# Is Uncle Z's HGH legit?



## heavyiron (Nov 29, 2011)

I have been on Uncle Z's blue tops for about a month now. I started at 3.3 iu HGH daily and then moved to 5iu GH daily. I have ordered blood work to confirm the GH is genuine. My labs will include testing the following;

*Human Growth Hormone*

*Acromegaly Screen (Basic)*
IGF-1
TSH
Thyroxine (T4) Free, Direct
Glucose, Serum

I will continue to administer the blue tops every day. The day of the test I will fast 12 hours before hand. 2 hours before the draw I will administer a dose of HGH as peak plasma concentrations are about 2 hours after administration of HGH. IGF-1 levels are more stable and when the GH          level is very high, the IGF-1 level is also very high. A test for IGF-1 may          also be done to confirm high GH levels.

No matter the results I will post them here for everyone's review.


----------



## J.thom (Nov 29, 2011)

this is why you're the man heavy, can't wait to see the lab reports although I'm def sure there g2g


----------



## Repo (Nov 29, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> I have been on Uncle Z's blue tops for about a month now. I started at 3.3 iu HGH daily and then moved to 5iu GH daily. I have ordered blood work to confirm the GH is genuine. My labs will include testing the following;
> 
> *Human Growth Hormone*
> 
> ...



That's great Heavy - I'm on these bad-boys as well and am looking forward to seeing your results.

I'm loving these at the same 5iu's dose ... "look great and feel even better!"


----------



## GH Consigliere (Nov 30, 2011)

Heavy it this going to like a log on hgh peptides ? How you feel etc...I would love to follow this due I got no knowegle on and pedtides  will AAS too but that another story lol


----------



## vannesb (Nov 30, 2011)

very interested as well, am sure it will be a great log


----------



## heavyiron (Nov 30, 2011)

Here is where I ordered the private testing. I also Googled discount codes and found the tests for 15% off. 

Private MD - Buy Lab Tests Online

Acromegaly Testing - Private MD


----------



## GH Consigliere (Nov 30, 2011)

Wow that's cheap and 15% shit shake the trash out! Keep the good sources


----------



## heavyiron (Nov 30, 2011)

Went to Labcorp this AM and got the blood draw. They said 24-72 hours for results.


----------



## GH Consigliere (Nov 30, 2011)

Shit I got wait two weeks but maybe it's for test?


----------



## BP2000 (Nov 30, 2011)

Good work H!  

Did you get a baseline IFG-1 done?  I just got mine back (labcorp) (took 1 day) and my IGF-1 leve was 354


----------



## J.thom (Nov 30, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Went to Labcorp this AM and got the blood draw. They said 24-72 hours for results.



nice heavy, I'm going to get blood work done before my next cycle to to make sure I'm g2g and everything is in check. 

can't wait to see the results


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 1, 2011)

BP2000 said:


> Good work H!
> 
> Did you get a baseline IFG-1 done?  I just got mine back (labcorp) (took 1 day) and my IGF-1 leve was 354


Baseline with zero AAS or anything my was IGF-1 was 163 ng/ml years ago. Since AAS will raise IGF-1 you have to take that into account.


----------



## Pony (Dec 1, 2011)

Im looking forward to seeing the results of your tests, although Im very happy with the results Im seeing on myself.  

..Viva la Mexico!


----------



## ordawg1 (Dec 1, 2011)

Looking forward to comparisons -Thanks-OD


----------



## BP2000 (Dec 2, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Baseline with zero AAS or anything my was IGF-1 was 163 ng/ml years ago. Since AAS will raise IGF-1 you have to take that into account.




Yeah I hear Test by itself will raise IGF-1 level's dramatically on it's own.  

Ive looked at work from guys getting on hrt and one guy increased his levels by 60% just by going on hrt.  Most is 30% though.  Not bad.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 2, 2011)

ordawg1 said:


> Looking forward to comparisons -Thanks-OD



I had my hgh and igf levels tested today also.  I'm running  nipertropin.  Would uncle z be ok if I compared my results with uncle  z's?  I injected 5 iu's 3 hours before the blood draw.


----------



## Hench (Dec 2, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> I had my hgh and igf levels tested today also.  I'm running  nipertropin.  Would uncle z be ok if I compared my results with uncle  z's?  I injected 5 iu's 3 hours before the blood draw.



+1, would like to see this.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 2, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> I had my hgh and igf levels tested today also.  I'm running  nipertropin.  Would uncle z be ok if I compared my results with uncle  z's?  I injected 5 iu's 3 hours before the blood draw.


It's more complicated than just comparing IGF-1 levels. My baseline is pretty low. Yours would have to be similar. Also, the duration on GH has to be taken into account and AAS will skew the results as they raise IGF-1 in a dose dependent relationship. Also, peak plasma levls of GH are at 2 hours. My draw was about 1.5 hours after injecting. Therefore the comparison will not be apples to apples.

However your results would be interesting to see. Do you happen to have a baseline IGF-1 level?


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 2, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> It's more complicated than just comparing IGF-1 levels. My baseline is pretty low. Yours would have to be similar. Also, the duration on GH has to be taken into account and AAS will skew the results as they raise IGF-1 in a dose dependent relationship. Also, peak plasma levls of GH are at 2 hours. My draw was about 1.5 hours after injecting. Therefore the comparison will not be apples to apples.
> 
> However your results would be interesting to see. Do you happen to have a baseline IGF-1 level?



