Does IGF-1 Long 3 work?

[TooPowerful4u]

Im gonna take a shot in the dark at this one, but could it possibly be due to the low doses of IGF-1? You are one big mofo first off, and 2nd arent u on high doses of GH? Maybe ur body is used to higher levels in IGF-1

[acuman]

Interesting read. No need to get offended by what sooty is saying, pudgy. When someone says something, we dont know where the intended line is drawn between opinion and fact.

Bouncers brings up a point; there are studies and book sense, then real-world-what-actually-works knowledge. Sooty offers some tech info, bouncer and others real world info.

Hell, it was only recently that the medical community recognized that aas cause muscle growth, even though bb and athletes knew this all along.

[Sootybaby]

OK in answer to why Long 3 was developed. It was developed to substitute insulin as a growth promotor to cell lines in TISSUE CULTURE. These cells in have (like most cell types) IGF-1 receptors on there cell surface. But the can also secrete into the media IGF-1 binding proteins. Some, like IGF1 binding protein 4 for instance, DOWNREGULATE the effect of IGF-1. As a growth additive in tissue culture you do not really want any up or down regulatory effects because this throws up variables that will sway the results of experiments. Hence the addition of the 18 aa residue in IGF-1 Long three. It wil happily interact wih the cells (via their receptors) in tissue culture without being subjected to the vagaries of any secreted binding proteins.

So far so good. But remember that in tissue culture we are just dealing with , for example , a monolayer of muscle cells. In Vivo (you and I) the majority of IGF-1 is produced in the liver. In order to get out of the liver it HAS to bind to a cell surface IGF-1 binding protein (IGF-1 BP-2) which actively shuttles it from this tissue to the bloodstream. (unlike fat soluble steroids IGF-1 is to big a molecule to just pass through cell menbranes without being the aid of transmembrane proteins. Once in the the blood stream IGF-1 is normally bound by a secretory binding protein (BP-3). This is a larege molecule whose role would appear to envelope the IGF-1 molecules and proect is from brakdown by proteases as it flows through the blood to target tissues.To then get into a tissue such as muscle. It must first be donated back to binding protein 2 for mebrane tranlocation. Once in the muscle the activity of the IGF1 is upregulated (bp-5) or downregulated (bp-4) by other binding proteins. Although once inside the tissue it does not need to be bound to BP's to elicit a response.

Here is in essence my problem with IGF-1 Long Three. In Vivo it will not enter muscle tissue. Not a hope by the sub-cut route, and even if you jab it directly into the muscle it wont spread far from the injection site ( most I.M. injections rely on the blood suplly in the (highly vascularised) muscle tissue). And for prctical purposes you would need to jab yourself many times to achieve an effective distribution.

This is fairly solid science. If you want to check it out then go onto the pubmed website and look at the literature. Some decent overview revies are freely downloadable.

Don't disregard the science. If it wasn't for us you wouldn't have any of these fine products for maximising results and would still be ripping of the heads of macaques and wolfing the pineal glands (and their viruses eg SV40 and possibly HIV). Gross but by one account certainly true.

I don't know how some people have had gains by using IGF-1Long three. I would need to know what their physiological state was up to and during the course.

And, yes, whilst science is often playing catch up with the bodybuilding fraternity in the exact effects of some of our discoveries. It would be some what impractical unethical to say to a study group "come and inject 4-8IU of GH into you every day and pump big weights and lets see what happens". When it come to the fundementals, you should be of notice.

So that is my problem with Long 3.

Best regards

Sootybaby

[Thorazine]

"It has been demostrated that by using Growth Hormone at even 2 I.U. per day can lead to a threefold increase in IGF-1 lvels in elderly patients( who are often GH deficient) and so this is the most effective means of increasing IGF-1 levels."

-The important question you need to ask yourself is exactly "where" are the IGF-1 levels increasing? Isn't this mostly hepatic IGF-1, and isn't it true that hepatic IGF-1 has little effect on muscle building?

[Bouncer]

Originally posted by TooPowerful4u
Im gonna take a shot in the dark at this one, but could it possibly be due to the low doses of IGF-1? You are one big mofo first off, and 2nd arent u on high doses of GH? Maybe ur body is used to higher levels in IGF-1

Actually bro im not running GH at all right now. Been off for about 2 months and waiting to get some more in.

[bgmke7]

wow! i cant believe all this misinformation floating around in this thread.let me say this.if igf-1 is nothing but a placebo effect then i will take that placebo effect all day long.i know for a fact that igf-1(if real)has changed my body in ways that no steroid could ever touch.this is no placebo effect, people!i know that im not known on this board but i do know what im talking about here.i have been there and done that with just about every substance know to cause muscle growth.when i say that igf-1 works and works damn well i mean it.now it really sucks for those that dont respond to igf-1 cause i wish all could expierence what i and so many others have from this substance.if it doesnt work on you then i would try to get it somewhere else(possibly fake) and then if it still doesnt work.well im truley sorry for you,but dont start with this crap about saying that it is all placebo effect because basically what your doing is saying that i and some very respected individuals are all liars.i take offense to that.we are here to share knowledge and not call each other liars.
later

[sana]

