tombradycardia
New member
looks like orange tops are back in stock for those who were waiting
Steroid Source Talk
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Opti - HGH / Somatropin ++ AAS oils ++ AAS tabs ++ MISC.
- Thread starter opti
- Start date
-
- Tags
- growth hormone hgh opti somatropin
As well
HeisenbergLil
New member
Recently read a German study about intramuscular vs sub q injection. I’ve been doing sub q for about a year now and just recently about a month ago changed to im. Noticeable difference for me in vascularoty and fullness. Absorption rates are much higher im vs sub q. I’ll post the study below
HeisenbergLil
New member
Just as the early adult users often suffered side effects due to excessive doses when they tried to extrapolate the childrenâ??s therapeutic dosage (by weight), the idea of injecting subcutaneously is an example of adults not receiving the full benefits of GH by mimicking the pediatric experience. German endocrinologists and researchers teamed up to investigate the effects of gender, dose and route of administration (subcutaneous versus intramuscular) on the availability and effectiveness of GH. Ten male and 10 female subjects were recruited; subjects were healthy and athletic young adultsâ?? the doses provided were three to five times the recommended adult replacement dose, roughly nine to 20 units for the males. The subjects received three separate injections: ~9 units subcutaneously, ~9 units intramuscularly and ~20 units subcutaneously. Data obtained by analyzing the subjectsâ?? blood over the next 36 hours revealed interesting results that might offer insight to users of GH.
Comparing the ~9 unit doses, it was clear that intramuscular injections provided significantly higher peaks in GH concentration and greater total-delivered dose.12 In fact, the male subjects received nearly 50 percent more total GH from the same dose when the hormone was injected into muscle as opposed to subcutaneous fat. While GH delivery was vastly improved with intramuscular injections, IGF-1 concentrations were no different between subcutaneous versus intramuscular injections following the same (single) dose. Thus, it is unclear at this time whether intramuscular administration would provide any anabolic or tissue repair benefits. Hopefully, further research will clarify this point with long-term studies.
As most preschoolers learn, boys are different from girls. In the above study, men cleared GH from their system more quickly. At first, this might seem a disadvantage, but in fact, it appears to be the basis for some of the physical advantages males display. Intramuscular GH not only peaked higher, but also earlierâ?? so, despite being cleared more rapidly, a greater total amount of GH is delivered when injected into muscle.12 Not only does the body benefit from receiving more total drug/hormone, the cells of the body are able to prime themselves to respond to the next dose of GH more quickly as the drug is cleared. GH triggers responses in cells by binding to receptors on the surface, which activate a series of enzymes inside the cell.13 Ultimately, the reactions send chemical factors to the DNA to turn on growth-promoting processes.
The GH response sequence doesnâ??t always happen in a linear relationship; in other words, a little GH does not produce a little response in some reactions (GH is involved in over 400 metabolic processes).14 There appears to be a threshold concentration (when the cell is fully primed) that triggers the biochemical cascade in gender-specific reactions and once that level is passed, higher doses cause greater response.15 However, uncontrolled or continuous growth, enticing as that sounds, is neither healthy nor beneficial. To prevent the cell from being stressed with responding to another growth signal too soon, feedback suppressors are generated inside the cell at the same time the cell is building protein and burning fat.13 By clearing out GH more quickly, males also clear out the suppressor blockade, allowing the cells to respond to the next pulse of GH more quickly.
Perhaps the time is overdue in this article to remind the reader that GH is most effective when released in pulses, not as a steady, continuous signal. So although it was not seen with the single-dose study, it is likely that intramuscular GH would offer a more â??lifelikeâ?? signal and possibly greater physiologic benefits over time.
The concepts of suppressor factors and pulsatile GH-release patterns appear to explain some of the differences seen between men and women relative to GH therapy. Typically, men respond much more robustly to GH therapy than women. Additionally, men have higher IGF-1 levels despite the sexes (male and female) releasing the same amount of GH.16,17
In a paper submitted to the journal Endocrinology, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania investigated the effect of â??maleâ?? pattern (pulsatile) and â??femaleâ?? pattern (continuous) release of GH on the liver cells of rats.18 Similar to humans, rats display sex-based differences in GH release, with males generating sharp peaks and valleys in hormone concentrationâ?¦females generally maintain a continuous release with little change in hormone concentration. As a result, females (rat and human) generate less IGF-1 and have a blunted effect to GH treatment. The researchers attempted to discover why this is so.
