@Ahmed88 | Intellectually Disabled or Trolling?

[Sayori]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

Nice thread

mirin the effort in your post

I find it cringey to deny your chat gbt use when there is clear evidence

If you're going to use chat gbt to source at least admit it holy

 

[Sayori]

@Sayori

It was a very nice read

Evisceration threads are peak

 

[foidletslayer]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

Dee Nee Ree

 

[Sayori]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

Moot you got caught in a stray @mohi_100

 

[mohito]

Moot you got caught in a stray @mohi_100

I ended up changing my mind and i also posted about it in this same thread. It was definitely a tough topic but both perspectives were interesting

 

[Zagro]

tbh you could just generate text that debunks his points and proofs yours

but then he could generate text that debunks what you wrote

and it would create endless cycle of "having proofs for everything you want" in ts world (since chemicals don't work the way they promoted to work)

It doesn’t work like that bro

The “you can always counter-argument” theory doesn’t fucking work if the answer is clear and literally proven

He’s the only retard generating things

 

[cowmuncher26]

mirin hard bro. hes just a retard trying to farm rep from other retards

 

[Dzandar]

if at any point in your life you thought HGH would make you a magic 6'6 slayer youre a genuine iqlet who is spoon fed tiktok shills sorry

 

[Zagro]

if at any point in your life you thought HGH would make you a magic 6'6 slayer youre a genuine iqlet who is spoon fed tiktok shills sorry

I’ve never said that you fucking retard you’re the one coming from tiktok

 

[Dzandar]

I’ve never said that you fucking retard you’re the one coming from tiktok

my join date is almost two years before you but whatever seethe and sneed lol, mirin the iq larp tho

 

[Zagro]

my join date is almost two years before you but whatever seethe and sneed lol, mirin the iq larp tho

Wow that makes you instantly more knowledgeable you fucking retard with 4 posts, did you get this account from a data breach or what?

I’ve been rejected in 2023 does that make us equal in knowledge? No retard.

What the fuck is this logic bro also no idea where you read that rhGH will make you 6’6 pulling shit out of your ass just to look high iq

 

[Dzandar]

Wow that makes you instantly more knowledgeable you fucking retard with 4 posts, did you get this account from a data breach or what?

I’ve been rejected in 2023 does that make us equal in knowledge? No retard.

What the fuck is this logic bro also no idea where you read that rhGH will make you 6’6 pulling shit out of your ass just to look high iq

keep seething im gonna cum

 

[Zagro]

keep seething im gonna cum

Bump the thread a little more son i appreciate it

 

[Dzandar]

Bump the thread a little more son i appreciate it

bumping the thread so more people see how much of a retarded nigger you are

 

[Zagro]

bumping the thread so more people see how much of a retarded nigger you are

Good boy keep bumping it

You literally haven’t even read the thread mate

 

[combatingNorwooding]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

I mean, he is Arab so

 

[Jeremy Meeks]

Wouldn’t 1iu/kg/week be 70 iu for a 70kg person so, 10iu a day? If it were split

 

[Zagro]

Wouldn’t 1iu/kg/week be 70 iu for a 70kg person so, 10iu a day? If it were split

Tell me where it says that it was dosed daily, i don’t see it anywhere do you?

Dosing once a week or 3-4x a week was a common practice back then, so if the trial doesn’t state it you cant prove it

 

[Jeremy Meeks]

Tell me where it says that it was dosed daily, i don’t see it anywhere do you?

Dosing once a week or 3-4x a week was a common practice back then, so if the trial doesn’t state it you cant prove it

I know I get that it was dosed once a week, but 1iu/kg/week doesn’t equal 6iu a week

 

[Zagro]

I know I get that it was dosed once a week, but 1iu/kg/week doesn’t equal 6iu a week

No idea what you’re referring to quote it

The treated kids are like 30-40kg as they most likely are underweight, that means 40iu weekly and let’s say it somehow translates to daily which is still 2-fold lower than what recent studies use daily

 

[rotation]

since chemicals don't work the way they promoted to work

indian dyslexic user with chronic illiteracy

i just still hate you from when I used to try and debunk primal retards in my free time and you were always spewing some BS

what does this statement even mean

 

