• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 5 votes

Results of my 1.5 years of injecting exogenous GDF11

gdf11

  • Please log in to reply
249 replies to this topic
⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#61 mitteldorf

  • Guest
  • 6 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 23 December 2015 - 08:28 PM

Here's a piece that doesn't hang together for me:

 

Perry describes a dosage of .05 ug, compared to a whole-body inventory of 80 ug,   This implies that the exogenous GDF11 builds up in the body over at least a week before it makes a substantial change.  And yet he describes benefits (and side-effects) that he can feel from the first dose.  The low dosage also doesn't seem to jibe with the claims about the short half-life of GDF11. http://www.nature.co...x.2013.567.html

 

Testing the effects of long-term GDF11 treatment may be difficult because the protein has poor solubility and stability.

“These proteins are notoriously hydrophobic and very hard to work with,” said Kumar. “They are very short proteins and have a very short half-life.”

“The problem with administering GDF11 is that it's probably unstable or not long-lasting,” added Sadoshima. “It would be very difficult to keep it at high levels of circulation.”

“You might need to administer this chronically,” said Hill. “The ideal thing would be a small molecule agonist of cardiac-specific receptors” that mimics the effect of GDF11 but has better pharmacodynamics.



→ source (external link)

 

 


  • Good Point x 1
  • Informative x 1

#62 sub7

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • 14

Posted 29 December 2015 - 01:50 PM

Here's a piece that doesn't hang together for me:

 

Perry describes a dosage of .05 ug, compared to a whole-body inventory of 80 ug,   This implies that the exogenous GDF11 builds up in the body over at least a week before it makes a substantial change.  And yet he describes benefits (and side-effects) that he can feel from the first dose.  The low dosage also doesn't seem to jibe with the claims about the short half-life of GDF11. http://www.nature.co...x.2013.567.html

 

Testing the effects of long-term GDF11 treatment may be difficult because the protein has poor solubility and stability.

“These proteins are notoriously hydrophobic and very hard to work with,” said Kumar. “They are very short proteins and have a very short half-life.”

“The problem with administering GDF11 is that it's probably unstable or not long-lasting,” added Sadoshima. “It would be very difficult to keep it at high levels of circulation.”

“You might need to administer this chronically,” said Hill. “The ideal thing would be a small molecule agonist of cardiac-specific receptors” that mimics the effect of GDF11 but has better pharmacodynamics.



→ source (external link)

 

bump in order to hear more on this, whether in agreement or against it

 

one thing though; "whole-body inventory of 80 ug" may be where we are wrong, as the insufficient precision of present testing methods may have yielded a wrong estimate of total-body-inventory.... just a speculation on my part
 



sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#63 Turnbuckle

  • Member
  • 3,636 posts
  • 1,484
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 December 2015 - 03:06 PM

Steve, are you actually taking GDF11, or an antibody to it? Because it doesn't look like GDF11 is all that healthy--

 

GDF11 Increases with Age and Inhibits Skeletal Muscle Regeneration.

 

Age-related frailty may be due to decreased skeletal muscle regeneration. The role of TGF-β molecules myostatin and GDF11 in regeneration is unclear. Recent studies showed an age-related decrease in GDF11 and that GDF11 treatment improves muscle regeneration, which were contrary to prior studies. We now show that these recent claims are not reproducible and the reagents previously used to detect GDF11 are not GDF11 specific. We develop a GDF11-specific immunoassay and show a trend toward increased GDF11 levels in sera of aged rats and humans. GDF11 mRNA increases in rat muscle with age. Mechanistically, GDF11 and myostatin both induce SMAD2/3 phosphorylation, inhibit myoblast differentiation, and regulate identical downstream signaling. GDF11 significantly inhibited muscle regeneration and decreased satellite cell expansion in mice. Given early data in humans showing a trend for an age-related increase, GDF11 could be a target for pharmacologic blockade to treat age-related sarcopenia.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/26001423

 

 

 

Antibodies to myostatin are already in drug development--

 

 

Myostatin antibody (LY2495655) in older weak fallers: a proof-of-concept, randomised, phase 2 trial.
 
BACKGROUND:
Myostatin inhibits skeletal muscle growth. The humanised monoclonal antibody LY2495655 (LY) binds and neutralises myostatin. We aimed to test whether LY increases appendicular lean body mass (aLBM) and improves physical performance in older individuals who have had recent falls and low muscle strength and power...
 
INTERPRETATION:
Our findings show LY treatment increases lean mass and might improve functional measures of muscle power. Although additional studies are needed to confirm these results, our data suggest LY should be tested for its potential ability to reduce the risk of falls or physical dependency in older weak fallers.
 

 

 

 


Edited by Turnbuckle, 29 December 2015 - 03:17 PM.


⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#64 sub7

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • 14

Posted 29 December 2015 - 06:45 PM

The thread-starter has, in  few previous posts, posted evidence that goes against this contention "GDF11 Increases with Age"

Check out pages 1 and 2 of this thread


  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#65 Turnbuckle

  • Member
  • 3,636 posts
  • 1,484
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 December 2015 - 07:55 PM

The thread-starter has, in  few previous posts, posted evidence that goes against this contention "GDF11 Increases with Age"

Check out pages 1 and 2 of this thread

 

From what I gather of this fracas, it's still up in the air. GDF11 either goes up or down with age, and thus either blocking it or supplementing it gives you the fountain of youth. And if you don't have the right amount you might get the opposite result--

 

The signaling pathway in which GDF11 lies “is notoriously dose-sensitive,” and low and high doses can have different or opposite effects, [Wagners] says.

 

 

Which all sounds suspiciously like people seeing what they want to see in experimental noise. Beyond that, the good results in the OP from a microscopic dose (.05 ug) points to a placebo effect, or an effect that is pro-aging at higher doses. In which case the best dose is zero.



#66 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 16,365 posts
  • 2,002
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 29 December 2015 - 09:20 PM

 

We now show that these recent claims are not reproducible and the reagents previously used to detect GDF11 are not GDF11 specific

 

Just wondering, does this possible faulty testing also place some skepticism on the "typical" 80ug whole body inventory of GDF11?

 

Here is what the wikipedia editors have to say about the recent row:

 

 

These previous findings have been disputed since another publication has demonstrated the contrary, concluding that GDF11 increases with age and has deleterious effects on skeletal muscle regeneration,[7] being a pro-aging factor, with very high levels in some aged individuals. However, in October 2015, these contrary results have been shown to be the result of a flawed assay that was detecting immunoglobulin and not GDF11. The newer Harvard study shows GDF11 does in fact reverse age-related cardiac hypertrophy

 



⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#67 aribadabar

  • Guest
  • 637 posts
  • 225
  • Location:Canada

Posted 29 December 2015 - 11:27 PM

Here's a piece that doesn't hang together for me:

 

Perry describes a dosage of .05 ug, compared to a whole-body inventory of 80 ug, 

 

I think you missed the decimal point - he stated:

Assuming the average human has  5 liters of blood, that would equate to 5000 *168 pg = 840 ng = [0].84 ug of circulating GDF11 in the average person. 

So it is 100x smaller than your assumption and at 0.05 ug/d  (~1/16) looks more than sufficient to be active and actually more like megadosing, as he admitted it himself.


Edited by aribadabar, 29 December 2015 - 11:42 PM.


#68 Turnbuckle

  • Member
  • 3,636 posts
  • 1,484
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 29 December 2015 - 11:34 PM

Odd that these two groups are battling it out like this, since it seems they are neighbors. They've even dumped ice water on each other in days past--https://www.youtube....h?v=0FeeOBdzT8c.



#69 mitteldorf

  • Guest
  • 6 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 30 December 2015 - 04:03 AM

Yes - I meant 0.80 ug and not 80 ug.

 

Thank you for the correction. I have egg on my face especially because I'm a numbers kinda guy.

 

But the text was correct for the actual number, 0.80.  It would take about a week of 0.05 ug doses to make a substantial difference in the body's inventory. Even assuming a very slow turnover time for GDF11, that still would just bring the inventory from 0.80 to 1.15.  And that assumes that all of it makes it from muscle into the blood stream.  

At least some of our sources say that the turnover is quite fast, in which case .05 ug would have negligible effect.


  • Informative x 1

⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#70 stevegperry

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 52 posts
  • 28
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 08 January 2016 - 06:24 PM

I apologize for the delay in responding to the above.  I was in Gran Canaria doing one of the hardest bike trips in the world, right along side teams training for the Tour de France.  Did the Tauro Pass which is 20km straight uphill.  Didn't do it fast or well, but I did it.  And watched Tour de France teams pass me like I was standing still!  I am just a casual biker on the flats of Manhattan and am convinced I could not have done this without GDF11 supplementation.  Never got winded and never got that dreaded lactic acid buildup. I would post some good pix of the trip, but I don't see a way to attach anything to replies.

