Ellis:

I'm going to have to have shoulder surgery in a few months for an
arthritic left shoulder.  It's called a glenohumeral arthroplasty,
and will result in what is normally a 5 to 7 month long
recovery/rehabilitation period, including physical therapy.

I've heard that HGH can and is being used to help in allowing for
a relatively quicker recovery from these kinds of events.

What is your opinion, and can you provide any advice on this?

[Yes... Definitely, DO take HGH.  It will definitely allow you
to recover much faster.  I have very little personal experience
with surgery or injuries, but I have personal experience with small
cuts or bruises, and they heal MUCH faster... others have written
about their personal experienc, and everybody agrees that HGH
helps to heal faster.  - Ellis]



I've read that HGH injections which begin about 3 weeks prior to
such surgery and continuing on during rehab have been very
significantly effective...

[yes... I have read the same.  If anybody has a PERSONAL
experience to report, please report.  Yorker, you don't have
to be injured or in surgery to need to "recover".   In effect,
your body is already injured, and HGH will help it to recover
starting now... and continuing long after you have healed from
the operation... start now and you will feel better before your
operation, then you will heal faster after your operation...
then just keep taking growth hormone until you get tired of
feeling so well.  - Ellis]



Looking forward to your response!

[Hello Yorker,

Stop the effects of diabetes before they happen


Diabetes can cause some very nasty problems in various parts of
your body. It's especially rough on your eyes, kidneys, feet,
and vascular system as a whole. But if you suffer from diabetes,
there's an easy way to protect yourself from these serious effects.

Researchers recently discovered that there's a way to stop
glycation. Glycation is the process that makes high blood sugar
so dangerous. When your blood sugar (glucose) is high, it can
chemically fix itself to tissues in your body. That's glycation.

It's normal to have some glycation. But with high blood glucose,
the process accelerates. Glycation irreversibly affixes glucose
to membranes, hemoglobin, proteins, and other structures. It can
severely impair their function. A common test for this process
is hemoglobin A1c, which is a measure of glycated hemoglobin.
The slower this process, the better for you.

The researchers found that the common nutrient l-carnitine offers
significant protection in rats against this process. They fed the
animals a high-fructose diet. Sixty percent of their calories came
from fructose. Now that's a lot! The fructose-induced high blood
sugar caused glycation in the rats' tissues.

The researchers also fed the rats l-carnitine. The dose was 300 mg
per kilogram per day. The treated rats had significantly lower
glycation. The researchers found that the supplement was more
effective than the known anti-glycation agent aminoguanadine.

So the nutrient works better than the petro-chemical.

This was a rat study and the metabolism of rats is different from
people's. However, carnitine is a very safe supplement with no
known problems. It also helps you generate energy in your
mitochondria.

The dosage used in the rats was high, about 21,000 mg for an
average-sized man. You can buy l-carnitine in 500 mg capsules.
If you have diabetes or metabolic syndrome, I would start at
1,000 mg three times a day. You can find l-carnitine at any
health food store and on the Internet.

Yours for better health and medical freedom,

Robert Jay Rowen, MD

Ref: "L-Carnitine inhibits protein glycation in vitro and
in vivo: evidence for a role in diabetic management,"
Rajasekar P, Anuradha CV, Acta Diabetol, 2007; 44(2): 83-90.


Richard Smith

[Thanks for sending this, Richard.  - Ellis]

Anyone know of any current research on Crohn's and HGH.  Has
anyone had experience with dosages of HGH for Crohn's?  U. S.
Gastro MDs don't want to get involved with it since there isn't
any literature on the science for Crohn's/HGH

Jason


[Hello Jason... Well... it is not precisely "literature" but it's
what we received a few years ago, that I pasted on a page of its
own on the internet so that everybody can read it:

http://www.rajeun.net/crohns.html

It helped Elaine Johnson a lot, and since then I've had e-mails from
several others also tried HGH and got very good reults.

Please let us know your results.  - Ellis]

I LIVE IN San Diego....I want to buy HGH in Tijuana.  Is there a
certain  Brand that you recommend???

jAMES



[Hello James... I can deliver to you in Tijuana without
any problem at all... I recommend that you should get a
prescription from a doctor in Mexico while you are here,
it could come in useful someday... I can deliver Saizen
1.33 mgs. or Humatrope 5.0 mgs.

Please write to me to etoussier@... and Subject:
Rejuvenation Subscriber, and I'll answer with price, and
how to make payment, etc.

Thanks for writing,

Ellis]

I have just begun using insulin.  I use Lantus in the morning and
evening.

My morning BS has improved from low 100s to mid 80s/mid 90s.

I have also begun using Humalog before meals (4-8ius).

However, I have experienced increased blood pressure and I seem
to be gaining fat/weight around my midsection.

Are these side effects common and are they attributable to one or
the other of the insulin types?


Ellis [You don't tell us what is your DIET... And you don't tell
us if you EXERCISE.  You must exercise, and your diet must be
HGH PROTEIN, LOW CARB.

