Human Growth Hormone

[pumper]

as of yet you have failed to referance anything that supports any of the issues in your initial "hGH causes cancer" post.

the only outside source you cite contained none of your hGH contentions.

the only documentation you offer is a personal conversation you allegedly had with the A man.

IMHO, you NEVER even attempted to document any of your posted inferences .. much less presented a single convincing fact.

not even 1.

posting facts (not BS) on health care issues would be the humanly thing to do.

I was just reclinin' & contemplatin' .. as I drifted into the REM state I realized you kinda referred me to the A man's ghost .. TIT!

[Sheryl]

OK you two, TRUCE. Any more salvos fired by either side and an official warning will follow.

Debate is welcome in this forum but only if it is civil. You've both stepped over that line so cease and desist.

HGH has not been proven to cause cancer Neither has it been proven not to. The long term, expensive studies it would take to do this just haven't been done. There have been clinical trials of the use of rHGH for persons with adult-onset HGH deficiency (which is a fairly rare ciondition due to pitiutary disease):

"Common side effects observed in (trails for people suffering from adult onset HGH deficinecy) included edema and joint/muscle pain, which appeared related to dose of GH. Since the first of these trials was conducted in 1988, long term risks are not yet known. .."

There were a few much smaller studies on its use in aging, results as follows:

""In 1990, considerable excitement was generated from a report by Rudman and colleagues which described wonderful effects of GH treatment in a small group of elderly men. These volunteers, who ranged in age from 61 to 81 years, showed increased lean body and bone mass, decreased fat mass and, perhaps most dramatically, restoration of skin thickness to that typical of a 50-year-old.

The study cited above and a handful of others have provided an initial understanding of the benefits, limitations and risks of sustained (6 to 12 month) GH supplementation in elderly men and women. A consistent finding in these investigations was a high incidence of adverse side effects - edema, fluid retention and carpal tunnel syndrome - which necessitated reductions in GH dose of cessation of treatment. GH treatment consistently induced an increase in serum IGF-1, a decrease in fat mass and increase in lean mass.

The effects on fat and lean masses may be viewed as positive effects, but, at the end of the day, it has to be asked whether GH treatment improved functioning in the elderly. In the studies in which function was objectively assessed, GH treatment did not improve cognitive function, and, despite the effects on lean body mass, was not any more effective than exercise alone in promoting strength. Long-term GH therapy in elderly postmenopausal women lead to significant increases in bone mineral density, but these increases were less than what is routinely achieved with estrogen replacement.

While it must be acknowledged that a relatively small number of elderly patients have been treated for prolonged periods with GH, the controlled trials conducted thus far do not support is efficacy in aleviating age-related deficits in cognitive or somatic function.

Another indication of potentially serious side effects of GH therapy in adults, including the elderly, has been provided by controlled clinical trials that assessed the utility of human GH treatment in critical illness, where endogenous GH secretion is typically suppressed. GH therapy was anticipated to attenuate the catabolic effects of illness and thereby decrease duration of hospitalization. The results of several clinical trials involving hundreds of patients, demonstrated a significant increase in mortality associated with high doses of GH. Additionally, those patients treated with GH that survived had longer periods of intensive care and hospitalization than those receiving placebos"

source: http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathp...it/ghaging.html

At the bottom of this article is a list of the published studies in various medical journals which it references.

[LoriG]

To reiterate. HGH is not an anabolic steroid.

There is wonderful site called Rejuvanation with 3000 members, many of who have used HGH for many years. These are responsible people who daily inject low doses (.5 to 2 iu) of HGH. I think most people would base their research on low dose supplementation rather than on the side effects professional bodybuilders and athletes have had when using hugely excessive dosages of HGH and anabolic steroids. I wouldn't recommend taking a bottle of aspirin a day for heart attack prevention either. In any event, there are 3000 members on the site and it's 9 year history, there has only been one person who has reported a cancer and it is most likely he had it prior to HGH as it showed up in his initial bloodwork when he first started his HGH program. The site is http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rejuvenation/

By the way, someone said that the positive effects are likely a placebo response. I'm not sure where they got that information as there are many studies indicating measurable clinical improvements in HGH users, with regard to reduction of adipose tissue, increases in bone density etc.

[JimmyTheMook]

It will be a huge business and some say many of the big drug companies are the ones stifling the mainstream use of this product.

[pumper]

"Neither has it been proven not to." (prove a negative is all but impossible)

what has been PROVEN to not cause cancer?

rhGH has been on the market since 1985 (somatren & somatropin) .. 23 years where is the cancer?

"edema and joint/muscle pain, which appeared related to dose of GH"

acromegaly.

i have a DX of shoulder osteoarthritis ('67 sports injury) .. no issues in 5 years of daily injections

"huge business and some say many of the big drug companies are the ones stifling the mainstream use of this product"

big drug companies are the only manufacturers.

2nd generation "rDNA Protein Secretion Technology" can only be done by asset rich biotech companies.

US $2 billion in 2007

Omintrope from Sandoz is manufacutred in the EU .. american companies held it up it's FDA approval for 4 years.. today it's sold at a 25% discount from the Lily or Upjohn products

sandoz had to take the FDA to court!

i paid $12 for omintrope form a licensed US pharmacy this week ( i have US script .. my doc uses complete labs from Bumrungrad / Dr. Poj. endocrinology.. U of Penn)

Stallone's favored Chinese Jintropin was banned for protectionism in 2007

Jintropin, pre-ban,was $8IU in the US (it's still available on sukhumvit, pharmacy mid suk same side & between the ambasador & robinsons .. soi 15 or so)

Sandoz's Saizen is priced at over $20IU in the US .. $12IU in panama .. Saizen is available in UK not sure price.

Big pharm has the same interest as it did in Canadian drug Imports .. keep the fairly priced pharmacueticals out of the US

in december '07 a bill was introduced in congress to make rhGH a controlled substance.. the same congress voted in '07 to continue to be a state sponsor of tobacco terrorism. (20% of all death in the US is tobacco related. cdc 2006)

tobacco kills the equivalent of 30 747 hijackings or 3 9/11s per day & the do gooder jesus lubin congress subsidizes

Dennis House with the RAM Group Hospitals is trying to set up an antiaging practice in LOS ,, he says it will be aimed at 'up market clientsl'

Edited February 15, 2008 by Sheryl
commercial link deleted

[pumper]

there are lab tests to determine anterior pituitary function & serum hGH / IGF-1 levels .. Bumrungrad's Dr. Poj can order the labs w/ results next day. (blood must be over nighted to Singapore)

"There have been clinical trials of the use of rHGH for persons with adult-onset HGH deficiency (which is a fairly rare ciondition due to pitiutary disease):"

rhGH has passed FDA testing twice .. somatrem & somatropin

it has been on the market for over 20 years

3rd generation rhGH (long lasting) is in 2 phase FDA testing

it has been tested.

few negatives, except for too many home runs & strike outs by men in their mid 40s.

go Rocket!

I think contact lens should be dis-allowed by all sport

& no arthroscopic surgery .. & surgery without antibiotics .. as in Babe Ruth's era.

it's the 21st century

.. biotech is a glorious field of medicine

Thailand is offering parents the option of saving their child's own stem cells (umbilical cord) in case of disease later in life .. should this be disallowed?

[

[soi lurker]

I dont know wether HGH is linked to cancer or not. I can state here that the earlier used, human derived HGH was linked to Crutzfeld's Jacobs Disease (CJD) - or the laymans version, mad cow disease. HGH sources were switched to synthetic after the link was established.

[Sheryl]

"Neither has it been proven not to." (prove a negative is all but impossible)

what has been PROVEN to not cause cancer?

rhGH has been on the market since 1985 (somatren & somatropin) .. 23 years where is the cancer?

"edema and joint/muscle pain, which appeared related to dose of GH"

acromegaly.

i have a DX of shoulder osteoarthritis ('67 sports injury) .. no issues in 5 years of daily injections

You're taking HGH for osteoarthritis? Are you sure it's not cortisone?

And it is indeed possible to prove something doesn't cause cancer or, to be more accurate, to prove that people taking something do not have a significantly higher risk of cancer than people who aren't. But it is very costly as it requires a large sample to be followed over many, many years.

I deleted the link you posted for 2 rewasons: 1, it included commercial ads and thus against TV policy and 2, it contained deliberatekly misleading statements eg ""Journal of the AMA April, 2007: "Negative risks with Hormone Replacement Therapy are usually overstated." -- soundsfine except that the article referenced is about female hormaone replacement therapy and nothing at all to do with HGH. No reputable publication or doctor is going to say that risks/concerns about adverse effects of HGH are either warranted or unwarrabnted because the research simply hasn't been done.

[pumper]

You're taking HGH for osteoarthritis? Are you sure it's not cortisone?

LOL!

& I like funny girls! any other jokes?

I did not say i was taking rhGH for osteoarthritus ..

I said I was taking rhGH & that it was not an issue with my osteoarthritis.

re celebrix for osteoarthritis: That is a med I only take PRN because of the side effects .. but it is a wonderful medication for anyone with joint issues.