No, I did not get a baseline, I didn't know better.  I just finished up pct after 8 months of blasting and cruising, so I'm sure that will throw igf levels off too.  I'm willing to share my results as long as it's ok with z.  I don't want to be impolite.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 2, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> No, I did not get a baseline, I didn't know better.  I just finished up pct after 8 months of blasting and cruising, so I'm sure that will throw igf levels off too.  I'm willing to share my results as long as it's ok with z.  I don't want to be impolite.


Ok, you just finished PCT. How long have you been running the GH?


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 2, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Ok, you just finished PCT. How long have you been running the GH?



one week.  Here is a graph that was provided for me about the pharmacokinetics of hgh.  I was going to compare my results to this study.

The first treatment sequence received a  0.5 mL (2.92 mg) subcutaneous dose of r-hGH (Saizen®,  Merck Serono)  administered by standard needle and syringe (period 1)  followed by  administration of the same dose of rhGH using the  cool.click??? 2  needle-free injection device (period 2). The second  treatment sequence  received 0.5 mL (2.92 mg) r-hGH administered by the  cool.click??? 2  device (period 1) followed by administration of the same  dose of r-hGH  using a standard needle and syringe (period 2).


----------



## bigbenj (Dec 2, 2011)

Exo is always getting tests and shit lol


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 2, 2011)

bigbenj said:


> Exo is always getting tests and shit lol



I'm a bit of an ocd science nerd...


----------



## TJTJ (Dec 2, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> I'm a bit of an ocd science nerd...


----------



## OldSchoolLifter (Dec 2, 2011)

excited to see the result Friend, On 6iu ed right now, and its been great


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 3, 2011)

*Uncle Z blue tops are genuine HGH. *

HGH levels and IGF-1 levels are significantly elevated given my baseline values and my age.


----------



## shearerr (Dec 3, 2011)

looks good, thank you for sharing


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 3, 2011)

how much did you inject?


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 3, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> how much did you inject?


5iu HGH 90 minutes before the draw.


----------



## independent (Dec 3, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> I'm a bit of an ocd science nerd...



Thats better than broscience.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 3, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> 5iu HGH 90 minutes before the draw.



well that might make the comparison interesting.  I injected 5 iu 3 hours before my test.  Do you think hgh serum levels can be compared?  With an adjustment for the time difference?


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 3, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> one week.  Here is a graph that was provided for me about the pharmacokinetics of hgh.  I was going to compare my results to this study.
> 
> The first treatment sequence received a  0.5 mL (2.92 mg) subcutaneous dose of r-hGH (Saizen®,  Merck Serono)  administered by standard needle and syringe (period 1)  followed by  administration of the same dose of rhGH using the  cool.click??? 2  needle-free injection device (period 2). The second  treatment sequence  received 0.5 mL (2.92 mg) r-hGH administered by the  cool.click??? 2  device (period 1) followed by administration of the same  dose of r-hGH  using a standard needle and syringe (period 2).



Looks like the dose used in the above graph was over 7.8iu HGH. This may be another factor to consider as the following study shows a 2 hour peak. Either way it seems that HGH may be tested 2-3 hours after administration to capture a snapshot of peak levels.

J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1982 Nov;55(5):1003-6.

*A  comparison of subcutaneous and intramuscular administration of human  growth hormone in the therapy of growth hormone deficiency.*

Russo L, Moore WV.
*Abstract*

The  sc and im administration of human GH (hGH) was compared in the therapy  of GH deficiency. The peak and integrated concentrations of hGH in the  plasma of the patients were similar after sc and im injection of an  initial dose (0.1 U/kg) of hGH. The peak hGH concentration occurred at 2  h in both groups. The posttreatment height velocity and the change in  height velocity at 3-month intervals were also similar in the im and sc  groups. The somatomedin generation test resulted in a higher mean peak  of somatomedin C after sc injection; however, if the individual peaks of  somatomedin C were averaged, there was no difference between sc and im  injection. A cross-over at 9 months of therapy to determine patient  acceptance of im vs. sc injections indicated overwhelming acceptance of  the sc route. The antibody responses to hGH were similar in both groups.  We conclude that sc injection of hGH is an effective and safe mode of  therapy for GH deficiency. The lipoatrophy that occurred infrequently at  the injection site can be eliminated by rotation of sites. Subcutaneous  administration of hGH will be more acceptable by the patients with less  pain and less noncompliance.

PMID:6889608 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 3, 2011)

It seems like your hgh serum levels are consistent with the graph considering you injected only 5 iu's and tested at 1.5 hours.  Looks like good hgh.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 3, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> It seems like your hgh serum levels are consistent with the graph considering you injected only 5 iu's and tested at 1.5 hours.  Looks like good hgh.


Yes, just found another chart. Looks like 3-4 hours if you click on the full text.