 

Now let's answer some posts:

 

Testing the effects of long-term GDF11 treatment may be difficult because the protein has poor solubility and stability.

“These proteins are notoriously hydrophobic and very hard to work with,” said Kumar. “They are very short proteins and have a very short half-life.”

“The problem with administering GDF11 is that it's probably unstable or not long-lasting,” added Sadoshima. “It would be very difficult to keep it at high levels of circulation.”

“You might need to administer this chronically,” said Hill. “The ideal thing would be a small molecule agonist of cardiac-specific receptors” that mimics the effect of GDF11 but has better pharmacodynamics.

 

Kumar, Sadoshima and Hill were just theorizing on the stability of GDF11, but I have firsthand proof.  GDF11 is very stable and I have been using the same mix for 3 months.  Also, in the Canaries, I did not have time to bother with putting ice in my GDF11 thermos and it is still as powerful as ever. Don’t forget that the molecular structure of GDF11 is conserved across all vertebrate species, which puts it in a class all by itself.  It obviously is critical to life and is much less fragile than anything else I have worked with.  Try leaving a vial of GH in the heat for a week…

 

 

Which all sounds suspiciously like people seeing what they want to see in experimental noise. Beyond that, the good results in the OP from a microscopic dose (.05 ug) points to a placebo effect, or an effect that is pro-aging at higher doses. In which case the best dose is zero.

 

GDF11 appears to be down regulating peptide.  You need to “fill the tank” with big doses, but after awhile you just need a maintenance dose.  Also, note that Thomas Coote on the GRG quoted a diabetes study where the control group only had circulating levels of GDF11 of 840 ng, so a maintenance dose, once down regulated, of 1 ng every couple of days does not seem ridiculously low.

 

Odd that these two groups are battling it out like this, since it seems they are neighbors. They've even dumped ice water on each other in days past--https://www.youtube....h?v=0FeeOBdzT8c.

 

Yes, GDF11 has definitely spawned two distinct camps – either you believe Wager’s claims, or you believe GDF11 is just like myostatin and causes muscular atrophy or worse. And both sides seem to be able serve up data to support their claims.  And it's getting somewhat nasty - hard to believe the Conboys actually wrote in a recent paper that "GDF11 has been dethroned".  The controversy may ultimately be solved by us non scientists.  I know of at least 5 people trying GDF11 and if in 3 months their biomarkers correlate to mine, then that's huge.

 

Also, I did watch this video and good to see that Amy Wagers has a sense of humor.  Though I have emailed her twice and she has never responded.  You'd think she'd be dying of curiosity to hear what a human supplementing GDF11 has to say.  But apparently that's not the case...

 

 

 


  • Informative x 3
  • Good Point x 1

#71 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 10 January 2016 - 04:22 PM

A couple of items...

 

I sent a PM asking your source of human GDF11 and haven't seen a reply.  Every source I contacted refuses to sell to private individuals. 

 

Storage is given to be -20C.  Even reconstituted peptides must be refrigerated, and you claim to go backpacking with yours.

 

The study that contradicted Wagers study showed than mice injected with GDF11 and had their muscles damaged actually had reduced healing of those muscles.

 

In Wagers study the mice lost weight.  In your trial you state 5lbs of muscle added in 1.5y.  This is a contradiction to the Wagers study.  5lbs of muscle equates to an additional 225 calories per week for 1.5y.  And of course the majority of the calories should have been protein.  I believe to said you did not change your diet.  Muscle gain is impossible in adults without nutrition changes.  You stated that people noticed your 5lbs as well.... my weight fluctuates that much per day and no one notices I'm 5lbs lighter in the morning than in the evening.  5lbs is literally indistinguishable unless you weight 55lbs to begin with.

 

The fact that the mice lost weight in one study, and had decreased capacity to heal muscle in another is consistent with GDF11 actually being myostatin, which of course it is related to myostatin in the first place.

 


Edited by Rocket, 10 January 2016 - 04:40 PM.


#72 mindpatch

  • Guest
  • 120 posts
  • 27
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 January 2016 - 04:55 PM

Is anyone else unable to download the document?

I can't because I don't have Word installed.  I normally save and upload to Google Drive and open with Google Docs, but I can't save the linked file. 