[Zagro]

indian dyslexic user with chronic illiteracy

i just still hate you from when I used to try and debunk primal retards in my free time and you were always spewing some BS

what does this statement even mean

"Yeah bro rhGH doesn't even increase GH it's the jewish government spreading misinformation"

He thinks what people promote about compounds on tiktok is also what the companies promote

 

[Wexilarious]

indian dyslexic user with chronic illiteracy

i just still hate you from when I used to try and debunk primal retards in my free time and you were always spewing some BS

what does this statement even mean

The sentence is grammatically incorrect, though its meaning is clear.

What it means
The author is saying that certain chemicals (or chemical products) do not perform as effectively as the advertisements or promotions claimed they would.

Why it is incorrect

1. Missing Passive Voice: You cannot say "they promoted" unless the chemicals themselves were doing the advertising. You need the passive form: "they are promoted" or "they were promoted."
2. Missing "to be": In English, you are promoted to be something or to do something.
3. Phrasing: While "the way" is common in speech, using "as" is often more natural for comparisons of function.

Better ways to write it

• Natural/Common: "Since the chemicals don't work as advertised."
• Corrected version of your draft: "Since chemicals don't work the way they are promoted to work."
• More formal: "Since these chemicals do not function as promoted."

To give you the best edit, I just need to know:

• Is this for a casual conversation, a product review, or a scientific context?
• Are you referring to cleaning products, medications, or pesticides?

 

[Zagro]

The sentence is grammatically incorrect, though its meaning is clear.

What it means
The author is saying that certain chemicals (or chemical products) do not perform as effectively as the advertisements or promotions claimed they would.

Why it is incorrect

1. Missing Passive Voice: You cannot say "they promoted" unless the chemicals themselves were doing the advertising. You need the passive form: "they are promoted" or "they were promoted."
2. Missing "to be": In English, you are promoted to be something or to do something.
3. Phrasing: While "the way" is common in speech, using "as" is often more natural for comparisons of function.

Better ways to write it

• Natural/Common: "Since the chemicals don't work as advertised."
• Corrected version of your draft: "Since chemicals don't work the way they are promoted to work."
• More formal: "Since these chemicals do not function as promoted."

To give you the best edit, I just need to know:

• Is this for a casual conversation, a product review, or a scientific context?
• Are you referring to cleaning products, medications, or pesticides?

Nigga cant even phrase his own words

"ChatGPT how do I breathe?"

 

[Wexilarious]

Nigga cant even phrase his own words

"ChatGPT how do I breathe?"

He couldn't understand what i meant, so ai made it easier for him

 

[rotation]

He couldn't understand what i meant, so ai made it easier for him

I don't understand, is this supposed to make me look bad?

all that GPT has done is say you don't know how to speak correct english, lol

'the author is an indian retard, so I need to rephrase his nonsense'

 

[Azie555]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

good thread knk

 

[Zagro]

good thread knk

Thank you knk

 

[cortisolman2]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

dnr niggah

 

[AtrophicPyra]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

BAHAHA NIGGA MADE A GUIDE ON HOW AHMED88 IS A RETARD

 

[Zagro]

BAHAHA NIGGA MADE A GUIDE ON HOW AHMED88 IS A RETARD

Holy shit what a horrible post:rep ratio

 

[susisesi]

@Ahmed88 | DEATHNIC and/or SUB5?​

Officially inviting @Ahmed88 to show his face against mine,

-So sorry to anyone ethnic im not usually like this lmao-

Do you guys think this low iq deathnic muslim arab can back up his insults?

Some of this arabs claims insulting others w skin color and looks that im waiting for him to back up:

I am asking for either a public rate or if he’s so scared a private rate rating us in looks.
Also mentioning the skin and eye color.


I am here to proudly represent Turkey and the glorious Turkish Subforum
and asking @Ahmed88 to represent whichever deathnic arab country he is from

Yes I am doing all of this because I am proudly Turkish and don’t care what you guys think tbh

He’s prolly gonna make some excuses tho, not even asking to show face publicly.