No, these are not side effects of using insulin.  These are
side effects of incorrect diet.

My GUESS is that you are EATING TOO MUCH CARBS because your
DOSE OF INSULIN is very high.  Once you have your blood glucose
at mid 80's, the only way you are going to get it to go UP is
if you eat a lot of carbs.

If your diet would be based around chicken and fish and
vegetables, and if you would stop eating FRUITS, STARCHES, BREAD,
SWEETS AND CEREALS and SUGAR, there would not be any reason for
such a high dose of Humalog...

(see the Carbohydrate Thermometer:

http://www.rajeun.net/carbotherm.html

Since you are injecting such a high dose of Humalog, I think you
are probably overeating these groups of foods.

Also.. please tell us how many times a day you are checking your
blood glucose levels, and please show your results before and
after eating, with dose of insulin.  That will help me to answer
more accurately.

Thanks for writing... and I'm glad you started to use insulin.
You are already getting better results, now let's find out and
solve whatever is causing higher blood pressure and fat around
the belly, and you've got a longer and healthier life ahead of
you.

Everything is related to what and how much goes through between
your lips.

- Ellis]

Are there any good long term studies on longevity and HGH or
other anti-aging medications?

Ellis [No... HGH has been used for adults only since 1991, and
most adults who are using it have used it for less than 5 years,
so I suppose that if it really does prolong life, then it will
take another 30 or 40 years before we start to have many people
in their 90's who have taken HGH...  I THINK it prolongs life...
I KNOW that it prolongs GOOD HEALTH, and that is good enough
reason for me to use it, but if it continues to prolong my good
health I think it also increases the probability that I would
also live a long life.  - Ellis]


   If there is any data that HGH actually prolongs life, then that
would be a possible explaination for the govt's stance, because the
actuarial tables project that by 2050 there will be a subset of
centarian in the USA numbered in the thousands at least.

These people will be receiving benefits from an actuarial protocol
designed for people to have a significantly shorter after retirement
lifespan.

The various and sundry agencies that administer these funds realize
this and do not seem to be encouraging anything that prolongs life
from my estimation.

Does anyone else have any data in this regard?

Doc Mike


Ellis: [I don't think the GOVERNMENT is ever going to make it
its business to give the CITIZENS a daily dose of HGH... But I
hope that THE GOVERNMENT is not actually going to OUTLAW HGH
because it might result in LONGER LIFESPAN.  I do think Social
Security should change their policies, or they will definitely
go broke, like any insurance company would go broke if it had
to give an annuity in the same terms as the Social Security
benefits that were passed by legislators who understand ZERO
of economics or statistics.  They passed laws assuming there
is a never ending amount of money, a printing press that can
print money without end, and The Government always has money
to pay.  These assumptions are mistaken.  Social Security can
definitely go broke, and the Government can go broke also... and
bad statistics are not the only reason why a country can go
broke... It can go broke because the business of Government is
not run like a business, it is run for political gain.  But
all that is a topic for somebody else's forum.  - Ellis]

Oh be careful!  I am just beginning to absorb the very basics
of what you are saying.  I can't afford to lose you now!!!

Were there any negative side effects to taking the larger amount?
Could there be long term?

Ellis: [I don't know... I have only tried it twice, and both times
I went back to 2 iu... But if growth hormone cost 1 penny per
dose, I would definitely experiment longer with the dose that
makes me LOOK GOOD.  When something makes you LOOK GOOD and
FEEL HEALTHIER, I don't suppose it is because it is DOING HARM.
- Ellis]

I'm so afraid of the "too much of a good thing" syndrome.
Seriously ,  how long could one keep up a dose like that?

Ellis: [If my pocketbook was deep enough, I would try it more,
because I took 3 iu for 9 months and didn't have any side effects...
I only dropped to 2 iu in order not to be too far higher than
everybody else.  But who is to say that the pack is not too low?

This is all new to everybody... So... what can be the possible
side effects that you are worried about?  I am not afraid that
HGH will cause cancer.  I am not afraid that HGH will cause my
internal organs to grow too big and not fit in my body anymore...
I am not afraid that HGH will cause my pituitary to stop
making HGH...

So what is left to be afraid of?  That HGH might cause acromegalia...
but before it causes a severe case of acromegalia, it would cause a
mild case of acromegalia, and that is not the end of the world
either.  So I would look a little bit like an ape, like the Arnold
Schwartzenneger Small Soldiers type... so what?  It wouldn't kill
me.  But that is not going to happen unless 8 iu is too much and
I would take it for 6 or 8 months... But what if I would take
5 iu per day, for 6 or 8 months?  - Ellis]

By the By... am in total agreement with you on the "arnold" look.  Guys need to
let that go.  We Women for the most part have little
to no respect for it.

Ellis [Some women must like the Arnold look... He got himself a
pretty good looking wife. - Ellis]


Take a look next time you are out.  It's the Lance Armstrong types
(survival of the fittest) that gets our darwinian cork to bobbing.

Body builders brings images of drool (always has... )  sorry :(
But, they are great for the shock and attention factor!  Other then
that...eh.