Originally posted by bgmke7
wow! i cant believe all this misinformation floating around in this thread.let me say this.if igf-1 is nothing but a placebo effect then i will take that placebo effect all day long.i know for a fact that igf-1(if real)has changed my body in ways that no steroid could ever touch.this is no placebo effect, people!i know that im not known on this board but i do know what im talking about here.i have been there and done that with just about every substance know to cause muscle growth.when i say that igf-1 works and works damn well i mean it.now it really sucks for those that dont respond to igf-1 cause i wish all could expierence what i and so many others have from this substance.if it doesnt work on you then i would try to get it somewhere else(possibly fake) and then if it still doesnt work.well im truley sorry for you,but dont start with this crap about saying that it is all placebo effect because basically what your doing is saying that i and some very respected individuals are all liars.i take offense to that.we are here to share knowledge and not call each other liars.
later

no one is calling you a liar and i wouldn't say that what sootybaby has presented is misinformation.

he has presented the science behind why he believes it shouldn't work. if you're going to dispute it, then please offer me a logical scientific argument for why you see it working. if the binding proteins which are necessary to transport IGF-1 to the cells cannot bind to IGF-1 L3, i do not see anyway how it could work.

provide me with some evidence and convince me.

[bgmke7]

sana

listen bro,
igf-1Lr3 works all by itself and i think that sootybaby should know this,that is why im holding him accountable for what he is saying.he should also know that igf-1 when bound to the binding protein makes it useless or inactive.so yes,my statement still stands that he is presenting misinformation.the reason igf-1Lr3 works better than original igf-1 is that it doesnt bind to the binding protein.it is resistent! now,let me start like this.....i have used igf-1Lr3 about 5 times now.i know it works.it doesnt work just a little bit,it doesnt work just ok,it works in ways you cant imagine.it has dramtically changed the way i look.now if you think igf-1 is going to turn you into a pro over night then forget it.if you dont have everything else dialed in(i.e. food intake,gear intake,and training)then forget using igf-1 and take up a new sport cause this isnt for you.im here telling you that what sootybaby is saying is either misinformation on his part,or that he is out right lying to you.i could go into this much more but i wont.this stuff works!!!!!!enough said.
later

[sana]

Re: sana

Originally posted by bgmke7
listen bro,
igf-1Lr3 works all by itself and i think that sootybaby should know this,that is why im holding him accountable for what he is saying.he should also know that igf-1 when bound to the binding protein makes it useless or inactive.so yes,my statement still stands that he is presenting misinformation.the reason igf-1Lr3 works better than original igf-1 is that it doesnt bind to the binding protein.it is resistent!

i'm not trying to get into a pissing match with you nor do i benefit from people either using or not using IGF-1 L3.

if you read carefully what sootybaby's post says - it IS based on science and is an informed post.

IGF-1 produced in your liver (via GH stimulation) is carried by 1 type of binding protein to arrive at your muscle (so it doesn't deteriorate) and a second type of binding protein once it arrives at the muscle cell (transmembrane transport molecule) due to its size.

as you readily admit - IGF-1 L3 does NOT bind to any of the binding proteins - so HOW - i am asking you - do you explain that it works.

he's offering a science based argument.

where's your science?

btw - i'm a not a bro.

[bgmke7]

ok,ok

i will look for it,but in the mean time as for my science behind what im saying is ME.i took this stuff,i evaluated what,if anything,that it was doing to my body,and then i concluded THAT IT WORKS!!!!!.ok?now i have to run but i will look for the appriopriate scientific studies.just give me a day and i will be back.
later

p.s. sorry for calling you a bro no harm intended and i also do not benefit if people use igf or not.im trying correct a wrong statement that was made.thats all.

[sana]

Re: ok,ok

Originally posted by bgmke7
im trying correct a wrong statement that was made.thats all.

from what i've read on pubmed and stuff, his statements were completely based on science. i don't see how it can be wrong.

you may have responded to "something" but how does the science explain your response.

[pudgy]

its ok to disagree, like i did, just civily, like i did, or bye :) your choice

[Bouncer]

bgmke, it didnt work for me bro. got it from cyber-solutionz, the same place many get there from. im not a newbie in any sence of the word and I can tell you from personal experiance that GH (Jintropin) works much better for me then Long-R does. thats not to say its a useless product because i have read many that like it. but for me, i will stick with my GH.

[bgmke7]

BOUNCER

im really sorry that you didnt respond to the igf.i wish i had an answer as to why.im sure in time that we will know the answer but for now there are alot of poeple just like yourself that dont get anything from it.again,sorry:( this stuff has done dramatic things to my physique.also gh does a million other things besides increase igf in the human body.i too have taken gh and loved it.gained alot of muscle while losing body fat.when i did the igf it was 10 times more drastic then gh.that is no lie!i noticed a difference in days,yes days with the igf.by the 2 week mark i was someone else.i didnt even recognize my body when i looked in the mirror.damn,im even getting excited to do my next run with it right now.one more week and im going back on it.i cant wait!again,bro im sorry you didnt respond.
later

[acuman]

After reviewing studies, I have seen that IGF-1 is still a mystery. It has been used in studies in animals from pigs to cows. In cows, it caused a retention of weight in low calorie diets, in pigs it had an opposite effect and caused, I believe it was, weightloss. So it works differently in different animals. Its also been used on various rodents.
As for the binding proteins, science does not fully understand how they work...BP3 is a carrier for IGF, BP5 inhibits its effects, and so on.
Look on PubMed, do a search, and you'll find that IGF is still a mystery, so all we have is "real world" experiences from people.