Endocrinologia Japonica: * (1988) ,*


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 3, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Yes, just found another chart. Looks like 3-4 hours if you click on the full text.
> 
> Endocrinologia Japonica: * (1988) ,*



awesome, thanks.  It also looks like igf levels are greater with ed injections compared to 2-4 times a day, even when the weekly amount is the same.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 3, 2011)

Interestingly, their serum levels are significantly higher for a similar dosage to the graph I posted.  Maybe it's their age?  Their levels had a mean of 42.9 ng/ml.  Whereas my graph, the mean was between 15-20.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 3, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> Interestingly, their serum levels are significantly higher for a similar dosage to the graph I posted.  Maybe it's their age?  Their levels had a mean of 42.9 ng/ml.  Whereas my graph, the mean was between 15-20.


I haven't checked but sometimes the newer studies use more sensitive measuring as technology improves. I lean towards the newer studies because of this.


----------



## nby (Dec 3, 2011)

Nice test heavy, thanks.  EDIT: that stuff is pricey!


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 3, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> I haven't checked but sometimes the newer studies use more sensitive measuring as technology improves. I lean towards the newer studies because of this.



I would think that body weight is a factor too.  These were kids that were probably small considering they were receiving hgh.


----------



## ordawg1 (Dec 3, 2011)

Very nice Heavy-consistent with all reports that Zs HGH is gtg-Thanks-ordawg1


----------



## LightBearer (Dec 3, 2011)

i remember seeing guys igf-1 tests being in the thousands while on hgh, so im wondering if theiir tests were just wrong or if they were taking it for much longer at higher IU


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 3, 2011)

LightBearer said:


> i remember seeing guys igf-1 tests being in the thousands while on hgh, so im wondering if theiir tests were just wrong or if they were taking it for much longer at higher IU


Maybe they were injecting IGF-1? This is why I had my Growth Hormone levels measured as well. That way I would know if I was injecting HGH. Also I took the test fasted. Carbs can increase IGF-1 levels in many users. Anyway my baseline IGF-1 was 163 ng/ml so this is a nice bump for me.

I'm planning on retesting down the raod at a higher HGH dose and I will wait a little longer after administration to get the draw since I had the draw a bit early.


----------



## nby (Dec 3, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Maybe they were injecting IGF-1? This is why I had my Growth Hormone levels measured as well. That way I would know if I was injecting HGH. Also I took the test fasted. Carbs can increase IGF-1 levels in many users. Anyway my baseline IGF-1 was 163 ng/ml so this is a nice bump for me.
> 
> I'm planning on retesting down the raod at a higher HGH dose and I will wait a little longer after administration to get the draw since I had the draw a bit early.



You said you've only been on it for a month, HGH takes a considerable amount of time to build IGF-1 levels afaik. Just injecting IGF-1 would increase the levels a lot faster.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 4, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> I have been on Uncle Z's blue tops for about a month now. I started at 3.3 iu HGH daily and then moved to 5iu GH daily. I have ordered blood work to confirm the GH is genuine. My labs will include testing the following;
> 
> *Human Growth Hormone*
> 
> ...



I wrote an article before about rhGH blood testing unfortunately those blood test results are  not reliable.
Recombinant GH injected by some subjects is very similar or even identical to the naturally occurring GH. Therefore to my best knowledge there is no specific test capable of distinguishing between them. 
GH stays in circulation for a very short time (minutes to one hour, depends if the injection is intravenal or subcutanous)and is rapidly secreted by kidney.  Testing IGF-1 or other compounds that will be indicative for injection of GH are not  reliable.

*Challenges in the detection of GH abuse*

Detection of doping with exogenous GH is a formidable
challenge for several reasons [3]. It is difficult to differentiate
between rhGH and endogenously produced pituitary
GH, because rhGH has an amino acid sequence identical
with that of the native 22-kiloDalton (kDa) isoform of the
hormone. Cadaveric GH contains the full range of GH
isoforms and so is indistinguishable from endogenous GH.
Demonstration of exogenous administration must therefore
rely on detecting levels that are not found in normal
physiology. This in turn creates a further problem, because
GH has a short half-life (<20 min) and is secreted in a
pulsatile manner leading to widely varying circulating GH
concentrations throughout the day. Many physiological
factors regulate GH secretion but in the context of antidoping
it is important to recognise that both exercise and
stress lead to a brisk and marked increase in GH secretion
[67, 68]. Consequently the finding of a high GH concentration
in the post-competition setting may merely reflect
endogenous secretion.
This is well recognised in clinical endocrinology, in
which diagnosis of acromegaly cannot be based on a single
GH measurement. Acromegaly is diagnosed by assessing
the GH response to administration of an oral glucose load
over a two-hour period or by repeated measurement of GH
throughout the day. Although these are effective clinical
tools, they are impractical for anti-doping purposes, for
which repeat sampling is not possible.
Mass spectrometric methods for detecting the abuse of
androgenic anabolic steroids and related substances in urine
are highly sophisticated. These are not feasible for GH
because the urinary clearance of GH is not a constant
function of plasma GH [69]. The rates of glomerular
filtration and tubular re-absorption determine urinary
clearance, and GH re-absorption from the glomerular
filtrate is sensitive to the highly variable ambient protein
concentration in the filtrate [70, 71]. Exercise increases
urinary protein excretion, which inhibits GH re-absorption
and increases urinary GH concentration [72]. Consequently
immunoassays and blood sampling are currently preferred.
In addition to these biological considerations, there are a
number of practical aspects to any doping test. Ideally it
should be inexpensive and have a high volume testing
capacity and robust technical operation with high sensitivity
and specificity in order to avoid making false accusations
[73]. Finally it must also be acceptable to the sporting
community and easy to administer in sporting venues.
Development of a test to detect growth hormone abuse
Two different yet complementary approaches have been
investigated to detect GH abuse; the first, pioneered by
Christian Strasburger and Martin Bidlingmaier in Germany,
is based on the detection of different pituitary GH isoforms
whereas the second utilises the measurement of GHsensitive
markers.