Think Male gymnasts'. Yeah!  Swimmers'. Yeah!  think  "wild wild
west"!  My dad picked out a carbon copy for his daughter.  well, I
have  Charles Atlas for a son, doesn't lift any weight other than
his own; & loves his pretty Brad Pitt face way too much to ever
take steroids.

HOWEVER:  WHEN WE CAME BACK FROM A WEEK IN CANCUN... he came up with mono
(picked up parasite).  He was exhausted, & turned out to have
Epstein Barr  from "Xcaret" bacteria ridden river where we were.

Ellis: [I have been in the rivers of Xcaret, and they are
crystal clear and the water has filtered through tons of rock.
Which bacteria ridden river are you referring to?  - Ellis]


I have been shooting him with HGH ever since (well, first doctor ,
then me).  Insurance refuses to pay, but worth every cent to see
him war it out in volleyball;  surfing  competition ;  etc.  Quite
an athlete. Can this kid dance!  (2007 so you think you can dance
television).

Never a "meathead". Models for Ford; has 2 network shows on at same
time right now.  Yes, mama is proud. Without supplements & HGH he
would not be moving.  Honestly. Feel free to knock a battery off
his shoulder; he is sweet as sweet gets; nothing to prove...
comfortable in his own skin, and loved no matter what.

Interested myself in GH  (anemic since return from dirty river; for
years now);  but not enough research shown for us "girls" yet.
This is why you cannot OD yet!

Ellis: [There are plenty of women taking HGH and loving it.
And if you are anemic, you need to put up your red blood cells.
Read this:

http://www.rajeun.net/hb.html

Need you here for soon coming "girl advice".  Right?  You know...
44 year old blonde exhausted mom who is always anemic.

Please ELLIS, no cliff diving today, ok?

Ellis:[No cliff diving today.  I really am very interested in
staying alive and very healthy...everything I do is because I
am convinced it is probably good for my health and has no risk...

I took 8 iu ONE DAY (and then again another day...) because I
already knew it had zero long term risk.  Maybe it might have
caused something that one day, but I already knew that bodybuilders
take 8 iu for several months without side effects, before I tried
it for one day.  So let them be the heroes, I am not a hero, I
am in this for a selfish reason: I want to be very healthy.

And since I got good results on that one day, I tried it a second
day, and I'm sure I will try it a few more times, but not everyday
because I don't have a budget of a few thousand per month for HGH.


Thanks for writing,

- Ellis]















- In Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com, "Ellis Toussier Bigio" <etoussier@...> wrote:
>
> I received this question by e-mail, I answer it here, too:
>
>
> Question: I was taking 2 unit a day.  Is that too much?
>
> Ellis:[No, that is not too much... it might be too little... but
> it is good enough... I have taken 2 iu almost every day for 10
> years... at first I took 1 iu... then 1.5 iu... then 2.0 iu...
> then I took 3 iu for about 9 months... then I took a blood test
> which showed my IGF-1 was above 700 so I dropped to 2 iu and my
> IGF-1 is now about 500 to 550...
>
> I don't know that IGF-1 700 is too high, but at the time I was
> too far out in front of everybody else who I knew was taking HGH
> and I didn't want to be the brave pioneer who dies for the sake
> of science...
>
> But... In 10 years, I have heard from body builders that were
> taking 8 and 10 iu per day... some overdosed and got pain and
> stayed at that dose, because what I think is a side effect, they
> think is exactly what they want: they WANT to look like gorillas,
> square jaw and big face, like Arnold Schwartzennegger.  That is
> their idea of beauty, and they are welcome to their idea.  I
> don't want to be huge or muscular... I am happy to be healthy and
> of average build.
>
> But I noted that 15 iu is the dose that is given to patients
> who are HIV+... and 15 iu is a dose that will cause cartilage
> to grow... so one man's dose with benefit is another man's
> dose with side effects.  So that is the top side dose.
>
> One body builder who took 10 iu for several months got pains,
> so he dropped his dose to 8 iu and the pains went away...
> So 10 iu is a bad dose after several months... and 8 iu
> can be a dose for several months without side effects...
>
> Four days ago, after many years taking 2 iu per day, on a whim, I
> decided to take 8 iu for ONE day...
>
> The amazing thing was that the NEXT DAY I looked at myself in
> the mirror and I couldn't believe my eyes: MY EYELIDS have
> opened more and the top eyelid is not drooping... I had been
> debating whether to have plastic surgery to make the upper
> eyelid not droop, and now it is not drooping...
>
> And the skin ON MY NECK is pulled tighter... I had been
> debating whether to have plastic surgery to tighten the
> "chicken skin" on my neck... I had Thermage, then I had
> Fraxell, to try to improve my chicken skin on my neck, and
> it did get better... But 8 iu of HGH is cheaper than Fraxell,
> and cheaper than Thermage, and much cheaper than plastic
> surgery... I don't know how long it will last, but TODAY I
> look terrific.
>
> Three days ago I took 2 iu, two days ago I took 2 iu, one day
> ago I took 2 iu... I still looked good, but I wondered what
> would happen if I take 8 iu for one day, again.
>
> So today I took 8 iu again...
>
> I don't know if it is my imagination but I think I LOOK BETTER...
> it is incredible, but I think I look better, a few hours after
> the 8 iu...
>
> A customer came to my house to buy Humatrope, and as soon as
> she saw me she asked "Ellis, what did you do?  You look very
> good."
>
> I didn't do much.  I had Botox a few weeks ago, and that smooths
> out the forehead, and I had 8 iu 4 days ago and 8 iu today, and
> that tightened the skin of my eyelids and tightened the skin of
> my neck.
>
> So if growth hormone cost 1 cent per iu, that is, cost is not a
> problem, which is the OPTIMUM dose?  Many doctors, like Hertoghe,
> recommend THE LEAST DOSE WHICH GIVES BENEFITS... that is about one
> half iu per day... but I know somebody who takes one fourth of an
> iu per day (that is: 8 iu per month) and gets the benefit that
> he wants (less pain in his knee...)
>
> I agree that ANY DOSE above ZERO is better than ZERO... but that
> still doesn't say which is the OPTIMUM DOSE.
>
> I have always thought that THE OPTIMUM DOSE IS THE HIGHEST DOSE
> THAT GIVES US GOOD BENEFITS BUT DOES NOT CAUSE ANY SIDE EFFECTS
> IN THE LONG RUN.
>
> Why the highest dose, and not the lowest dose?  Because I think
> the highest dose that does not cause side effects will approach
> the level of HGH that it might have been 40 years ago, if we
> were a healthy great athlete... and if we were not a great
> athlete, maybe our body was lacking some HGH...???
>
> In any case, NOBODY KNOWS which is the OPTIMUM DOSE... and if
> growth hormone cost 1 penny per iu, then I would probably try
> 3 or 4 iu per day for a while, especially since I already took
> 3 iu for 9 months and had no side effects...
>
> So that is the reason why I decided I should TRY 8 iu for ONE
> DAY... and that gave me such a stunning result that now I think
> that the optimum dose FOR ME might be 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 iu...
>
> - Ellis]
>