As mentioned above, when GH triggers its receptor, it generates biochemical signals that stimulate cell growth; it also stimulates suppressor signals to reduce the cellâ??s response to further GH signaling. While the growth signals require fairly high levels of GH, the suppressor proteins are generated by relatively low concentrations of the hormone.18 Thus, while women secrete the same or possibly greater total amounts of GH throughout the day, they benefit less due to the ongoing production of the suppressor proteins which block cells from reacting to GH. Even the male rat cells did not respond vigorously to GH when it was present continuously.18 Compared to the â??maleâ?? pattern of GH pulses, a continuous â??femaleâ?? GH presence only generated about 10 percent to 15 percent of the response at the same dose.
Not only do females secrete GH in a pattern that is much less effective, they are also less capable of responding to the more optimal â??maleâ?? pulsatile pattern. When exposed to pulses of GH, male cells responded twice as well. Further, certain genes in female cells are not activated by the GH cascade, even when a pulsatile pattern is presented, suggesting that sex-specific responses to the hormone have developed over the eons due to natural selection, evolution, intelligent design, God or whatever guiding force actually determines human existence.
Perhaps it is all scientific mumbo-jumbo as described above. What does it boil down to for the person considering GH treatment or use? Men have significant physiologic advantages in responding to GH, natural or pharmaceutical. In addition to secreting GH in a pattern that promotes, rather than suppresses, growth and positive changes, male cells are also programmed to respond to GH bursts more vigorously and certain enzymes are turned on that are not activated in female cells. In contrast, females secrete GH in a continuous fashion that causes cells to block any response or positive changes and when presented with a burst of GH, such as might occur during exercise, they experience a lower level of response and have different cellular effects. So, on the face of things, it appears that there is less justification for the use of GH, therapeutically or illicitly, in women. In practice, women do experience similar benefits from GH therapy but to a lesser degree than men, further emphasizing the need to consult with a qualified and experienced clinician when considering GH therapy or use.
Also, the standard method of administering GH, via a subcutaneous injection, may not be the best method. A higher peak, greater total amount and faster clearance occurred when GH was injected intramuscularly. The downside to this is a greater risk of injury (striking a nerve, injecting into a blood vessel, suffering a deep tissue infection), more pain and potential interference with anabolic steroid injections in those who use the two drugs during the same period.
The findings of the last two decades are very exciting and as the knowledge base expands regarding GH therapy, safer and more appropriate use of the drug is likely to expand, unless political hurdles occur. Research has shown that adults can benefit from very low doses of GH (0.5 to 3.0 units daily), avoiding most adverse side effects associated with the initial high-dose attempts.19 Further, ********** research has shown that GH may be beneficial to anabolic steroid users during post-cycle recovery by maintaining lean mass and lowering body fat while reducing systemic inflammation; certain parameters of cardiovascular function are also improved though greater work is done by the heart as measured by heart rate and blood pressure.20
The era of GH is still relatively new, as safe and reliable sources have been accessible to clinicians for less than 20 years and widespread use is still in its infancy. Sadly, the ethical and political drama relating to sports doping and Internet trafficking will curtail research in this area, much as it has for anabolic steroids. Hopefully, for those who use GH within the confines of approved uses, further research will be published, allowing clinicians and patients to approach decisions relating to GH therapy in an informed and educated manner. Further, though illicit use is not advocated, it is equally important to minimize the burden of unnecessary or suboptimal use by athletes or those seeking to avoid the perils of age or a sedentary lifestyle.
References:
Comparing the ~9 unit doses, it was clear that intramuscular injections provided significantly higher peaks in GH concentration and greater total-delivered dose.12 In fact, the male subjects received nearly 50 percent more total GH from the same dose when the hormone was injected into muscle as opposed to subcutaneous fat. While GH delivery was vastly improved with intramuscular injections, IGF-1 concentrations were no different between subcutaneous versus intramuscular injections following the same (single) dose. Thus, it is unclear at this time whether intramuscular administration would provide any anabolic or tissue repair benefits. Hopefully, further research will clarify this point with long-term studies.
As most preschoolers learn, boys are different from girls. In the above study, men cleared GH from their system more quickly. At first, this might seem a disadvantage, but in fact, it appears to be the basis for some of the physical advantages males display. Intramuscular GH not only peaked higher, but also earlierâ?? so, despite being cleared more rapidly, a greater total amount of GH is delivered when injected into muscle.12 Not only does the body benefit from receiving more total drug/hormone, the cells of the body are able to prime themselves to respond to the next dose of GH more quickly as the drug is cleared. GH triggers responses in cells by binding to receptors on the surface, which activate a series of enzymes inside the cell.13 Ultimately, the reactions send chemical factors to the DNA to turn on growth-promoting processes.
