Peak-Muscle.com  

Welcome to the Peak-Muscle.com forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. Come join us in on one of the best online fitness communities. We have 16,000 members that are likeminded towards a fitness, bodybuilding lifestyle. Registration is free and only takes but a few minutes. By joining our free community you will have access to communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. You will be able to create threads to discuss and or create a fitness regimen. Or just bounce ideas off of some very knowledgeable members. So don't miss out. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read
Go Back   Peak-Muscle.com > Anabolic Steroid Discussion > Peptides and SARMS
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-05-2016, 08:23 AM   #1
liftsiron
Administrator
 
liftsiron's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cimmeria
Posts: 18,385
liftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant future
The Next Generation of GH Secretagogues?

The Next Generation of GH Secretagogues?


by Mike Arnold

Of all the drugs used in bodybuilding today, growth hormone is probably the most lauded of the bunch. From beginners to advanced lifters alike, everyone seems to want to use this stuff. It’s not hard to understand why. It rapidly increases muscle fullness, makes it easier to stay lean, helps prevent injuries, and of course, builds muscle. Although pharmacy-grade GH is ideal, its excessive cost and a preponderance of fakes have made its acquisition unrealistic for most. While UGL-made GH is an acceptable alternative, it is still rather costly in comparison to other PEDs and frequently suffers from dosing/legitimacy issues. This has caused many bodybuilders to start exploring new options, the most popular of which is a category of PEDs commonly referred to as “GH peptides/secretagogues”.

Over the last 10 years we have witnessed the release of over a dozen different drugs in this category, but until recently they fell short in terms of effectiveness and as a result, failed to make the impact they were capable of. With the vast majority possessing a relatively poor pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile, most prospective users just didn’t feel they were worth the effort, instead opting to stick with more user-friendly drugs. Their biggest downfall was their short active life, requiring them to be injected multiple times daily just to maintain blood levels for a portion of the day. Some others were simply too weak, with massive dosages producing only moderate results. However, this all changed with MK-677. Not only did it remain active for a full 24 hours, allowing it to be dosed just once per day, but it could be administered orally—a huge bonus for the needle averse. Most importantly, it worked well from a cosmetic and IGF-1 elevation standpoint, producing results equivalent to what is typically experienced with 3-4 IU of exogenous GH.

Until recently MK-677 stood alone, being the only highly effective, orally active GH secretagogue on the market. This all changed with the introduction of Anamorelin; a next-generation GH secretagogue with a similar mechanism of action. Developed by Helsin, a European-based pharmaceutical company, Anamorelin was recently approved for use in cancer patients in several European countries. As such, it has undergone extensive clinical testing, demonstrating a high degree of efficacy and an impressive safely profile. Unfortunately, advanced cancer victims are often afflicted with a condition known as cancer cachexia, which is a wasting syndrome characterized by a decrease in lean mass, muscle weakness, fatigue, and a loss of appetite. Recent research with Anamorelin sought to address these symptoms by mimicking the effects of ghrelin—a gastric enzyme involved in the regulation of appetite and growth hormone production. In other words, this stuff is being used specifically for its muscle-building/preserving effects; a benefit directly applicable to the goals of any bodybuilder.

What were the results of this research? In the ROMANA trials (the first phase III studies examining the impact of Anamorelin on anorexia-cachexia), patients were selected to receive either 100 mg of Anamorelin or placebo for a 12 week period. Among the 484 participants in ROMANA 1, those taking the drug experienced an increase in lean body mass of 2.42 lbs and a total bodyweight increase of 4.84 lbs, while those in the control group lost roughly 1 pound of lean body mass. In the 2nd ROMANA trial, which involved 495 participants, lean body mass increased in the Anamorelin group by roughly 2.1 lbs compared to a 1.2 lb loss in the control group.

While a 2.4 lb lean mass gain and a total bodyweight gain of 4.8 lbs may not sound overly impressive at first glance, keep in mind that these studies were conducted in patients with advanced lung cancer; a disease which is notorious for causing a loss of muscle mass and strength. The fact that Anamorelin could not only stave off, but actually reverse this devastating effect is extremely encouraging. In those who do not have to contend with the debilitating effects of cancer, and whose life conditions are ideally suited to the acquisition of muscle tissue (i.e. bodybuilders), it stands to reason that Anamorelin would perform even more impressively.