casswinthrop wrote:

>However, I have experienced increased blood pressure and I seem
>to be gaining fat/weight around my midsection.
>
>
>
>No, these are not side effects of using insulin.  These are
>side effects of incorrect diet.
>
>
>
One of the well known side effecte of insulin IS weight gain.  The
reason is that insulin promotes the uptake of sugar by the cells.


[The REASON that there is weight gain is because they are not
eating the RIGHT AMOUNT OF FOOD.  They are OVEREATING.  Therefore
they require a greater dose of INSULIN.

Dr. Bernstein calls it, "the Law of Small Numbers" which is that
you require less insulin if you eat less, and you get fat if you
eat too much and inject large doses of insulin "to compensate"...

It doesn't matter that insulin promotes the uptake of sugar by
the cells, which I agree it does.  But if you eat the right
amount of carbs, which is about 12 to 20 grams OF CARBS per
meal, then there is no extra sugar to be stored in the cells.

So again: these are side effects of incorrect diet.  - Ellis]

The tissues of diabetics have a better than normal ability to
store calories.  This probably accounts for the high incidence of
diabetes  and obesity among groups who had a small number of
founding ancestors who were exposed for generations to starvation
- like the Polynesians and some groups of Southwest Native
Americans - mostly those who have lived for thousands of years
in desert environments.

Natural selection favored those who were efficient at storing
calories for hard times.

Now, in an environment of plenty, their physiology is still
operating for survival of scarcity.

CM. M.D.


[So then we agree that if they overeat in the environment of
plenty, insulin will store sugar in the cells.  So if they do
not overeat in an environment of plenty, then they will not get
fat.

So then you should agree with what I wrote: it is a side effect
of incorrect diet.

Thanks for writing. - Ellis]

As an ex biochemist/physiologist the only thing I can see a
problem with at higher doses are down-regulation/up-regulation
of HGH receptors over time.  This is a common problem with many
substances - Prozac can have this effect over time .

Ellis: [But Prozac is not a hormone, it is a medicine... HGH
is a hormone...

In any case, NOBODY KNOWS which is the correct or Optimum dose
of HGH, we are all guessing... Sure there are dangers, but there
is also danger in doing nothing, which is what most people are
doing.

I much rather find out what is the danger of taking a high dose
of HGH that makes me LOOK GOOD for one day, than proving what
is the danger of NOT taking that dose, especially since I already
KNOW that a dose of 8 iu will not do me ANYTHING BAD if I only
take it ONE DAY because I ALREADY KNOW BODYBUILDERS who have
taken 8 iu for 60 days, and they didn't have ANY bad side effects...

So I can AFFORD to risk it for ONE DAY... And now I KNOW that it
makes the skin on my neck and my eyelids TIGHTEN UP.