The isoform method

Endogenous pituitary GH occurs in multiple isoforms;
approximately 70% of circulating GH is in the form of a
22-kDa polypeptide whereas 5–10% occurs as a 20-kDa
isoform as a result of mRNA splicing. There are,
furthermore, dimers, oligomers, and acidic, desaminated,
acylated, and fragmented forms of GH [74].
By contrast, rhGH comprises solely the 22-kDa isoform.
When rhGH is administered, endogenous pituitary secretion
is down-regulated through negative feedback, leading to an
increase in the 22-kDa isoform relative to other non-22-kDa
isoforms. The isoform method relies on measurement of
GH isoforms by two immunoassays that use monoclonal
antibodies that bind preferentially to either 22-kDa GH or
pituitary-derived hGH [75–77]. An increased proportion of
22-kDa GH or pituitary-derived hGH is indicative of GH
administration [78].

The proportions of GH isoforms are unaffected by age,
sex, sporting discipline, and pathological states [79, 80], but
exercise causes a transient relative increase of the 22-kDa
isoform, thereby reducing the sensitivity of the test if
samples are taken immediately after competition [81, 82].
Proof-of-concept was first shown for subjects with GH
deficiency receiving rhGH replacement; for these patients
the ratio of 22-kDa to pituitary GH was greater than unity
whereas for samples from healthy control adults the ratio
was less than unity [78]. Subsequently the effect of rhGH
administration on the isoform profile was studied in an
open-label cross-over study involving 10 healthy trained
men and 10 women who received a single bolus injection
of rhGH (0.033 mg kg−1 sc, 0.033 mg kg−1 im, and
0.083 mg kg−1 sc) on three separate occasions [83]. Peak
GH concentration and area under the curve were higher in
men and after intramuscular injection. The 20-kDa GH
isoform was suppressed for 14–18 h and 30 h in women
receiving low-dose and high-dose rhGH, respectively,
whereas in men the 20-kDa GH was undetectable at
baseline and throughout the study.

The WADA International Standard for Laboratories
requires confirmation of any adverse analytical finding.
For immunoassays, this means using a second set of
immunoassays using antibodies that recognize different
epitopes [84]. To comply with this, before the 2004 Athens
Olympic Games, two pairs of 22-kDa and pituitary GH
assays were developed in-house by Strasburger and
Bidlingmaier. The initial versions incorporated researchgrade
capture antibodies immobilized on the solid-phase
surface of a micro-titre plate, a biotinylated detection
antibody, and a streptavidin–europium conjugate, which
generated a signal that could be read using a fluorimeter
[85].

The assays were validated in Munich before being
introduced in WADA-accredited laboratories in Sydney,
London, and Athens. An external quality assessment
scheme (EQAS) was established, and showed good
consistency in the reporting of both negative and suspicious
samples; importantly there were no false positives. The
results were reviewed at a WADA-sponsored workshop in
Dallas in April 2004 and the assays were approved for use
at the Athens Olympic Games. These assays were subsequently
used at the winter Olympic Games in Turin and the
Commonwealth Games in Melbourne in 2006 [85].
It was recognized early in development of the assay that
to maintain stability and reliability the kits should be
produced under controlled manufacturing conditions and, in
2006, WADA entered an agreement with SphingoTec,
Berlin, Germany, to adapt the assays to a new technical
platform (tube-based chemiluminescence technique) that
would be suitable for the production of commercial kits
[75].
This new platform uses capture antibodies that are precoated
on the surface of assay tubes, and detection
antibodies directly labelled with acridinium ester, a chemical
that gives a luminescent signal when excited at a
specific energy in the reading instrument (luminometer).
This development significantly improved detection sensitivity
and kit stability and reduced both intra-assay and
inter-assay CVs.

After testing over 1000 samples, the first adverse
analytical finding came in February 2010 when the British
rugby league player, Terry Newton, tested positive [21].
Further adverse findings have followed, but so far none has
been challenged in the Court for Arbitration in Sport.
The main disadvantage of the isoform method is its short
window of detection [83]. Recombinant hGH, even when
injected subcutaneously, is cleared rapidly and GH is
frequently undetectable in a blood sample taken the
morning after an injection [86].  [87].
 Consequently, any athlete who ceases GH
use several days before a competition GH will not be
suspected. It is, therefore, likely that the isoform method
will not catch a cheat in the classical “post-competition”
dope-testing scenario and the optimum use of this method
is likely to be in unannounced “out of competition” testing,
as happened in the case of Terry Newton. Another
disadvantage of this method is that it will not detect the
use of cadaveric GH or GH secretagogues, because these do
not alter the isoform profile.
An Australian–Japanese consortium has taken a slightly
different approach and has developed assays that specifically
measure either 22-kDa or 20-kDa GH [88]. A pilot
study showed that after daily administration of 0.1 IU kg−1
(0.033 gkg−1)day−1 of 22-kDa-GH for 17 days there was a
increase in serum 22-kDa-GH concentration which reached
a peak value 3 h after the injection and returned to baseline
by the next day. By contrast, serum 20-kDa decreased
before returning to the initial level after 24 h. The ratio of
22-kDa GH to 20-kDa GH increased markedly after
administration of GH but had returned to baseline within
24 h in each of three subjects studied [79].


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 4, 2011)

Yeah, I'm not really trying to detect doping of exogenous GH. 

My labs where taken to show that once the blue tops were injected my GH levels and IGF-1 levels rose. I understand this is a semi-crude method however GH levels can be measured and will rise for several hours when administering GH. Anyway I think you are posting more about the elimination half-life of rhGH and how to detect it, where I am looking at plasma levels of GH. 

Anyway, I'm happy to report my GH and IGF-1 levels are above the reference range. I'm thinking of doing follow up labs at a higher dose and waiting a bit longer after administration. Should be interesting to see if I can get my GH plasma levels even higher.


----------



## OldSchoolLifter (Dec 4, 2011)

Is your Growth Hormone real?~a guide to find out – HeavyIron | Uncle Z Blog


----------



## autodad (Dec 4, 2011)

Sweet I just ordered.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 4, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Yeah, I'm not really trying to detect doping of exogenous GH.
> 
> My labs where taken to show that once the blue tops were injected my GH levels and IGF-1 levels rose. I understand this is a semi-crude method however GH levels can be measured and will rise for several hours when administering GH. Anyway I think you are posting more about the elimination half-life of rhGH and how to detect it, where I am looking at plasma levels of GH.
> 
> Anyway, I'm happy to report my GH and IGF-1 levels are above the reference range. I'm thinking of doing follow up labs at a higher dose and waiting a bit longer after administration. Should be interesting to see if I can get my GH plasma levels even higher.



Testing IGF-1 or other compounds that will be indicative for injection of GH are not reliable at all . After GH administration there was no difference in peak IGF-I or P-IIINP or in the maximum change in IGF-I or P-III-NP.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 4, 2011)

Grozny said:


> Testing IGF-1 or other compounds that will be indicative for injection of GH are not reliable at all . After GH administration there was no difference in peak IGF-I or P-IIINP or in the maximum change in IGF-I or P-III-NP.



This is why he also tested serum hgh levels.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 4, 2011)

Grozny said:


> Testing IGF-1 or other compounds that will be indicative for injection of GH are not reliable at all . After GH administration there was no difference in peak IGF-I or P-IIINP or in the maximum change in IGF-I or P-III-NP.


I also had Human Growth Hormone levels tested which were well above the reference range. The blue tops raised my Growth Hormone levels. 

Also, IGF-1 testing is commonly used alongside HGH testing as IGF-1 WILL rise with GH administration over a period of time. Usually follow up HGH and IGF-1 labs are done after 1-3 months of Growth Hormone administration.

J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2003 May;16 Suppl 3:631-5.

*Confirming the diagnosis of growth hormone deficiency (GHD) and transitioning the care of patients with childhood-onset GHD.*

Hintz RL.
*Source*

Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. hintz@stanford.edu

*Abstract*

Growth hormone  deficiency (GHD) diagnosed in childhood may persist into adult life.  After attainment of final height, retesting of the patient's growth hormone-insulin-like growth  factor (GH-IGF) axis using the adult GHD diagnostic criteria should be  performed after an appropriate interval of 1-3 months off GH therapy. At  the time of retesting, other pituitary hormones and serum IGF-I levels  should also be measured. The opportunity should be taken to assess body  composition, bone mineral density, and fasting lipid and insulin levels.  Patients with severe, long-standing, multiple pituitary hormone  deficiency, genetic defects, or severe organic GHD can be excluded from  GH retesting. When the diagnosis of adult GHD is established,  continuation of GH therapy can be recommended unless there is a known  risk of diabetes mellitus or malignancy. The patient's transition to GH  replacement in adulthood should be arranged as a close collaboration  between the pediatric and adult endocrinologists, who should discuss the  reinitiation of treatment with the patient.

PMID:12795365 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


----------



## LightBearer (Dec 4, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Maybe they were injecting IGF-1? This is why I had my Growth Hormone levels measured as well. That way I would know if I was injecting HGH. Also I took the test fasted. Carbs can increase IGF-1 levels in many users. Anyway my baseline IGF-1 was 163 ng/ml so this is a nice bump for me.
> 
> I'm planning on retesting down the raod at a higher HGH dose and I will wait a little longer after administration to get the draw since I had the draw a bit early.


sure thats entirely possible. igf in high doses would also cause weight loss due to dropping blood sugar
id really like to see the blood test of a person on a name brand hgh so we could have an idea on how much hgh should raise igf


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 4, 2011)

LightBearer said:


> sure thats entirely possible. igf in high doses would also cause weight loss due to dropping blood sugar
> id really like to see the blood test of a person on a name brand hgh so we could have an idea on how much hgh should raise igf


There are a ton of variables so not sure it would be apples to apples without a controlled setting.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 5, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> well that might make the comparison interesting.  I injected 5 iu 3 hours before my test.  Do you think hgh serum levels can be compared?  With an adjustment for the time difference?



Samson Nips fake =(

http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/2580261-post153.html


----------



## XYZ (Dec 5, 2011)

Grozny said:


> Testing IGF-1 or other compounds that will be indicative for injection of GH are not reliable at all . After GH administration there was no difference in peak IGF-I or P-IIINP or in the maximum change in IGF-I or P-III-NP.


 

99.9% of your posts are of the same quality.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 5, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> Samson Nips fake =(
> 
> http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/2580261-post153.html




I updated the thread with pics of my labs.


----------



## Calves of Steel (Dec 5, 2011)

XYZ said:


> 99.9% of your posts are of the same quality.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 6, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> I also had Human Growth Hormone levels tested which were well above the reference range. The blue tops raised my Growth Hormone levels.
> 
> Also, IGF-1 testing is commonly used alongside HGH testing as IGF-1 WILL rise with GH administration over a period of time. Usually follow up HGH and IGF-1 labs are done after 1-3 months of Growth Hormone administration.
> 
> ...



Human GH is secreted in spikes and not continuously.  Therefore a single measurement is meaningless.  The accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24 h.  Therefore the value in your report even if it is a bit about the average says nothing.  Variations in IGF-1 among different people and under different conditions are quite big there the elevation if IGF-1 level in you report *also is not indicative of taking external hGH.* 

In conclusion so far we have no test for determining injected external hGH.   

Some (but not all)recombinant hGH may have an additional amino acid at the end but even in that case there is no reliable test to distinguish between that and endogenous hGH. 

If u really want to analyse Uncle Z blue tops I have a laboratory who can do it, then we can see a purity and dosage; let me know if u are interested. (its little bit pricey)


----------



## Grozny (Dec 6, 2011)

XYZ said:


> 99.9% of your posts are of the same quality.



I guessing u are not smart enough to understand it


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 6, 2011)

Grozny said:


> Human GH is secreted in spikes and not continuously.  Therefore a single measurement is meaningless.  The accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24 h.  Therefore the value in your report even if it is a bit about the average says nothing.  Variations in IGF-1 among different people and under different conditions are quite big there the elevation if IGF-1 level in you report *also is not indicative of taking external hGH.*
> 
> In conclusion so far we have no test for determining injected external hGH.
> 
> ...



Are you purposefully skipping over the serum hgh level of 6.5 w a reference of 0-2.9?
I injected some bunk hgh and my serum hgh was .1


----------



## Grozny (Dec 6, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> Are you purposefully skipping over the serum hgh level of 6.5 w a reference of 0-2.9?
> I injected some bunk hgh and my serum hgh was .1



As u can read as above regarding rhGH a single measurement is meaningless,the accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24.

If uncle z is ready to pay for the lab test I can analyse those blue tops according PhEur standard.

Then  determine content and related substances. I need about 1-2 g product.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 6, 2011)

Grozny said:


> As u can read as above regarding rhGH a single measurement is meaningless,the accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24.
> 
> If uncle z is ready to pay for the lab test I can analyse those blue tops according PhEur standard.
> 
> Then  determine content and related substances. I need about 1-2 g product.


There are 3 main types of HGH testing, you are confusing the three tests. Growth Hormone is commonly tested to see bioequivalence based on log-transformed AUC and Cmax values. Many labs offer this to determine if further tests need to be made. The uncle Z blue tops increased my GH levels over 60 times baseline. pharmacokinetics of HGH are proven science and we have provided that science repeatedly but you choose to ignore it or are just plain ignorant. You are not fooling anyone with your agenda. Its clear you will do anything to tear down other sources even if it means deceiving members about common lab procedures.

Below is the pharmacokinetics of HGH once injected. It's obvious that GH blood testing is a REALITY.







_The first treatment sequence  received a  0.5 mL (2.92 mg) subcutaneous dose of r-hGH (Saizen®,  Merck  Serono)  administered by standard needle and syringe (period 1)   followed by  administration of the same dose of rhGH using the   cool.click™ 2  needle-free injection device (period 2). The second   treatment sequence  received 0.5 mL (2.92 mg) r-hGH administered by the   cool.click™ 2  device (period 1) followed by administration of the same   dose of r-hGH  using a standard needle and syringe (period 2).

_*Full study below*_

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6904/7/10
_


----------



## Grozny (Dec 6, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> There are 3 main types of HGH testing, you are confusing the three tests. Growth Hormone is commonly tested to see plasma levels. Almost all labs offer this to determine if further tests need to be made. The uncle Z blue tops increased my GH levels over 60 times baseline. pharmacokinetics of HGH are proven science and we have provided that science repeatedly but you choose to ignore it or are just plain ignorant. You are not fooling anyone with your agenda. Its clear you will do anything to tear down other sources even if it means deceiving members about common lab procedures.
> 
> Below is the pharmacokinetics of HGH once injected. It's obvious that GH blood testing is a REALITY.
> 
> ...



What confusion ?? Actually there is no any sense to make just a one blood test to verify the authenticity of GH that's my and scientifically point of view, it's totally worthless.

To have a stable results with your blood test the accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24 h.

Actually I have a possibility to make labtest for any aas and GH now if u are interested  then we can do it.

