GH intramuscular

[Colossus_1986]

whats the difference between a GH injection constantly being done in:

ex 1 - Intramuscular into bicep with insulin needle

as opposed to 2- the conventional Sub-Q way in the navel area, still with insulin syringe.

can you expect growth in that 1 particular region?
if someone is looking for improvement in that particular area, should they just
put any and all of their anabolics in there? GH also? just the GH...etc

i know most "size" occurs from the swelling and scar tissue, but is it worth it?

curious as hell on that one

[Emmortal]

GH's effects are systemic therefore you will not see any site specific growth when injecting into a muscle.  The only difference between IM and SubQ injectiosn with GH is absorption time.  IM is a slightly faster rate of absorption as opposed to SubQ.

If you want site specific growth you should look into pegMGF and LR3-IGF1.

[Van_Bilderass]

GH's effects are systemic therefore you will not see any site specific growth when injecting into a muscle.  The only difference between IM and SubQ injectiosn with GH is absorption time.  IM is a slightly faster rate of absorption as opposed to SubQ.

If you want site specific growth you should look into pegMGF and LR3-IGF1.

I don't believe igf or mgf cause site specific growth either.

[Emmortal]

I don't believe igf or mgf cause site specific growth either.

Technically, no, you are correct.  I should have worded that more carefully.  pegMGF does from what I understand of it, but IGF is systemic as well.  You could work your biceps out and shoot it in your quads and get the most growth in your biceps.

[Van_Bilderass]

Technically, no, you are correct.  I should have worded that more carefully.  pegMGF does from what I understand of it, but IGF is systemic as well.  You could work your biceps out and shoot it in your quads and get the most growth in your biceps.

I don't know anyone who used MGF. Have you used it or do you know anyone who used it? What effects did they note?

To me it seems like the MGF and pegMGF was a bust. Who knows what the supposed MGF even contained as no one tested it to my knowledge. I know Patrick Arnold said he was very doubtful that there has been a pegylated MGF on the market ever since according to him it's very difficult to produce.

[Emmortal]

I just finished up a cycle of it with IGF.   I started it a week before doing IGF to get a chance at seeing how the effects were.  I had posted some information about it in another thread.  I've read what PA has said about it as well so I'm not sure if that's true or not, who really knows when it comes to this shit.

I did notice some insane pumps while on it that first week.  Sometimes it was to the point where I had to stop working out for 10 minutes or so just to relax.  Mostly in my shoulder and biceps.  Vascularity was up quite a bit as well.  I ran it for 5 weeks, first week being by itself and the second week I ran it in conjunction with IGF.  While on both I noticed increased fullness in my muscle bellies for days after a workout, increased pumps and vascularity as well.

Since both of their true effects take months to really notice, I can't say for sure at this point, other than what I listed above, what their end effects will be but I'll keep you all posted.

[Emmortal]

Some more thoughts on this.  I guess my question comes down to, what the fuck is this stuff if it's not really pegMGF?  What else would cause the types of effects that I experienced as well as others have experienced while use pegMGF?  If it is indeed as difficult as PA would suggest in the manufacturing process, then what are we injecting here?  I know this is truly speculation without some lab testing, but I'm just curious if anyone else has some insight.

My mind keeps going back to the ORD busts that found rat poison labeled as IGF and I'm starting to cringe a bit =)

Oh and sorry for hijacking your thread Colossus!

[Alex23]

I don't believe igf or mgf cause site specific growth either.

Wrong. it's been proven and observed over and over.

[Emmortal]

Wrong. it's been proven and observed over and over.

I think people are attributing that to the fact that IGF goes where there are the most receptors available, and if you just worked your biceps out and shot it into the biceps then you'll see "localized" growth because that's where there most receptors will be.  However,  you could work your biceps out and shoot it in your quads and you'll see the most growth in your biceps.  As soon as you inject it, it gets washed into the bloodstream almost instantaneously and there's nothing in IGF research that states it's effects are local to the area of injection, everything that I've read says it's systemic.

[Van_Bilderass]

Wrong. it's been proven and observed over and over.

Show the proof buddy. I'll wait.

Even if you "observed" some localized growth you'd have a hard time proving it's not due to scar tissue or temporary swelling due to tissue irritation.

[thelamefalsehood]

Wrong. it's been proven and observed over and over.

I thought he was natural , how would a natural have any clue on how AAS and Peptides work?

[Alex23]

how would a natural have any clue on how AAS and Peptides work?

hahaha I thought I've hear it all... does a med student knows how opiates works without being on it ?

Show the proof buddy. I'll wait.
Even if you "observed" some localized growth you'd have a hard time proving it's not due to scar tissue or temporary swelling due to tissue irritation.

Hope you haven't been waiting all afternoon on a message board. On my side, still waiting on your pics.

Satellite cell activation and accelerating fiber type conversion... PGF-2 is known to have a localized effect on the fiber type ratio as well. Nothing magic but these peptides are known to have localized effect. So do non-esterized.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2171577

[Emmortal]

That's a cool study, but it refers to IGF1, not LR3, apples and oranges.

[Van_Bilderass]

Hope you haven't been waiting all afternoon on a message board. On my side, still waiting on your pics.

Satellite cell activation and accelerating fiber type conversion... PGF-2 is known to have a localized effect on the fiber type ratio as well. Nothing magic but these peptides are known to have localized effect. So do non-esterized.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2171577

I took a quick look and didn't see anything about localized effect at the injection site. MGF is muscle specific - no shit! Doesn't mean an injection of MGF to a specific muscle will have a localized effect only in that muscle or even that muscle to a larger degree than the rest of the muscular system.

I haven't seen any proof that "non-esterized" steroids cause local growth.

As far as my pics... that comment is hilarious considering your response to thelamefalsehood. Doesn't have anything to do with the subject at hand.