The GH response sequence doesnâ??t always happen in a linear relationship; in other words, a little GH does not produce a little response in some reactions (GH is involved in over 400 metabolic processes).14 There appears to be a threshold concentration (when the cell is fully primed) that triggers the biochemical cascade in gender-specific reactions and once that level is passed, higher doses cause greater response.15 However, uncontrolled or continuous growth, enticing as that sounds, is neither healthy nor beneficial. To prevent the cell from being stressed with responding to another growth signal too soon, feedback suppressors are generated inside the cell at the same time the cell is building protein and burning fat.13 By clearing out GH more quickly, males also clear out the suppressor blockade, allowing the cells to respond to the next pulse of GH more quickly.
Perhaps the time is overdue in this article to remind the reader that GH is most effective when released in pulses, not as a steady, continuous signal. So although it was not seen with the single-dose study, it is likely that intramuscular GH would offer a more â??lifelikeâ?? signal and possibly greater physiologic benefits over time.
The concepts of suppressor factors and pulsatile GH-release patterns appear to explain some of the differences seen between men and women relative to GH therapy. Typically, men respond much more robustly to GH therapy than women. Additionally, men have higher IGF-1 levels despite the sexes (male and female) releasing the same amount of GH.16,17
In a paper submitted to the journal Endocrinology, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania investigated the effect of â??maleâ?? pattern (pulsatile) and â??femaleâ?? pattern (continuous) release of GH on the liver cells of rats.18 Similar to humans, rats display sex-based differences in GH release, with males generating sharp peaks and valleys in hormone concentrationâ?¦females generally maintain a continuous release with little change in hormone concentration. As a result, females (rat and human) generate less IGF-1 and have a blunted effect to GH treatment. The researchers attempted to discover why this is so.
As mentioned above, when GH triggers its receptor, it generates biochemical signals that stimulate cell growth; it also stimulates suppressor signals to reduce the cellâ??s response to further GH signaling. While the growth signals require fairly high levels of GH, the suppressor proteins are generated by relatively low concentrations of the hormone.18 Thus, while women secrete the same or possibly greater total amounts of GH throughout the day, they benefit less due to the ongoing production of the suppressor proteins which block cells from reacting to GH. Even the male rat cells did not respond vigorously to GH when it was present continuously.18 Compared to the â??maleâ?? pattern of GH pulses, a continuous â??femaleâ?? GH presence only generated about 10 percent to 15 percent of the response at the same dose.
Not only do females secrete GH in a pattern that is much less effective, they are also less capable of responding to the more optimal â??maleâ?? pulsatile pattern. When exposed to pulses of GH, male cells responded twice as well. Further, certain genes in female cells are not activated by the GH cascade, even when a pulsatile pattern is presented, suggesting that sex-specific responses to the hormone have developed over the eons due to natural selection, evolution, intelligent design, God or whatever guiding force actually determines human existence.
Perhaps it is all scientific mumbo-jumbo as described above. What does it boil down to for the person considering GH treatment or use? Men have significant physiologic advantages in responding to GH, natural or pharmaceutical. In addition to secreting GH in a pattern that promotes, rather than suppresses, growth and positive changes, male cells are also programmed to respond to GH bursts more vigorously and certain enzymes are turned on that are not activated in female cells. In contrast, females secrete GH in a continuous fashion that causes cells to block any response or positive changes and when presented with a burst of GH, such as might occur during exercise, they experience a lower level of response and have different cellular effects. So, on the face of things, it appears that there is less justification for the use of GH, therapeutically or illicitly, in women. In practice, women do experience similar benefits from GH therapy but to a lesser degree than men, further emphasizing the need to consult with a qualified and experienced clinician when considering GH therapy or use.
Also, the standard method of administering GH, via a subcutaneous injection, may not be the best method. A higher peak, greater total amount and faster clearance occurred when GH was injected intramuscularly. The downside to this is a greater risk of injury (striking a nerve, injecting into a blood vessel, suffering a deep tissue infection), more pain and potential interference with anabolic steroid injections in those who use the two drugs during the same period.