1 200 mg celebrix will fix what 10 (or 20) ibuprofen don't touch

& 1 PM will work (for me) 2 nights

thanks for deleting the post .. I became concerned because dummie 'ol me included directions to a Pharmacy that stocks jintropin in Bkk.

trying to be helpful (move boxes for the pharmacy) could have caused issues for my friends behind that counter.

thanks

[Sheryl]

3 increasingly incoherent posts by the same person have been deleted and this topic is close to being closed unless someone else has new and something useful to add.

We have heard first hand accounts from TV members who use HGH for anti-aging, explaining their decision and describing the benfits they find.

We've had some unproductive mud slinging and attempts to post commercial links and misleading promotional ads.

The facts are really quite simple. The drug is approved for use for people with pituitarydisorders. As such it went through the normal testing process for any drug that is intended to treat a disease: clinical trials to confirm that it is effective as compared to a placebo and to document its side effects. The latter, having been done through short-term clinical trials, does not provide information on effects of long-term use. Since its approval, as is the case with all drugs, adverse events reported to the drug company have been listed ("post marketing events"), but it must be kept in mind that (1) only those which someone thought was drug-related and took the time to report to the drug company are included and (2) the events so listed are not necessarily due to the drug; some will have been coincidental.

The known side effects and post-marketing events can easily be found on any reputable website or from the manufacturer's own, or in a package insert, and they will all say the same thing as they come from the same source.

There have been no long term studies of its use in otherwise healthy people to combat the aging process. There have been no studies done to assess whether or not it increases the risk of cancer of any type. Concerns about cancer are speculative only. Note also that "causing cancer"and "increasing the risk of cancer" (or any other health problem) are not the same thing. If the drug directly caused cancer, this would indeed have become evident by now. That's not the concern. Very few things absolutely cause cancer. The concern is whether or not it increases the likelihood (relative risk) of cancer, and that remains unknown.

The type of information available for drug side effects/post marketing events are not designed to or able to determine whether there is an increased risk of cancer or other long-term diseases. If one wants that information it is necessary to conduct extremely expensive prospective control studies over many years involving many thousands of people. This is very, very rarely done. Since most drugs are intended for use in people with a disease, the effects of which would be worse than the known side effects of the drug, the trade off is obviously worth it even if long term use does carry some degree of increased risk of c ancer, heart disease or whatever. It is only when there is a situation where people not suffering from a disease are taking a drug on a long term basis in very large numbers that it becomes enough of a public health concern to warrant such research. This was recently done in the case of female hormone replacement therapy and it did, in fact, turn up some risks that the pre-approval clinical trials and post marketing event reports had missed.*

So far as I know such research is not in progress on HGH, perhaps because it is still not approved for use in anti-aging and the numbers of people so using it are unknown. Perhaps some day such research will be done, but if it is, it will still need many years to produce answers.

That is it in a nutshell. Each person needs to make their own decision based on this information. There is nothing wrong with chosing to take HGH for aging as long as this decision is taken with awareness of the known side effects and that there is a lack of data on possible long term effects. There is also nothing wrong with choosing not to take it based on those same considerations.

As with any medication, it is a questions of weighing potential risks and benefits.

* Re female HRT, the studies showing long term risks were based on synthetic progestins plus a form of horse estrogen. Another study just released that indicates that the synthetic progestins were probably the culprit. Synthetic progestins are entirely different compounds than natural progesterone. It is not yet known if HRT using natural progesterone would prove free of long term risks or not.

[geriatrickid]

Couple items ticked me off;

To stress sheryl's point; Within pharmacology, HRT refers only to female hormone replacement therapy. As a side note, pharmaceutical manufacturers must self insure for claims arising from the use of this product because the litigation regarding adverse reactions makes the class uninsurable.

There have been no long term clinical trials that establish the safety of recombinant human growth hormone for use as a "lifestyle" enhancer. While there have been some short term studies directed at specific physical conditions, the results from these studies should not be taken to mean that the product is safe for long term use. Even the short term studies corroborated the general knowledge pool that the use of this class of hormone has the following following adverse reactions and side effects associated with its use;

*enlarged feet, foreheads and hands - causing pain and joint disruption with arthritis

* insulin resistance - leading to diabetes

* disruption of both liver tissue and function

* swelling of tissue in ankles and legs due to fluid retention

* enlargement of vital organs

* colorectal polyps - both benign and malignant

* impotence.

Yes, some people will see some wonderful results after a short use. What users do not realize is that the body is a complex series of chemiical reactions and when one introduces foreign substances such as these polypetides, there are reactions that don't immediately show up. Simply put, if one does not have a medical condition necessitating the use of HGH, one should avoid the use. For those that claim it makes one youthful, I say, perhaps, but you are trading years as the impact will show up as you age. The more substances that we take that interfere with our natural chemistries, the more likely we are to interfere with the DNA repair mechanisms that keep us cancer free and control the aging process. It's a trade off. Caveat emptor.