Imagine that, it makes the skin of MY EYELIDS tighten up!  This was
something that I was seeing in the MIRROR and I was contemplating
that someday I might have to get plastic surgery done on my eyelids
because they were drooping a bit!

I spoke with my plastic surgeon doctor and I told him that I
look GREAT, and he wants to see me!  So if I am just making this
up, he'll tell me if I don't really look so hot.

I dropped my dose to 2 iu again for a few days, and now I tried
4 iu for 2 days... and tomorrow I will take 2 iu again...  - Ellis]





michelleinlaguna <michelleinlaguna@...> wrote:
Oh be careful!  I am just beginning to absorb the very basics
  of what you are saying.  I can't afford to lose you now!!!

  Were there any negative side effects to taking the larger amount?
  Could there be long term?

  Ellis: [I don't know... I have only tried it twice, and both times
  I went back to 2 iu... But if growth hormone cost 1 penny per
  dose, I would definitely experiment longer with the dose that
  makes me LOOK GOOD.  When something makes you LOOK GOOD and
  FEEL HEALTHIER, I don't suppose it is because it is DOING HARM.
  - Ellis]

  I'm so afraid of the "too much of a good thing" syndrome.
  Seriously ,  how long could one keep up a dose like that?

  Ellis: [If my pocketbook was deep enough, I would try it more,
  because I took 3 iu for 9 months and didn't have any side effects...
  I only dropped to 2 iu in order not to be too far higher than
  everybody else.  But who is to say that the pack is not too low?

  This is all new to everybody... So... what can be the possible
  side effects that you are worried about?  I am not afraid that
  HGH will cause cancer.  I am not afraid that HGH will cause my
  internal organs to grow too big and not fit in my body anymore...
  I am not afraid that HGH will cause my pituitary to stop
  making HGH...

  So what is left to be afraid of?  That HGH might cause acromegalia...
  but before it causes a severe case of acromegalia, it would cause a
  mild case of acromegalia, and that is not the end of the world
  either.  So I would look a little bit like an ape, like the Arnold
  Schwartzenneger Small Soldiers type... so what?  It wouldn't kill
  me.  But that is not going to happen unless 8 iu is too much and
  I would take it for 6 or 8 months... But what if I would take
  5 iu per day, for 6 or 8 months?  - Ellis]

  By the By... am in total agreement with you on the "arnold" look.  Guys need to
let that go.  We Women for the most part have little
  to no respect for it.

  Ellis [Some women must like the Arnold look... He got himself a
  pretty good looking wife. - Ellis]

  Take a look next time you are out.  It's the Lance Armstrong types
  (survival of the fittest) that gets our darwinian cork to bobbing.

  Body builders brings images of drool (always has... )  sorry :(
  But, they are great for the shock and attention factor!  Other then
  that...eh.

  Think Male gymnasts'. Yeah!  Swimmers'. Yeah!  think  "wild wild
  west"!  My dad picked out a carbon copy for his daughter.  well, I
  have  Charles Atlas for a son, doesn't lift any weight other than
  his own; & loves his pretty Brad Pitt face way too much to ever
  take steroids.

  HOWEVER:  WHEN WE CAME BACK FROM A WEEK IN CANCUN... he came up with mono
(picked up parasite).  He was exhausted, & turned out to have
  Epstein Barr  from "Xcaret" bacteria ridden river where we were.

  Ellis: [I have been in the rivers of Xcaret, and they are
  crystal clear and the water has filtered through tons of rock.
  Which bacteria ridden river are you referring to?  - Ellis]

  I have been shooting him with HGH ever since (well, first doctor ,
  then me).  Insurance refuses to pay, but worth every cent to see
  him war it out in volleyball;  surfing  competition ;  etc.  Quite
  an athlete. Can this kid dance!  (2007 so you think you can dance
  television).

  Never a "meathead". Models for Ford; has 2 network shows on at same
  time right now.  Yes, mama is proud. Without supplements & HGH he
  would not be moving.  Honestly. Feel free to knock a battery off
  his shoulder; he is sweet as sweet gets; nothing to prove...
  comfortable in his own skin, and loved no matter what.

  Interested myself in GH  (anemic since return from dirty river; for
  years now);  but not enough research shown for us "girls" yet.
  This is why you cannot OD yet!

  Ellis: [There are plenty of women taking HGH and loving it.
  And if you are anemic, you need to put up your red blood cells.
  Read this:

  http://www.rajeun.net/hb.html

  Need you here for soon coming "girl advice".  Right?  You know...
  44 year old blonde exhausted mom who is always anemic.

  Please ELLIS, no cliff diving today, ok?

  Ellis:[No cliff diving today.  I really am very interested in
  staying alive and very healthy...everything I do is because I
  am convinced it is probably good for my health and has no risk...

  I took 8 iu ONE DAY (and then again another day...) because I
  already knew it had zero long term risk.  Maybe it might have
  caused something that one day, but I already knew that bodybuilders
  take 8 iu for several months without side effects, before I tried
  it for one day.  So let them be the heroes, I am not a hero, I
  am in this for a selfish reason: I want to be very healthy.