The findings of the last two decades are very exciting and as the knowledge base expands regarding GH therapy, safer and more appropriate use of the drug is likely to expand, unless political hurdles occur. Research has shown that adults can benefit from very low doses of GH (0.5 to 3.0 units daily), avoiding most adverse side effects associated with the initial high-dose attempts.19 Further, ********** research has shown that GH may be beneficial to anabolic steroid users during post-cycle recovery by maintaining lean mass and lowering body fat while reducing systemic inflammation; certain parameters of cardiovascular function are also improved though greater work is done by the heart as measured by heart rate and blood pressure.20
The era of GH is still relatively new, as safe and reliable sources have been accessible to clinicians for less than 20 years and widespread use is still in its infancy. Sadly, the ethical and political drama relating to sports doping and Internet trafficking will curtail research in this area, much as it has for anabolic steroids. Hopefully, for those who use GH within the confines of approved uses, further research will be published, allowing clinicians and patients to approach decisions relating to GH therapy in an informed and educated manner. Further, though illicit use is not advocated, it is equally important to minimize the burden of unnecessary or suboptimal use by athletes or those seeking to avoid the perils of age or a sedentary lifestyle.
References:
- Devlin JG, Brien T, et al. Effect of alteration of species source of insulin on insulin-antibody levels. Lancet, 1966;2:883-4.
- Raben MS. Treatment of a pituitary dwarf with human growth hormone. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 1958;18:901-3.
- Brown P, Brandel JP, et al. Iatrogenic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: the waning of an era. Neurology, 2006;67:389-93.
- Cronin MJ. Pioneering recombinant growth hormone manufacturing: pounds produced per mile of height. J Pediat, 1997;131(1 Pt 2):S5-7.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fatal degenerative neurologic disease in patients who received pituitary-derived human growth hormone. MMWR, 1985 June 21;34:359-60,365-6.
- Rudman D, Feller AG, et al. Effects of human growth hormone in men over 60 years old. N Engl J Med, 1990;323:1-6.
- Lehmann S, Cerra FB. Growth hormone and nutritional support: adverse metabolic effects. Nutr Clin Pract, 1992;7:27-30.
- Nelson AE, Ken KY Ho. Abuse of growth hormone by athletes. Nature Clin Pract Endocrinol Metab, 2007;3:198-9.
- Russo L, Moore WV. A comparison of subcutaneous and intramuscular administration of human growth hormone in the therapy of growth hormone deficiency. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 1982;55:1003-6.
- Jorgensen JO, Moller J, et al. Pharmacological aspects of growth hormone replacement therapy: route, frequency and timing of administration. Horm Res, 1990;33; Suppl, 4:77-82.
- Rich JD, Dickinson BP, et al. Abscess related to anabolic-androgenic steroid injection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1999;31:207-9.
- Keller A, Wu Z, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of GH: dependence on route and dosage of administration. Eur J Endocrinol, 2007;156:647-53.
- Le Roith D, Nissley P. Knock your SOCS off! J Clin Invest, 2005;115:233-6.
- Waters MJ, Hoang HN, et al. New insights into growth hormone action. J Mol Endocrinol, 2006;36:1-7.
- Verma AS, Dhir RN, et al. Inadequacy of the Janus kinase 2/signal transducer and activator of transcription signal transduction pathway to mediate episodic growth hormone-dependent regulation of hepatic CYP2C11. Mol Pharmacol, 2005;67;891-901.
- Koranyi J, Bosaeus I, et al. Body composition during GH replacement in adults - methodological variations with respect to gender. Eur J Endocrinol, 2006;154:545-53.
- Johannsson G, Bjarnason R, et al. The individual responsiveness to growth hormone (GH) treatment in GH-deficient adults is dependent on the level of GH-binding protein, body mass index, age, and gender. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 1996;81:1575-81.
- Thangavel C, Shapiro BH. A molecular basis for the sexually dimorphic response to growth hormone. Endocrinology, 2007;148:2894-***.
- Abrahamsen B, Nielsen TL, et al. Dose-, IGF-I- and sex-dependent changes in lipid profile and body composition during GH replacement therapy in adult onset GH deficiency. Eur J Endocrinol, 2004;150:671-9.
- Graham MR, Baker JS, et al. Evidence for a decrease in cardiovascular risk factors following recombinant growth hormone administration in abstinent anabolic-androgenic steroid users. Growth Horm IGF Res, 2007;17:201-9.
