Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd (International, US, EU, Canada and Australia domestic

Since gyno is closely associated with higher levels of GH, when using xx mg of two brands/batches, and one is inducing gyno but the other isn't, that's pretty strong evidence one is effectively delivering more GH.

Overdosing is never more than ~20% so that's unlikely the cause of dramatic gyno.

Immunogenicity against GH develops in a pretty high proportion of users, it's just not well documented because clinically it rarely rises to "significant" level. Significant being defined as very slow of no growth in children, or a similar lack of response in IGF when treating adults. Some lesser amount of effectiveness loss is likely quite common. (see inhibition in the chart above)

So while gyno might be caused by some unique mechanism(some odd impurity for instance), I think this is one of those "if you hear galloping think 'horse' not 'unicorn' " situations.
Gyno is caused by the particular individuals response to GH. All the other 'causes' per the injected HGH would be indirect.
 
Last edited:

Since immunogenicity doesn't develop instantly, it's entirely possible he's developing it to the QSC batch now too. It started strong, gyno flared, and after a short while xx% of gh is now being inhibited, effectively lowering the dose.

Two other relevant factors:

~He stopped, then restarted using it. A "drug holiday" can trigger a stronger immune response when restarting vs "continuous exposure" to a peptide/protein. **

~Immune response is highly individual. He may just have a strong immune reaction to gh of all types.

Of course this is all hypothesis, and not only do we not have antibody test results, but usually, we don't have all the facts of what he's using, how he's using it, etc.

**on another note, I strongly suspect this is happening with GLPs. As the European Medicine Agency points out, the impact of immunogenicity (development of ADAs, Anti-drug Antibodies) is often not fully understood until some time, often years, after a peptide/protein therapeutic hits the market:

IMG_0031.webp

 
Last edited:
**on another note, I strongly suspect this is happening with GLPs. As the European Medicine Agency points out, the impact of immunogenicity (development of ADAs, Anti-drug Antibodies) is often not fully understood until some time, often years, after a peptide/protein therapeutic hits the market:
That’s pretty bleak. Imagine losing 100, 200 pounds, maintaining for a few years at a lowish dose, then it stops working and you slowly regain all that weight. That’s some Flowers For Algernon shit right there.
 
That’s pretty bleak. Imagine losing 100, 200 pounds, maintaining for a few years at a lowish dose, then it stops working and you slowly regain all that weight. That’s some Flowers For Algernon shit right there.

Not a phenomenon observed in 10,000+ participants in the pharma trials, including the multi year extended phases. No loss of efficacy with continuous exposure.

However, "it stopped working" is a common theme among non-pharma users.

It's important to understand that immunogenicity isn't usually binary, ie, it happens or it doesn't. It's often there but just kept in check. With x dose, diluted to x ratio, at x frequency, without interruption, it doesn't rise to a level where it compromised efficacy.

So you take one dose, the immunogenic reaction peaks at, using an arbitrary scale of 1-10, 5. A week later it's dropped to 3. You take another dose (another "exposure event") it peaks at 5, drops to 3 by the next weekly dose, and back up to 5 and so on, remaining at a stable level.

Now you take a "drug holiday", an extended break from use, immunogenicity drops to 0, but in the absence of exposure to the peptide your immune system builds up a nice supply of "memory T-cells", a "rapid response team" for future "invasions".

You take another dose after long break. immunogenicity response jumps to 8 and the drug is much more rapidly cleared from your system. A week later it's down to 5, and with the next dose it's back to 8, rapidly neutralizing the peptide, so the only way to get the same effect as previously is to increase the dose.

And there are other factors. We know from the trials there isn't a problem with 1 "exposure event" per week, but microdose and now you've got 7 exposure events, giving your immune system daily practice on ridding itself of this "infection". And ironically, small doses are often worse in terms of creating immune responses than larger ones.

So that's why screwing around with what's proven effective long term is so risky. In some individuals, this unwanted "enhanced immune response" can last for years. or even a lifetime.
 
Question, has anyone had gyno sides from the GH here? I’ve been running GH from a different source for years but can’t come close to the price here. Wondering if it’s common with these kits or what’s up lol?

Also why am I still a “ new member “ wtf I’ve been a member for years..
you've only posted 33 messages, lmao
 
Any of you ever have a sudden change in aromatization?
Same cycle.
Same batch of gear.

Suddenly need hcg to keep e2 up.
Not concerned but if BF% is same any ideas what would equate to needing to add hcg.

Test/Primo
70/30
 
Any of you ever have a sudden change in aromatization?
Same cycle.
Same batch of gear.

Suddenly need hcg to keep e2 up.
Not concerned but if BF% is same any ideas what would equate to needing to add hcg.

Test/Primo
70/30
Are you only on 70 mg of test? Just drop the primo
 
It's not happening.. lol.

With such high rates of efficacy for Ozempic
That’s pretty bleak. Imagine losing 100, 200 pounds, maintaining for a few years at a lowish dose, then it stops working and you slowly regain all that weight. That’s some Flowers For Algernon shit right there.

Immunogenicity of pharma produced GLP drugs on the left, of compounded GLPs (ie "legal UGL") on the right, as measured by the FDA for the compounders advisory committee meeting in October 2024. In the two compounded samples it was approx 100x and 2000x stronger than pharma produced. It's worth noting that in sample 7, immunogenicity was reduced by 80% after filtering.

IMG_9531.webp
 
Back
Top