I agree that there's a lot missing and some sensationalism in the article. The article, of course, is not the study and we need to see the study. I'll try to track it down over the next few days.
I do know (I heard a story on news radio about it including interview with one of the researchers) that it was a randomised, controlled, double-blinded study and that it came out of a highly respected research institute. That much, at least, makes me pay attention to the claims it's making.
Personally I couldn't care whether HGH works (in isolation) or not on any level except frank curiousity but I've been able to find practically no research of any quality to say either way. This looks to be the most promising study I've seen but I stand quite willing to be corrected on this.
Again, I'll be exceptionally dubious if they used anything even approaching 'high dosage'.
If half of the participants were using 3 units a day, that's ~$10,000 (US) a WEEK! If the Garvan Institue has that kind of scratch to throw around trying to disprove something like a connection between Growth Hormone and growth, perhaps you should ask them to put togther some kind of study to disprove a link between alcohol consumption and intoxication.
Originally Posted by jnp
In a double-blind study of recreational athletes (exercising >2 h/wk for > one year, aged 27.9 5.7 y, mean SD), 64 men were randomised to 8 weeks treatment with placebo, GH (2 mg/d), T (250 mg IM Sustanon/wk, 5 wks) or combined treatments, and 33 women to placebo or GH (2 mg/d). Physical performance was measured before treatment and at 8 wks by a) a sub-maximal predictive cycle test for VO2max, b) dead lift dynamometry for strength, c) vertical jump height for power, and d) sprint cycle ergometry (Wingate test) for anaerobic work capacity. Statistical analysis was performed using repeated measure ANOVA and significance determined after Bonferronis correction.
Results are expressed as % change from baseline (meanSEM).
So 2mg/day. I don't know what that translates to in 'units'.
WHOLE - LEE CRAP!
Originally Posted by bornsceptic
Kay. That's over 5 units a day. That's a lotta G. I stand resoundingly corrected.
I'm almost as impressed that they gave these guys 250mg of Sustanon a week. That's actually pretty cool.
Obviously dumping 250mg of test into the guys every week caused them to get bigger and stronger (dramatically, for the guys who had never done anything of the sort before). So, I know the Sustanon and Sustanon + hGH groups improved.
The four tests they performed seem unlikely to be strongly affected by hGH, though. As I mentioned before, the only thing I've ever personally seen hGH do well is reduce bodyfat or restart the HPTA post cycle.
Speaking of... I wonder if they provided PCT for the poor guys to whom they gave Sustanon. Sucks being them in a few weeks if not...
Anyway, I'd like to see what the actual results were and find out what they consider 'no improvement'.
Originally Posted by jnp
I'm having trouble reproducing the actual results table but here's the subsequent paragraph...
In men, when compared to placebo, GH alone did not significantly change VO2 max, dead lift, jump height or anaerobic work capacity. T alone also did not significantly change any of the four measures of performance compared to placebo. Combined treatment significantly increased anaerobic work capacity. In women, GH did not significantly change any of the measures of physical performance compared to placebo.
We conclude that in young healthy adults, short term GH or T supplementation in the doses used does not significantly improve physical performance, while combined treatment enhances anaerobic work capacity in men. The effects of higher doses for longer duration on performance merit investigation.
Essentially the only test that was affected by anything more than placebo was the anaerobic work capacity -
Men: Placebo = +0.8% GH = + 5.8 Test = + 4.9 Combined = +9.6%.
An interesting one is that dead lift was about the same improvement for placebo, GH and Test (6-7%) but for combined was only 1.6%.
There was also an improvement in VO2 max of placebo 0.9% vs. combined 3.6% but, as with some of the other apparently positive results, the margin for error and statistical significance meant this wasn't great enough to show it really worked.
I guess that does suggest that another study with a larger sample size might be in order.
Last edited by bob; 6/06/2007 10:26pm at .
What was the duration of the study?
I don't think I have to point out the extreme asshattery in suggesting that testosterone will not improve the deadlift... Results like this would tend to indicate that these guys have discovered a new formula for suck.
Originally Posted by jnp
The study was sponsored by an org with a vested interest in discrediting claims that ANYTHING truly enhances performance...while penalizing people for using said substances.
How the hell did they get funding for such amount of supplementation to begin with?
Read this for flexibility and injury prevention, this, this and this for supplementation, this on grip conditioning, and this on staph. New: On strenght standards, relationships and structural balance. Shoulder problems? Read this.
My crapuous vlog and my blog of training, stuff and crap. NEW: Me, Mrs. Macho and our newborn baby.
New To Weight Training? Get the StrongLifts 5x5 program and Rippetoe's "Starting Strength, 2nd Ed". Wanna build muscle/gain weight? Check this article. My review on Tactical Nutrition here.
t-nation - Dissecting the deadlift. Anatomy and Muscle Balancing Videos.
The street argument is retarded. BJJ is so much overkill for the street that its ridiculous. Unless you're the idiot that picks a fight with the high school wrestling team, barring knife or gun play, the opponent shouldn't make it past double leg + ground and pound - Osiris
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO