I believe there’s some talk in this thread about using it IV to recreate the body’s pulsatile GH release mechanism more accurately. This is what GHRH does though, it stimulates the pulsatile release (at least a short-acting version does). The long-acting CJC-1295 though seems to be a little different. It actually raises baseline GH secretion but you can still see the pulsatile secretion trends come out overnight. I’m not so sure this would be much different from GH taken subQ or IM.
I still think a short-acting GHRH analog with high potency and a short duration of action might be the best option for stimulating a fast and infrequent pulse of GH release from the pituitary. Unfortunately the “modified GHRH” (aka short-acting CJC-1295) is the best option on the market for this right now and it has potential issues with regards to analog solubility that likely prevent it from acting as quickly as it could (unless taken IV). Although that is purely informed speculation on my part at this point. Certainly there is room for a new analog to come about in this respect, it will just take the right scientist with the right knowledge of the peptide to create it (and a little creativity ;-P).
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Dec;91(12):4792-7. Pulsatile secretion of growth hormone (GH) persists during continuous stimulation by CJC-1295, a long-acting GH-releasing hormone analog.
Ionescu M, Frohman LA.
Section of Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Diabetes, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1747 West Roosevelt Road, Room 517, Chicago, Illinois 60608, USA.
CONTEXT: Pulsatile GH secretion is considered important for many of the hormone's physiological effects. [b]Short-term GHRH infusions enhance GH pulsatility and increase IGF-I[/b], but the short GHRH half-life limits its therapeutic use. A synthetic GHRH analog (CJC-1295) that binds permanently to endogenous albumin after injection (half-life = 8 d) stimulates GH and IGF-I secretion in several animal species and in normal human subjects and enhances growth in rats. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess GH pulsatility after a single injection of CJC-1295 and determine which GH secretion parameters correlated to the increase in IGF-I production. METHODS: GH pulsatility was assessed by 20-min blood sampling during an overnight 12-h period in healthy 20- to 40-yr-old men before and 1 wk after injection of either 60 or 90 microg/kg CJC-1295. RESULTS: [b]GH secretion was increased after CJC-1295 administration with preserved pulsatility. The frequency and magnitude of GH secretory pulses were unaltered. However, basal (trough) GH levels were markedly increased (7.5-fold; P < 0.0001) and contributed to an overall increase in GH secretion (mean GH levels, 46%; P < 0.01) and IGF-I levels (45%; P < 0.001).[/b] No significant differences were observed between the responses to the two drug doses. The IGF-I increases did not correlate with any parameters of GH secretion. CONCLUSIONS: CJC-1295 increased trough and mean GH secretion and IGF-I production with preserved GH pulsatility. The marked enhancement of trough GH levels by continuous GHRH stimulation implicates the importance of this effect on increasing IGF-I. Long-acting GHRH preparations may have clinical utility in patients with intact pituitary GH secretory capability.
Wouldn’t Sermorelin be appropriate as the ‘short acting GHRH’ you mentioned would be best for pulsatile release?
(why one wouldn’t just spend $200-300 on 200-300iu of GH is beyond me though… seeing as most spend that on AAS anyway).
I don’t know too much about Sermorelin other than the following - it is dosed from 50-200mcg/day… with 1mcg/kg recommended on the insert. It has a half life of 11-12 mins… and i believe this is both IV and SC injection.
I know that a single nightly dosage in pre-pubescent boys with growth deficiency works to add inches to height, but i have read VERY LITTLE on Bodybuilding benefits. Much less than most other peptides.
I know that some have had a DROP in IGF levels post therapy, possibly due to the body trying to normalise itself as the Sermorelin is very susceptible to the negative feedback loop (as is desired for this discussion of ‘pulsatile’ dosing), but others have had great body comp. benefits, and with the prices i have seen - this would cost between $140 and $350 for 350 days at 100mcg/day.
