I have to say HGH has helped me a lot but I use far greater amounts than most and dose IV which makes a difference btw.
I find IGF-1 DES and lR3 completely useless. Just about all of it goes systematic.
Liver generated IGF-1 goes systematic too. Regardless of whether we're talking about DES, LR3, or normal IGF-1 produced by the liver, all of it will enter the bloodstream and attach indiscriminately to whatever IGF-1 receptor sites it happens to come in contact with.
It might help with soft tissue growth and possibly give you a big bloated gut, but who wants that?
It will attach to receptor sites in muscle as well, just like any other form of GH.
Sure it may help in pct but I think hgh would be better suited. The tenary complex (igf-bp3) may be very helpful in building muscle if taken at a high enough dose as just about all of it stays local. I believe right now its only used in children with stunted growth and is very expensive.
I am assuming by "local" you mean it will stay in the muscle it is injected into, correct? Question...if it stays local, how does it help children with stunted growth, being that it is not able to exit the injection site (muscle) and circulate throughout the body, causing skeltal growth?
I don't know of anyone who has used it but if the price comes down in the future it just might be the thing to look for.
As for the "mutation" it does exist but only a pro would desire it.
I guess it depends on how one defines the word "mutation".
Elevations of HGH cause very significant insulin resistance and gives the appearance of a big look, but is really just intramuscular fat. Intact that huge jump in weight
since 94 when Yates won the olympia has just about been fat.
I am assuming you are referring to an increase in visceral fat when you speak of Yates's waist expansion in the latter half of his career. In truth, this could and assuedly is due to multiple reasons. However, visceral fat, contrary to popular belief, is lost just as easily as subcutaneous fat and is burned off along with sub-q fat at roughly the same rate. By the time a BB'r gets down to 3-4%, it is an impossibility for him to be carrying large amounts of visceral fat in his abdominal region, as the body would draw from this resevoir of stored fat for energy long before allowing the rest of the body to reach an extremely low level of BF. In the same way, intramuscular fat stored within muscle is also burned off right along with sub-q and visceral fat, as the individual loses overall fat mass. Again, by the time a BB'r reaches a competition level of BF at 3-4%, he will have burned off any extra intramuscular fat which was previously stored in muscle tissue. The body will not reduce sub-q fat to the 3-4% range, while leaving a significantly greater percentage of IM fat present.
In addition, insulin resistance is easily avoided when using low-moderate doses of GH. A BB'r is more likley to develop insulin resistance from his eating habits and insulin use, than he is GH use...unless the dosage starts to get very high. Lastly, GH has been shown in numerous studies to "burn" abdominal fat at a greater rate than fat from other areas of the body in males.
You say that any weight gain Dorain experienced post-94' was due solely to fat gain, but the only thing that really grew noticably was his waist. The muscles of his torso, arms, and legs did not grow to any meaningful degree, with light growth occuring in a few small areas located within certain muscle groups. So, you say GH causef him to grow by gaining IM fat, but if this is the case, how come this growth did not occur anyhere but in is abdominal region?
What makes you say synthetic igf-1 is more potent than natural?