  And since I got good results on that one day, I tried it a second
  day, and I'm sure I will try it a few more times, but not everyday
  because I don't have a budget of a few thousand per month for HGH.

  Thanks for writing,

  - Ellis]

  - In Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com, "Ellis Toussier Bigio" <etoussier@...>
wrote:
  >
  > I received this question by e-mail, I answer it here, too:
  >
  >
  > Question: I was taking 2 unit a day.  Is that too much?
  >
  > Ellis:[No, that is not too much... it might be too little... but
  > it is good enough... I have taken 2 iu almost every day for 10
  > years... at first I took 1 iu... then 1.5 iu... then 2.0 iu...
  > then I took 3 iu for about 9 months... then I took a blood test
  > which showed my IGF-1 was above 700 so I dropped to 2 iu and my
  > IGF-1 is now about 500 to 550...
  >
  > I don't know that IGF-1 700 is too high, but at the time I was
  > too far out in front of everybody else who I knew was taking HGH
  > and I didn't want to be the brave pioneer who dies for the sake
  > of science...
  >
  > But... In 10 years, I have heard from body builders that were
  > taking 8 and 10 iu per day... some overdosed and got pain and
  > stayed at that dose, because what I think is a side effect, they
  > think is exactly what they want: they WANT to look like gorillas,
  > square jaw and big face, like Arnold Schwartzennegger.  That is
  > their idea of beauty, and they are welcome to their idea.  I
  > don't want to be huge or muscular... I am happy to be healthy and
  > of average build.
  >
  > But I noted that 15 iu is the dose that is given to patients
  > who are HIV+... and 15 iu is a dose that will cause cartilage
  > to grow... so one man's dose with benefit is another man's
  > dose with side effects.  So that is the top side dose.
  >
  > One body builder who took 10 iu for several months got pains,
  > so he dropped his dose to 8 iu and the pains went away...
  > So 10 iu is a bad dose after several months... and 8 iu
  > can be a dose for several months without side effects...
  >
  > Four days ago, after many years taking 2 iu per day, on a whim, I
  > decided to take 8 iu for ONE day...
  >
  > The amazing thing was that the NEXT DAY I looked at myself in
  > the mirror and I couldn't believe my eyes: MY EYELIDS have
  > opened more and the top eyelid is not drooping... I had been
  > debating whether to have plastic surgery to make the upper
  > eyelid not droop, and now it is not drooping...
  >
  > And the skin ON MY NECK is pulled tighter... I had been
  > debating whether to have plastic surgery to tighten the
  > "chicken skin" on my neck... I had Thermage, then I had
  > Fraxell, to try to improve my chicken skin on my neck, and
  > it did get better... But 8 iu of HGH is cheaper than Fraxell,
  > and cheaper than Thermage, and much cheaper than plastic
  > surgery... I don't know how long it will last, but TODAY I
  > look terrific.
  >
  > Three days ago I took 2 iu, two days ago I took 2 iu, one day
  > ago I took 2 iu... I still looked good, but I wondered what
  > would happen if I take 8 iu for one day, again.
  >
  > So today I took 8 iu again...
  >
  > I don't know if it is my imagination but I think I LOOK BETTER...
  > it is incredible, but I think I look better, a few hours after
  > the 8 iu...
  >
  > A customer came to my house to buy Humatrope, and as soon as
  > she saw me she asked "Ellis, what did you do?  You look very
  > good."
  >
  > I didn't do much.  I had Botox a few weeks ago, and that smooths
  > out the forehead, and I had 8 iu 4 days ago and 8 iu today, and
  > that tightened the skin of my eyelids and tightened the skin of
  > my neck.
  >
  > So if growth hormone cost 1 cent per iu, that is, cost is not a
  > problem, which is the OPTIMUM dose?  Many doctors, like Hertoghe,
  > recommend THE LEAST DOSE WHICH GIVES BENEFITS... that is about one
  > half iu per day... but I know somebody who takes one fourth of an
  > iu per day (that is: 8 iu per month) and gets the benefit that
  > he wants (less pain in his knee...)
  >
  > I agree that ANY DOSE above ZERO is better than ZERO... but that
  > still doesn't say which is the OPTIMUM DOSE.
  >
  > I have always thought that THE OPTIMUM DOSE IS THE HIGHEST DOSE
  > THAT GIVES US GOOD BENEFITS BUT DOES NOT CAUSE ANY SIDE EFFECTS
  > IN THE LONG RUN.
  >
  > Why the highest dose, and not the lowest dose?  Because I think
  > the highest dose that does not cause side effects will approach
  > the level of HGH that it might have been 40 years ago, if we
  > were a healthy great athlete... and if we were not a great
  > athlete, maybe our body was lacking some HGH...???
  >
  > In any case, NOBODY KNOWS which is the OPTIMUM DOSE... and if
  > growth hormone cost 1 penny per iu, then I would probably try
  > 3 or 4 iu per day for a while, especially since I already took
  > 3 iu for 9 months and had no side effects...
  >
  > So that is the reason why I decided I should TRY 8 iu for ONE
  > DAY... and that gave me such a stunning result that now I think
  > that the optimum dose FOR ME might be 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 iu...
  >
  > - Ellis]
  >






---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

--- In Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com, "yorkere" <yorker@...> wrote:

I had surgery for a rotator cuff tear in 2003. I had two metal pins
put in, limited range of motion, and extreme pain for months after.

I went to the shoulder1 forum and found a guy that said he started
HGH before his surgery and continued it after surgery. He had no
problems and a quick recovery.

I started HGH a few months after surgery and my recovery and range
of motion improved tremendously. Visit the section of the Shoulder1
forum relating to human growth hormone here:

(may have to copy/paste link)

http://www.shoulder1.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=69&threadid=7297&enterthrea\
d=y

Hope this helps. Steve

Ellis:[Hello Steve... That is a FANTASTIC discussion on the link
you give above, and THANKS for giving us this link.  I recommend
that YORKER should definitely read it... However, I would like to
get in touch with the author of this... "NC Triathlon"
Referring to MY PAGE he says:

NC TRIATHLON: "I'm clueless about purchasing rhGH overseas??

I spoke with several docs before making the decision to go
through with it myself (along with mucho hours searching online).
I work with one of the ER docs who is totally pro rhGH for recovery
from Ortho surgery; however, his advice to me was definetly be sure
and get a script from a doc and practice you have access to.

From what I understand, sometimes overseas, the quality control
isn't as rigorous as it is here in the states



Ellis [Excuse me: ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT!  ABSOLUTE SUPERIORITY COMPLEX.

Quality control in Mexico is absolutely as strict as it is in the
United States or anywhere in Europe, or I am sure in Asia or South
America.  What makes you think that outside the U.S.A. we are
unable to get the same equipment, and keep the place as spotlessly
clean?

And the growth hormone that I buy and sell in Mexico is MADE IN THE
UNITED STATES (Humatrope) or MADE IN ITALY (Saizen, or Serostim).

But if it was MADE IN MEXICO I would trust it 110%.   I have VISITED
laboratories, and they are space age, like out of Star Wars.

So don't fall for that baloney about how it is inferior it is if you
buy it in Mexico (or in Canada, as Canadians will surely agree...)
- Ellis]



and sometimes, the rhGH that you purchase, may actually be HCG or
some other substance.



Ellis: [That is much more likely to happen if you buy "growth
hormone" in a gymnasium in the U.S.A. than if you buy growth
hormone in a LEGAL PHARMACY in Mexico.  It just so happens that
we can buy growth hormone LEGALLY in Mexico, so we don't HAVE TO
BUY HGH in the black market, or flea market, or in gymnasiums.

LOOK UP "FAKE GROWTH HORMONE" on Google and you will find that most
of the cases of fake HGH are IN the U.S.A. and not in Mexico where
we can buy it LEGALLY without any problem.

I gave three stars to this post 1. for the extremely good link
and discussion about HGH and shoulder pain... so good that I am
going to have to put a link to it on my pages, too... and 2.
for the discussion about the DANGER of buying HGH from "overseas"
which happens to refer to ME ! - Ellis]

> Ellis:
>
> I'm going to have to have shoulder surgery in a few months for an
> arthritic left shoulder.  It's called a glenohumeral arthroplasty,
> and will result in what is normally a 5 to 7 month long
> recovery/rehabilitation period, including physical therapy.
>
> I've heard that HGH can and is being used to help in allowing for
> a relatively quicker recovery from these kinds of events.
>
> What is your opinion, and can you provide any advice on this?
>
> [Yes... Definitely, DO take HGH.  It will definitely allow you
> to recover much faster.  I have very little personal experience
> with surgery or injuries, but I have personal experience with small
> cuts or bruises, and they heal MUCH faster... others have written
> about their personal experienc, and everybody agrees that HGH
> helps to heal faster.  - Ellis]
>
>
>
> I've read that HGH injections which begin about 3 weeks prior to
> such surgery and continuing on during rehab have been very
> significantly effective...
>
> [yes... I have read the same.  If anybody has a PERSONAL
> experience to report, please report.  Yorker, you don't have
> to be injured or in surgery to need to "recover".   In effect,
> your body is already injured, and HGH will help it to recover
> starting now... and continuing long after you have healed from
> the operation... start now and you will feel better before your
> operation, then you will heal faster after your operation...
> then just keep taking growth hormone until you get tired of
> feeling so well.  - Ellis]
>
>
>
> Looking forward to your response!
>
> [Hello Yorker,
>

Actually, you must have an RX from a Mexican MD to buy GH in TJ.

If not, you risk ending up in the rat infested TJ jail.  I know from
first hand experience that the cops in TJ now watch the pharmacies,
then follow customers, stop them, and look for Mexican prescriptions.

If you don't have one, they detain you, then go to the pharmacy and
arrest the person who sold it to you and take both of you to jail,
or extort money from you, then dump you at the border, if you're
lucky.