 I m not bashing your thread but this result from your lab test is worthless.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 6, 2011)

Grozny said:


> What confusion ?? Actually there is no any sense to make just a one blood test to verify the authenticity of GH that's my and scientifically point of view, it's totally worthless.
> 
> To have a stable results with your blood test the accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24 h.
> 
> ...



Testing every 20 min multiple times is how you test endogenous hgh levels.  The study above shows how they test serum hgh levels after injecting exogenous hgh.  After 2-4 hours of exogenous hgh being injected there should be a spike in serum hgh levels.  Heavy wasn't measuring his natural hgh levels, he was measuring the response To injecting hgh.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 6, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> Testing every 20 min multiple times is how you test endogenous hgh levels.  The study above shows how they test serum hgh levels after injecting exogenous hgh.  After 2-4 hours of exogenous hgh being injected there should be a spike in serum hgh levels.  Heavy wasn't measuring his natural hgh levels, he was measuring the response To injecting hgh.



please is there someone with knowledge here ...


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 6, 2011)

Grozny said:


> please is there someone with knowledge here ...



Can you provide a scientific explanation for his serum hgh levels being so elevated, other than that he injected exogenous hgh?  You are ignoring this important piece of the puzzle.


----------



## yzfrr11 (Dec 6, 2011)

Grozny said:


> To have a stable results with your blood test the accurate procedure in the clinic is taking samples every 20 min for 16-24 h.



The best time to catch your peak HGH level is around 3-4 hours post a singe bolus SC injection. While it is true that the metabolic half life of rHGH is only 30 minutes, the rate of absorption of the dose from the soft tissues into the venous capillary network is limiting the rate of appearance of the HGH into the serum. So, HGH demonstrates second order pharmacokinetics.

Now, if you are talking about naturally released GH from your anterior pituitary, you are absolutely correct that a single serum level is totally worthless because the release of the hormone is very fleeting and short lived. However, after a bolus injection, a peak serum level is observed at 3-4 hours. And in this scenario, a single serum level has been validated in the peer reviewed scientific literature.


----------



## exphys88 (Dec 6, 2011)

yzfrr11 said:


> The best time to catch your peak HGH level is around 3-4 hours post a singe bolus SC injection. While it is true that the metabolic half life of rHGH is only 30 minutes, the rate of absorption of the dose from the soft tissues into the venous capillary network is limiting the rate of appearance of the HGH into the serum. So, HGH demonstrates second order pharmacokinetics.
> 
> Now, if you are talking about naturally released GH from your anterior pituitary, you are absolutely correct that a single serum level is totally worthless because the release of the hormone is very fleeting and short lived. However, after a bolus injection, a peak serum level is observed at 3-4 hours. And in this scenario, a single serum level has been validated in the peer reviewed scientific literature.




well said.  He's ignoring all of this though.


----------



## XYZ (Dec 6, 2011)

exphysiologist88 said:


> well said. He's ignoring all of this though.


 

There is a reason for that, he doesn't know and he cuts and pastes almost everything.


----------



## yzfrr11 (Dec 6, 2011)

XYZ said:


> There is a reason for that, he doesn't know and he cuts and pastes almost everything.



Maybe he doesn't understand English?


----------



## BP2000 (Dec 6, 2011)

nice work H!  You have IGF-1 level's of a young man


----------



## XYZ (Dec 6, 2011)

yzfrr11 said:


> Maybe he doesn't understand English?


 

Who knows, I love that he states he's from CO.


----------



## ellfrog007 (Dec 6, 2011)

Thanks for this post.A big help.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 6, 2011)

yzfrr11 said:


> The best time to catch your peak HGH level is around 3-4 hours post a singe bolus SC injection. While it is true that the metabolic half life of rHGH is only 30 minutes, the rate of absorption of the dose from the soft tissues into the venous capillary network is limiting the rate of appearance of the HGH into the serum. So, HGH demonstrates second order pharmacokinetics.
> 
> Now, if you are talking about naturally released GH from your anterior pituitary, you are absolutely correct that a single serum level is totally worthless because the release of the hormone is very fleeting and short lived. However, after a bolus injection, a peak serum level is observed at 3-4 hours. And in this scenario, a single serum level has been validated in the peer reviewed scientific literature.


Correct. He completely missed this point. 

Testing to diagnose GH abnormalities often involves either a GH  stimulation test (many measurements every 20 min or so) or a GH suppression test. These are used to evaluate  pituitary response and changes in GH levels.We could care less about these tests because we are NOT testing for pituitary response.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 7, 2011)

yzfrr11 said:


> The best time to catch your peak HGH level is around 3-4 hours post a singe bolus SC injection. While it is true that the metabolic half life of rHGH is only 30 minutes, the rate of absorption of the dose from the soft tissues into the venous capillary network is limiting the rate of appearance of the HGH into the serum. So, HGH demonstrates second order pharmacokinetics.
> 
> Now, if you are talking about naturally released GH from your anterior pituitary, you are absolutely correct that a single serum level is totally worthless because the release of the hormone is very fleeting and short lived. However, after a bolus injection, a peak serum level is observed at 3-4 hours. And in this scenario, a single serum level has been validated in the peer reviewed scientific literature.



