an IGF1 thread i just had to share

[Skarhead]

TweetAWESOME info/debate... make sure you scroll all the wya down.. thats the best part actually

maybe others can share their experiences as well

https://www.theironcorps.com/forum/sh...0685#post10685

[Rado]

Tweet

AWESOME info/debate... make sure you scroll all the wya down.. thats the best part actually

maybe others can share their experiences as well

https://www.theironcorps.com/forum/sh...0685#post10685

Need to be a member Skar

[Skarhead]

Tweetthanks for pointing that out i didnt know ... i'll copy/paste

[Skarhead]

TweetI was steered away from trying IGF years ago by a couple of friends who spent a lot of money on it and failed to see ANY results. They never saw much in the way of gains with HGH either, but enjoyed the feeling of vigor and well-being they experienced while using it.

A couple of years ago, Pat Arnold of ErgoPharm took a Big Cat article on IGF and dismantled it piece by piece. Interesting reading at BB.com. Below are a few of his thoughts on IGF from a different discussion. The trainer he refers to is Milos Sarcev. But Tom Prince and Bob Cicherillo told me they also feel it is essentially worthless...even at the pro level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold
I know nobody that has taken IGF-1 that thinks its anything speical. Nor do I know anyone that knows anyone that does. I am friends with a bb trainer whose clients are top ten olympia competitors. he himself was at one time a top ten olympia competitor. He says that the people that he knows that have taken it were dissapointed. one of which is a now retired brit with big bulldog tatoo on his arm

For some reason though these unknown folks on these steroid boards are getting these phenomenal gains.

Sorry, thats not enough for me

BTW, the anabolic effect of IGF-1 is well known to diminish very quickly (within 2-3 weeks), so extended use should not really make a difference. check pubmed and read the studies on its clinical use

[Skarhead]

TweetOriginally Posted by Patrick Arnold
I know nobody that has taken IGF-1 that thinks its anything speical. Nor do I know anyone that knows anyone that does. I am friends with a bb trainer whose clients are top ten olympia competitors. he himself was at one time a top ten olympia competitor. He says that the people that he knows that have taken it were dissapointed. one of which is a now retired brit with big bulldog tatoo on his arm
That’s great, but we use LR3 IGF-1. If he’s talking about LR3, then why doesn’t he say so, all he’s doing is adding to the confusion. We still have people trying to apply things that are about hIGF-1 to LR3 IGF-1, in some cases they can apply, but it’s not always the case. So all the newbie researching, get it all confused, because people want to call LR3 IGF-1, IGF-1.

I have a question, because I have no idea, was LR3 IGF-1 even available when Dorian was Mr. O? I believe it came into existence in about ‘92-93, so I’m having a hard time believing it was being used at that time, by BBers. I could believe Ronnie has or does use it, but Dorian, I have a hard time with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold
For some reason though these unknown folks on these steroid boards are getting these phenomenal gains.

Sorry, thats not enough for me

Where did he read anyone say anything about phenomenal gains, I’ve never seen anything about phenomenal gains, I’ve read about making gains with fat loss. But I’ve never read anyone say their gains were better then slin, we know slin is the most anabolic hormone, I’ve read about big gains with slin.

I hate to get personal, but we’re reading this from a guy that pimps or used to, pro-hormones, like the results, are the same as juice or better. Now I know that’s B.S. because I tried his products, before I juiced, they were garbage. My gains from LR3 were far better then what he was selling, so he has no room to talk about LR3, when he pimped junk. I wonder if him not getting any money from LR3 is his motivation, for his comments here, only he knows. I'm not saying it is, let me make that clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold
BTW, the anabolic effect of IGF-1 is well known to diminish very quickly (within 2-3 weeks), so extended use should not really make a difference. check pubmed and read the studies on its clinical use

This statement makes no sense, “the anabolic effects” if it’s no good, how does it have an anabolic effect at all? He shots himself in the foot here. It has an anabolic effect but it’s no good, how do those 2 go together? I’m going to assume (we all know what that means), that the “diminish” is a reference to the idea that some how LR3 IGF-1 give you permanent gains.

I for one, think the whole idea of permanent gains, is false, with any drug we use. If it were true, then Arnold would still look like he did in the ‘76 Mr. O. Isn’t that the sell on primo, you get permanent gains? Arnold is supposed to be the primo king, so it would stand to reason, that if primo or any other gear gave permanent gains. Some of the former Mr. O’s would still look as they did during their hey day.

I know this guy has some sort of degree in chemistry or something, so I can’t believe he made this statement, “the anabolic effect of IGF-1 is well known to diminish very quickly (within 2-3 weeks)” If the half-life of hIGF-1 is 10-20 minutes, how is it supposed to still be anabolic more then 2-3 weeks after the last administration? Even if he’s talking about LR3 IGF-1, it only has about a 6 hour half-life, how is it supposed to be anabolic after 2-3 weeks or longer, which is the implication he’s giving. That it’s supposed to be anabolic longer then those 2-3 weeks, according to the promoters of LR3 or IGF-1, which ever he's talking about. I’d be surprised if LR3 was still anabolic 2-3 days after the last administration.

I’m not saying LR3 is the holy grail, because I don’t think it is, from all I’ve read slin is the mass builder, but since I haven’t tried it yet, I can’t say for sure. I’m using LR3 in the cycle I’m doing now, my next run will be with slin. Alternating between, LR3 and slin, 4 weeks each, for a total of 16 weeks. I’ll only be running my HRT dose of test, during that time. If it works out the way I hope it will, I’ll be alternating between gear cycles and LR3/slin bridges.

JohnnyB

[Skarhead]

TweetThe threads I quoted from was over a year old,m and in searching for it I found a newer one devoted entirely to q & a about LR3 igf-1.

BTW, I agree with you about pro-hormones. Avant's One+ was a transdermal steroid combo and much more potent than Ergopharm's 1-AD which was a precursor. Transdermal fina was better yet...and then I tried transdermal nandralone/test. All of that crap pales by comparison to a newbie cycle of 500 mg test enth @ 250 mg twice a week. I'm not sorry ph are gone....young teens were abusing them anyway...parents complained and when the gov't gets involved, they don't use a scalpel, they use a chainsaw!

But....if you read PA's posts on the various boards, he debates on every chemical topic you can imagine and seldom mentions his own products. Below is a testimonial from Big Cat, head moderator at BB.com, and supermod @ Cuttingedgemuscle. His steroid profiles are among the best available and are posted as a sticky on many boards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Cat
Patrick Arnold is THE authority on steroids in the world. There is no one like him. If you want absolute certainty on these issues, he'd be the one to ask. The problem is he knows it as well and really likes to show it off. I mean, I'm a molecular biologist and few know what I know, but he makes me feel like a little kid sometimes.


https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=511094
Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabestud
So are you saying that cycling LR3 IGF-1 has no effect on muscle hypertrophy?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold
i don't think it does./

it may cause temporary increase in glycogen storage and water retention, which can lead to some temporary positive cosmetic changes (you look bigger and fuller)

It may also lead to positive effects for conncetive tissue (strengthening)

but muscular hypertrophy? All the science we know on IGF-1 would suggest that this is highly unlikely



Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabestud
So everything I've read about LR3 IGF-1 is false? There are pretty good reviews on it and all.....what do you think about HGH then?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold
dunno what you read, but if its some of the BS i have seen then i am afraid answer is yes

not surprised about reviews being good. As i have said, it couldl result in glycogen deposition which would be associated with intramuscular water retention. The result would be muscle fullness and perception of growth. But its not muscle growth. you may also experience a little fat loss with it, but thats a bigger maybe

HGH gives pretty much the same effect. oh HGH is wonderful. It results in water retention and alot of that is in the muscel. so you feel pumped on it. And over time it can result in more fat loss. Not only that, but your skin texture will improve. you look good. But NO MUSCLE GROWTH!!

Oh, and HGH (and probably IGF-1 too) can be wonderful for maintaining muscle protein on a restricted diet or under catabolic conditons (post cycle). but anti-catabolic is not the same thing as anabolic.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold
i have taken LR3igf-1 before, as a means to help connective tissue, not as an anabolic.

I did feel systemic effects though, and these effects were pretty much identical to what i feel from GH. water retention primarily and muscle fullness.

this can easily be misinterpreted as muscel growth. If you tell people that the LR3igf1 increases muscle fibers and size then they are going to interpret the changes in their body as new muscle. but its not

i bet none of the people reported massive strength increases did they. just like gh. cuz if it built muscle there would be strength increases

[Skarhead]

TweetThis is pretty much downplaying BOTH hgh and IGF as anabolic agents