# peptides vs aas



## mnpower (Nov 1, 2011)

i have been researching igf-1 and really want to give it a shot but reconstrcuting and storage sound like such a pain in the ass...whats the benefit of a peptide vs just grabbing another bottle of tren besides the obvious shutdown of my test?


----------



## OldSchoolLifter (Nov 1, 2011)

completely different in all aspects, One is a steroid, the other is a Peptide. One helps grow muslce cells, the others helps create new ones, and repair soft tissue damage. All on what your goals are, what are you expecting, and so on.


----------



## moresize (Nov 1, 2011)

OldSchoolLifter said:


> completely different in all aspects, One is a steroid, the other is a Peptide. One helps grow muslce cells, the others helps create new ones, and repair soft tissue damage. All on what your goals are, what are you expecting, and so on.


 
yep...great advice


----------



## coolrise (Nov 1, 2011)

Peptides in conjunction with AAS is the way to go...


----------



## mnpower (Nov 2, 2011)

OldSchoolLifter said:


> completely different in all aspects, One is a steroid, the other is a Peptide. One helps grow muslce cells, the others helps create new ones, and repair soft tissue damage. All on what your goals are, what are you expecting, and so on.


 
perfect awser thats what i was curious about. is there a peptide that anyone has tried that seems better then the rest?


----------



## brundel (Nov 2, 2011)

If Im not mistaken elevated igf-1 levels are associated with the development of certain cancers. Small cell lung cancer for example.
Ill see if I can dig up some research to support this one way or another.


----------



## brundel (Nov 2, 2011)

High levels of a well-known growth factor significantly increase the risks of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer, medical researchers have found.

At the same time, they determined that a protein that binds to the growth factor seems to neutralize it and reduce the risk of these malignancies, which are three of the four biggest cancer killers in the United States.

"If further studies confirm these findings, blood levels of the growth factor and its binding protein might be used to identify people at the highest risk for these cancers and, therefore, who might benefit most from lifestyle changes and other means of prevention," says Jing Ma, an instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School. Also, future work on the binding protein could lead to new drugs for treating colorectal, breast, and prostate tumors in their earliest stages.

The growth factor, known as insulin-like growth factor-1, or IGF- 1, is necessary for proper growth in children, but studies of men and women more than 40 years old raise the possibility that it contributes to the growth of tumors. These studies were conducted at Channing Laboratory in Boston, a joint facility of Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, and at the Harvard School of Public Health.

Last week, the researchers announced that, in a six-year study of 32,826 nurses, those with the highest levels of IGF-1 had a two-and- a-half times greater risk of colorectal cancer. High levels of IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) produced the opposite effect.

The week before, another group from the same laboratory reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute that a study of 14,916 male physicians concluded that men run the same risk. In the case of those with the highest IGF-1 and lowest IGFBP-3, the relative risk of colorectal cancer rose fourfold, after accounting for differences in weight, height, alcohol intake, and other known risk factors.

"The fact that these two large studies give the same results for both men and women increases our confidence in the findings," notes Edward Giovannucci, an assistant professor of medicine who led the nurses' study. Giovannucci is also assistant professor in the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health.

Last year, data from the investigation of male physicians also showed that men with the highest levels of IGF-1 had more than four times the risk of prostate cancer than those with the lowest levels.

Another Channing Laboratory team concluded that premenopausal women with high IGF-1 levels have more than double the relative risk of breast cancer. Younger women are at greatest risk. This team was led by Susan Hankinson, an assistant professor of epidemiology at the School of Public Health and an assistant professor of medicine at the Medical School.

In all these studies, blood samples were collected from 32,826 nurses and 14,916 physicians between 1982 and 1990. None of these people had cancer at the time. They were then followed by questionnaires for 6 to 14 years. Those who developed cancer were then matched by age and smoking frequency with those who stayed cancer-free, and their blood levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 were compared.

Slowing Aging

These results raise concern about attempts to slow aging in older people by giving them growth hormone to increase their IGF-1. Since levels of both substances decrease with age, some observers suggest that injections of the hormone may counter several effects of getting old.

In one study, 12 men, 61 to 81 years old, were given growth hormone three times a week. After six months, their blood showed levels of growth hormone similar to those in men 10 to 20 years younger. They achieved increases in muscle mass and skin thickness and decreases in body fat compared to a matched group who didn't take the hormone.

A subsequent study of 27 women, 62 to 82 years old, who took the hormone showed a decrease in fat and some protection against bone loss.

These results caused a torrent of media reports suggesting that science had found away to stall, even reverse, some degenerative changes of aging.

"We would advise healthy people not to take the hormone," Ma says. "Our studies raise concern that giving it over long periods will increase the risk of prostate and colorectal cancers." Other researchers have found a lack of gain in muscle strength and physical performance despite the increase in muscle mass and decrease in fat.

"We've not shown directly that the hormone is harmful," Giovannucci adds. "Potentially, there could be some benefit from giving it to people with a growth-hormone deficiency. But people should understand that there's a risk involved, and proceed cautiously."

Too Much Growth

"There's good biological rationale for the associations we found," Giovannucci says. When IGF-1 is added to dishes of cells growing in the laboratory, the cells flourish like flowers blooming in spring. In children, the hormone stimulates bone growth and development of organs such as the heart, liver, and kidneys. But in older people, rapidly proliferating cells increase the opportunity for genetic mutations that may lead to cancer. And once cancer cells begin to form, IGF-1 will promote their growth as well as that of normal cells.

Ma mentions evidence of a connection between colorectal cancer and acromegaly, a condition that causes enlargement of facial features, hands, and feet due to excess secretion of growth hormone. "The rate of colorectal cancer among acromegalics is abnormally high, because their IGF-1 levels can be up to 10-fold higher that those of normal people," she notes.

"The levels of IGF-1 implicated in increased risks for cancer among middle-aged and older nurses and physicians in our studies are not as high as those in acromegalics or abnormally tall people," Giovannucci explains. "Rather they are at the high end of what we would consider a normal range."

IGF-1 is a major determinant of height, and taller people are at higher risk for colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer, according to Ma. "It is possible that people who grow tall, because of higher levels of IGF-1 in childhood and adolescence, have a high risk of cancer in adulthood," Giovannucci points out. "However, someone who retains high levels of the hormone from childhood through middle age might be at even higher risk."

Levels of IGF-1 drop when people eat less. Animal studies show that decreases in food intake lessen tumor growth and increase life span, Ma and Giovannucci agree. "However, it's too early to make specific recommendations about restricting calories on the basis of our results," Ma cautions.

It's also too early to determine if a test based on blood levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 will predict who will get colorectal, prostate, or breast cancer. The findings of the Harvard researchers must be confirmed by additional large studies.

Meanwhile, drug companies and other research teams are exploring the feasibility of designing new cancer drugs based on the activity of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3.

Giovannucci, Ma, and their colleagues are now investigating the role of diet, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and other possible determinants of high IGF-1 and low IGFBP-3 levels. "It might be possible to adjust these levels and lower cancer risks with lifestyle changes that are not too drastic," Ma speculates.

"We're also looking at genes that might control levels of the growth factor and its binding protein," notes Giovannucci. "People found to possess a genetic predisposition to IGF-1- related cancers could be closely monitored and, perhaps, pretreated with lifestyle changes and new drugs." 

REF: Growth Factor Raises Cancer Risk


----------



## brundel (Nov 2, 2011)

The IGF signaling pathway appears to play a crucial role in cancer. Several studies have shown that increased levels of IGF lead to an increased risk of cancer.[16] Studies done on lung cancer cells show that drugs inhibiting such signaling can be of potential interest in cancer therapy.[17]

Ref:Insulin-like growth factor 1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## brundel (Nov 2, 2011)

IGF-1 and cancer

BRISTOL, UNITED KINGDOM. Several studies have shown powerful associations between blood levels of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-1) and the risk of colon cancer, prostate cancer, and premenopausal breast cancer. As a matter of fact, recent evidence indicates that high IGF-1 levels may be more important than other previously reported risk factors for cancer. IGF-1 is released by human growth hormone and stimulates growth throughout fetal and child development. IGF-1 in the body is normally tightly bound to a large protein molecule (IGF binding protein-3) and there is evidence that high levels of IGF binding protein-3 protect against the development of certain cancers.
A distinguished group of medical researchers at the University of Bristol now voice concern about the increasing use of IGF-1 and growth hormone enhancers by body builders and elderly people trying to recapture their vanishing youth. They suggest that IGF-1 may increase both cell turnover and the susceptibility of cells to become cancerous. They also point to recent evidence that indicates that IGF-1 prevents the programmed death (apoptosis) of cancer cells. The researchers warn that people using growth hormone and IGF-1 enhancers are unlikely to be aware of their potentially harmful effects.
The pharmaceutical industry is well aware of the increasingly clear association between IGF-1 and cancer. Chemotherapeutic drugs are being developed to block the activity of IGF-1 or enhance the activity of IGF binding protein-3.

Smith, George Davey, et al. Cancer and insulin-like growth factor-I. British Medical Journal, Vol. 321, October 7, 2000, pp. 847-48 (editorial)


----------



## brundel (Nov 2, 2011)

Perhaps another option would be wise.
A couple lbs of muscle isnt worth having cancer. You get cancer and itll all be gone anyways during treatment and the types of cancers they are discussing are the major terminal varieties.

Just sayin


----------



## pieguy (Nov 2, 2011)

You have three routes when using peptides

GHRP+GHRH
IGF
HGH

One isn't really better than the other, they're just all different and they each have their strengths. 

GHRP-2+CJC-1295 w/o dac is something you take 3x daily to help your body create more growth hormone. 

