T Nation

MK-677 IGF-1 Results and Other Bloodwork

@blshaw @lordgains @wanna_be I know you have expressed interest. I got my blood work back. I have had IGF-1 measured 4 times by LabCorp with the results being 103, 114, 117, and 124 ng/mL range of 98-282 ng/mL. The last test was while on testosterone at 150 mg/wk. I have added MK-677 at 7.5 mg/night and upped the testosterone to 200 mg/wk. I got quest blood work, and the range is different (53-331), but my result is 110 ng/mL. I don’t think the range means much, and I don’t think the MK does much for me (please correct me if I am wrong here).

I will say I didn’t sleep all that well the night before, but did sleep probably 5-6 hours. I didn’t drink or exercise the day before.

Looks like I’ll be looking to HGH in the future.

In other news, I am pleased with my TT and FT results of the $19 10 mL 250mg/mL test I bought. TT was 1223 ng/dL.

Gonna need to work on Cholesterol. LDL was 146, HDL was 37. Total Triglycerides were bottom of the range, so I don’t know what that means?

As I was saying pretty terrible.

Sex hormones were about as expected.

Really pleased with liver and kidney labs. I had been concerned with a negative pattern of kidney labs in the past eGFR in 4 tests was 88, 79, 79, 73. This is supposedly a more accurate eGFR (for BBers because it uses cystatin C). GGT is an overall liver score (also happy as previous labs I was borderline). The liver score is actually amazing IMO. I went from being slightly over to on the low end (which is optimal IMO).

I was also pleased with blood values. Again ranges are different, but I am still a ways from the top of range with a TT of 1223 ng/dL.

Prolactin was middle range.

What are your thoughts? Something likely needs to be done on lipids. They are pretty terrible. I will start on fish oil right now. Should I look into red yeast?

2 Likes

Eh… not so sure about that. If you want to truly know how bad they are get the particulate testing done. Compared to me your cholesterol levels are fantastic and I’m not stressing. Regarding RYR its like a natural statin. I beleive statins have the effect of lowering both good and bad cholesterol however. For the most part, I would probably do nothing assuming you already exercise and eat healthy.

My IGF-1 is the same as yours after three tests. ~110ng/ml +/-5. This was even after taking Semoralin/CJC combo. So I’m gonna try HGH myself. I’m not going crazy with it though, aiming for 3-400 range as to avoid complications which should be 3-4iu. I’ll start with 4 and take labs after a month. Let me know if you try as well and I will do the same. I’m not planning on starting the HGH until May.

1 Like

So many subpar lipid profiles on here. I suppose that is to be expected within a cohort routinely using supraphysiological doses of androgens.

I don’t like talking about the non-prescribed use of pharmaceuticals when relating to me but… In the lipid department 20mg simvastatin/day has done wonders for me

For athleticism the myopathy/muscular cramps, potential rhabado etc can be of concern. But not all experience side effects.

My LDL is like… 80mg/dl. RYR had a similar effect, though the prospect of citrinin contamination made me uneasy. I have a doc who gives me routine blood work, so LFT’s, CK, kidney function etc can be monitored.

There’s the concern regarding cognition/downstream consequences associated with suppressing cholesterol as cholesterol synthesis is involved with a whole host of processes required to maintain homeostasis. I’m not particularly concerned, my lipids are fantastic… HDL isn’t great. Depending on what I “use” it ranges from 20-47mg/DL (47 was the highest I’ve ever had it test). Even with an HDL of say 30 my HDL/LDL ratio isn’t teeerrrible…

To note I don’t “cycle” and barring some life-changing event I don’t see myself doing so for a very, very long time… Perhaps never again. Rather I sprinkle in an extra 100-200mg of something if I feel like doing so, and in the future (once again barring some life altering event) I may even stop doing this.

I feel lucky to have “gotten in” and had my fun. I can be almost certain via medical testing that I’ve acquired very little to no long term damage. With that the “get in, get out” philosophy stands and I have no regrets regarding my prior experimentation.

1 Like

I think you’d find the population in general these days has subpar lipids due to sedentary lifestyles and crappy diets. That’s not an excuse, but I just don’t put much stock in mild deviations on a general lipid panel. My Dad has had perfect cholesterol his whole life, high HDL, moderate range LDL and 3 heart attacks. My mom’s profile looks like mine, atrocious, and no issues. Her whole family is a wreck of obesity and poor diets with also no heart issues, lots of cancer though in elderly years.

1 Like

Dependent on the demographic you look at. I’m currently in college and I’d gauge most kids would have decent lipid profiles as many are physically active (perhaps elevated trigs due to excessive consumption of alcoholic beverages). Just walking around campus equates to getting in at least 10,000 steps per day.

Have had a few interesting conversations with the guys who go to gym here. Many consisting of me explaining exactly why someone shouldn’t take steroids.

Then peeks the question “have you tried them”. To which I respond “nah bro”.

What do you make of the trigs being almost bottom of the range, while LDL and Total Chol is high and HDL is low?

Wanna feel better about yourself…? Here is mine…



Your lipids are worse. Do you think something like fish oil is a good thing to add. Could I expect improvement from it? Are you currently doing anything to improve? I guess the answer is yes (weight loss). Anything else.

Also, given the range is different on the IGF-1, is it safe to assume it isn’t doing anything significant? I am not sure if the range being different means the measurement is different? Maybe they were just using a larger study to generate the range? My value actually went down, but the distance from the bottom of the range went up.

Nothing can be made, lipids can be used to roughly gauge risk and at a certain point serve as an independent risk factor. That being said other factors like systemic inflammation, particle size/subfractions will paint a bigger picture regarding overall risk.

The way I see it, AAS use; particularly higher dosages puts the body under a lot of stress. It’s probably better to shoot for having better lipids (within reason) when on gear. Inflammatory markers go up on gear (CRP, Homocysteine etc)… It’s impossible to maintain a "good’ lipid profile on high dosages, but I’d argue it’s still better to have say…

LDL 120 HDL 15 as opposed to LDL 200 HDL 10.

I’d also argue one should strive to have good lipids when off. Cardiovascular disease is a slow burn, it doesn’t occur overnight. Rather cumulative years of shitty lipids and living, lifestyle choices and whatnot take a toll.

But as @blshaw said, to some extent it’s a crapshoot. Some people can live with shit lipids, take AAS, smoke, drink and take drugs yet live a relatively long life without succumbing to heart disease. Others are born with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and die in their 20s due to coronary artery disease…

wouldn’t be surprised if you had a variant of familial hypercholesterolemia.

LDL of 191 for a lean, fit male who isn’t on gear at the time is pretty high.

You can, but aside from losing weight/making dietary modifications you’d need to look at pharmacological intervention if you want to make a large budge re your lipids.

Yours aren’t THAAAAT bad. Then again, I’m not a doctor. If you’re particularly concerned book an appointment with your GP.

1 Like

I agree here. They really aren’t that bad. If you’re diet is low in quality fats… sure add some fish oil. Its great for inflammation and other things anyway.

The problem arises “how bad are they when he’s on blast?”

Using orals? LDL 250-300+ when on isn’t out of the question, coupled with HDL in the single digits.

Lots of good data! Glad to see that cheap test is real too :joy:. Maybe that same company sells some good growth too!

1 Like

Yeah true. I no longer use orals. Just can’t risk it especially since I now take a statin. I still use DHTs which in and of themselves are not great but hey… YOLO.

DHT’s are all I use nowdays too (as specified very low dosages). Masteron at around 100mg/wk is the only way I’m able to have a libido/pitch a tent when having to use certain medications for various medical conditions.

I don’t like using masteron though, crushes HDL, doesn’t feel healthy… I feel too “elated” on it. Very full of energy/vigor… Doesn’t seem right…

Keep getting this image of arterial stiffening in my head when I use it. Not sure why, I can’t see why mast would be any worse than other compounds in this regard.

They have a $79 dollar kit, that people rave about, that has 100 iu. I might roll the dice on it and just try like 2 iu a day.

Sorry to say but… If you’re getting a 100iu kit of HGH for 79$ it’s probably bunk and/or of shoddy quality.

Don’t they offer a “top of the line” kit for not much more? Think it would be worth the minimal (considering the over all cost) savings?

Do you plan to order a single kit and do some more testing? It would be interesting to see the results from different tiers. Granted, I don’t think there’s too many tests you could run without access to fancy equipment

The “good” stuff isn’t much more. Actual pharma, yes, but even higher end ugl (that I’ve seen) kits aren’t much more.