View Single Post
Old 03-04-2008, 03:56 PM   #9 (permalink)
Delhi
Bigger, Better, Stronger
 
Delhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North
Posts: 1,928
Delhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with HackskiiDelhi Is on a par with Hackskii
Re: GH study carried out on athletes

Only thing that concerns me about this is the "Statistically significant" aspect.

The decrease in fat mass approached statistical significance (change in fat mass, –0.9 kg [CI, –1.8 to –0.0 kg]). Weight increased, although the difference was not statistically significant (change in weight, 0.3 kg [CI, –0.5 to 1.1 kg]).

Now being interested in stats I know that translates to NO difference in fat loss between groups.

If the study is accurate (No reason to think otherwise) then the suggestion is GH has no significant fat loss properties.

So the conclusion is that GH is usless at fat loss
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Delhi is offline   Reply With Quote