#73 mindpatch

  • Guest
  • 120 posts
  • 27
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 January 2016 - 04:58 PM

I apologize for the delay in responding to the above.  I was in Gran Canaria doing one of the hardest bike trips in the world, right along side teams training for the Tour de France.  Did the Tauro Pass which is 20km straight uphill.  Didn't do it fast or well, but I did it.  And watched Tour de France teams pass me like I was standing still!  I am just a casual biker on the flats of Manhattan and am convinced I could not have done this without GDF11 supplementation.  Never got winded and never got that dreaded lactic acid buildup. I would post some good pix of the trip, but I don't see a way to attach anything to replies.

 

Now let's answer some posts:

 

Testing the effects of long-term GDF11 treatment may be difficult because the protein has poor solubility and stability.

“These proteins are notoriously hydrophobic and very hard to work with,” said Kumar. “They are very short proteins and have a very short half-life.”

“The problem with administering GDF11 is that it's probably unstable or not long-lasting,” added Sadoshima. “It would be very difficult to keep it at high levels of circulation.”

“You might need to administer this chronically,” said Hill. “The ideal thing would be a small molecule agonist of cardiac-specific receptors” that mimics the effect of GDF11 but has better pharmacodynamics.

 

Kumar, Sadoshima and Hill were just theorizing on the stability of GDF11, but I have firsthand proof.  GDF11 is very stable and I have been using the same mix for 3 months.  Also, in the Canaries, I did not have time to bother with putting ice in my GDF11 thermos and it is still as powerful as ever. Don’t forget that the molecular structure of GDF11 is conserved across all vertebrate species, which puts it in a class all by itself.  It obviously is critical to life and is much less fragile than anything else I have worked with.  Try leaving a vial of GH in the heat for a week…

 

 

Which all sounds suspiciously like people seeing what they want to see in experimental noise. Beyond that, the good results in the OP from a microscopic dose (.05 ug) points to a placebo effect, or an effect that is pro-aging at higher doses. In which case the best dose is zero.

 

GDF11 appears to be down regulating peptide.  You need to “fill the tank” with big doses, but after awhile you just need a maintenance dose.  Also, note that Thomas Coote on the GRG quoted a diabetes study where the control group only had circulating levels of GDF11 of 840 ng, so a maintenance dose, once down regulated, of 1 ng every couple of days does not seem ridiculously low.

 

Odd that these two groups are battling it out like this, since it seems they are neighbors. They've even dumped ice water on each other in days past--https://www.youtube....h?v=0FeeOBdzT8c.

 

Yes, GDF11 has definitely spawned two distinct camps – either you believe Wager’s claims, or you believe GDF11 is just like myostatin and causes muscular atrophy or worse. And both sides seem to be able serve up data to support their claims.  And it's getting somewhat nasty - hard to believe the Conboys actually wrote in a recent paper that "GDF11 has been dethroned".  The controversy may ultimately be solved by us non scientists.  I know of at least 5 people trying GDF11 and if in 3 months their biomarkers correlate to mine, then that's huge.

 

Also, I did watch this video and good to see that Amy Wagers has a sense of humor.  Though I have emailed her twice and she has never responded.  You'd think she'd be dying of curiosity to hear what a human supplementing GDF11 has to say.  But apparently that's not the case...

Well, that's interesting.  As a long time competitive cyclist and endurance athlete who's getting a little on in years, something that helps metabolically and with aerobic capacity would be of benefit. 



#74 Logic

  • Guest
  • 2,650 posts
  • 570
  • Location:Kimberley, South Africa
  • NO

Posted 10 January 2016 - 05:52 PM

Well, that's interesting.  As a long time competitive cyclist and endurance athlete who's getting a little on in years, something that helps metabolically and with aerobic capacity would be of benefit. 

 

 

I assume you're already taking C60oo,  ITTP,  NR, etc?


  • Off-Topic x 1

#75 mindpatch

  • Guest
  • 120 posts
  • 27
  • Location:United States

Posted 10 January 2016 - 06:48 PM

 

Well, that's interesting.  As a long time competitive cyclist and endurance athlete who's getting a little on in years, something that helps metabolically and with aerobic capacity would be of benefit. 

 

 

I assume you're already taking C60oo,  ITTP,  NR, etc?

 

No....tried it....don't know what that stands for...Nicotinomide Riboside?...haven't tried it. 



#76 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 16,365 posts
  • 2,002
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 10 January 2016 - 07:16 PM

A couple of items...

 

I sent a PM asking your source of human GDF11 and haven't seen a reply.  Every source I contacted refuses to sell to private individuals. 

 

Storage is given to be -20C.  Even reconstituted peptides must be refrigerated, and you claim to go backpacking with yours.

 

The study that contradicted Wagers study showed than mice injected with GDF11 and had their muscles damaged actually had reduced healing of those muscles.

 

In Wagers study the mice lost weight.  In your trial you state 5lbs of muscle added in 1.5y.  This is a contradiction to the Wagers study.  5lbs of muscle equates to an additional 225 calories per week for 1.5y.  And of course the majority of the calories should have been protein.  I believe to said you did not change your diet.  Muscle gain is impossible in adults without nutrition changes.  You stated that people noticed your 5lbs as well.... my weight fluctuates that much per day and no one notices I'm 5lbs lighter in the morning than in the evening.  5lbs is literally indistinguishable unless you weight 55lbs to begin with.

 

The fact that the mice lost weight in one study, and had decreased capacity to heal muscle in another is consistent with GDF11 actually being myostatin, which of course it is related to myostatin in the first place.

 

Just keep in mind that mouse studies rarely translate into anything actionable for humans.
 



#77 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 10 January 2016 - 07:40 PM

 

A couple of items...

 

I sent a PM asking your source of human GDF11 and haven't seen a reply.  Every source I contacted refuses to sell to private individuals. 

 

Storage is given to be -20C.  Even reconstituted peptides must be refrigerated, and you claim to go backpacking with yours.

 

The study that contradicted Wagers study showed than mice injected with GDF11 and had their muscles damaged actually had reduced healing of those muscles.

 

In Wagers study the mice lost weight.  In your trial you state 5lbs of muscle added in 1.5y.  This is a contradiction to the Wagers study.  5lbs of muscle equates to an additional 225 calories per week for 1.5y.  And of course the majority of the calories should have been protein.  I believe to said you did not change your diet.  Muscle gain is impossible in adults without nutrition changes.  You stated that people noticed your 5lbs as well.... my weight fluctuates that much per day and no one notices I'm 5lbs lighter in the morning than in the evening.  5lbs is literally indistinguishable unless you weight 55lbs to begin with.

 

The fact that the mice lost weight in one study, and had decreased capacity to heal muscle in another is consistent with GDF11 actually being myostatin, which of course it is related to myostatin in the first place.

 

Just keep in mind that mouse studies rarely translate into anything actionable for humans.
 

 

 

Firstly, let me say I am not trying to sound like I am being belligerent.  Only asking some valid questions...

 

1. Taking this substance on hiking trips and bike rides? Every peptide I know of requires refrigeration. Even testosterone in olive oil which does not require refrigeration won't keep if you travel the world with it in a plastic bottle without at least some constant mildly cool temp.  All of the producers call out -20c for long term storage.  It sounds like the OP is traveling around the world with his GDF11 in a plastic bottle. Lord only knows what that means for sterility!

 

2. 5lbs muscle gain is not possible in a fully developed adult without modification to diet: increased calories, carbs, fats, protein.  On the order of 225 cals per week for 1.5y.  I believe the op said no change to diet or exercise.  Even anabolic steroids do not cause muscle growth without diet modification and resistance training.... a subject may gain "water weight" without diet and training, but not "keepable" muscle mass. I suppose the OP is saying that his dormant muscle stem cells were activated by the GDF11 and grew new muscle fiber.  But again, new muscle fiber is a result or training and diet to grow the new cells.  Without nutrition, all the growth factors in the world won't grow muscle out nothing. Without resistance training, the stem cells will not get called upon to heal and adapt the muscle. The OP bikes, so obviously his legs are the muscles getting training which means the op has gained 2.5lbs per leg.  Impressive leg growth!  Again, the op states people notice the added 5lbs of muscle. Given he is an adult male, 5lbs added across the major muscle groups of the entire body is 100% unnoticeable.

 

3. I've contacted several labs and none will sell to a private individual or ship to a residential address.  What is the ops source?

 

4. Considering both sides of debate collectively found reduced capacity to heal muscle (group 2), and weight loss (group 1), what would make someone believe it will have the opposite effect in a human: weight gain (muscle), and increased capacity to heal.  Say what you will about differences between mice and humans, what is bad for a mouse is likely bad for a human and vice versa.  We're different but not different.  It is after all a derivative of myostatin.  For a comparison, derivatives of testosterone are called anabolic steroids and their affects are usually greater (some less) than the testosterone molecule it is based off of.  Why would a derivative of myostatin behave any differently than as myostatin with either greater or lesser effect?