IF HE CAN’T BACK UP HIS CLAIMS I AM EXPECTING A FORMAL APOLOGY TO TURKISH PEOPLE FROM HIM OR HIM DELETING HIS ACCOUNT.

Spoiler: Turkish subforum and nationalistcels GTFIH:

@Zagro @Atsizz @StuntmanMike @Resistance. @Fridx @Ergenekon

sleeping now, waiting for a response untill tomorrow morning or him deleting his account

 

[Zagro]

@Ahmed88 | DEATHNIC and/or SUB5?​

Officially inviting @Ahmed88 to show his face against mine,

-So sorry to anyone ethnic im not usually like this lmao-
View attachment 4764724

Do you guys think this low iq deathnic muslim arab can back up his insults?

Some of this arabs claims insulting others w skin color and looks that im waiting for him to back up:

View attachment 4764704View attachment 4764705View attachment 4764706

I am asking for either a public rate or if he’s so scared a private rate rating us in looks.
Also mentioning the skin and eye color.


I am here to proudly represent Turkey and the glorious Turkish Subforum
and asking @Ahmed88 to represent whichever deathnic arab country he is from
View attachment 4764739

Yes I am doing all of this because I am proudly Turkish and don’t care what you guys think tbh

He’s prolly gonna make some excuses tho, not even asking to show face publicly.


IF HE CAN’T BACK UP HIS CLAIMS I AM EXPECTING A FORMAL APOLOGY TO TURKISH PEOPLE FROM HIM OR HIM DELETING HIS ACCOUNT.

Spoiler: Turkish subforum and nationalistcels GTFIH:

@Zagro @Atsizz @StuntmanMike @Resistance. @Fridx @Ergenekon

sleeping now, waiting for a response untill tomorrow morning or him deleting his account

You also got ragebaited i see

Don’t do anything he’ll just dox your face, which he’s welcome to as you mog his whole bloodline

 

[AtrophicPyra]

Holy shit what a horrible post:rep ratio

I gotta start using chatgpt threads to farm reps

 

[TakaTeo]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

Mmm im going to sleep so sweetly after reading this my growth plates are humming in agreement

 

[RYVINIXX]

insane thread as always, mirin hard

 

[FoidCucker]

"the — proves nothing since i used some texts from studies" It does prove that you used GPT you fucktard you didn't quote anything from a paper it's full on copy and pasted from GPT do you genuinely think everyone here is retarded or some other bullshit?

The studies you provided are the ones you've found yourself no one else sent it or mentioned it , interesting way of counter-argumenting I'm suprised your peanut brain even understood that there is no other way than lying that could save your ass

"They were mentioned because retards like you often use these studies to say things like:" Funny because some of them are in the GHD section and not even about GHD and it's the same for the ISS papers you've linked too, no one else ever used these studies against you nor have I ever seen some of these studies posted on .org, stop lying retard.

"Yeah don't mind me I'm just using something for grammar that interestingly enough sounds exactly like ChatGPT!" You did not write this buddy, you do not know what any of the pathways you mentioned do or how they work.

"GH stimulates chondrocyte proliferation and hypertrophy" Are you sure that it's mainly the GH? , it just might be the local IGF-1 in your growth plates but what the fuck would you know about that.

"Exogenous GH can increase the current chondrocyte population" Okay thanks for agreeing with me so it does increase height nice one, more chondrocytes available means more growth retard.

"but it does not and cannot surpass the hard ceiling set by polygenic skeletal architecture" It can very easily do that you should know that genetics/DNA doesn't mean shit you can change everything about them but not the sequence, that means you can influence and full on change the expression and the shape, you just cant suddenly grow to 7'.

GH/IGF-1 also influence the RZCs they regulate how fast its depleted/recruited to other pools so you're wrong again, this means that if you can deplete is slower than normally and let proliferation do it's work and cause as many deviations as possible you will surpass your "genetics".

"strogen remains vital for chondrocyte development and growth together with the control of essential genes" Estradiol is literally only harm for your growth plates it does NOTHING for your growth you do NOT need it for longitudinal growth only the ERB pathway may benefit you SLIGHTLY.

"locking estrogen disrupts these gene networks and cartilage maturation, producing at best a marginal temporal extension of growth, not a fundamental increase in growth potential." Estrogen disrupts cartilage maturation NIGGA THAT'S WHY WE USE IT , it's only to prefevent further damage done by estrogen and lengthen the time window you would naturally have for longitudinal growth.

Estrogen literally harms all pools of chondrocytes it's the thing you should avoid the most and this nigga talking bout some "It's important for growth as is modulates RUNX2 bla bla" retard you don't want RUNX2 if it increases it that's bad for your growth.

Same nigga who compared us to plants, nice one.

Using rat studies is acceptable in this case you retard "oh yes let's give full on KO to some random babies genes so that we can continue our research and ensure the baby grows up to hang himself because of brittle bones and being 4'11" there are growth plate and rat trials there.

You fucking retard holy shit why am I even bothering bro this is just you ripping your ass in two just to find a way to counter-argument after you got shat on, I never said anything about the uremic models being perfectly healthy why are you explaining it . They have "suppressed" growth as you've written and are treated with androgens and it proves exactly what I mentioned.

"mechanistically unfounded and contradicted by both developmental biology and clinical evidence' THIS IS LITERALLY THE BIGGEST BULLSHIT SO FAR ONLY THING WE DON'T HAVE IS FULL ON CLINICAL EVIDENCE YOU CAN PROVE IT MECHANISTICALLY IT'S THE EASIEST SHIT IF YOU CAN UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS AND BIOLOGY ALSO PROVES IT YOU FUCKING RETARD.


Which underweight ISS kid weights 80kg bro?

Where did the 80iu weekly come from are you imagining 1-12 year olds pushing 100kg body weight whilst being hypogonadal and having multiple other deficiencies

Okay so listen here, if I take 365 showers at new years does that mean I took a shower every single day? Or just that I took 365 in one day? What you're claiming is literally that taking 365 showers in one day means that it's the same as taking one every single day. You CANT convert the weekly injected dose into daily you fucking retard, HEY LETS INJECT 10 GRAMS OF TRENBOLONE SO THAT I HAVE DOSED MY FULL 20-WEEK BLAST IN ONE DAY AND DON'T HAVE TO INJECT EVER AGAIN.

Are you well bro? Honestly? Did you read the part where I stated five times that it's administered weekly, they inject it WEEKLY. Like every monday, one dose, weekly, one bolus, not daily, weekly.

dnr but holy fuck mirin

 

[Verdam]

bump

 

[IbalmeHponeMin]

Introduction
So I've recently came up against this retarded and pseudo-intellectual subhuman called; @Ahmed88, whom has spread copious amounts of misinformation so I have to put him back in his place, completely fueled by ChatGPT to the brim and hasn't read a singular paper in in his life he literally has no experience or knowledge either.

https://looksmax.org/threads/why-hgh-is-cope-and-will-not-work-for-you-hgh-users-gtfih.1887337/#post-26411837

But what can we expect, we should show empathy and feel sorry for the parents of this creature.
View attachment 4672156

It's disappointing to see people still agree with retards as the likes of "Ahmed88" but I'm sure they just skimmed through right?
View attachment 4671865
View attachment 4671866
View attachment 4671869
View attachment 4671871
View attachment 4671879
View attachment 4671883
View attachment 4671885

Let's start evaluating his posts and his recent biggest claim on rhGH which was the main reason this thread was made, I usually don't really give a fuck as this is a weekly occurrence in .org "HGH DEBUNKED GTFIH" "HGH DESTROYS HEIGHT AND MAKES YOU SHORTER" and more and he did talk bad about me so one more reason.

The Main Thread

The Papers Provided For "GHD":

Spoiler: Short and Long-Term Effects of Growth Hormone in Children and Adolescents With GH Deficiency

This is just a decent review on what has been discovered so far proves legit nothing about your claim. They compare past and modern injection frequencies, dosages and criterias, and contains mostly info about weekly administration of rhGH at 0.2 till 0.6 units per kilogram, if we take a hypothetical look at it and say that the patient is at a weight that's statistically average (which is once again not possible as most patients under treatment of rhGH are overweight or underweight) it should equal to 30 units per week and that's insanely low dosed and the worst delivery frequency someone has ever came up with it goes on to evaluate other risks and shit but this literally proves nothing.

