.gif "IP Gear")
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 679
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1724606/pdf/v037p00100.pdf
Article basically claims that GH will NOT increase muscle mass, and that it may actually hamper athletic performance. The guy seems a little biased but nonetheless he does raise some interesting points, and concerns. Here are some key points the author makes:
"Chronic rhGH abuse is more dangerous. As most athletes
are likely to be using suprapharmacological amounts, the correct
model in which to look for such deleterious effects is not
the adult GH deficient patient given replacement therapy, but
patients suffering from acromegaly—that is, with an excess of
GH secretion, often 100 times normal. These patients have
poor exercise tolerance, which improves after treatment to
decrease GH secretion.74 However, they show little evidence of
true muscle hypertrophy in terms of creatinine to height ratios
or muscle cross sectional areas, but often exhibit a number of
myopathic features such as increased plasma creatine kinase,
raised type 2 to type 1 muscle fibre areas, type 2 fibre atrophy,
and myofilament loss as well as myopathic electrophysiological
changes.75 Furthermore, patients with acromegaly have
considerably increased rates of cardiovascular disease,
diabetes, abnormal lipid metabolism, osteoarthritis, and
breast and colorectal cancer.63 The concentrations of free fatty
acids stimulated by exercise in these patients76 is in the range
suggested by Opie77 to be a possible cause of sudden death
from arrhythmia."
"There is good evidence that hGH administration exacerbates
the pronounced increase in lipolysis that occurs during
exercise and, in addition, increases the production of lactate
and protons by working muscles. The inevitable metabolic acidaemia
and consequent reduction in the rate of glycogenolysis
in muscle and liver could explain the acutely decreased
performance. Furthermore, because of the effect of rhGH in
decreasing glycogen storage in muscle and liver, it will make
recovery from exercise more difficult. However, a bigger
danger is probably the unphysiologically high fatty acidaemia,
which could promote cardiac arrhythmia."
"if there were a threshold in the supraphysiological range for
an anabolic effect of rhGH on muscle, it would be expected
that patients with acromegaly would show true muscle hypertrophy.
In fact, the lack of appreciably greater muscle mass per
height as well as associated pathological changes (see later)
argues against this idea. This is reinforced by the finding that transgenic mice overexpressing GH show no relative increase
in muscle mass as a fraction of total body weight, and what
muscle they have develops less force than expected on a
weight basis."
What do you guys think? How much should we worry about the occurance of some of the side effects he mentions? Some of them sound pretty scary, particular cardiovascular desease and diabetes.
Article basically claims that GH will NOT increase muscle mass, and that it may actually hamper athletic performance. The guy seems a little biased but nonetheless he does raise some interesting points, and concerns. Here are some key points the author makes:
"Chronic rhGH abuse is more dangerous. As most athletes
are likely to be using suprapharmacological amounts, the correct
model in which to look for such deleterious effects is not
the adult GH deficient patient given replacement therapy, but
patients suffering from acromegaly—that is, with an excess of
GH secretion, often 100 times normal. These patients have
poor exercise tolerance, which improves after treatment to
decrease GH secretion.74 However, they show little evidence of
true muscle hypertrophy in terms of creatinine to height ratios
or muscle cross sectional areas, but often exhibit a number of
myopathic features such as increased plasma creatine kinase,
raised type 2 to type 1 muscle fibre areas, type 2 fibre atrophy,
and myofilament loss as well as myopathic electrophysiological
changes.75 Furthermore, patients with acromegaly have
considerably increased rates of cardiovascular disease,
diabetes, abnormal lipid metabolism, osteoarthritis, and
breast and colorectal cancer.63 The concentrations of free fatty
acids stimulated by exercise in these patients76 is in the range
suggested by Opie77 to be a possible cause of sudden death
from arrhythmia."
"There is good evidence that hGH administration exacerbates
the pronounced increase in lipolysis that occurs during
exercise and, in addition, increases the production of lactate
and protons by working muscles. The inevitable metabolic acidaemia
and consequent reduction in the rate of glycogenolysis
in muscle and liver could explain the acutely decreased
performance. Furthermore, because of the effect of rhGH in
decreasing glycogen storage in muscle and liver, it will make
recovery from exercise more difficult. However, a bigger
danger is probably the unphysiologically high fatty acidaemia,
which could promote cardiac arrhythmia."
"if there were a threshold in the supraphysiological range for
an anabolic effect of rhGH on muscle, it would be expected
that patients with acromegaly would show true muscle hypertrophy.
In fact, the lack of appreciably greater muscle mass per
height as well as associated pathological changes (see later)
argues against this idea. This is reinforced by the finding that transgenic mice overexpressing GH show no relative increase
in muscle mass as a fraction of total body weight, and what
muscle they have develops less force than expected on a
weight basis."
What do you guys think? How much should we worry about the occurance of some of the side effects he mentions? Some of them sound pretty scary, particular cardiovascular desease and diabetes.