-bron: Muscular Development Online Magazine - Intramuscular GH? New Research Suggests It Is Best
Gguitarmann667
Member
I have been doing them sub and I'm considering continuing it because I really enjoy the sleep benefits. And Im worried about taking it IM and not being so sleepy for soo long. But at the same time I've seen multiple people say the gains are better from Im because of the faster action. So I'm trying to decide what to do. And I never tried any other sources before this. But it literally changed everything for me it's definitely strong. The first 2 times I went up to 3 Iu my hands went numb, and I gained like 10 lbs without changing my diet and it looks like I have a pump constantly. It looks like what I thought tren would do. I'm up to 5 iu a day now and it's changed my physique more than any change in dosage or compound with the actual roids. So I haven't tried other sources but I don't see how it could get any better than this unless u can get serostim or something.
Topshelf50
New member
Anyone tried the ansomone? I’ve heard decent things about it
Bigdovis2
Active member
I haven’t but I’m super curious too, I mean you hear all about pharma but when you think china you think generic. Would it be the quality of generic of the quality of say genotropin. And the price is obviously appealing.
Would like to hear feedback on whoever has tried it. If not who knows I might be the one reporting back. Mix the opti with the ansomone
I like the enthusiasm but GH dimerization is not a good thing.
A dimer is two molecules/proteins/complexes etc. bound together.
Glucose + Glucose = Maltose (a HOMOdimer because the two monomers are the same)
Glucose + Fructose = Sucrose (a HETEROdimer because the two monomers are different.)
Dimer in regards to GH is two GH molecules bound together (homodimer) usually through a disulfide bond (a sulfur atom in each molecule binds to the other). GH dimers cannot bind to the GH receptor because they can no longer fit in the right spot on the receptor (binding domain), AKA now it doesn't work.
Link for graph. That is from a case study related to a kid with a gene mutation that caused excessive GH dimerization resulating in reduced growth.
Green line = normal GH. Blue line = dimerized mutant GH.
Side effects like water retention, welts, etc. from administering dimerized GH is entirely anecdotal from bodybuilding users.
Only posting this to show my IGF-1 levels. Been on Opti Grays for about 5 weeks. The first 2 weeks was 2iu. The last 3 weeks or so has been 3iu. Zero side effects (knock on wood). Sleep better than ever. Feel great so far. Also i realize 5 weeks isn't a long time for GH but the sleep part is changing how I operate in the gym and my day to day.
Attachments
jumdumpster
Active member
awesome. im using 3iu of the greys too right now. actually sleeping well on cycle was such a game changer
For real. Derek from More Plates More Dates showed his levels at 3iu of pharma grade stuff from back in the day and if i remember correctly, his was around 470. So im more than happy with these numbers.
1000%
Bigdovis2
Active member
Just picked up a lot of the black tops, this is will be my first run with GH
Currently “cruising” on 250 test 120 primo
Gonna try 2ius and, should I even try to work up to 3 of just save it for a blast?
I’ve used GH peptides so I got my bac water and all, hit me with some info if y’all got any for new GH users
Currently “cruising” on 250 test 120 primo
Gonna try 2ius and, should I even try to work up to 3 of just save it for a blast?
I’ve used GH peptides so I got my bac water and all, hit me with some info if y’all got any for new GH users
Gearjunkie45
New member
This makes me excited to see, I just started the greys 5 weeks ago too, first experience with GH. Ran 2iu for the first 4 weeks and just upped it to 3iu last week. Getting bloods in another week or two, hopefully my results are similar! No sides at all on 2iu, started getting numb hands upon waking with 3iu so definitely working. Deeper, high quality sleep has been a game changer for sure.
Bigdovis2
Active member
That’s what I’m looking for with the “trt” I have.
gonna wait to up it till after I get bloods, then see. I saw the grey tops I’m just that guy to spend less money, looking at the testing it looked about the same? Idk shit abt GH so
Still curious about that Chinese pharma shit tho
Bigdovis2
Active member
Hey man, revisiting this thread to ad a question.
Did u ever receive tracking? Ik some sources will just ship it an send tracking if even asked but I emailed an heard nothing so just curious. Got all that confirmation stuff
Gearjunkie45
New member
Yes I an automated email with tracking within about 24 hours of placing my order but I’ve read in here not everyone does.
Bigdovis2
Active member
Fuck lol, I guess it’s cold outside now so it’s alright.
Bad timing and will be gone on the weekend, so I was like “shit I hope it doesn’t show up Saturday”
But it’s not 95 degrees and 100% humidity here in the south anymore so I’d assume the package would be fine