Brook,
I will have to get pointers from you on the finer points of IV injection if/when I embark on this protocol 
[quote]Dynamo Hum wrote:
Brook,
I will have to get pointers from you on the finer points of IV injection if/when I embark on this protocol ;-)[/quote]
No probs.
[quote] Brook wrote:
Cortes wrote:
BenceJones wrote:
So how many iu’s total have you used thus far?
Around 220. I have another 300, but if things keep going as well as they are, I will probably get ahold of about 300 more and extend the GH use as long as possible. I’m thinking I’ll probably be on 5 months total of AAS (I know, anathema around these here parts, the horror, etc, etc.) and follow it with 3 months of stasis/taper, running the GH the entire time.
Its funny - staying on IS considered a big taboo here, and when i first became a regular here i was advised by an existing vet to keep that kind of info to myself, as there are too many who take information the wrong way.
HOWEVER, i am willing to bet that the majority of posters here that people consider ‘vets’ are ‘on’ the majority of the time - if not permanently!
[/quote]
It didn’t used to be quite as taboo as it seems to have become lately. I certainly would not recommend such a cycle to anyone just getting started, of course. And that’s where you start getting into problems. “Well, if you guys are doing that and coming out alright, then dot dot dot”
However, anybody can say anything they want, and I’m not a “vet” or whatever, but most of the guys that get BIG and truly stay that way, at least the ones I know (and yes, I’m referring to the same exact people Brook is above)…Yeah, they end up staying on for quite a bit longer than your typical recommended (around here) 8 week or less cycle.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Brook wrote:
Cortes wrote:
BenceJones wrote:
So how many iu’s total have you used thus far?
Around 220. I have another 300, but if things keep going as well as they are, I will probably get ahold of about 300 more and extend the GH use as long as possible. I’m thinking I’ll probably be on 5 months total of AAS (I know, anathema around these here parts, the horror, etc, etc.) and follow it with 3 months of stasis/taper, running the GH the entire time.
Its funny - staying on IS considered a big taboo here, and when i first became a regular here i was advised by an existing vet to keep that kind of info to myself, as there are too many who take information the wrong way.
HOWEVER, i am willing to bet that the majority of posters here that people consider ‘vets’ are ‘on’ the majority of the time - if not permanently!
It didn’t used to be quite as taboo as it seems to have become lately. I certainly would not recommend such a cycle to anyone just getting started, of course. And that’s where you start getting into problems. “Well, if you guys are doing that and coming out alright, then dot dot dot”
However, anybody can say anything they want, and I’m not a “vet” or whatever, but most of the guys that get BIG and truly stay that way, at least the ones I know (and yes, I’m referring to the same exact people Brook is above)…Yeah, they end up staying on for quite a bit longer than your typical recommended (around here) 8 week or less cycle.
[/quote]
Agreed 100% - but just to add;
For the majority of people who simply want larger muscles or bigger numbers, but work full time and live regular lives, when lifting is secondary to other activities or an adjunct to life in general, who are wanting a relatively safe way to maximise their gains - then cycling is the way to go.
Those who are looking to compete at some level, have the sources or money, see lifting as one of the biggest and most important factors in their life - and are willing to (for the sake of honesty and realism of the facts) potentially risk infertility, high cholesterol, Hypertension and other potentially serious medical ills, then staying on is going to produce more results in the LONG TERM.
I just wanted to be frank for a second that the sides that steroids are known for are real in many - and of all the men who i know who stay on, they ALL have regular blood tests and are not playing about with anything, with everything carefully planned out to the detail.
/hijack!
[quote] Brook wrote:
Cortes wrote:
Brook wrote:
Cortes wrote:
BenceJones wrote:
So how many iu’s total have you used thus far?
Around 220. I have another 300, but if things keep going as well as they are, I will probably get ahold of about 300 more and extend the GH use as long as possible. I’m thinking I’ll probably be on 5 months total of AAS (I know, anathema around these here parts, the horror, etc, etc.) and follow it with 3 months of stasis/taper, running the GH the entire time.
Its funny - staying on IS considered a big taboo here, and when i first became a regular here i was advised by an existing vet to keep that kind of info to myself, as there are too many who take information the wrong way.
HOWEVER, i am willing to bet that the majority of posters here that people consider ‘vets’ are ‘on’ the majority of the time - if not permanently!
It didn’t used to be quite as taboo as it seems to have become lately. I certainly would not recommend such a cycle to anyone just getting started, of course. And that’s where you start getting into problems. “Well, if you guys are doing that and coming out alright, then dot dot dot”
However, anybody can say anything they want, and I’m not a “vet” or whatever, but most of the guys that get BIG and truly stay that way, at least the ones I know (and yes, I’m referring to the same exact people Brook is above)…Yeah, they end up staying on for quite a bit longer than your typical recommended (around here) 8 week or less cycle.