And for those that say, but yea a doctor is prescribing it. To that I say, because one is an MD does not make one immune from the disease of greed. There are doctors who become junkies and alcoholics and that defraud medicare systems too.

[radioguy1450]

I don't get it, a Forum filled with ex-pats who sit around drinking alcohol all day and the moment HGH is brought up they start talking about the risks????

If you're worried about your liver, stop drinking! Worried about your health, eat vegetables.

People on this board are not looking to take massive quantities of steroids and HGH. We are talking about low doses and cycling those doses. I'll take a a few cycles of HGH per year for my liver over constant drinking any day. The liver is an amazing organ because of its' ability to heal itself. Of course you have to cycle off your drug of choice for this healing to take place. I see smart HGH users doing this, I don't see drinkers doing it.

So go to Burger King, have a pound of fries and a cheese burger, then head to the bar for a dozen pints, and then tell me how dangerous HGH is. I find it entertaining.

[Chris Lawrence]

Wow what a drug this HGH is. Creates some banter. But is a reflection on how this dug is seen in the community. I think the relation to 'juice' for the weight lifiting/sporting community puts some type of slant on the need for healthy discussion.

I have been trying to talk to medical people here in Oz, and to a degree the same type of approach is given. Its like a taboo subject; but no one seems to be using it; but I am getting feeed back on its use? The doctors don't want to talk about it and just cut the discussion off. All I am trying to do is get to a medical person that presribes the drug so that I can get an informed discussion on how it is used tolerated, benefits and side effects. Without this type of approach I think it is like pi#sin in the wind. How can I make a informed decission.

I spoke to one doctor and as a side discussion we talked about interferon and its effects. I said this drug could affect your stamina, with the reply O no, it should do the opposite. If the medicos are not working in a certian area of medicine, their views and opinion are not always spot on.

The other thing is that the drug companies cannot control the drug and therefore have no need to promote its use or research in its outcome and side effects. I have seen some reports but they all seem to be inconclusive?

I don't agree with taking high doses for extended times. The other downside is that when you have a community that don't want to talk about it then it is sent underground. That is the feeling that I got when speaking to the doctors I have seen. I thoght I would have a better chance getting a scheduled drug.

Many years ago suffering with nasal problems, a doctor suggested the use of a steriod injection. I can't remeber what it was but for six months I could breath. I never grew tit# or more hair, it just helped. Again a few years ago after two painful operations on my sinus' I saw a doc and told it what had happened some years ago. His attitude changed and my feeling was that he just didn't tolerate a person asking for this type of medicine?

Anyway I have got the name of a doctor that is using HGH/DHEA and before I make any decission I want to talk about it first. Maybe the outcome will be that the risks are to great and I won't go any further with it. But at the end of the day I want the informed choice to be mine.

Keep the subject going, just delete the posts that you think aren't relevant.

[percy2]

You bring up many good and valid points.

One problem is that Doctors (and as far as that goes anybody who's knowledge gives them authority) become very defensive when lay persons question their knowledge or display knowledge that hasn't been gain in a similar way to theirs.

I must stress that this is not all Dr's. its just a worryingly common trait.

The best Doctors seem to be the ones that will listen and then explain rather than ignore and pontificate, unfortunately time constraints often lead Doctors to the latter.

Cheers

[Chris Lawrence]

Totaly agree percy2. But a referral would be nice?

[egg6447]

of all the claims, counter claims dreams and desires. the only sure sign ive seen on this thread is the same as steroids, AGRESSION. stop takeing your meds pumper, thumper or whatever.

[LoriG]

Hi Egg,

Maybe you are right, perhaps Pumper is being aggressive. I don't see it that way though. What I'm reading from Pumper's posts seem to be well informed opinions from someone who is responsible and has personally experienced the benefits of HGH long term. I don't believe aggression is a known side effect of HGH. I did a search on Medscape and the National Institute of Health Library site and was unable to find any research to support aggression as a side effect. As you may have read on this thread, my husband and I are on HGH as well. Without going into great detail, I will say it has changed our lives in many positive ways. Aggression (or any other negative side effects) has not been an issue, mind you, we are only taking 1iu. We have no interest in looking like body builders. We are just a couple in our 50s enjoying the best health we have experienced in years.

Lori

[Chris Lawrence]

DHEA as I am learning is a drug prescribed for adolescents with growth problems here in Oz. There are some side effects but aggression is not one that is mentioned in the drug information. The drugs are Saizen and Scitropin. I am also fining an underground of middle aged people looking at its use. Also hearing a number of gym junkies using it as it combines the benefits that only a multitude of roids would do.