In another double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, Anamorelin was evaluated for its effects on growth hormone, insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), prolactin, ACTH, LH, FSH, TSH, cortisol, insulin and glucose. Study participants (healthy volunteers selected from the general population) were administered Anamorelin daily at doses of 25 mg, 50 mg, 75 mg, and placebo. Results demonstrate that Anamorelin significantly increased GH levels at all doses, but with the 75 mg dose resulting in a decrease in insulin sensitivity. Although normally viewed in a negative light, a decrease in insulin sensitivity in this instance is a positive sign, as there is an inverse relationship between GH elevation and insulin resistance. In other words, the higher GH levels rise, the worse insulin sensitivity gets. This is because GH dose-dependently causes an increase in IGF-1 levels, which in turn leads to greater activation of the insulin receptor and a subsequent decrease in insulin sensitivity. In a nutshell, you could say that decreased insulin sensitivity equals higher igf-1 levels—at least within the context of this study.

Anamorelin was also shown to increase levels of the IGF-1 binding protein known as IGFBP-3. An increase in this protein is a good thing, as it acts as a transporter of IGF-1, helping shuttle IGF-1 to receptor sites within muscle tissue. Anamorelin did not appear to negatively affect the somatotropic axis, as evidenced by the maintenance of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 levels throughout the study duration. Anterior pituitary hormones and blood glucose levels also remained unaffected. However, with this particular study being of such limited duration, and with a decrease in insulin sensitivity not always immediately manifesting in hyperglycemia, it is reasonable to suggest that longer-term use might result in an increase in BG levels. Still, this is to be expected of any compound with significant GH/IGF-1 elevating properties. Anamorelin also increased appetite, which may or may not be a good thing depending on the user’s situation/needs. As in previous studies, bodyweight increased substantially and was directly correlated with an increase in IGF-1 levels. Overall, Anamorelin was well tolerated, with no noteworthy complaints lodged by study participants.

Oddly, this GH secretagogue has received very little talk in the bodybuilding community, despite an impressive body of research and current prescription status in multiple European nations. It will be interesting to see how this stuff stacks up against MK-677 and more importantly, if there is any type of synergistic effect between the two. As one of only a couple effective, orally active GH elevating agents currently available, I expect Anamorelin to establish a place on the research/black market in the coming year, at which point we will better be able to gauge its true effects in bodybuilders.
__________________
ADMIN/OWNER@Peak-Muscle
liftsiron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2016, 08:34 AM   #2
Glycomann
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Wow thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 08:26 AM   #3
bufbiker
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Did I read somewhere that it caused cancer in rats?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 09:31 AM   #4
liftsiron
Administrator
 
liftsiron's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cimmeria
Posts: 18,385
liftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant futureliftsiron has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by bufbiker View Post
Did I read somewhere that it caused cancer in rats?
One isolated poorly done study imo. At crazy dosages. There may be more studies but I've only seen the one circulating the forums.
__________________
ADMIN/OWNER@Peak-Muscle
liftsiron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 10:28 PM   #5
Shovel
VET
 
Shovel's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 2,772
Shovel is a splendid one to beholdShovel is a splendid one to beholdShovel is a splendid one to beholdShovel is a splendid one to beholdShovel is a splendid one to beholdShovel is a splendid one to beholdShovel is a splendid one to behold
I'm still a peptide skeptic. I never got much out of em, especially hgh.
__________________
Semper Fi
Shovel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2016, 09:11 PM   #6
Strongisland631
Vet
 
Strongisland631's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 215
Strongisland631 is on a distinguished road
Very interesting. Thanks for posting/
__________________
"It is only till we have lost everything, that we are free to do anything."
Strongisland631 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2017, 10:51 AM   #7
FUZO233
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 5
FUZO233 is on a distinguished road
interesting
FUZO233 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2017, 01:23 PM   #8
basskiller
Administrator
 
basskiller's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: My personality is who I am, My attitude is who you are
Posts: 2,868
basskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to beholdbasskiller is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by liftsiron View Post
One isolated poorly done study imo. At crazy dosages. There may be more studies but I've only seen the one circulating the forums.
Exactly.. when reading some of these studies, you definitely have to pay attention to the doses given cause sometimes they can be as much as 50 times the equivalent dose as we would take.

Also since damn near all studies are privately paid for in some fashion.. they might be out to prove a conceived outcome.. so your only seeing which ones they want to publish.. Any others that don't fit into their criteria, they don't have to let the public know about..
basskiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2017, 07:21 PM   #9
Glycomann
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
^^ that would be highly unethical. Any decent scientific manuscripts go through a rigorous review process. Also, for all NIH funded scientific research funded by a government body is subject to review by the Center for Scientific Review. There are ethics governing bodies in place for pretty much all funding agencies and all good journals. Science isn't the shithole people think. It's not perfect but it's not organized crime either.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:48 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.