Hgh

sitries

Whats everyones views on this stuff?? what are the risks associated with it, what can i expect, gains and strength wise? How long will it need to be run for for best results. and will it have any positive effects on skin and hair growth etc (is reducing MPB possible using HGH) I know that gains wont be like doing a steroid cycle and that it would be best to run it alongside a cycle. Would it be good to aid keeoing gains after a steroid cycle. say maybe do a 3month steroid cycle alongside a 6month stint on HGH.

sorry for all the Qs!

Neil R

Depends on you goals as to how best to use it.
Gh won't nessesarily give you what your looking for though. A lot of people start on Gh thinking its some kind of magic bullet to looking like the pros but it isn't.

sitries

im interested in using it for a decent period of time to promote solid, lean permanant gains. could it provide me with this. say for example if you dd a 6month coarse of it at a smallish to medium dosage - how much could you expect to gain??? and what would the potential side effects be??

Neil R

If everything else is spot on. Training , diet, rest etc then 2-4iu a day for 6 months should give you noticable gains that should be permanent. You can't really put a number to it as everyone is different and generally the older you are the better the response.
If you can aford it and want to try then by all means do so. You should be pleased with the results.
A lot of people would prefer to use the money to buy more gear in, but its each to his own.

CanadaBiggerUK

What about the side affects with HGH. People who have naturally over active levels get growth of the facial and hand bones which can change appearances. I am assuming if you take high dosages for long enouh it would have similar effects? What are your thoughts? HGH peaks during sleep and exercises invovling multi muscle groups (squats and deadlifts) have been shown to increase intramuscular test and HGH......out of interest

PScarb

the levels that cause these severe side effects are very high and so would be the dose needed if injecting GH i would say you would see these sides if you used 16iu+ ed for months but not on any less although we are all different, GH levels from core intense exercise is not much at all and can be blunted by what you drink post workout....you cannot compare to be honest..

i have used GH for the last 2yrs and i would say i have gained 10-15lbs in this time period of lean muscle that i can say is from the GH as a top level amateur yes i think it is worth it but if you do not compete i think you are wasting your money...

crazycal1

you dont need gh bud.

einsteins mind was the key to all things...to understand more than to know.

www.extremenutrition.co.uk

wogihao

To be fair hgh is a end game product, its what you should be thinking about when everything else is maxed out.

Because of the recent stuff on the telly and papers people mistakenly beleve that its a short cut to being masive (just in the same way people used to think about steriods).

What I dont understand is if your not competeing or over 240lbs at average height why even contemplate this? why not just stick to the basics its much cheaper and it will probably get you the results you want a whole lot more quickly.

PScarb

i dont compete at this weight but i use it mate, sorry mate but from your last sentance you dont understandd the use GH can give most competing athletes at a particular level...

wogihao

yea but how tall are you paul? your 5ft5"? so if we say that average height is say 5ft 10 your probably going to be loseing 8lbs a 1" in height so whats that 40lbs.. so thats 200lbs in the on stage

why would a light guy realy need hgh relative to his height? why couldnt you just use the regular meds avalible?

Just recently theres guys that arnt even 220lbs at 6ft+ that are considering useing it..

I was always told that HGH is a end game drug, somthing you would use as a top amature or from a professional.

I meen if guys could get to huge before why the need to use such a expensive drug when sticking to the basic cheap compounds would often be far more productive.