Agreed 100% - but just to add;
For the majority of people who simply want larger muscles or bigger numbers, but work full time and live regular lives, when lifting is secondary to other activities or an adjunct to life in general, who are wanting a relatively safe way to maximise their gains - then cycling is the way to go.
Those who are looking to compete at some level, have the sources or money, see lifting as one of the biggest and most important factors in their life - and are willing to (for the sake of honesty and realism of the facts) potentially risk infertility, high cholesterol, Hypertension and other potentially serious medical ills, then staying on is going to produce more results in the LONG TERM.
I just wanted to be frank for a second that the sides that steroids are known for are real in many - and of all the men who i know who stay on, they ALL have regular blood tests and are not playing about with anything, with everything carefully planned out to the detail.
/hijack![/quote]
Good post. I have nothing to add other than that we are in complete agreement.
Looking forward to continued updates cortes.
Thanks for posting that update Cortes. GH sounds like a very powerful drug…it,s amazing that you could continually lose bf while gaining weight, especially considering your diet was not on par!
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Pumps in the gym are just incredible. … there is something just a bit more going on, as I have used AAS for long enough at this point to be able to make a distinction … sometimes I just have stop everything because the pumps are SO full and intense. It’s actually a problem at times …
[/quote]
A friend of a friend has been using a non-maleimide version of CJC-1295 (ie, shorter acting but more potent GHRH) with very similar results. Their use of other anabolics is absent (nothing like you!) but the first week of GHRH analog use has been very interesting.
Approximately 100 ug per day, split in 2 doses, still working on optimal timing but morning and night seems to be the best. The original reason for using is not along the lines of muscle growth; other things unrelated, however the pump effect is getting seemingly stronger each day and was somewhat unexpected. It has been to the point of hurting somewhat.
The first few days were met with fairly strong soreness all over the body and it is still there a little bit, but seems to be subsiding. If it did not the therapy would need to be stopped.
Fat loss or changes in strength/endurance cannot be commented on much at this point. They usually keep a pretty lean body.
What do you think about GHRH then?
I can’t remember the reasoning but I thought I read somewhere that it was better for preventing the side effects of plain GH use?
GHRP has action at ghrelin receptors apparently (I haven’t read the papers though) and this is supposed to be where the hunger comes from when using those analogs.
The GHRH doesn’t seem to do much hunger-wise. However the first week of its use has brought with it lots of soreness in general. It is hard to imagine how a stronger pulse of GH would feel. Or if it could get more intense period.
If you had the albumin-reactive version of CJC-1295, then its potency is considerably reduced from a version that does not react with it. The original CJC paper shows this discreetly and they kind of downplayed it I think. There is no data showing regular GHRH versus the dAla2, Ala15, Leu27 GHRH analog. This DDPIV resistant version that does not conjugate albumin should cause a greater pulse of GH release because it is more potent and does not willy around on albumin hence can all activate receptors as soon as it is in the blood (ie, 1 dose acts over 1-2 hours at high potency versus 24+ at lower potency).
Native GHRH is pretty much a waste of time though I would think, unless dosed really high. DPPIV inactivates it within 5 minutes tops… the position 2 substitution makes a big difference.
Well I’m just saying that pending what was tried, it might not have been a very optimal test…
The “modified GRF/GHRH” (that’s what they’re calling it on other forums, maybe vendors too) is the way to go, at least as far as currently available GHRH analogs go.
It will be interesting to see if GHRH also causes the finger growth effects… I haven’t seen any reports of it doing so as the compound is less tested than plain GH but it would be neat if for some reason it did not.
Surely the only reason it wouldn’t, would be due to a lesser GH level?
I’m not sure. I find myself wondering if GHRH could work a little differently because the GH release is directed internally from the pituitary versus subQ/IM (also IV) GH. It may be more pulsatile or have different local effects. There’s also potential differences in the time you have GH in your blood for pending what you are taking and what method of administration you use. I am looking for a paper looking at GH versus GHRH in IGF-1 stimulation but can’t find anything. Or something else to compare them…
In 07’ i did 1 i.u./day of Jintropin HGH along with my usual d-bol, sust, deca for 100 days and my thyroid went totally out of control. i go to the V.A. for blood work every month and my thyroid was EXTREMELY hyperactive. My body is extremely sensitive to HGH i guess cause my body fat was immesurably low.
I guess i’m niaeve(sp)cause i have never done anything I.V., only subcutaneous abdominal with hgh and intramuscular with AA’s are you talking about doing hgh IV ??
[quote]HIT wrote:
I guess i’m niaeve(sp)cause i have never done anything I.V., only subcutaneous abdominal with hgh and intramuscular with AA’s are you talking about doing hgh IV ??[/quote]
Did they stutter?