[Jezza-B]

if you consider MK-677 for what it does, then you can decide from there.

it returns your levels of GH secretion to that of a young adult who is still growing. If you are a young adult, sub-30, then you're probably getting way less in terms of benefits than negatives as it messes with cortisol, prolactin etc.

if you're over 30 or pushing 40 like me, then its useful to prop up your natural GH production when you're not wanting to crank GH. It has a noticeable difference the older you are, at which point the cortisol and prolactin are less of a concern and you can counter with P-5-P and ashwaghanda for the most part.

Well I’m early 30s so maybe it’s the ideal time. Obviously running it will only tell me wether it works for me or not.

 

[theSB]

if you consider MK-677 for what it does, then you can decide from there.

it returns your levels of GH secretion to that of a young adult who is still growing. If you are a young adult, sub-30, then you're probably getting way less in terms of benefits than negatives as it messes with cortisol, prolactin etc.

if you're over 30 or pushing 40 like me, then its useful to prop up your natural GH production when you're not wanting to crank GH. It has a noticeable difference the older you are, at which point the cortisol and prolactin are less of a concern and you can counter with P-5-P and ashwaghanda for the most part.

That is incorrect. It raises GH in a dose dependent manner up to a point, across all age groups (read the studies) and increase IGF1 continually with increasing doses.

 

[godsgifttoearth]

That is incorrect. It raises GH in a dose dependent manner up to a point, across all age groups (read the studies) and increase IGF1 continually with increasing doses.

which specific studies are you referring to?

 

[theSB]

which specific studies are you referring to?

Any study conducted on it. Doesn't need to be a specific one. They all show the same results. And there's no shortage of them.

 

[godsgifttoearth]

Any study conducted on it. Doesn't need to be a specific one. They all show the same results. And there's no shortage of them.

I don't believe they do cos the study subjects are all GH deficient. its the reason why they exist as a type of drugs. more convenient and cheaper way of addressing GH deficiency.

Two-Month Treatment of Obese Subjects with the Oral Growth Hormone (GH) Secretagogue MK-677 Increases GH Secretion, Fat-Free Mass, and Energy Expenditure1

ABSTRACTObesity is associated with blunted GH secretion, unfavorable body composition, and increased cardiovascular mortality. The objective of this study

academic.oup.com

this one gets thrown around a lot cos its 18-50yr old which is an applicable range but Obese Subjects. Obesity blunts GH release [1], so they are basically GH deficient. "Abdominal obesity is associated with blunted GH secretion and low serum insulin-like growth factor-I concentrations"

just pulling from a review on secretagogues [2]

"When compared to baseline, both 10 and 25 mg ibutamoren doses increased the mean 24-h GH concentration by 57% and 97%, respectively. These ibutamoren treatments boosted pulsatile GH release yielding a 1.7-fold increase in GH secretion over 24 h. For the 25 mg dose, IGF-1 levels were also increased by 55% at 2 weeks and 88% by 4 weeks. The IGF-1 levels of all subjects rose to levels normal for young adults. Ibutamoren did not significantly impact cortisol levels but did elevate prolactin, fasting glucose and insulin levels. These findings confirmed that ibutamoren is a potent GH and IGF-1 stimulator for patients with lower baseline GH and IGF-1 levels (47,48)."

the 50mg/day study was also in GH deficient subjects. so when people are quoting

"Following treatment with 50 mg MK-677, IGF-I concentrations increased 79 +/- 9% (84 +/- 3 to 150 +/- 6 micrograms/L, P < or = 0.05 vs. baseline) and 24-h mean GH concentrations increased 82 +/- 29% (0.21 +/- 0.02 to 0.39 +/- 0.04 microgram/L, P < or = 0.05 vs. baseline), respectively"

its going from clinically low, to normal ranges. if you're in a heavy calorie surplus like a BB'er, you're also then only going to leverage the post training pulse and the nocturnal pulse from sleep, which are generally maxed out in young people anyway. [4]

[1] Growth hormone treatment of abdominally obese men reduces abdominal fat mass, improves glucose and lipoprotein metabolism, and reduces diastolic blood pressure - PubMed
[2] Beyond the androgen receptor: the role of growth hormone secretagogues in the modern management of body composition in hypogonadal males
[3] Oral administration of growth hormone (GH) releasing peptide-mimetic MK-677 stimulates the GH/insulin-like growth factor-I axis in selected GH-deficient adults - PubMed
[4] [PDF] Growth hormone response to graded exercise intensities is attenuated and the gender difference abolished in older adults. | Semantic Scholar

 

[theSB]

I don't believe they do cos the study subjects are all GH deficient. its the reason why they exist as a type of drugs. more convenient and cheaper way of addressing GH deficiency.

