28 replies to this topic

[Mind]

An Anti-frailty Pill For Seniors? New Drug Increases Muscle Mass In Arms And Legs Of Older Adults.

First off, I expect this would be heavily regulated or even banned because, of course, some professional baseball player might use it to break the home run record - CAN'T HAVE THAT - WOULD BE THE DEATH OF SOCIETY!

Ok, I am being a little sarcastic here. More on the level, this news plus the newest results on SRT1720, sure seem to indicate that we are gaining ever finer control of the aging process.

Published in the November 4, 2008 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, the study showed that levels of growth hormone (GH) and of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF- I) in seniors who took MK-677 increased to those found in healthy young adults. The drug restored 20 percent of muscle mass loss associated with normal aging.

"Our study opens the door to the possibility of developing treatments that avert the frailty of aging," explains Dr. Michael O. Thorner, a nationally recognized researcher of growth hormone regulation and a professor of internal medicine and neurosurgery at UVA. "The search for anti-frailty medications has become increasingly important because the average American is expected to live into his or her 80s, and most seniors want to stay strong enough to remain independent as they age."

[edward]

"the study showed that levels of growth hormone (GH) and of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF- I) in seniors who took MK-677"

What is interesting to me about this and the use of growth hormone, which then boosts IGF-I for anti-aging is that there is some short term benefit in terms of strength and body composition however long term its been shown that the most effective anti aging strategies tend to decrease IGF-I and even growth hormone. CR does it. There was also an article on GH knockout mice I read at the Methuselah foundation site and how they currently have the record for genetic interventions to extend life....

Messing with GH seems to me to be not a good strategy for life extension, though maybe if I was one of the frail elderly I might see a pill that could at least remove the frail part of my condition to be welcome.

[renwosing]

Safer to stay with somatropin(HGH).

Renwosing

[mpe]

Would'nt NF-kB inhibition be a better proporsition than increasing Igf-1.

Improving the bodies regenerative capacity without messing with growth hormone has to be abetter way to go

[zoolander]

How does NF-kB inhibition help improve the bodies regenerative capacity? NF-kB is intimately involved in the inflammatory process that results in regeneration or should I say an adaptive response to a stimulus i.e resistance training. Unfortunately, in the aged, the muscle seems to be switched toward preventing regeneration and this may be protective.

[VictorBjoerk]

What about diabetes, high blood pressure etc?

[zoolander]

What about diabetes, high blood pressure etc?

in what regards?

[StrangeAeons]

In terms of developing stopgap treatments, I should point out that I have seen a fair deal of seniors fail and break things very easily; and that this can often be the tipping point towards their decline towards death if they are already in bad shape. Avoiding falls and fractures, and increasing mobility, is far more valuable to life extension then worrying about the long term. Elderly people do poorly in nursing homes and hospitals, easily succumbing to nosocomial infections as well as suffering emotionally and being more likely to go down the paths of dementia and Alzheimer's. The young can worry about long term treatments, while the elderly truly need whatever we can give them right now.

[FunkOdyssey]

Published in the November 4, 2008 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, the study showed that levels of growth hormone (GH) and of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF- I) in seniors who took MK-677 increased to those found in healthy young adults. The drug restored 20 percent of muscle mass loss associated with normal aging.

And this is better than taking growth hormone directly (why)? Pending an explanation, I am underwhelmed.

[Shepard]

And this is better than taking growth hormone directly (why)? Pending an explanation, I am underwhelmed.

Seems to be just because it's oral.

[niner]

And this is better than taking growth hormone directly (why)? Pending an explanation, I am underwhelmed.

Seems to be just because it's oral.

One possibility is that the HGH increase is more controlled and/or longer lasting, but this is just my speculation. Merck holding a patent on it has to be up there, at least in their mind. This may be important to others as well, in that Merck has the resources to run a decent sized clinical trial.

[edward]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

[StrangeAeons]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

I understand the concern, but in at-risk populations the gain in mobility might outweigh the risk; unfortunately I don't have the same grasp of endocrinology that you do, so perhaps I am slighting the risks... but at least from what I've seen in personal experiences a very small increase in mobility for seniors can have profound consequences on their independence and longevity.

[DukeNukem]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

I supplement very lightly with hGH. My primary hormone is testosterone. And boy does it make a difference.

[focus83]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

I supplement very lightly with hGH. My primary hormone is testosterone. And boy does it make a difference.

What makes the difference? The HGH supplement or your testosterone regimen?
Btw, how exactely do you increase your testosterone levels?

[caston]

One thing I have wondered is if blocking NF-kB would interfere with building muscle mass while body building.

[platypus]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

I supplement very lightly with hGH. My primary hormone is testosterone. And boy does it make a difference.

I'd be interested in hearing your experiences with testosterone. Are the products purported to raise testosterone (like Super Miraforte from LEF) worth anything?

[TheFountain]

"the study showed that levels of growth hormone (GH) and of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF- I) in seniors who took MK-677"

What is interesting to me about this and the use of growth hormone, which then boosts IGF-I for anti-aging is that there is some short term benefit in terms of strength and body composition however long term its been shown that the most effective anti aging strategies tend to decrease IGF-I and even growth hormone. CR does it. There was also an article on GH knockout mice I read at the Methuselah foundation site and how they currently have the record for genetic interventions to extend life....