It SHOULD be more suitable for long term dosing due exactly to the negative feedback controlling the dose and the very fast elimination HL. I know that many anti-aging clinics have switched to sermorelin from GH.
Rusty or BBB, do you know anything about it that would make it any good for the IV protocol of use - possibly 2-3x a day?
I’d go with the “modified GHRH” over Sermorelin (native GHRH) if you can. The “modified GHRH” (dAla2, Ala15, Leu27) is a bit more potent and resistant to the enzyme DPPIV, which will cleave the first two amino acids of Sermorelin off the peptide within minutes of it hitting the bloodstream (hence the very short half-life). The “modified GHRH” is molecule for molecule more effective than Sermorelin.
I’d avoid CJC-1295 due to its prolonged duration of action (less pulsatile release; more baseline release), and the fact that it is fairly less potent than “modified GHRH” and hence requires much larger doses. Plus it is less stable in solution than “modified GHRH” (aka CJC-1295 without the maleimide group that makes it long acting).
The benefits of the “modified GHRH” only take a week or so to become apparent. Total body soreness. Bruises on the lats (strange). Skin heals itself much faster overnight (a reason to try therapy outside of musculature benefits); more attention from women, possibly outside of this effect, perhaps not-- there could be something else going on.
Noticeable growth of muscles from 50-100 ug/day subQ after 1-2 weeks lifting 5 days/week. This stuff seems to be the real deal.
I guess you are kidding, but BBB is right - this is a very good discussion and truly merits its own thread (apart from distracting from this thread’s discussion).
From the steroids forum home page, simply click on the “post” icon to create your own new thread.
I guess you are kidding, but BBB is right - this is a very good discussion and truly merits its own thread (apart from distracting from this thread’s discussion).
From the steroids forum home page, simply click on the “post” icon to create your own new thread.[/quote]
You are in no position to be quite this patronizing, thanks DH.
Anyway, - i was under the impression this is a discussion about pulsatile dosing of GH and IMO any analogues that fit into the same protocol as your GH experiment, should be worthy of inclusion in this thread - you could say - “get your own thread” OR you could add your valuable opinion seeing as you came up with the protocol in the first place… or is that unreasonable?
i just want to add…i find this thread amazing about different techniques of using gh…of coarse everyone had there opinions but this topic was simply amazing to read…and i want to give thanks to all of you
[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
Brook wrote:
That isn’t much to do with the puslsatile dosing of GH compounds is it?
No, so perhaps we can now go back to what this thread was originally about, i.e. ‘the HGH experiment’, lol, and stop talking about secretagogues.
Sure the subject is worthy of a seperate thread, where you and Rusty can educate us about their possible use (I see you have an excellent thread with Bill Roberts here somewhere already) and I can offer the odd snippet like ‘meleatonin may make your GHRH more effective - or it may not’ etc.
As it is, this was supposed to be about results from the GH protocol I put forth.
BBB[/quote]
This is kinda what I’ve been thinking.
So, to get things back on track. BBB’s GH protocol ROCKS!
Oh, and I have heard mention that GABA might be a suitable supplement to prevent or retard somatostatin release. Any thoughts?
I was kind of wondering, just wondering, mind you, if there was a way to ensure that somatostatin was not not released, if you could administer GH on slightly more days than you have currently lined out. For example (for simplicity’s sake) EOD. I’m not planning on doing this, but I wonder if you see any problems with it that I’m not seeing.
[quote]soontobeIFBB wrote:
Are you still using this in prep for a comp cortes?[/quote]
Yes indeed, my friend. And I’ll be using it throughout, beyond, and through my PCT, as well. I will eventually get some physique pics up, but close to show day (late July).
[quote]Cortes wrote:
soontobeIFBB wrote:
Are you still using this in prep for a comp cortes?
Yes indeed, my friend. And I’ll be using it throughout, beyond, and through my PCT, as well. I will eventually get some physique pics up, but close to show day (late July).[/quote]
Well, good luck, I am sure you already have your competition beat, but enjoy the journey = )