Edited by Rocket, 10 January 2016 - 07:51 PM.

  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • dislike x 1

⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#78 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 10 January 2016 - 10:26 PM

Darn, I can't edit my post. 

 

But back to the claim people noticed his extra 5lbs.  2 years ago I was barely 155lbs, maybe less, and today after considerable strength training and diet modification, I am now about 195lbs.  It wasn't until I hit 170lbs that people in my place of business started commenting that I looked a little bigger.  And then the comments were, "Gee you look like you gained 5 or 10 pounds." 

 

Furthermore, how would the OP know 5lbs of muscle have been gained?  Because the scale averages 5lbs more than it did 2.5y ago?  What about that weight gain is indicative if muscle mass?  Can the OP bench press or squat heavier weight? 

 

GDF11 having an anabolic effect would result in inches being lost off the waist AND an increase in weight on the scale.  If GDF11 were anabolic it would shuttle nutrients into the muscles keeping them away from the fat cells, leading to a loss of fat and a gain in LBM.  This is why steroid using BBers can eat a lot of food and not gain too much body fat, and sometimes even lose the BF while gaining muscles. This is what an anabolic substance does.

 

Furthermore, as Wagers observed, commercially available GDF11 varies WIDELY in actual dosages and activity.  Given this wide variation in GDF11 the OP has zero way of knowing that he is using 0.05ug daily or not, or what the activity level of that batch is.  Seems like a crap shoot!  Seems like his dosage is not what he thinks it is!

 

At best, if this is legit, then per Wagers, his heart should be a bit rejuvenation, but he should be losing weight.  At worst, if this is legit, then the affects are placebo.

 

I have pm'd the OP to find his source of GDF11 because none of the sources I have contacted will send material to a private individual at a private residence.


Edited by Rocket, 10 January 2016 - 10:33 PM.

  • Unfriendly x 3
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • dislike x 1

#79 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,341 posts
  • 236
  • Location:Italy

Posted 10 January 2016 - 11:00 PM

OP reported intensification of red lights which is unlikely to be a placebo-effect IMO.



#80 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 11 January 2016 - 02:43 AM

OP reported intensification of red lights which is unlikely to be a placebo-effect IMO.


And iodine gives me dreams. People say a lot of things. With claims of his body being rejuvenated, there are some gaping holes in what has been claimed here. Its hard to believe he is traveling around the world with his plastic bottle unrefrigerated and some hypodermic needles and his mixture is sterile, active, and precisely dosed as he is saying. Even the real scientists say that the gdf11 available varies widely in effectiveness and dosing isn't right.

The scientists saw weight loss, not weight gain.... So on and so forth...

Surely the OP has a pic before his 5lb weight gain and a pic with the 5lb gain that his associates all noticed.
  • Unfriendly x 2

#81 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,341 posts
  • 236
  • Location:Italy

Posted 11 January 2016 - 07:27 AM

 

OP reported intensification of red lights which is unlikely to be a placebo-effect IMO.


And iodine gives me dreams. People say a lot of things.

Yes, but clear perceptual effects are impossible to ignore. That's why it's difficult to find placebos for psychedelics - unless the placebo also alters perception it will be clear who is on placebo and who is not. 



#82 stevegperry

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 52 posts
  • 28
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 11 January 2016 - 03:59 PM

Hello All,

 

I will start today's post with a link to my Google drive, that has my GDF11 paper, procuring/mixing/biomarker instructions, zip file containing my biomarkers and a couple of Canary Island biking pictures just for fun.  Link is:

https://drive.google...dWxGd29wQV9kOU0

 

And now let's answer some posts:

 

I sent a PM asking your source of human GDF11 and haven't seen a reply.  Every source I contacted refuses to sell to private individuals. 

 

Check out procurement/mixing/biomarker doc above which mentions Peprotech.  Also check out http://www.miltenyib...man-gdf-11.aspx

Milteny biotech has been much more cooperative. You do need to be "resourceful" to get a lab to send it to you. Your residence with an official company name attached to it should be fine.  And of course, an intelligent statement of intended use is key e.g., "We will be measuring GDF11 cross binding to activin type 2 receptors in vitro".

 

And iodine gives me dreams. People say a lot of things. With claims of his body being rejuvenated, there are some gaping holes in what has been claimed here. Its hard to believe he is traveling around the world with his plastic bottle unrefrigerated and some hypodermic needles and his mixture is sterile, active, and precisely dosed as he is saying. Even the real scientists say that the gdf11 available varies widely in effectiveness and dosing isn't right.