Two-Month Treatment of Obese Subjects with the Oral Growth Hormone (GH) Secretagogue MK-677 Increases GH Secretion, Fat-Free Mass, and Energy Expenditure1

ABSTRACTObesity is associated with blunted GH secretion, unfavorable body composition, and increased cardiovascular mortality. The objective of this study

academic.oup.com

this one gets thrown around a lot cos its 18-50yr old which is an applicable range but Obese Subjects. Obesity blunts GH release [1], so they are basically GH deficient. "Abdominal obesity is associated with blunted GH secretion and low serum insulin-like growth factor-I concentrations"

just pulling from a review on secretagogues [2]

"When compared to baseline, both 10 and 25 mg ibutamoren doses increased the mean 24-h GH concentration by 57% and 97%, respectively. These ibutamoren treatments boosted pulsatile GH release yielding a 1.7-fold increase in GH secretion over 24 h. For the 25 mg dose, IGF-1 levels were also increased by 55% at 2 weeks and 88% by 4 weeks. The IGF-1 levels of all subjects rose to levels normal for young adults. Ibutamoren did not significantly impact cortisol levels but did elevate prolactin, fasting glucose and insulin levels. These findings confirmed that ibutamoren is a potent GH and IGF-1 stimulator for patients with lower baseline GH and IGF-1 levels (47,48)."

the 50mg/day study was also in GH deficient subjects. so when people are quoting

"Following treatment with 50 mg MK-677, IGF-I concentrations increased 79 +/- 9% (84 +/- 3 to 150 +/- 6 micrograms/L, P < or = 0.05 vs. baseline) and 24-h mean GH concentrations increased 82 +/- 29% (0.21 +/- 0.02 to 0.39 +/- 0.04 microgram/L, P < or = 0.05 vs. baseline), respectively"

its going from clinically low, to normal ranges. if you're in a heavy calorie surplus like a BB'er, you're also then only going to leverage the post training pulse and the nocturnal pulse from sleep, which are generally maxed out in young people anyway. [4]

View attachment 219126

[1] Growth hormone treatment of abdominally obese men reduces abdominal fat mass, improves glucose and lipoprotein metabolism, and reduces diastolic blood pressure - PubMed
[2] Beyond the androgen receptor: the role of growth hormone secretagogues in the modern management of body composition in hypogonadal males
[3] Oral administration of growth hormone (GH) releasing peptide-mimetic MK-677 stimulates the GH/insulin-like growth factor-I axis in selected GH-deficient adults - PubMed
[4] [PDF] Growth hormone response to graded exercise intensities is attenuated and the gender difference abolished in older adults. | Semantic Scholar

Valid points. But those studies do show that anyway, regardless of what the individual subjects were suffering from. And you've cherry picked the studies too. Which is a bit of an odd thing to do.

They both show a dose related increase in both GH and igf-1. And iirc it's a sustained increase, not the same as normal as normal is pulsatile and short lived, I'd need to confirm that last part to be certain though. Been years since I've read them. Read more studies. There are plenty. And they're still ongoing too. People seem to think research has ended in it . It hasn't.

 

[theSB]

MK-677, an orally active growth hormone secretagogue, reverses diet-induced catabolism - PubMed

The reversal of diet-induced negative nitrogen balance by GH suggests a possible therapeutic role for GH treatment in catabolic patients. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, two-period cross-over study was designed to investigate whether MK-677, an orally active nonpeptide mimic of...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A good one for calorie restriction. Otherwise healthy individuals.

Some of the other ones are also sleep studies.

Have a look for studies post 2000 when they started studying in humans. A lot will be in older adults, you are correct. Can't be mad at something being investigated for what it will potentially be prescribed for though.

But it's also not right to imply that the increases seen wouldn't be seen in younger people either, as unless you can show that then it's just speculation.

I'm happy with the amount of research that's been done showing it to be highly effective. People liking using it is another thing entirely.

 

[theSB]

I'll have a look later as I had a lot of studies saved. Pretty sure I posted them on here but can't for the life of me find them.

Posted a good few relevant ones in the past in healthy individuals.

 

[godsgifttoearth]

MK-677, an orally active growth hormone secretagogue, reverses diet-induced catabolism - PubMed

The reversal of diet-induced negative nitrogen balance by GH suggests a possible therapeutic role for GH treatment in catabolic patients. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, two-period cross-over study was designed to investigate whether MK-677, an orally active nonpeptide mimic of...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A good one for calorie restriction. Otherwise healthy individuals.

Some of the other ones are also sleep studies.

Have a look for studies post 2000 when they started studying in humans. A lot will be in older adults, you are correct. Can't be mad at something being investigated for what it will potentially be prescribed for though.

But it's also not right to imply that the increases seen wouldn't be seen in younger people either, as unless you can show that then it's just speculation.

I'm happy with the amount of research that's been done showing it to be highly effective. People liking using it is another thing entirely.

I haven't selected anything, there's an entire review paper that covers multiple secretagogues

so the issue with drawing direct conclusion from the restriction studies is exactly what i said above. if you are in a caloric deficit, you will have more pulses of GH, so your total AuC for GH and IGF-1 will always be higher. if you're in an energy surplus e.g high insulin environment, your total GH pulse opportunity is only post exercise and nocturnal. so we can compare iso or hyper calorific to each other or hypocaloric to each other.

looking at those numbers from that study.

