IM vs. Sub Q vs. IV use of peptides

[strongrhino]

Thanks for the welcome Bigenough!

Taba made some great points on causes and effects of usage! Here are some other points I made some time back on another thread regarding such.
http://www.professionalmuscle.com/f...ubling-hgh-dose-big-changes-3.html#post846099


"Permanent vein collapse occurs as a consequence of:

1. Long-term injecting.
2. Repeated injections, especially with blunt needles. (A new 31 gauge slin needle is hardly a fair comparison, especially when a Doc draws blood - they're a much larger gauge).
3. Poor technique.
4. Injection of substances which irritate the veins. (DRUGS - heroin being chief)
5. Smaller veins may collapse as a consequence of too much suction being used when pulling back against the plunger of the syringe to check that the needle is in the vein. This will pull the sides of the vein together and, especially if they are inflamed, they may stick together causing the vein to block. Removing the needle too quickly after injecting can have a similar effect.

Collapsed vein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I"ve been dosing GH via IV for more than a year now. Naturally I rotate areas. Always use a slin 31 gauge - nothing larger than. If I'm unsure that I'm in a vein (you'll know how to tell after a while) I still do not pull back on the plunger, instead, blood just creeps back into the chamber all by itself (slowly). This will let you know you're in a vein without pulling back (creating suction), then inject slowly, never rush it by slamming the liquid in as I've seen some do. If you've missed the vein - well then you gave yourself a SC shot instead! Though as I said, you'll eventually become a pro at it.

So after reading that study are ya still gonna add additional risks to your health- while the study clearly states subq is the superior method? Do you need some help deciphering the study- not trying to be rude here really. Unless you are used to reading scientific studies these things can be confusing to the layman. PM me if ya have any questions- I got ya bro.

 

[123cctv]

You act arrogant and crass.WELL HERE IS THE STUDY PROVING SUBQ IS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN IV SO NOW YOU CAN STOP POKING YOURSELF

http://www.professionalmuscle.com/f...cientific-study-showing-subq-superior-iv.html

Long ago I cited the study you referenced and a few others of importance, relevant to this subject. Here's a link to it, posted earleir this year back in April. You might want to read it all.
http://www.professionalmuscle.com/f...m/58192-injecting-growth-iv-2.html#post773348 However I'm convinced you either haven't read it all OR you are unable to comprehend its data. Regardless, allow me to assist you with their findings via my previous quotations:




Note this study which compares SQ (SC), I.V. and I.N. inj's.
**broken link removed**

It said,

"On the other two occasions the patients received an sc injection (0.10 IU/kg) and an iv injection (0.015 IU/kg) of GH, respectively."

Did you catch the difference in dosage?? I.V. was only 1/8th of the SC dose! Now check out the spike/peaks!

"Intravenous administration produced a short-lived serum GH peak value of 128.12 ± 6.71 μg/l. Peak levels were 13.98±1.63 μg/l after sc injection "

WOW!! The I.V. just didn't double (increase 100%) peak. Nope! Instead, it increased approx 1000% above the SQ/SC dose. I'd say that's another benefit any other dosing is incapable of.



Now if you're saying, the study found IGF-1 wasn't secreted! You're right! That's true. Yet my previous contentions to this particular study was the I.V. dosage was too f*cken SMALL by any comparison! Now if they had botherred to take the time to UP the dosage just a tad, they would have found otherwise!

Note the following study which DID test w/comparable dosages.

Enjoy.




Are there any benefits lost utilizing IV vs. SQ/IM?

Insulin-like growth factor-I response is comparable following intravenous and subcutaneous administration of growth hormone
Journal of Surgical Research, Volume 51, Issue 6, Pages 472-476
T. Kimbrough, S. Shernan, T. Ziegler, M. Scheltinga, D. Wilmore

"Subcutaneous (sq) administration of recombinant human growth hormone (r-hgh) has an anabolic effect and increases systemic insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I) in surgical patients. IGF-I is a mediator of growth hormone (gh) anabolic effects. To determine the effect of intravenous (iv) administration of r-hgh on systemic IGF-I, 11 patients were given 14 1-week courses of daily 8-hr infusions of r-hgh (10 mg in 500 ml D5W). Serum gh and IGF-I levels were measured. To compare routes of administration, iv r-hgh patients were matched to comparable sq r-hgh patients and IGF-I responses were examined. Illness severity effect on IGF-I response to r-hgh was assessed by dividing 16 burn patients who received either iv or sq r-hgh into two groups on the basis of severity scores. Analysis of the data showed that IGF-I levels increased significantly after iv r-hgh, IGF-I response to iv r-hgh (1.14 ± 0.18 U/ml to 4.12 ± 0.65 U/ml) was not different from IGF-I response to sq r-hgh (1.04 ± 0.36 U/ml to 4.96 ± 1.09 U/ml)."