There are plenty of peptides that are stable at room or higher temperatures e.g., testosterone. Also, most of the time I do keep my GDF11 in the fridge.  But sometime refrigeration is just not possible when you are camping or biking.  As for my GDF11's efficacy, well you just might have to try it to know what I mean when I say I titrate GDF11 to "red lights/sharp vision".  I generally take 2 ng of GDF11 every other day to maintain this effect.  If I take a "GDF11 holiday" for a week, this effect disappears.  Another thing I do occasionally is double to dose to 4 ng to see what happens.  And at that level, I get a touch of GERD, which I try to avoid at all costs.

Now if my GDF11 was no longer effective, do you think the above would happen? 

 

Yes, but clear perceptual effects are impossible to ignore. That's why it's difficult to find placebos for psychedelics - unless the placebo also alters perception it will be clear who is on placebo and who is not. 

I know that saying GDF11 causes me to have sharp vision/enhanced red lights makes me sound like someone who has been to one too many Dead concerts!  I actually talked to my anti aging doc about this and he said that some of his GH patients have reported this effect.  Which always sounded a bit flakey to me also until I experienced it firsthand with GDF11.

 

Furthermore, how would the OP know 5lbs of muscle have been gained? 

Check out the InBody scale printouts in the zip file above.

 

GDF11 having an anabolic effect would result in inches being lost off the waist AND an increase in weight on the scale.

I have gone from wearing 38 inch waist jeans to 36 inch waist jeans which is good progress, but I still need a lot more work in this area.  I do have a Tanita body fat scale complete with hand grips that says my body fat is now 23%.  But the InBody scale is much more accurate and we'll see what it has to say when I go for the next round of biomarkers.

 

Why would a derivative of myostatin behave any differently than as myostatin with either greater or lesser effect?

The fact that myostatin is 90% the same molecular structure as GDF11 has been mentioned in several papers as why GDF11 can't possibly have any positive rejuvenation effects.  Which is a ridiculous assertion in my book.  Insulin and IGF-1 are even more similar, but no one stands up and says IGF-1 has the same effects as insulin.

 

However, like insulin cross binding to IGF-1 sites, GDF11 has been shown to cross bind to activin 2 type receptors when present in excessive amounts.  Note that the circulating levels of myostatin are 500 times that of GDF11, so you really have to overdose GDF11 for this to happen.  And massive overdoses of GDF11 given ti mice, over a million times the dose I take, have been in a few papers of late.  No wonder they aren't getting any results.

 



⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#83 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 11 January 2016 - 04:02 PM

I for one would love to find that GDF11 is the magic bullet.  But even if it is, as Wagers states, it's window of therapeutic effects could be very small.  Too much could lead to the opposite effect of what is she believes GDF11 does: rejuvenate the brain, heart, and skeletal muscle.



#84 stevegperry

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 52 posts
  • 28
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 11 January 2016 - 04:15 PM

Oops, Google gave me a link that just goes to a pic of me instead of the contents of the Google drive.  Let's try this again: https://drive.google...k&usp=drive_web

 



#85 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 16,365 posts
  • 2,002
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 11 January 2016 - 07:06 PM

 

 

A couple of items...

 

I sent a PM asking your source of human GDF11 and haven't seen a reply.  Every source I contacted refuses to sell to private individuals. 

 

Storage is given to be -20C.  Even reconstituted peptides must be refrigerated, and you claim to go backpacking with yours.

 

The study that contradicted Wagers study showed than mice injected with GDF11 and had their muscles damaged actually had reduced healing of those muscles.

 

In Wagers study the mice lost weight.  In your trial you state 5lbs of muscle added in 1.5y.  This is a contradiction to the Wagers study.  5lbs of muscle equates to an additional 225 calories per week for 1.5y.  And of course the majority of the calories should have been protein.  I believe to said you did not change your diet.  Muscle gain is impossible in adults without nutrition changes.  You stated that people noticed your 5lbs as well.... my weight fluctuates that much per day and no one notices I'm 5lbs lighter in the morning than in the evening.  5lbs is literally indistinguishable unless you weight 55lbs to begin with.

 

The fact that the mice lost weight in one study, and had decreased capacity to heal muscle in another is consistent with GDF11 actually being myostatin, which of course it is related to myostatin in the first place.

 

Just keep in mind that mouse studies rarely translate into anything actionable for humans.
 