I'm talking exclusively about taking external GH, there is no any concrete answer even with blood test to detect the plasma level (external rhGH) , cuz there is no reliable test to distinguish between "external" and endogenous hGH. 

Per example if heavy has made a blood test before and after taking his GH that would be a start for something that we can discuss cuz we have a reference peak.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 7, 2011)

XYZ said:


> There is a reason for that, he doesn't know and he cuts and pastes almost everything.



u have all symptoms and signs of dyslexia  reading difficulties, writing ...  and just for u 

*Dyslexia

*From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about developmental dyslexia. For acquired dyslexia, see Alexia (acquired dyslexia).

*Dyslexia is a very broad term defining a learning disability that impairs a person's fluency or comprehension accuracy in being able to read,[1] and which can manifest itself as a difficulty with phonological awareness, phonological decoding, orthographic coding, auditory short-term memory, or rapid naming*.[2][3] Dyslexia is separate and distinct from reading difficulties resulting from other causes, such as a non-neurological deficiency with vision or hearing, or from poor or inadequate reading instruction.[4][5] It is believed that dyslexia can affect between 5 to 10 percent of a given population although there have been no studies to indicate an accurate percentage.[6][7][8]
There are three proposed cognitive subtypes of dyslexia: auditory, visual and attentional.[7][9][10][11][12][13] Reading disabilities, or dyslexia, is the most common learning disability, although in research literature it is considered to be a receptive language-based learning disability.[14]
Accomplished adult dyslexics may be able to read with good comprehension, but they tend to read more slowly than non-dyslexics and may perform more poorly at nonsense word reading (a measure of phonological awareness) and spelling.[15] Dyslexia is not an intellectual disability, since dyslexia and IQ are not interrelated, as a result of cognition developing independently.[1


----------



## XYZ (Dec 7, 2011)

Grozny said:


> u have all symptoms and signs of dyslexia  reading difficulties, writing ... and just for u
> 
> *Dyslexia*
> 
> ...


 

LOL, if you say so sweet cheeks.


----------



## BP2000 (Dec 7, 2011)

yeah he should have gotten igf-1 test done before as a reference but we know that going on hrt can raise levels 30% or more.  Then adding Z's HGH raised his levels from whatever they were after test replacement to now 350 which is a level of a 20 yo.


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 7, 2011)

My baseline IGF-1 was 163 ng/ml.

I'm in my mid forties.


----------



## yzfrr11 (Dec 7, 2011)

Grozny said:


> there is no reliable test to distinguish between "external" and endogenous hGH.



Not true.

Any GH level greater than 3.0 is exogenous HGH - because even after an insulin/arginine challenge test, a serum HGH of greater than 3.0 is not possible.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 8, 2011)

Bro GH measurements are highly variable and so a single high reading has no clinical or forensic value.

For this case the IGF-I measurement is more stable and is high. This is probably suggestive of the GH administration however, there are a number of caveats:

1)     Sample must be measured twice with two separate assays for both           P-    III-NP.

2)      The laboratory gives a single reference range and as age is a major determinant of IGF-I, our function gives an age correction; it is not clear whether the reference range given by the lab is appropriate for this man 

etc etc ...


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 8, 2011)

Grozny said:


> Bro GH measurements are highly variable and so a single high reading has no clinical or forensic value.
> 
> For this case the IGF-I measurement is more stable and is high. This is probably suggestive of the GH administration however, there are a number of caveats:
> 
> ...


The Uncle Z bluetops elevated both my HGH and IGF-1 levels above the reference range.

1) I will retest again soon and post the results.

2) The lab DID factor in my age. They used 41-45 years old.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 8, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> The Uncle Z bluetops elevated both my HGH and IGF-1 levels above the reference range.
> 
> 1) I will retest again soon and post the results.
> 
> 2) The lab DID factor in my age. They used 41-45 years old.



is it possible to send to one of my labs a sample of your blood  to test with our method then we will publish results here ??


----------



## Grozny (Dec 9, 2011)

Grozny said:


> is it possible to send to one of my labs a sample of your blood  to test with our method then we will publish results here ??



laboratory analyzing  will be done for free are u interested ???


----------



## heavyiron (Dec 9, 2011)

LabCorp is a reputable lab in the USA. I will show Prince my original lab work so you guys know I am being 100% honest. I will see him Saturday.


----------



## Grozny (Dec 9, 2011)

heavyiron said:


> LabCorp is a reputable lab in the USA. I will show Prince my original lab work so you guys know I am being 100% honest. I will see him Saturday.



I was just thinking to analyse your blood with another selective method, exclusively  sensitive for the GH detection.


----------



## independent (Dec 9, 2011)

Grozny said:


> is it possible to send to one of my labs a sample of your blood  to test with our method then we will publish results here ??



Dont do it heavy, he wants your dna to make a clone of you for a personal sex slave.


----------



## Vibrant (Dec 9, 2011)

bigmoe65 said:


> Dont do it heavy, he wants your dna to make a clone of you for a personal sex slave.



I was thinking he was planning a murder and he needed dna to plant.


----------



## Ezskanken (Dec 9, 2011)

Thanks for doing all this Heavy!


----------



## Pony (Dec 9, 2011)

Hey guys, the shit works - hows that for a fucking test result?


----------