Results? As far as IGF-1 goes (which is what we want secreted) = No difference!

BTW that dude who showed his arm- I see plenty of "potholes" not very attractive.

I'm 47 years old. You're looking at normal age/skin spots, not "potholes". Further, there's only one vein on my arm that's visible within that pic that I use for injections. It has the two redspots noted from that days injections. Everythng else you're looking at is normal and unlrelated to.

 

[strongrhino]

After a 1 1/2 yrs. of dosing I.V., sometimes as much as 3x daily, here are the many the scars I have to show for it. Do you see any? Actually, if you look closely, you mght see where a admin'ed twice today. However scars and collapsed veins require a bit of concentration to incur.

Always change up injection sites.

Seriously tho- your arm looks unhealthy. Especially in that first pic. Any swollen lymph nodes? Check your axillary (under arm pit) and your Humeral nodes (Near elbows) and while your at it just to make sure you supra claviculars (top of Collar bone). Lookin out bro. Really in that first pic Got me concerned. Maybe you are just used to it. Any discharge? Augmentin 750x2 day would clear ya right up if so.

 

[strongrhino]

And now you are paraphrasing a scientific study to appear to make your conclusions valid? Thought ya might do that but buddy that is not how science works. Its unbiased and draws factual conclusions. Not skewed results that have "interests" involved. This is a solid study- no holes and ya wont find one. I got 5 more when you ready that draw the same conclusions.

 

[weight78]

that is irrelavant, I mean why dont we shoot our aminos in the vein or test base in the vein. This post cotains many reasons why. The tried and true way has never been IV, we got 100's of bodybuilders and athletes that are experienced users. On the package insert it says SUBCUTANOUS OR IM- NO WHERE ON ANY SAIZEN OR JINTROPIN BLAH BLAH BLAH DO THEY RECOMMEND IV- COME ON NOW

WOW, Im sorry Didn't realize you know everything. My studies are a complete waste of time. Wish I wouldn't have disovered humulin-r IV mimics humalog and your get a huge blood level spike with gh IV wich with the slin has shown a far greater rise in Igf-1. Sub-q on the other hand seems better for fat burning. There are many ways to manipulate. But I obviously am a complete idiot blah blah blah...

 

[123cctv]

So after reading that study are ya still gonna add additional risks to your health

If you're suggesting every one of the above problems occur with I.V. are applicable to what we are saying here? Then you've lost it bud. Everyone of these possibilities can be avoided. Get a clue.

Unless you are used to reading scientific studies these things can be confusing to the layman.

It's clear, you're the one missing the overall information cited within the study. I.V. peaked 10x greater, better simulated human GH secretion and DOES secrete IGF-1 IF when dosage is increased. No benefits lost.

 

[123cctv]

And now you are paraphrasing a scientific study to appear to make your conclusions valid?

We are about done here bud. I used quotations only.

Fact - I.V. on the study you cited was a mere 1/8th trickle by comparison of the SC dose. In other words, the SC dose was 8x larger.

Fact - The I.V. peak value was 10x greater than the SC peak.

Fact - The I.V. peak was "short lived".

Fact -- Another study posted and numerous others state a short lived spike will better mimic our own natural GH release.

Lastly, being that I love studies and have probably already seen whatever it is you believe you have up your sleave, please show me these other 5 studies so we can address your err re: their summation.

 

[strongrhino]

We are about done here bud. I used quotations only.

Fact - I.V. on the study you cited was a mere 1/8th trickle by comparison of the SC dose. In other words, the SC dose was 8x larger.

Fact - The I.V. peak value was 10x greater than the SC peak.

Fact - The I.V. peak was "short lived".

Fact -- Another study posted and numerous others state a short lived spike will better mimic our own natural GH release.

Lastly, being that I love studies and have probably already seen whatever it is you believe you have up your sleave, please show me these other 5 studies so we can address your err re: their summation.

So the study I posted does conclude that SubQ is the most effective way to asminister HGH for absorbsion and spike levels of all 3 blood indicators? Better read it again- this time with your glasses.

 

[123cctv]

This edit: There was a link I clicked on for the package insert now it's gone WTF?

Not sure why you lost the link. However here it is again:
**broken link removed**

"Absorption — Humatrope has been studied following intramuscular, subcutaneous, and intravenous administration in adult
volunteers (see Figure 1). The absolute bioavailability of somatropin is 75% and 63% after subcutaneous and intramuscular
administration, respectively.

Of course the IV absolute bioavailability would be 100%"

I like it.
Course, it's doubtful that anyone's gona believe E-Lily, Humatrope!!

 

[123cctv]

So the study I posted does conclude that SubQ is the most effective way to asminister HGH for absorbsion and spike levels of all 3 blood indicators.

And why does this particular study state SC was better? Becaue IGF-1 failed to secrete. Of course, the SC DOSE WAS 8X GREATER! Duh! Hardly a fair comparison.

However you can't grasp their summation so I offered another study which dosages were fairly distributed. Nothing to say?

By the way, when you get a sec please choke up the other 5 confirming studies.

Thanks.

 

[strongrhino]

Not sure why you lost the link. However here it is again:
**broken link removed**

"Absorption — Humatrope has been studied following intramuscular, subcutaneous, and intravenous administration in adult
volunteers (see Figure 1). The absolute bioavailability of somatropin is 75% and 63% after subcutaneous and intramuscular
administration, respectively.

Of course the IV absolute bioavailability would be 100%"

I like it.
Course, it's doubtful that anyone's gona believe E-Lily, Humatrope!!

ONE MORE TIME FOR YA IN CONCLUSION:

An i.v. bolus injection of, on average, 1 IU of GH induced no metabolic response. Only s.c. GH administration induced increased levels of IGF-I, insulin and glucose. These data reveal that a closer imitation of the physiological GH pulses than achieved by s.c.

Eli Lilly is a drug company- not an unbiased research organization.

 

[1Rhino1]

Well ill be god damned. It appears as though i stand corrected. I'm def going to be reading more on this.

 

[weight78]

Not sure why you lost the link. However here it is again:
**broken link removed**

"Absorption — Humatrope has been studied following intramuscular, subcutaneous, and intravenous administration in adult
volunteers (see Figure 1). The absolute bioavailability of somatropin is 75% and 63% after subcutaneous and intramuscular
administration, respectively.

Of course the IV absolute bioavailability would be 100%"

I like it.
Course, it's doubtful that anyone's gona believe E-Lily, Humatrope!!

Thank you. Like I said. IV goes staight into the blood.

 

[Matsuo Munefusa]

this is the reason why I decided to go with IV admin...at least some of my shots...because I really dont have enough money to run what I'd like with IM

 

[BigEnough]

This should sum this thread up, Strongrhino has been using rips for one whole month!!! Why argue with this guy? He has NO personal HGH exp. I must admit, It's pretty funny watching a 42 year old "Doctor" resort to petty name calling and shit throwing when he feels his little pecker has been flicked too hard!

 

[sandow74]

So the study I posted does conclude that SubQ is the most effective way to asminister HGH for absorbsion and spike levels of all 3 blood indicators? Better read it again- this time with your glasses.

There is no way you are really this dense and stupid, I think you are simply trolling at this point and just trying to keep arguing. The study clearly shows that the IV dose was 1/8th that of the sub Q dose. Do you understand what that means? That they had to use 8 times the amount of HGH when dosing SubQ in order to achieve similar results to the IV route. So just the dosing parameters themself demonstrate how much more effective IV'ing is over SubQ, not to mention all the other increases seen with IV. Please point out where the study demonstrates that SubQ is "More Potent" than IV?

 

[sandow74]

ONE MORE TIME FOR YA IN CONCLUSION:



Eli Lilly is a drug company- not an unbiased research organization.

Wait a minute, you are claiming that the drug companies are unbiased? You may be the only person in the country who has ever taken this position.

 

[shovelhed82]

Not sure why you lost the link. However here it is again:
**broken link removed**

"Absorption — Humatrope has been studied following intramuscular, subcutaneous, and intravenous administration in adult
volunteers (see Figure 1). The absolute bioavailability of somatropin is 75% and 63% after subcutaneous and intramuscular
administration, respectively.

Of course the IV absolute bioavailability would be 100%"

I like it.
Course, it's doubtful that anyone's gona believe E-Lily, Humatrope!!

There it is! Thanks...

 

[strongrhino]

So because Eli Lilly posts a study with interests involved that makes the study I posted which is unbiased invalid? are you kidding me. Where does it say 1/8 of the subQ dose was used? Are you reading the same study or are you fabricating information to look good or feel good about the published addictive qualities of IV administration? Hey do as you will I know I am taking as suggested and not risking my health and not getting pot marks on my arms like some druggie. You are skewing data. Everyone read the study and make up your mind. It even states that IV 1iu has ZERO effect on anything measurable whatsoever. Even I find that hard to believe but it is what unbiased science says it is. This dude is mixing and matching patching different studies to make them out the way HE wants them to read and for all of you educated people out there read the studies and make your own conclusions.

 

[strongrhino]

This should sum this thread up, Strongrhino has been using rips for one whole month!!! Why argue with this guy? He has NO personal HGH exp. I must admit, It's pretty funny watching a 42 year old "Doctor" resort to petty name calling and shit throwing when he feels his little pecker has been flicked too hard!

And you are the pot marked junkie with 14" arms who has nothing valuable to add anywhere except insults.