The hardest thing is getting to a Doctor that u can sit down and discuss this with. I am waiting on one to get some information so we can talk.

Your experience LoriG would be most welcomed (for me anyway).

[LoriG]

Age Management is a medical specialty that emphasizes preventive

medicine first-focusing on the prevention of disease, slowing the

aging process, and enhancing health. Hormone modulation is the second

component of Age Management medicine, and it is geared towards

enhancing performance, as well as preventing disease. Prior to

discussing the specifics of hGH and testosterone, it should be noted

that lifestyle modification, sound nutritional practice, and careful

monitoring are essential to achieve the maximum benefit from hormone

modulation.

Testosterone levels decline gradually in men, starting from

approximately age 30, and this decline continues throughout life. In

women, levels decline precipitously at menopause, along with estrogens

and progesterone. In both sexes, along with this decline in

testosterone, comes a decrease in libido, lean body mass, strength,

energy, mood, sexual performance and mental acuity.

Somatopause is the decline in growth hormone level that occurs

gradually from young adulthood throughout life, and it occurs in both

sexes at roughly the same rate. This decline in growth hormone leads

to a decline in IGF-1, the hormone that is made in the liver in

response to growth hormone. The decline in IGF-1 also parallels the

decline of all the attributes mentioned above under testosterone. In

addition, with lower IGF-1 levels we also see a decrease in skin

thickness, bone density, aerobic capacity, and the healing rate of

wounds. On the other hand, some things go up as growth hormone (and

IGF-1) go down; these are: body fat, waistline, waist to hip ratio (an

indicator for risk of heart attack), LDL cholesterol, average days of

illness, and hospitalization rate.

Given the similarity of problems associated with the drop in both of

these hormones, one might ask: is it the decrease in testosterone or

growth hormone (IGF-1) that results in state of decline in body

composition and functional capacity associated with aging? This is the

question undertaken by the National Institute on Aging, under the

guidance of Marc Blackman M.D. of Johns Hopkins University in 1994.

They initiated a study of men and women, aged 61 to 84, who were in

somatopause, as well as either andropause (for men) or menopause (for

women). The objective was to determine whether the supplementation of

growth hormone, estrogen plus progesterone, or testosterone, had any

affect above placebo in the restoration of body composition and

functional capacity in the aging population; and if so, which hormones

were responsible for which benefits, and to what degree relative to

one another.

This was a very ambitious study and a beautifully designed one. The

study was double blind, which means neither the practitioner nor the

patient knew whether they were receiving the real hormone or placebo.

Enrollees in the study were randomly distributed to either the placebo

or the hormone group. It was done in multiple different centers to

minimize practitioner bias and it was, of course, placebo controlled.

The men were divided into four groups to be administered the

following:

1. Growth hormone plus placebo

2. Testosterone plus placebo

3. Growth hormone plus testosterone

4. Placebo plus placebo

Women were divided into four similar groups, the only difference being

that estrogen plus progesterone was administered to women instead of

testosterone.

The outcomes of the study (results) can be summarized as follows:

1. Total body weight did not change in any of the groups.

2. Lean body mass increased in both men and women who were on sex

hormones alone (Testosterone in men, estrogen plus progesterone in

women), or growth hormone alone, or both sex hormones and growth

hormone. Lean body mass increased more in men on growth hormone plus

testosterone, than on men who were on either of those hormones alone.

3. Strength was increased primarily by testosterone. Growth hormone

had little or no effect on strength by itself, and estrogen plus

progesterone had no effect on strength in women.

4. Aerobic capacity was primarily boosted by growth hormone.

Testosterone improved aerobic capacity ever so slightly, but growth

hormone improved it substantially. Interestingly, the combination of

growth hormone and testosterone were again additive, meaning those on

both hormones did better than those on either hormone alone.

5. Women on estrogen and progesterone did not reduce body fat. Men on

testosterone reduced body fat by 3-5%. Men and Women on growth hormone

reduced body fat by 14%. Once again, testosterone and growth hormone

were additive. Men on both of these hormones decreased body fat by

17-18%.

6. LDL (bad cholesterol) was reduced in those on growth hormone. Total

cholesterol also came down in the growth hormone groups, and the ratio

of total cholesterol to HDL (coronary risk ratio) also declined,

indicating less risk for heart attack.

7. No benefit of testosterone on cholesterol levels was mentioned on

the report in this study. However, many other studies in the

literature point to the fact that in men, testosterone lowers

triglycerides and raises HDL cholesterol, both of which reduce risk

for heart attack. In some studies on women, testosterone is shown to

lower HDL (good cholesterol), indicating a potentially increased risk

for heart attack Our approach this by monitoring the

HDL carefully in women on testosterone. We have found that in some

women the HDL goes down, and in others it does not. When it does go

down we have several options:

a) We can reduce the testosterone dose or stop it all together;

We can use another agent to raise HDL cholesterol, such as Niacin

(Vitamin B3);

c) Or we can use another agent for cholesterol control so that we

bring the coronary risk ratio down where it should be.