IGF-1
232 +/- 25 to 186 +/- 19 ng/mL in the MK-677 group
236 +/- 19 to 174 +/- 23 ng/mL in the placebo group

Mean IGF-I concentration increased significantly
264 +/- 31 ng/mL (mean for the last 5 days of treatment) MK-667
188 +/- 19 ng/mL with placebo

so MK-677 maintained about a 12% increase in IGF-1 over baseline but a 40% increase over controls.

that expected cos IGF-1 is highly dependent on insulin and you don't have a lot in calorie restriction.

22.6 +/- 9.3 micrograms/L after a week of dosing MK-677
7 micrograms/L (treatment day 7) control

more than a 300% improvement in GH.

so i'd be happy to agree that MK-677 in a cut is beneficial to all if you want to maximise your GH levels.

 

[theSB]

I haven't selected anything, there's an entire review paper that covers multiple secretagogues

so the issue with drawing direct conclusion from the restriction studies is exactly what i said above. if you are in a caloric deficit, you will have more pulses of GH, so your total AuC for GH and IGF-1 will always be higher. if you're in an energy surplus e.g high insulin environment, your total GH pulse opportunity is only post exercise and nocturnal. so we can compare iso or hyper calorific to each other or hypocaloric to each other.

looking at those numbers from that study.

IGF-1
232 +/- 25 to 186 +/- 19 ng/mL in the MK-677 group
236 +/- 19 to 174 +/- 23 ng/mL in the placebo group

Mean IGF-I concentration increased significantly
264 +/- 31 ng/mL (mean for the last 5 days of treatment) MK-667
188 +/- 19 ng/mL with placebo

so MK-677 maintained about a 12% increase in IGF-1 over baseline but a 40% increase over controls.

that expected cos IGF-1 is highly dependent on insulin and you don't have a lot in calorie restriction.

22.6 +/- 9.3 micrograms/L after a week of dosing MK-677
7 micrograms/L (treatment day 7) control

more than a 300% improvement in GH.

so i'd be happy to agree that MK-677 in a cut is beneficial to all if you want to maximise your GH levels.

As said, I'll have a look for the studies.

I meant you picked a study that supports your view of it out of all of them.

Igf1 increases are higher than that in prettyuch every study I've read.

But I'll concede the point. You're drawing conclusions that can't be made though.

Will need to re read the studies in the obese as it's been years since I have. But, in every study, as I said, it increases GH and igf1 in every study.

Can we agree on that now?

 

[godsgifttoearth]

As said, I'll have a look for the studies.

I meant you picked a study that supports your view of it out of all of them.

Igf1 increases are higher than that in prettyuch every study I've read.

But I'll concede the point. You're drawing conclusions that can't be made though.

Will need to re read the studies in the obese as it's been years since I have. But, in every study, as I said, it increases GH and igf1 in every study.

Can we agree on that now?

i sorta think we're in agreement but misunderstanding each other. i will rephrase my opinion.

no argument on this point - MK-677 will always increase GH and IGF-1 secretion above baseline.

the point i was making is that the amount of that increase is dependent on age related factors and in some instances the negative effects of MK-677 make the increase not worth it IMO. so in a calorie surplus or maintenance,

say you're 22, your natty GH response is (arbitrary numbers) 8/10. MK-677 will get that to a near 10, e.g maximal output from your pituitary gland. but what you get from that is all the issues with MK-677

say you're 42, your natty GH response is basically 1/10. MK-677 will get that up to an 8 or 9/10.

that to me is a much better scenario, where an older gents TRT could easily be 150 test, 25mg/day mk, 500mg metformin and you're basically a teenager again. whereas a young male isn't really realising any benefit from a minor increase in already high GH pulsatile response.

in a calorie deficit, MK makes sense for anyone who wants to also be using GH to help fat loss and its perhaps a better choice cos its pulsatile, so more situationally reactive vs injections.

 

[theSB]

i sorta think we're in agreement but misunderstanding each other. i will rephrase my opinion.

no argument on this point - MK-677 will always increase GH and IGF-1 secretion above baseline.

the point i was making is that the amount of that increase is dependent on age related factors and in some instances the negative effects of MK-677 make the increase not worth it IMO. so in a calorie surplus or maintenance,

say you're 22, your natty GH response is (arbitrary numbers) 8/10. MK-677 will get that to a near 10, e.g maximal output from your pituitary gland. but what you get from that is all the issues with MK-677

say you're 42, your natty GH response is basically 1/10. MK-677 will get that up to an 8 or 9/10.

that to me is a much better scenario, where an older gents TRT could easily be 150 test, 25mg/day mk, 500mg metformin and you're basically a teenager again. whereas a young male isn't really realising any benefit from a minor increase in already high GH pulsatile response.

in a calorie deficit, MK makes sense for anyone who wants to also be using GH to help fat loss and its perhaps a better choice cos its pulsatile, so more situationally reactive vs injections.

I am 42! 🤣🤣

With you now. Yes we are in agreement.

I don't think I agree with the youth aspects though. Purely as I haven't seen this to be true.

GH is very fleeting, variable and shirt lived naturally.

With mk it's as high as it can be and constant, to put it in a simple way.

I'll need to find the high dose studies.

 

[didless]

Has anyone use Viogen before? Recomended dosage?