IGF: "IGF-1 is released in the liver and binds to the IGF receptors within the cells, which ultimately causes a stimulation of cell growth (both causing new tissue formation and existing tissue growth) and an inhibition of cell death. It is a highly anabolic and anti-catabolic compound. For the athlete or bodybuilder, this had many positive effects: increased nitrogen retention and protein synthesis because it is highly anabolic. IGF-1 (in the presence of sufficient protein) actually promotes growth of new muscle cells, which increases the overall number of cells in the muscle." You can use either IGF-LR3 which is a kind of extended release version of IGF, or IGF-DES which is something normally injected Post-workout right into the muscle worked.

HGH: This compound doesn't really require an introduction. It's expensive stuff and it melts fat off you while working synergistically with AAS to promote new muscle cell growth. You have to take 8-12iu of this stuff to really see it's muscle building effects and that'll cost you a pretty penny.


----------



## ~RaZr~ (Nov 2, 2011)

coolrise said:


> Peptides in conjunction with AAS is the way to go...



Peptides, sauce and thermos...that's how it's done


----------



## brundel (Nov 2, 2011)

Since this is an AAS vs peptides thread.

I have been shooting test abusively for decades.
So have countless people I know.
I have no health issues and never have. 
Blood tests confirm perfect cholesterol levels....better than normal by a long shot.
BP=perfect.
CBC= perfect.

Im plenty big and my health risks are HIGHLY reduced because I dont use orals (I have of course) and because I dont use shit Im unsure of.
I have used GHRP-6 and low dose (2iu) GH.

Yes I have used everything under the sun but at the end of the day I stick to test and some GH and 75mcg levothyroxine. I stay hard and lean and relatively big and strong.
No Im not 300lbs....or even close.
But Im not struggling to breath either.

Whats my point?

Minimize risks while still pushing the envelope.
Use AAS to reach your goals. But dont be stupid and take risks you clearly do not need to.


----------



## pieguy (Nov 2, 2011)

Well said. 

Just to fan Brundel's flames he's already set ablaze, GHRP's are going to increase blood igf levels which is the underlying cause of certain cancers as posted in his research wall of text.


----------



## mnpower (Nov 2, 2011)

i think ill just stick to aas....it does well enough on its own. lost my mom to cancer cant even imagine putting my kids through that just because i wanted another .5 inchs on my arms


----------



## pieguy (Nov 2, 2011)

mnpower said:


> i think ill just stick to aas....it does well enough on its own. lost my mom to cancer cant even imagine putting my kids through that just because i wanted another .5 inchs on my arms



I think responsible use of IGF-DES PWO would probably be your best, safest bet if you planned to pursue the peptide route.


----------



## mnpower (Nov 4, 2011)

pieguy said:


> I think responsible use of IGF-DES PWO would probably be your best, safest bet if you planned to pursue the peptide route.



that was my plan but at this phase of the game and my body weight im not even sure if its worth it. I appreciate everyones help, brundl a pleasure as always


----------



## brundel (Nov 4, 2011)

Thank you sir.
I just want people to understand that the abuse of aas is a risky game to play.
A lot of people win but I assure you there are a lot who lose their lives to aas use.
Luke wood and Art atwood both recently died in their 30s. One heart attack one kidney and then systemfailure if I'm not mistaken.
Take care brothers. Do your homework.
Take precautions where necessary.
Only take risks if its worth the potential negative outcome.

I can't even imagine my life without heavytraining and aas use.
So to me it is worth it.

We have lost a lot of valiant warriors over the years.
I wonder if they could be asked.....was it worth it to them???


----------



## brundel (Nov 4, 2011)

Thank you sir.
I just want people to understand that the abuse of aas is a risky game to play.
A lot of people win but I assure you there are a lot who lose their lives to aas use.
Luke wood and Art atwood both recently died in their 30s. One heart attack one kidney and then systemfailure if I'm not mistaken.
Take care brothers. Do your homework.
Take precautions where necessary.
Only take risks if its worth the potential negative outcome.

I can't even imagine my life without heavytraining and aas use.
So to me it is worth it.

We have lost a lot of valiant warriors over the years.
I wonder if they could be asked.....was it worth it to them???


----------



## BP2000 (Nov 4, 2011)

Yep safe bet is to not exceed normal levels of hormones in your body.  If you get older and your hormones drop you can add to keep level's up but to double or triple leve's your body will have a tough time staying in homeostasis.


----------



## flogzero (Nov 4, 2011)

Best thing about peptides (to me) is that you can run them while recovering from your AAS cycle without losing nearly as much muscle.  It can be tempting to start your next AAS cycle ASAP when you lose a lot of your gains.  But if you maintain well with peptides it's easier to take long breaks and let your systems fully recover.


----------



## Calves of Steel (Nov 4, 2011)

peptides aren't going to make you huge. AAS can. Peptides are great for the overall health of your joints and muscles and can contribute a small amount to growth or augment the effects of AAS.


----------