Messing with GH seems to me to be not a good strategy for life extension, though maybe if I was one of the frail elderly I might see a pill that could at least remove the frail part of my condition to be welcome.

When discussing anti-aging I think one thing we all agree on is that the goal is not to merely extend life but to extend youthfulness as well. And for all we know cycling HGH properly might lead to greater benefits than taking it constantly. On 2 months, off 2 months. This is just speculation, but I think, at least in terms of extending youthful vigour and physical usefulness, HGH is worth trying.

[TheFountain]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

I supplement very lightly with hGH. My primary hormone is testosterone. And boy does it make a difference.

Do you use an actual HGH intravenously or a releaser in the form of pill or powder?

[Mind]

again, we don't want high IGF-1 for life extension purposes....

Based on the current evidence, this statement seems to be spot on, but that is in a static world. Speaking exclusively of future bio-regeneration and attaining a youthful body (reversing aging), I would think IGF-1 and other growth factors/hormones will eventually be critical.

[kismet]

Do you use an actual HGH intravenously or a releaser in the form of pill or powder?

This is the second time I've come across this misconception on our board - keep in mind hGH is administered in the form of a subcutaneus injection.

Edited by kismet, 07 January 2009 - 09:47 PM.

[renwosing]

Anybody who sells you rHGH in pill or powder form, report him to kismet:)

Renwosing

[Shepard]

Anybody who sells you rHGH in pill or powder form, report him to kismet:)

No, anyone that buys it in pill or powder form...send them to me. I've got some more stuff they need.

[TheFountain]

Do you use an actual HGH intravenously or a releaser in the form of pill or powder?

This is the second time I've come across this misconception on our board - keep in mind hGH is administered in the form of a subcutaneus injection.

I am differentiating between HGH and HGH releasers, prohormones like DHEA and other anabolic stimulators like Ornithine-Alpha-Ketoglutarate. Not everything that has anti-catabolic reaction is taken subcutaneously. OKG appears to be a wonder drug in the form of a neat capsule.

Edited by TheFountain, 08 January 2009 - 10:47 AM.

[simon007]

This might be a bit of topic, but I've started using Arginine last September and lost about 5 Kg weight, I think most of it was visceral fat.
I think this was caused by the HGH releasing effect of Arginine.

Cheers,

Simon

Edited by simon007, 08 January 2009 - 11:21 AM.

[kismet]

Do you use an actual HGH intravenously or a releaser in the form of pill or powder?

This is the second time I've come across this misconception on our board - keep in mind hGH is administered in the form of a subcutaneus injection.

I am differentiating between HGH and HGH releasers, prohormones like DHEA and other anabolic stimulators like Ornithine-Alpha-Ketoglutarate. Not everything that has anti-catabolic reaction is taken subcutaneously. OKG appears to be a wonder drug in the form of a neat capsule.

If I say HGH (which I did and you did) I mean the hormone and assume everyone else saying hGH talks about the actual substance, which is a very frail polypeptide, that will be denaturated if not administered by s.c., i.m. or i.v. injection. I'm not talking about GH secretagogues which are mostly administered orally (I am not debating whether they and which of them are effective).
As I have said, s.c. injection is always preferred when administering compounds that do not require immediate effect (less dangerous and painful than the others - can be done by layman) and/or longterm administration (insulin, hGH, etc).
IIRC OKG is administered i.v. but not hGH or most secretagogues. We need to be very clear about the definitions. 

[TheFountain]

Do you use an actual HGH intravenously or a releaser in the form of pill or powder?

This is the second time I've come across this misconception on our board - keep in mind hGH is administered in the form of a subcutaneus injection.

I am differentiating between HGH and HGH releasers, prohormones like DHEA and other anabolic stimulators like Ornithine-Alpha-Ketoglutarate. Not everything that has anti-catabolic reaction is taken subcutaneously. OKG appears to be a wonder drug in the form of a neat capsule.

If I say HGH (which I did and you did) I mean the hormone and assume everyone else saying hGH talks about the actual substance, which is a very frail polypeptide, that will be denaturated if not administered by s.c., i.m. or i.v. injection. I'm not talking about GH secretagogues which are mostly administered orally (I am not debating whether they and which of them are effective). I guess when i framed my question I wasn't sure if other's actively differentiated between the two.
As I have said, s.c. injection is always preferred when administering compounds that do not require immediate effect (less dangerous and painful than the others - can be done by layman) and/or longterm administration (insulin, hGH, etc).
IIRC OKG is administered i.v. but not hGH or most secretagogues. We need to be very clear about the definitions. 

In the original post of mine you responded to I stated 'releaser'. So I do try to make active distinction between HGH and HGH releasers. When I asked duke if he administered actual HGH with a needle I then asked of he took a releaser in pill or powder form. When I say HGH with no add ons I mean the actual Drug, when I say HGH releaser I am referring to various forms of secretagogues.

Edited by TheFountain, 09 January 2009 - 01:37 PM.

[kismet]

Our communication is slightly off. There is simply no "HGH intravenously", it's subcutaneous. I hope I managed to get that across, if not nevermind.

[TheFountain]

Our communication is slightly off. There is simply no "HGH intravenously", it's subcutaneous. I hope I managed to get that across, if not nevermind.

Right. I actually mispoke when I said 'intravenous'. I was thinking of steroids which are different and much less safe than HGHs like jintropin.

Edited by TheFountain, 10 January 2009 - 07:22 PM.