 

 

Firstly, let me say I am not trying to sound like I am being belligerent.  Only asking some valid questions...

 

1. Taking this substance on hiking trips and bike rides? Every peptide I know of requires refrigeration. Even testosterone in olive oil which does not require refrigeration won't keep if you travel the world with it in a plastic bottle without at least some constant mildly cool temp.  All of the producers call out -20c for long term storage.  It sounds like the OP is traveling around the world with his GDF11 in a plastic bottle. Lord only knows what that means for sterility!

 

2. 5lbs muscle gain is not possible in a fully developed adult without modification to diet: increased calories, carbs, fats, protein.  On the order of 225 cals per week for 1.5y.  I believe the op said no change to diet or exercise.  Even anabolic steroids do not cause muscle growth without diet modification and resistance training.... a subject may gain "water weight" without diet and training, but not "keepable" muscle mass. I suppose the OP is saying that his dormant muscle stem cells were activated by the GDF11 and grew new muscle fiber.  But again, new muscle fiber is a result or training and diet to grow the new cells.  Without nutrition, all the growth factors in the world won't grow muscle out nothing. Without resistance training, the stem cells will not get called upon to heal and adapt the muscle. The OP bikes, so obviously his legs are the muscles getting training which means the op has gained 2.5lbs per leg.  Impressive leg growth!  Again, the op states people notice the added 5lbs of muscle. Given he is an adult male, 5lbs added across the major muscle groups of the entire body is 100% unnoticeable.

 

3. I've contacted several labs and none will sell to a private individual or ship to a residential address.  What is the ops source?

 

4. Considering both sides of debate collectively found reduced capacity to heal muscle (group 2), and weight loss (group 1), what would make someone believe it will have the opposite effect in a human: weight gain (muscle), and increased capacity to heal.  Say what you will about differences between mice and humans, what is bad for a mouse is likely bad for a human and vice versa.  We're different but not different.  It is after all a derivative of myostatin.  For a comparison, derivatives of testosterone are called anabolic steroids and their affects are usually greater (some less) than the testosterone molecule it is based off of.  Why would a derivative of myostatin behave any differently than as myostatin with either greater or lesser effect?

 

 

You make good points, I was just reminding everyone about "mouse studies". It was not my intent to diminish all of your arguments.
 



#86 stevegperry

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 52 posts
  • 28
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 12 January 2016 - 08:16 PM

Hello Longecity,

 

Have had so many requests for GDF11 paper and data, that I bought the URL www.gdf11rejuvenation.com and pointed it to a Google drive with all my GDF11 info on it.  LMK if it works ok and feel free to give this URL to anyone who is interested in extreme longevity.  

 

Steve



#87 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 13 January 2016 - 01:53 AM

I found this same source recently (that the op states) and they call me 2x a day every day to follow up with me.  I'm only concerned that GDF11 is going to turn out to be myostatin and have a negative effect on my muscle mass since I am very much into weight lifting and I prefer to see the scale go up every week rather than down.  Even Wagers study showed weight loss in her mice, though she offers no explanation if it was muscle, fat, or...?



#88 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 843 posts
  • 110
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 14 January 2016 - 02:02 AM

Trichostatin activates the GDF11 gene.
www.longecity.org/forum/topic/81655-trichostatin-a

⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#89 sub7

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • 14

Posted 15 January 2016 - 11:47 AM

Rocket,

 

You are absolutely convinced that GDF11 wil not work; you have given several arguments -all very well supported and extremely scientific, based on your immense wealth of knowledge in the field. Why are you then still trying to obtain GDF11?

If someone wants to sell it to you, why in the world would you use such a substance that will likely diminish your muscle mass, which you have worked so hard to obtain?


  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#90 stevegperry

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 52 posts
  • 28
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 15 January 2016 - 03:48 PM

I'm only concerned that GDF11 is going to turn out to be myostatin and have a negative effect on my muscle mass since I am very much into weight lifting and I prefer to see the scale go up every week rather than down.  Even Wagers study showed weight loss in her mice, though she offers no explanation if it was muscle, fat, or...?

 

A reputable lab like Peprotech or Milteny is not going to jeopardize their reputation by sending you myostatin.  But if they accidentally shipped you myostatin, I think you'd know pretty quickly.  For starters, you would never observe the sharp vision/red lights effect that I titrate to.  And GDF11 is anabolic, so if there were no GDF11 in your vial, you'd see no increase in lean body mass.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: gdf11

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users