The particular course we take varies with patient preference. The most

important task is to continually monitor the testosterone and HDL

level going forward so that we are able to learn how each individual's

physiology is affected by the various interventions, arriving at the

best possible benefit with the least possible risk.

8. Blood pressure did not change in any of the groups except one:

those men on growth hormone and testosterone experienced a

statistically significant decrease in diastolic blood pressure.

9. Side effects were non-existent in the testosterone group. The group

of women on estrogen plus progesterone experienced some breast

swelling and tenderness and rarely some irregular menstrual type

bleeding. The patients on growth hormone did experience some fluid

retention, although it was minor, and easily controlled by reducing

the dose. The symptoms of fluid retention were water weight gain and

mild joint discomfort (again, remedied by reducing the dosage).

Prostate health is a big concern for men, and often comes up when

discussing risks of supplementing growth hormone and/or testosterone.

In the NIA Study, both PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) and

international prostate symptom scores (IPSS) were followed. In men on

testosterone alone, no change in either of these numbers occurred. In

men on growth hormone plus testosterone, however, the PSA declined

while there was no change in the IPSS. This was very reassuring to

those of us practicing Age Management medicine. Not only were there no

prostate complications and no increase in prostate symptoms, but also

the PSA actually dropped in men on growth hormone plus testosterone.

Our observations of men and women on testosterone, in

general, show an increase in muscle mass, strength, libido, and energy

levels, as well as mood elevation. We also often see improved sexual

and cognitive performance. Cognitive performance is difficult to

attribute to a particular hormone however, since we are also making

lifestyle modifications and adding a variety of nutriceuticals, some

of which are designed to enhance memory and cognitive function.

Our observation of men and women on growth hormone is that they sleep

better and awaken refreshed. They have more energy and improved

aerobic capacity. They are dropping body fat and increasing muscle

mass and getting sick less often. Average bone density increases over

the course of a year. Skin becomes thicker and smoother with fewer

wrinkles. Spider veins also tend to decrease as a virtue of thickening

of the skin. The cholesterol profile usually improves as LDL (bad)

cholesterol generally goes down with the use of growth hormone.

Finally, there is an enhanced

[LoriG]

Hi Chris,

Ross and I started HGH, testosterone and Armour thyroid on the 1st of December this year. We were already taking DHEA. I've been taking DHEA for the past 12 years. We went through a battery of tests to determine (low) baseline blood values before initiating the program. Every 4 months our anti aging physician requires us to do more blood panels to monitor our progress or determine if changes should be made. I should mention that our doctor was a Cardiac Surgeon in the States prior to changing specialties and therefore we have a great deal of confidence in his abilities.

Having said that, this is what I have noticed; increased energy. From the first day, I noticed an increase in energy. I thought at first, this must be a placebo effect, but as the weeks past my energy levels only improved. Suddenly Ross and I wanted to go out and do things. We started experiencing a better quality of life. That has been the best part. I was looking at some photos the other day. One was taken in October 2007 on the beach here in Bermuda and another was taken on the same beach two months after starting HGH. In the first, I look pretty good I figure, for a 50 year old. The second I think I look pretty awesome for a 50 yr. old. I would never have believed my body could go through such a wonderful and rapid change. As Ross said "you looked great before, now you look cut." I won't give HGH and Testosterone full credit for my leaner form as I exercise every day, but I know it has played a big part. I used to exercise prior to hormone replacement, but I rarely had the energy to give a workout all I could. Prior to HR I had all but lost my sex drive. I understand this is quite common in women my age. Within two weeks of HR my sex drive was back. LOOK OUT! Ross takes a testosterone injection once a week and consequently we are like a couple of teenagers. It's really quite remarkable. I have noticed in both of us that our skin looks much better. I have for years suffered from dry skin, even in Bermuda where the humidity is high. That problem has been resolved. I have noticed dramatic change in Ross as far as wrinkling. He definitely looks younger and less wrinkled. Plus, even though he only has a chance to exercise 2 or 3 times a week (half hour run), his six pack is returning. Strange things I have noticed, that I didn't expect to see...I had quite severe horizontal ridging in my fingernails. This is a problem I've had for years. Today, my nails are smooth and break infrequently. I have more confidence and feel at peace. I have noticed this in Ross as well. He works shift work in a dangerous and stressful job. He is coping much better. We tire slowly, have full days and sleep well. Ross and I monitor our blood pressure and glucose. Prior to HR Ross had high BP. When we first started HR his BP rose slightly, but it was high enough that our doc was considering lowering his dosage of HGH. After about two months into the therapy, Ross's BP dropped to an average of 120/68, a very healthy BP and lower than it has been for years. My glucose levels dropped as well. Now, if I indulge in a plate of pasta, my reading won't go over 115. My last HBA1C was 4.6, indicating excellent glucose control. My only regret is that I didn't start this sooner. In a way, I feel like I lost part of my life, because I just didn't have enough energy to really live it. I don't know what the long term is on this. I do know someone who has taken HGH every day for 9 years. He looks awesome, is healthy and doesn't figure he will stop unless his health changes for the negative. So far, he hasn't had any negative side effects. Either have we. I believe the negative effects are entirely dose related. This is a hormone that has potential for abuse, but used prudently has tremendous potential. Feel free to PM me if you have additional questions.