"Several reports were published after years of treatment with pit-hGH in which the adult height outcomes achieved in non-acquired GHD (often called IGHD) were described. These results were summarized in reviews (168-170). As exemplified in Table 4, (169, 171–174, 176) these patients had been severely GH deficient (maximum in tests < 7.5 ng/mL) and were relatively old (approx. mean age: 13 yrs) at diagnosis and GH start. These characteristics were not only due to a selection bias, since the oldest patients at start are the earliest to reach their (near) end of growth. On the other hand, the patients treated during the pit-hGH era were very short (mean height at GH start < -4.0 SDS) and were given dosages of about 8-12 IU of pit-hGH from various sources, injected 2-3 times per week i.m., and the total amount of one ampule often contained 4 (2) I.U. After about > 5-6 years of treatment, an adult height of about -3.0 SDS was reached in patients with spontaneous puberty, while those with induced puberty reached a height of about -1.5 SDS. Females tended to be younger and shorter at start but reached a lower adult height."

The clinical trials cited are bullshit aswell dosages of 8-12 units 2-3x weekly will literally do more harm than good and no where near what we should be or are doing in our use-case.

Spoiler: Use of growth hormone in children

Another review that doesn't support your claim at all no idea why you keep providing bullshit papers like this, this was written in 2007 and as stated in the article itself at this time the only country that allowed rhGH administration for the treatment of ISS was the United States and it does not even talk about GHD you moron you cant even find specific articles on GHD its stated that there was a 5-7cm increase in final height and normalization of final height has been achieved, this was seen in the treatment of Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi, IUGR and CRI not even in GHD as the abstract states this paper covers other use-cases than GHD .

Spoiler: Recombinant human growth hormone for the treatment of growth disorders in children: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Once again another review which is not only done on GHD as you couldn't specify your needs to papi GPT have you? This report is done on GHD, TS, PWS, CRI, SHOX-D and SGA.

"Children in the rhGH group grew 2.7 cm/year faster than children in the untreated group and had a statistically significantly higher HtSDS after 1 year: -2.3 ± 0.45 versus -2.8 ± 0.45." and it obviously shows growth.

"Girls in one study grew an average of 9.3 cm more than untreated girls. In a study of younger children, the difference was 7.6 cm after 2 years. HtSDS values were statistically significantly higher in treated than in untreated girls." Shows the sex dimorphism in the growth plates that you have no clue about, comparing the results or even how the drug works in a females body to how it does in a male is literally the biggest mistake you could make. So any clinical trial on girls I wont accept.

And at last this review states that longer studies upwards of 2 years almost guarantee the patients reaching FAH or NFAH.

Spoiler: National Cooperative Growth Study: 25 Years of Growth Hormone Data, Insights, and Lessons for Future Registries

This is a very shitty paper once again, an observational study and I know for a FACT you haven't read a single molecule here

Let's take a quick look at the references shall we?
Growth Hormone Treatment for Growth Hormone Deficiency and Idiopathic Short Stature: New Guidelines Shaped by the Presence and Absence of Evidence
Spontaneous growth and response to growth hormone treatment in children with growth hormone deficiency and idiopathic short stature
Dose-dependent effect of growth hormone on final height in children with short stature without growth hormone deficiency
High dose growth hormone treatment induces acceleration of skeletal maturation and an earlier onset of puberty in children with idiopathic short stature
US Growth Hormone Use in the Idiopathic Short Stature Era: Trends in Insurer Payments and Patient Financial Burden
Interesting enough the paper you provided for GHD has more references for ISS than it does for GHD, like it's hard to even find one reference to a paper on GHD in there

Also before you get your hopes up this proves nothing and is a horrible "evidence" but it's expected as you don't even know what you're sending.

Spoiler: Safety and Efficacy of Pediatric Growth Hormone Therapy: Results From the Full KIGS Cohort

The cohort here exists of GHD, ISS, Turner Syndrome, SGA and many others, so once again not only GHD as this retard does not read the studies he provides. What is this even supposed to prove?
View attachment 4671969

Spoiler: Effect of different doses of recombinant human growth hormone therapy on children with growth hormone deficiency: a retrospective observational study

Let's take a quick look on this amazing paper you provided (sarcasm just so you know Ahmed)

"A total of 136 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 70 received 0.1 U/ (kg·d) (low-dose group) and 66 received 0.2 U/ (kg·d) dose of rhGH treatment (high-dose group)." Mirin high-dose group not even coming close to the doses which are adequate for height growth in individuals without deficiencies as us, these shit are all low dosed but obviously is effective for them.

Interesting thing is that there were no increases in adverse reaction even though the doses were doubled and a very small treatment group aswell, and once again proves literally nothing no idea where we're going with these papers but yeah let's move on

Spoiler: Long-term Response to Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Therapy in Indian Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency

At last, for the GHD papers this one is competing for the worst place.

"A total of 99 children (64 boys, 35 girls; 61 isolated GHD, 38 multiple pituitary hormone deficiency) were studied." very small treatment group once again + done in multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies so most of these children are hypogonadal and more on top of GHD and girls are included so worthless paper as there is sex dimorphism in the growth plates, you cant even provide half-decent studies.

That covers about the first part of "evidence" he has provided so let's move on his next claim again on GHD:

"VERY Important: These studies are on children who are medically short due to GH deficiency, and do NOT produce enough HGH not normal kids. The effect is correcting a deficiency, not surpassing genetic potential."

Dear Ahmed, you should know that there are a many studies where children surpass their set "genetic potential", although genetic potential is literally a myth you cant estimate or calculate height as it isn't mathematics, it can never be done it's only an estimation.

Validation of Prediction Models for Near Adult Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with Growth Hormone: A Belgian Registry Study
This study shows that there is a margin of error in predictions, so even if you can tell me that they only reach their "genetic potential" or PAH, the PAH isn't guaranteed to be true it can be overestimated or in some cases underestimated, this means that there are probably lots of children who surpassed their "genetic potential". Also this study proves only a little as the treatment group is small, so the females being accurately estimated can be a coincidence and vice-versa.

The Papers Provided For "ISS":

Spoiler: Long-term results of growth hormone therapy in children with short stature, subnormal growth rate and normal growth hormone response to secretagogues. Dutch Growth Hormone Working Group

This is a very interesting study actually, its done in children diagnosed with idiopathic short stature which is basically zero hormonal or medical reasons to be -2 HSDS.

Their growth rate is subnormal but they do respond to growth hormone secretagogues normally (as stated in the title), that means that there is no insensitivity or anything similar to the hormones GH or IGF-1.

Another thing is that it's done in girls aswell and only has a treatment group of 91 individuals meaning it's too low. You cant compare us men to women as the responses intracellularly and whatnot are very different to hormones because of obvious reasons you have no clue about.

Here's a few examples of sexual dimorphism in bone tissue and growth plates themselves, we can only extrapolate from here.
Sexual dimorphism in cortical bone size and strength but not density is determined by independent and time-specific actions of sex steroids and IGF-1: evidence from pubertal mouse models
Sexual dimorphism of growth plate prehypertrophic and hypertrophic chondrocytes in response to testosterone requires metabolism to dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by steroid 5-alpha reductase type 1

Spoiler: THE IMPACT OF DOSAGE ON THE EFFECT OF GROWTH HORMONE THERAPY IN CHILDREN WITH IDIOPATHIC SHORT STATURE

Another retarded clinical trial which doesn't support your claim in any way at all because it does not even come close to how our use-case is, injection-frequency, dosages and other its and bits.

"gr 1 and 2 received 3 and 4.5 IU/m2 b.s. 6 times per week, and gr 3 received 3 IU/m2 in the 1st year and 4.5 IU thereafter." Random ass dosing frequencies such as 6 times weekly and what the fuck are these dosages

It also proves my point which is higher doses being better and even needed for our use-case "the higher dosage appears more effective in terms of predicted adult height, although attained final heights have to be awaited for definitive conclusions."

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature and idiopathic growth hormone deficiency

This once again proves like nothing?

Only interesting thing is this is the study with one of the highest dosages if I recall correctly "Initially, GH treatment was provided at a dose 0.23 mg/kg/wk for the IGHD subjects and 0.23–0.33 mg/kg/wk for the ISS subjects. The GH dosage for the subjects with ISS was adjusted according to the subject's IGF-1 level in order not to exceed a dose greater than +2 SD.".

But this doesn't matter as the doses are adjusted in a way so that a IGF-1 level greater than +2 SD isn't achieved meaning it's not much different than every other study you provided as in our use-case we should exceed 2 SD greatly.

Spoiler: Effect of growth hormone treatment on children with idiopathic short stature (ISS), idiopathic growth hormone deficiency (IGHD), small for gestational age (SGA) and Turner syndrome (TS) in a tertiary care center

And at last we have another paper which ONCE AGAIN doesn't support your claim in any way? I mean you just send any review/trial that has ISS or GHD in the title or has been mentioned cause some of them aren't even about the things you claim.

Prime example is this study which covers many use-cases for rhGH, getting bored of these shit ngl

Finally done with the evaluation and none of them supported your claim and were the most shitty papers I've seen excluding one or two, most were not even the things you claimed they were about and they used WAY different dosages and administration frequencies, but let's move on.

"B-B-But ISS Children Grew Taller why can’t i?
Let’s clarify: ISS children are not short simply because of genetics. ISS is defined as short stature without a known cause, that INCLUDES GENETICS and many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity (Evidence: Idiopathic short stature)"

I'm having a stroke, "ISS children are not short because of genetics but it is also because of genetics" nice one mate."many children diagnosed as having ISS have partial GH insensitivity" another insanely false take again nice, there is also "ISS" diagnosed patients that are just literally short for no reason at all like legit just short fucks. It's also proven that ISS patiens do reach FAH or NFAH themselves lmao.

Nice evidence aswell random review from 2001, back when rhGH wasn't even available for 95% of the diseases it's used for now.

There are multiple causes found in “ISS”, insensitivities to IGF-1/GH and mutations in genes so its issues at the molecular level which are hard to detect.

I've also never said ISS diagnosed patients are the same as us healthy adolescents, but they are the closest thing we have.
Diagnostic yield of a multigene sequencing approach in children classified as idiopathic short stature
Genetics of Short Stature

The Proof He Has For Why It Wont Work:

Spoiler: "Proof" 1

"GH does not create new growth potential. The growth plates in long bones experience linear growth through their epiphyseal plates. The genetic code determines both number and proliferative capacity of chondrocytes present at these growth plates. GH promotes the growth of chondrocytes and their development into mature cells, yet it cannot boost these cells' genetic-based growth capacity beyond their existing limits."

rhGH does increase growth potential and it's very proven mechanistically, just takes basic knowledge of bone histology to understand that if there are more chondrocytes proliferating so more deviations and more chondrocytes that enlarge bigger in size than they initally are "designed" to be, you will end up with higher FAH. Height isn't a set thing, you can modify all aspects including the resting zone chondrocytes which is the pre-natal "genetic code" you're speaking about which you once again have no clue about. The amoung of IGF-1 you produce, your secretion and receptors are all also genetic, which we can override/change via exogenous rhGH.

Spoiler: "Proof' 2

"Height is a polygenic trait which multiple genetic loci control its development. The treatment of GH-sufficient children with GH therapy does not affect their gene expression or the genetic skeletal structure which their genome contains."

Bold of you to assume that, if you administer exogenous rhGH do you think it will only change your GH and IGF-1 levels and not impact anything else? As you said yourself its a polygenic trait and almost everything is linked to eachother, when you change one and increase it to supraphysiological levels there are many other things that can happen. It will impact many height modulating genes positively and with the usage of just an aromatase inhibitor you can reach pretty great results as you will have most of the significant modulators of height growth minimised.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

This is where the cherry-picking begins and this is a VERY funny one lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

As we can see a treatment group of 15 patients and 5 of which are girls, in group 1: 7 patients were on a dosage of 0.5IU/kg PER WEEK and in group 2: 8 patients were at a dosage of 1.0IU/kg PER WEEK. This is literally 6-9 units WEEKLY. This thread isn't serious or this guy is a clinically diagnosed retard, if you see growth from these dosages you're non-human.

