Does it cause hyperplasia?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mk-677 and hyperplasia
- Thread starter Louisdavies1
- Start date
That's a very vague question. Does it cause hyperplasia where? Do you mean hyperplasia of muscle cells?
Yes, indirectly.
Mk-677 acts in a way by which it affects the natural inherent secretion of hGH, and consequently IGF-I - which has been proven to cause hyperplastic changes in many tissues, including but not limited to skeletal muscle cells(1)(2)(3)(4)
References
(1)Growth hormone increases the proliferation of existing cardiac myocytes and the total number of cardiac myocytes in the rat heart/ Brüel A1, Christoffersen TE, Nyengaard JR / Journal of Cardiovascular Research (2007)
(2)Peripheral activities of growth hormone-releasing hormone/ Granata R1/ Journal of Endocrinilogical Investigation (2016)
(3)Regulation of muscle mass by growth hormone and IGF-I/ C P Velloso/ British Journal of Pharmacology (2008)
(4)Hyperplasia and cellularity changes in IGF-1-overexpressing skeletal muscle of crucian carp/ Li D1, Lou Q, Zhai G, Peng X, Cheng X, Dai X, Zhuo Z, Shang G, Jin X, Chen X, Han D, He J, Yin Z/ Journal of Endocrinology (2004)
MissBizz
Active member
Interesting! It's great to always learn more about these compounds!
Perfect info right here. This should give you everything you need to know.
(PM me for a price list for Biotech Labs and 10% discount)
Thanks fellas
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mastermolnar
Active member
Id say from mk677 it would be minimal... youd find far more hyperplastic effect in hgh... or for that matter, igf1. Thats my opinion and I think its pretty accurate.
Ill use a comparison... gains from hcg usage. It can be done at extremely high doses and would be minimally effective compared to running the real deal. . In this example. .. testosterone. Blue shine is correct in his statement but I think the degree to which you would see new cell growth from mk677 use is a bit understated. Not to mention the cost of achieving that level of endogenous production would be very expensive to say the least
Ill use a comparison... gains from hcg usage. It can be done at extremely high doses and would be minimally effective compared to running the real deal. . In this example. .. testosterone. Blue shine is correct in his statement but I think the degree to which you would see new cell growth from mk677 use is a bit understated. Not to mention the cost of achieving that level of endogenous production would be very expensive to say the least
I looked for research to support your point. If you assume that hyperplastic changes are a result of IGF-I level rise, which they are, you would be incorrect based on human trials.
MK-677 human trials
"To determine efficacy and specificity in older subjects, elderly men and women were treated orally with placebo or MK-0677 (10- or 25-mg doses) once daily for 14 d (60). Before dosing and again on d 14, GH concentrations were measured in serum at 20-min intervals for 24 h to determine pulse amplitude and frequency of release. On d 14, increased peak amplitude and 24-h GH AUC was observed without changes in pulse frequency; IGF-I was increased 40 and 60% by 10- and 25-mg doses, respectively."(1)
IGF-I serum levels following S.C hGH injection in humans
"However, a single dose of CP024 induced a significant increase in IGF-1 levels between 3 and 10 hours after dosing"(2)
Showing a 130ng/ml to 165ng/ml (well below 40%-60% volume compared to baseline)
"To determine efficacy and specificity in older subjects, elderly men and women were treated orally with placebo or MK-0677 (10- or 25-mg doses) once daily for 14 d (60). Before dosing and again on d 14, GH concentrations were measured in serum at 20-min intervals for 24 h to determine pulse amplitude and frequency of release. On d 14, increased peak amplitude and 24-h GH AUC was observed without changes in pulse frequency; IGF-I was increased 40 and 60% by 10- and 25-mg doses, respectively."(1)
IGF-I serum levels following S.C hGH injection in humans
"However, a single dose of CP024 induced a significant increase in IGF-1 levels between 3 and 10 hours after dosing"(2)
Showing a 130ng/ml to 165ng/ml (well below 40%-60% volume compared to baseline)
These are both human trials with both compounds looking into the very same axis via serum measurements of IGF-I. That's the ideal scenario to answer the question.
Research limitations: I would state that the limitations are simply due to the fact that both compounds were not put head to head on the same double blinded group, but the difference in favour of MK-677 falls substantially over the Standard Deviation, with a confidence interval of 95%.
A more significant limitation, which may be more relevant to us, is that the timeframe of the rise of IGF-I hasn't been investigated, albeit there is very little doubt as for the impact on the serum levels based on this information.
Surprised me, too. I really thought hGH would take this one...WTF
References
(1)Development of Growth Hormone Secretagogues / Roy G. Smith, Ph.D., Huffington Center on Aging, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Room M320, Houston, Texas 77030-3498.(2011);
(2)Intranasal Human Growth Hormone (hGH) Induces IGF-1 Levels Comparable With Subcutaneous Injection With Lower Systemic Exposure to hGH in Healthy Volunteers/ Andrew L. Lewis, Faron Jordan,corresponding author Tina Patel, Kirk Jeffery, Gareth King, Martin Savage, Stephen Shalet, and Lisbeth Illum/ Journal of Clinical Endocrinological Metabolism(2015)
Last edited:
mastermolnar
Active member
So your argument is that mk677 is MORE effective than exogenous hgh? During this head to head it appears that mk677 was given 14 days. I cant see the chart but from what I read and understand a single dose of hgh was given. What was the dosage? What would those numbers look like 14 days after continuation? Im pretty sure from my own experience and that of a handful of close and experienced friends, I can safely say that this study and the conclusion that mk677 is in fact more effective (if that's the conclusion made) is in fact false.... not because I read a writeup about results, but because I saw a different result firsthand... in person.
But thanks for sharing bro. I like this type of conversation/debate... respectful, differing aa it may be
But thanks for sharing bro. I like this type of conversation/debate... respectful, differing aa it may be
You can follow up on the research and see that for the hGH there were 2 daily administrations, both intranasal spray and abdominal SC in the range of 2-3 IU. The increase of MK has been significant even through the course of a single dose administration. I think that it's hard to compare 25mg dose to 2IU dose. The modalities of function need to be investigated on a different platform altogether and head to head.
As I said myself, I found it to be a bit... Skeptical, but I'll look for more concrete evidence. I wouldn't, however, dismiss MK's ability to raise IGF very dramatically.
Either way you throw it my take is that
A. hGH may (and should) overtake MK on a short run if comparable dosages are used. (establishing that is going to be hard, as well)
B. your statement that Id say from mk677 it would be minimal is definitely knocked out of the park, even if (and I think so myself) hGH will produce greater more dramatic effects.
C. Doesn't matter what research says, if you found MK in the field, so to speak, to be less effective, that's just the way it is factually.
Last edited:
P.S. could you share your experience? If you remember your dosing protocols and timeframes, that is? That'll really help a brother out!
Last edited:
mastermolnar
Active member
25mg dosing am... As well as a few friends of mine utilizing the same protocol.... for a few months. I saw almost no real difference in terms of mass building or hyperplasia....
I have been with 3.33 iu everyday now and just recently doubled that to 3.33iu twice daily. In the past few weeks I feel great and have noticed minor changes in body composition but nothing astounding. Its a little too soon to expect anything too notable but im far happier with the results thus far
I have been with 3.33 iu everyday now and just recently doubled that to 3.33iu twice daily. In the past few weeks I feel great and have noticed minor changes in body composition but nothing astounding. Its a little too soon to expect anything too notable but im far happier with the results thus far
Right on, sounds like it'll be worth while following up. How long did you run the MK? Also, how comparable do you think 25mg of MK are to 6.66IU of hGH?
Similar threads