Lori

[Chris Lawrence]

Hi Lori

Thank you very much for you 2 posts above.

A lot of my information is coming 2nd and 3rd hand as it is very hard in Oz to get a clear answer from a doctor on just how these drugs work. I agree that the medication needs to be monitored to see how the body is coping. An area for me is Diabetes; the only side effect is for people that suffer problems with their eyes with diabetes and this may be a problem with HGH/DHEA.

I am 50 in two months time and just zapped of energy. My lifestyle is best suited to the beach life, but I just don't have the energy to get there. 10 years ago I was swiming 1 kilometer a day and surfing on top of this. The things you enjoy. I believe I am still young, but I believe the diabetes has been a great cause to the lack of energy. (bad sleeping patterns compounded by increased weight compounded by sleep apnia compounded by low drive compounded by low self esteem)

Just a cycle of problems. I now get very irate at people saying 'you have just got to get out and do something'. I am a person that has always enjoyed getting out and being physical. The point I make back to people is that I have not got the energy.

It sounds as though the idea of Age Management is the way to go. What I mean by this is to convince the medico's that there is a need to look at this as a problem that has benefits to increase the capacity of people in their health and general well being. Treatment has to be well managed then by the practioner.

I don't believe I am clutching at straws here but am looking at ways to improve an outcome that is holding me back. Again after monitoring if it don't work I won't continue. As simple as that. But from what I have seen and the feedback, I feel that its worth taking further.

Regards

Chris

PS Mood swings aren't a problem? Sounds that it may improve well being and have a lesser effect on mood.

[LoriG]

Hi Lori

Thank you very much for you 2 posts above.

A lot of my information is coming 2nd and 3rd hand as it is very hard in Oz to get a clear answer from a doctor on just how these drugs work. I agree that the medication needs to be monitored to see how the body is coping. An area for me is Diabetes; the only side effect is for people that suffer problems with their eyes with diabetes and this may be a problem with HGH/DHEA.

I am 50 in two months time and just zapped of energy. My lifestyle is best suited to the beach life, but I just don't have the energy to get there. 10 years ago I was swiming 1 kilometer a day and surfing on top of this. The things you enjoy. I believe I am still young, but I believe the diabetes has been a great cause to the lack of energy. (bad sleeping patterns compounded by increased weight compounded by sleep apnia compounded by low drive compounded by low self esteem)

Just a cycle of problems. I now get very irate at people saying 'you have just got to get out and do something'. I am a person that has always enjoyed getting out and being physical. The point I make back to people is that I have not got the energy.

It sounds as though the idea of Age Management is the way to go. What I mean by this is to convince the medico's that there is a need to look at this as a problem that has benefits to increase the capacity of people in their health and general well being. Treatment has to be well managed then by the practioner.

I don't believe I am clutching at straws here but am looking at ways to improve an outcome that is holding me back. Again after monitoring if it don't work I won't continue. As simple as that. But from what I have seen and the feedback, I feel that its worth taking further.

Regards

Chris

PS Mood swings aren't a problem? Sounds that it may improve well being and have a lesser effect on mood.

[LoriG]

Hi Chris,

I identify with much of what you have said. As far as mood swings, that has not been a problem. Prior to HRT I was operating at a somewhat depressed level, however I didn't realise it until I felt better. It seems, depression and lack of energy crept up on me so slowly that it is impossible to know when it all started. What I know for sure is I'm not depressed anymore. Every day I wake up looking forward to life, anxious to go out and live it.

I've heard it is very difficult to find doctors who will prescribe HGH in Australia. I hope you will be successful. I went outside my country of residence as there are (as far as I know) no physicians that understand or for that matter, prescribe HGH.

At the very least you may wish to try DHEA, perhaps 50mg per day, if you can get your hands on some. I've noticed that it tends to improve mood in some people, but when you get down to it, HGH is the big dog on the block.