View attachment 4672308


When confronted about it he still cant comprehend that it's WEEKLY . This RETARD genuinely starts pulling numbers out of the deepest points of his rectum and somehow comes up to the conclusion that 0.5-1.0IU/kg per WEEK correlates to 2-3 fold the dosages we use? How? I'm genuinely speechless and astonished by this high level of intelligence (once again it's sarcasm Ahmed). I mean do I even have to continue onwards from here?

Spoiler: No Improvement of Adult Height in Non-growth Hormone (GH) Deficient Short Children with GH Treatment

I'm just going to provide one phrase that's directly in the abstract, and nothing else cause this is enough to explain how big of a retard he is

"The effect of GH treatment is reported to be dose-dependent and doses over 0.23 mg/kg/week are reported to be necessary to improve adult height in non-GHD short children. Currently, the GH dose is fixed at 0.175 mg/kg/week in Japan, and we expected to find, and indeed concluded, that ordinary GH treatment in Japanese, non-GHD short children does not improve adult height."

Weekly dosing bro....weekly dosing, no shit it doesn't improve height when they take around 6 units weekly.

Spoiler: Final height after growth hormone therapy in non-growth-hormone-deficient children with short stature

And we see a pattern here, again only one phrase directly in the abstract once again lol.

"We report the effect of growth hormone (GH) treatment for 4 to 10 years in 15 prepubertal non-GH-deficient short children (10 boys, 5 girls, aged 7.4 to 13.2 years). In 7 patients, GH was administered at a dosage of 0.5 U/kg per week (group 1: 4 boys, 3 girls) and in 8 patients (group 2: 6 boys, 2 girls) at a dosage of 1.0 U/kg per week."

PER WEEK.

My Proof For Why It Can Theoretically Work:

Spoiler: My Proof

Growth hormone directly and indirectly stimulates articular chondrocyte cell growth
The hypertrophic chondrocyte: To be or not to be.
Response of the growth plate of uremic rats to human growth hormone and corticosteroids
Effects of growth hormone treatment on growth plate, bone, and mineral metabolism of young rats with uremia induced by adenine
Effects of GH/IGF axis on bone and cartilage
Growth factor regulation of human growth plate chondrocyte proliferation in vitro

View attachment 4672376
Fucking hell this was draining to write, disappointing that people need to teach things that should be common sense to others. All of the proof he has of clinical trials is when it's dosed at single digits WEEKLY.

The second paper here is found with ChatGPT as I cropped and pasted above and the second and fourth ones are literally the same one but the second one being the full paper.

"Analogy (for conceptual clarity): Imagine a plant with genetically fixed maximum height. Adequate water and nutrients allow it to reach its potential. Adding more water beyond what it can physiologically use does not make it grow taller; it may even disrupt normal growth processes."

I thought extrapolating from trials done on rats were bad but this guy really compared us to plants.
View attachment 4672409

View attachment 4672531View attachment 4672529
No bro I don't use ChatGPT!!1! - Ahmed88

Summary
What you should understand from this thread is that .org users apart from most prominent users are mostly retarded (I'm no expection) and have no idea what they're talking about, you should always DYOR and not trust some random stranger on a looksmaxxing forum and even if you do make sure to look into it yourself and fact-check their claims.

Wrote this while starving and exhausted so expect some mistakes to be made and I've skipped over a few parts as it's draining, but new threads of mine are in the works

@Razzz
@gymcelld
@Leo
and others who realised he was a retard, shout out to yall.​

Should i run double digit for significant growth?

 

[Zagro]

Should i run double digit for significant growth?

You need double digits for minimal growth below 8-9 doesn’t do shit really

 

[IbalmeHponeMin]

You need double digits for minimal growth below 8-9 doesn’t do shit really

What about 12iu each day? Vendor told me to use 2iu a day