.2 +/- 27.7 (i.v.), P = 0.002]. Serum IGF-II levels were unaffected by short-term GH treatment and by the route of GH administration. Serum IGFBP-3 levels increased in response to GH administration (P < 0.001), irrespective of route (P = 0.76). The IGF-I/IGFBP-3 molar ratio increased significantly following GH administration (P < 0.001), and a higher ratio was obtained following i.v. infusion (P < 0.005). Subcutaneous GH infusion resulted in significantly lower mean levels of serum NEFA (P < 0.02), whereas similar mean levels of serum insulin (P = 0.54), blood glucose (P = 0.24), energy expenditure (P = 0.13), and respiratory exchange ratio (P = 0.09) were observed on the two occasions. CONCLUSIONS: A reduced bioavailability of s.c. as compared with i.v. administered GH has been recorded with two independent GH assays, and this was also accompanied by a significant, albeit modest, reduction in biological activity.

mike man · Aug 16, 2002

bgmke7

Now this a diluted version of gh in a glucose solution, right? If that is the case, then the common user probably couldn't just "mainline" the gh and expect no troubles whatsoever could they?
I mean, these studies are very meticulous and backed by plenty of medical dr's reseach and the results are there and they could be possible under the right conditions. But some guys may not be able to interpret that info very well and possibly screw themselves up.
Hey BigA, the guy you're referring to, are you sure he mainline his gh? If so, I give props to a madman! lol. Or druggie as you delicately put it. lol.

Big A · Aug 17, 2002

Druggie he is/was - he's probably dead by now.

Armageddon · Aug 17, 2002

There is another post on A's board about this and guys who are trying it. There was a statement about someone who was getting gains from subq but went to I V and added 9lbs in 2 weeks. Without changing anything around.

kronium · Aug 18, 2002

Just do it IM. Easier than SubQ and I swear it gives localized effects.

instynct999 · Aug 18, 2002

how the F is GH going to give localized muscle hypertrophy effects as that is largely responsible due to the IGF-1 created by liver metabolism

mike man · Aug 19, 2002

Well

I'll just have to check animals board out. Do you have a thread title or anything to narrow the search down?

kronium · Aug 19, 2002

instynct999 said:
how the F is GH going to give localized muscle hypertrophy effects as that is largely responsible due to the IGF-1 created by liver metabolism

Do a year worth of injections in the same muscle, and you will see localized growth. I did this the first year I took growth, and my left calf went to from a negative one inch to a positive one inch over my right calf. The left calf is even more defined now than the right. I do calf injections because this is the easiest place for me, and pretty much the only muscle I'm not injecting oil in!

instynct999 · Aug 19, 2002

well cool for you bro, but i would not even expect IGF-1 to have that substantial a localized effect let alone GH

one anecdotal does not science make

show me research or mechanisms anyone for this

still interesting and not discounting the possibilility