The lack of more research has more to do with stigmatization of it and the fact we have other effective heart failure drugs now.
1 Like
Shouldnāt we refer to this study involving tens of thousands of people? Because your so-called growth hormone treatment for heart failure is completely unnecessary, just as you saidāit doesnāt even rank among the therapies for heart failure.
1 Like
I think our disconnect is because my point is different than how you are interpreting it. Iām not saying people should rush to inject growth hormone for heart failure (although it would probably improve their condition). I am just demonstrating that there is a clear positive signal that growth hormone has health benefits as you can see from the heart failure studies.
1 Like
Among the offspring of centenarians, IGF-I bioactivity (p < 0.01), total IGF-I (p < 0.01), and the IGF-I/IGFBP-3 molar ratio (p < 0.001) were significantly lower than those in the control group of offspring whose parents both died prematurely.
It should be noted that growth hormone significantly elevates IGF-1.
2 Likes
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/acel.12519
The median 24-hour total GH secretion in offspring of long-lived families was 172 mU/L, significantly lower than the 238 mU/L in the control group (P=0.04), and the basal GH secretion in offspring of long-lived families was 14.5 mU/L, significantly lower than the 26.9 mU/L in the control group (P=0.03).
3 Likes
Pooling five independent experiments (covering rats/mice, males/females, and different starting ages), long-term low-dose GH treatment at a dose range comparable to that used in clinical trials for treating human GH deficiency and reversing age-related physiological decline had no effect on median or maximum lifespan.
2 Likes
Pooling five independent experiments (covering rats/mice, males/females, and different starting ages), long-term low-dose GH treatment at a dose range comparable to that used in clinical trials for treating human GH deficiency and reversing age-related physiological decline had no effect on median or maximum lifespan.
Since you left out some detailsā¦
Studies were carried out to examine the effects of long-term recombinant human growth hormone (GH) therapy on longevity in rodents. In the first study, 150 18-month-old female F344 rats were divided into three groups of 50 rats per group: Group 1, solvent vehicle; Group 2, 10 microg GH/kg body weight three times per week; Group 3, 50 microg GH/kg body weight three times per week. GH and solvent vehicle therapies were started at 18 months of age and continued until all the animals died spontaneously. Serum insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I was measured at 18 and 29 months of age and on 3-month-old rats. Serum IGF-I level decreased between 3 and 29 months of age. GH therapy reversed the decrease in a dose-dependent manner, with the 50 microg GH dose returning the serum IGF-I level to that of 3-month-old animals. However, statistical analysis revealed no significant effect of GH therapy on median life span, 10th percentile life span, or maximum life span. Similar observations on longevity were made on aged F344 male rats and on aged Balb/c mice, even when the dose of GH was increased to 1.0 mg/kg body weight two times per week. The main pathologic lesions in control animals were nephropathy, cardiomyopathy, leukemia, and testicular interstitial cell tumor; the prevalence of these lesions was not significantly altered by GH therapy.
ā¦
We conclude that long-term low-dose GH therapy that includes doses in the range that is given to humans in clinical trials in GH deficiency and to revert age-related physiologic declines has no overt deleterious effects on longevity and pathology in aged rodents.
Also from the cohort study you posted at the beginning of the thread:
A cohort of 15 809 GH-treated patients were analyzed (mean follow-up of 5.3 years). AEs were reported in 51.2% of patients (treatment-related in 18.8%). Crude AE rate was higher in patients who were older, had GHD due to pituitary/hypothalamic tumors, or adult-onset GHD. AE rate analysis adjusted for age, gender, etiology, and follow-up time showed no correlation with GH dose(!)
1 Like
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/004763749190026V?via%3Dihub
During a specific aging window of 17ā21 months, twice-weekly low-dose growth hormone injections (30 Āµg/mouse) significantly reduced the natural mortality rate in this cohort of male Balb/c mice. During the first 13-week observation period, GH treatment reduced mortality by 54%. In the 4-week withdrawal period following the first phase (13 weeks), all remaining control mice died, whereas only one mouse died in the GH-treated group.
The Balb/c mice aged 17 to 21 months in this paper are roughly equivalent to humans around 55 to 65 years old.
1 Like
Correct my if Iām wrong but isnāt GH only helpful in HF if the patient is GH deficient?
I donāt think we know for sure if itās helpful in non GH deficient people. Probably could make an anrgument either way. Thatās assuming we are talking about physiologic doses and not supraphysiologic.
2 Likes
some people, afraid of being criticized for publicly sharing the downsides, can only send me private messages sharing their experiences with growth hormone.
Cole,
I encourage you to ask these people to share their downside experiences with HGH. Actual experience speaks very loudly. I donāt recall anyone here ever being criticized for talking about their experiences. They should definitely not be afraid of that.
Thanks,
Jay
1 Like
Btw, I have seen thousands of anecdotes. Supra-physiologic doses can cause carpel tunnel, water retention, joint pain, fatigue, and higher blood glucose from a negative side effect standpoint. It also makes you look bigger and leaner. Of course anecdotes on how it affects aging are impossible to get.