At 50 my guess is your hormones are definitely in decline. I am certain if you replaced hormones to the level of a thirty year old, you would be filled with an abundance of energy and I predict, the transformation would be noticed within days.

Something that may be of interest to you is an article written July 2007 in the magazine Life Extension, "Conquer Diabetes with Testosterone". If you are unable to get the magazine, I'd be willing to mail it to you. You may be able to find the info on www.lifeextension.com.

[Chris Lawrence]

Thanks Lori.

I appreciate you telling of the experience. There is a lot of people that want to share knowledge but have not tried the product.

Kind regards

Chris

[jackoneilone]

excellent stuff and does wonders but what do you want it for specifically?

[Sheryl]

Chris,

Have you had a complete thyroid panel done? And other complete work-up?

I ask because what you describe is not normal for age 50, even in a diabetic. It sounds to me like either an undiagnosed medical problem (hypothyroid, chronic fatigue syndrome, other possibilities..) or chronic depression.

50 is not that old, certainly not old enough to account for the lack of energy you describe as an effect of just aging.

It can be hard to find a doctor willing to seriously look into causes of fatigue (their eyes tend to glaze over at the word, since it is such a non0-specific symptom) but I'd suggest you keep trying until you find one who takes you seriously and find out what is going on.

[Chris Lawrence]

Hi Sherly

I also have Hep C, which am scheduled in for treatment to commence (probably got this in the mid to late 70's). My geno type with the new treatment responds well to treatment. I have had the tests suggested and the hormone test done. I have also checked the prostate which is another area of concern with treatment with HGH.

Just started HGH treatment and have found an increase in energy. I am monitoring sugar levels daily and have found that particulary after exercise they are at good levels. This I have not achieved for a long time. The main motive for this treatment is to assist in loss of weight, but also feeling a bit more motivated. Yes you are right not many medico's want to try and resolve the issue with you.

My decision to do this treatment is also under supervision. I won't continue if it starts to affect my diabetes and quite frankly if nothing is working its an expensive way to even get a placebo affect. There are some still unanswered questions about this treatment and I hope they stay unanswered.

I have just strated work looking at chronic health management, and maybe there are some other alternatives. At the moment I feel OK with the HGH and I will review it in 3 months time if everything is going OK.

Thanks

Chris

[jackoneilone]

this is basically anti-aging medical issues.

Get a complete throids panel and hormonal panel

Usually HGH and Testosterone are supplemented to bring it all back to youthful figures and patients rapidly notice the changes along with that may go thyroid medications etc

[Bard]

Hi everyone,

I read this thread and found it pretty interesting. I do myself have hormone replacement therapy, however all I use is Testosterone and Tamoxifen as prescribed by my doctor. When he measured my hormone levels the Testosterone level was in low even though I am just approaching 40, due to this I had loss of sexual interest and performance, really grumpy and aggressive, very poor sleep pattern, gaining fat and the rest of the negativeness. When I started the treatment I changed as a person, I lost most of my body fat (due to more energy to exercise), hardened my muscles, regained my happiness and felt I wanted to participate in things again. The reason I write this is that Testosterone treatment for men usually boots up all the sides I have read is good about HGH, it is very cheap and as long as you do not abuse it, but follow the doctors advice and supervision, safe.

Now HGH as I was told by my doctor is not recommended to be used by itself but in conjunction with e.g. testosterone, my big query is if it really is smart to start using both immediately, or could you be just as well off with only testosterone? I talked to guys trying only HGH and they claim they never felt a thing. And with the current prices for PRESCRIBED HGH you will get really hurt in your wallet. So my recommendation is to see a doctor and try out testosterone first. If it works as well for you as for me, you save a lot of money and extra medical works.

Hope that was helpful.

[jackoneilone]

bard the 2 are usually used in conjunction and may even be combined with thyroid meds and insulin too. Making it very synergistic.

TRUST ME your friends that said HGH did nothing for them most likely were not using it properly and adequately. The thing with HGH to also remember is its not an INSTANT HIT like testosterone but gradual as it takes time. OBVIOUSLY if they were only say using 1iu a day they wouldnt feel much compared to the guy using 4iu. The key with HGH is dosage, dosage timing, any combos and duration of theraphy.

Eg lots of the big BB use HGH around 16IU a day in combination with testosterone, t3/t4 and insulin and maybe some other things too thats how they can manage to be like a bull.

But for normal folks trying to get back their lives and normalise their levels 4 or less iu is enough and combine it with some other stuff and youll see the changes. HGH has a lot of benefits that testosterone and other things dont have A LOT. Downside is the cost which if you got generic chinese or even chinese brand named is a lot cheaper and more affordable discuss all this with your doctor.