Search results

no prob bro. :) i think what's missing is that igf-1 is a completely different drug from lr3igf-1(what you call igf1-3). you aren't using igf-1. you're using the long arg(3) flavor of it which has been chemically modified with a special group attached to a special spot. lr3igf-1 has been...

regular rIGF-I -- not the lr3 variant -- runs $210.00/100 mcg at retail. daily replacement dose for laron's dwarfism patients: 100mcg/kg/day. let's assume you weigh 100 kg. you're spending $21,000/day for a replacement dose...

i don't know of any comprehensive discussions of it that i would consider authoritative. the pgf2a one is an excellent document and can be considered more-or-less accurate. :) i'm still really worried about the possibility of depleting your pool of stem cells. i'll do some reading about that...

hell yeah, but you can probably find a cheaper way to do that with similar results. :D

nah, the antibody just won't really work well at all. it's certainly not going to be permanent. if it's keyed to myostatin -- as the name obviously implies -- it won't do anything to curtail myostatin production, but instead attempts to destroy it quickly once it's produced. pharmacological...

i don't think that's necessarily safe with igf-i because the water from the b12 has a decent chance of breaking down the igf-i. it's relatively unstable in non-acidic water-based solutions. you've got a better shot with the BA-suspended shit than the AA shit because the BA mixes poorly with...

diseases in which myostatin production is messed up are commonly referred to as muscular dystrophies. from here you don't appear severely ill and/or dead, so no, i don't think you have major defects in your myostatin production. i think ton's first post was excellent. i'd like to re-emphasize...

have you lost bodyfat during that time? that could be a contributing factor. also, six years is a long time -- will probably lead to natural changes anyway...

read my post on interleukin-15 much further down for a full description of it. il-2 would be similar but even worse. i have no idea what a myostatin antibody would do at this point, but these tend to be extremely blunt tools. remember that antibodies in general work by marking individual...

no problem at all, thanks for the contribution. :D i just want to make sure the right information gets out there.

i've already debunked this particular post. it's loaded with bad science and unfortunately widely circulated. it was posted less than a month ago. some of the info is still valuable but make sure you don't take everything for gospel. http://board1.mantisforums.com/upload/showthread.php?t=23206

your 9 iu/day gh dose is probably relatively extremely small to your igf-i dose. for anabolism that's really pretty small and it needs to be stacked with slin for good results. lr3igf-i is considerably more effective on paper than gh, by the way. i was referring to real-world results reported...

awright, i've done a ton more reading. apparently despite the very close similarity in structure and production, the inserted sequence makes mgf a separate growth factor with separate effects, rather than a more potent version of igf-iea, but it is reliant on the same igf-i receptor(igf-ir...

noticed nothing myself. igf-i is likely to be less troublesome in this regard than GH because gh will lead to autocrine production of extremely large quantities of igf-i relative to the amount you're using systemically. in other words, gh means much more igf-i in bone and cartilage than...

even more interesting, administration of IGF-I or GH+IGF-I directly to these cells results in a virtual cessation of MGF production: http://www.physoc.org/publications/proceedings/archive/images/558P/hires/C5_T0.jpg http://www.physoc.org/publications/proceedings/archive/article.asp?ID=558PC5...

please understand that a bunch of abstracts tossed in a pile does nobody any more service than a link to pubmed with IL-15 as a search string. autoimmune diseases are some of the most crippling known. i wouldn't call the drug remotely safe, given that we haven't heard of anyone acquiring...

was i wrong re:mgf? mgf is produced through a genetic splice of the igf-i gene, not by splicing igf-i itself enzymatically. this is certainly why gh is so effective at building muscle mass. mgf is not a systemically circulating hormone but is instead locally(autocrine/paracrine) expressed...

intramuscular winny uptake ~90%, oral ~85%. liver must process the substance to remove it in either case but must process it twice with oral absorption.

1ml/day is a pretty high dosage. you can probably get away with much less, but you'll see continued suppression of estrogen levels all the way up to 30mg/day. i use 0.2ml/day, or 0.5mg. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8345034 pick...

... the idea is to limit systemic uptake with slower release because systemic uptake = explosive shits and the rest of it immediately metabolized by your lungs. YOU TAKE PGF2A IN ORDER TO CAUSE LOCAL MUSCLE GROWTH & INFLAMMATION. that is the entire goal. :rolleyes...