Of course they confiscate your GH.  You also need a prescription from
a US MD to avoid having the GH confiscated by the US border patrol.

The TJ cops also stop individuals at random and try to harass you
into letting them search your bags for drugs.  I've had this happen
on Revolucion for no reason whatsoever, and have seen it done to
others.

Mike

[Hello Mike... What you are writing is news to me... It doesn't
happen in Mexico City.  I can still buy HGH without a prescription.
But it is very easy to get a prescription, and I recommend that you
should have one.

And what you say about needing an American doctor prescription for
U.S. border patrol... I thought the "border patrol" Are the guys
that are supposed to keep Mexicans from crossing the border... So
you are saying that now they have added as one of their duties that
they will keep Americans from having HGH?

Where have all the Flowers gone... Long time passing?
Where have all the Florwers gone... Long long time ago...
Where have all the Flowers gone... gone to graveyards everyone...
When will they ever learn?  When will they ever learn?

Something smells rotten in Denmark.  - Ellis]



> I LIVE IN San Diego....I want to buy HGH in Tijuana.  Is there a
> certain  Brand that you recommend???
>
> jAMES

> [Hello James... I can deliver to you in Tijuana without
> any problem at all... I recommend that you should get a
> prescription from a doctor in Mexico while you are here,
> it could come in useful someday... I can deliver Saizen
> 1.33 mgs. or Humatrope 5.0 mgs.
> Ellis]
>

I was given 2- 27 iu bottles of somatropin as a gift of life.

How do I mix and at what dosage?

Ellis: [Mix with 2.70 ml of bacteriostatic water... each .10 ml
is 1 iu... That is how you mix it... but before you take it,
you should get a blood test.  See:

http://www.rajeun.net/bloodtest.html

Then you should know what the results of the blood test mean,
because you might not take HGH in some cases...

Note: I never heard of 27 iu bottles of HGH... It might not be
HGH.  - Ellis]

I paste this, which you can read at
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080206/ap_on_he_me/diabetes_heart_trial

It says that the NIH's National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
researchers are trying to figure out what happened... I already
figured out what happened and I can tell you immediately what
happened: they did NOT try to control blood glucose with INSULIN,
rather, they used AVANDIA.

AVANDIA is not INSULIN.  If they had used LANTUS or Humulin-R
in correct doses, and checked blood glucose levels before and
after injecting, they would have had the results that they
thought they would get (ie, they thought that lower blood glucose
would result in less deaths from heart attack.)

But now they have given keeping glucose levels tightly controlled
using insulin (in the manner of Dr. Bernstein) a bad name.

But PLEASE TAKE NOTE that INCIDENCE OF HEART ATTACK was lowered
by lower HbA1c... about 10% less, in this study which only was
shooting for HbA1c of around 6.  HbA1c of 6 is equivalent to an
average blood glucose of about 140 (which I call TERRIBLE).  They
did not attempt to lower HbA1c to 4.5% or 5.0% (between 83 and 100
mg/dl) as Dr. Bernstein aims to do...

This means that SOME HEART ATTACKS ARE CAUSED BY HIGH HbA1c...
and incidence of heart attack is probably even less at the HbA1c's
that Dr. Bernstein recommends.  - Ellis

========================
By LAURAN NEERGAARD and RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, Associated Press Writers
Wed Feb 6, 6:24 PM ET

WASHINGTON - The government abruptly halted aggressive treatment
in a major study of diabetes and heart disease after a surprising
number of deaths among patients who pushed their blood sugar to
super-lows — findings that call into question a growing movement
in diabetes care.

Wednesday's move doesn't affect health guidelines for most Type 2
diabetics, but it raises concern about a particularly vulnerable
group: Patients at especially high risk of heart attack or stroke.

The 10,000-patient study, dubbed ACCORD, was supposed to answer a
big question: Could pushing blood sugar to near-normal levels,
below today's recommended target, help protect these high-risk
patients' hearts?

Instead, the National Institutes of Health took the rare step of
halting part of the study 18 months early — citing 257 deaths among
aggressively treated patients compared to 203 among diabetics given
more standard care.

That translates into an extra three deaths for every 1,000
participants per year, and researchers were at a loss to explain
why. Diabetics' blood sugar wasn't too low, a condition known as
hypoglycemia. And a close look at the multiple medications patients
used, including the drug Avandia that is suspected of being
heart-risky, showed no sign that any were to blame.

Ironically, the study's death rate was well below what doctors
usually see in Type 2 diabetics, probably due to the extra care
and monitoring they received as part of the research.

Moreover, the aggressively treated patients suffered about 10
percent fewer heart attacks overall than their counterparts, said
Dr. William Friedewald of Columbia University, who helped monitor
the study.

"However, it appeared that if a heart attack did occur, it was more
likely to be fatal" in that group, Friedewald said. "In addition, the
intensive treatment group had more unexpected sudden deaths, even
without a clear heart attack."

So for now, the NIH's message: Diabetics with heart disease shouldn't
strive for near-normal glucose, but to a level long described as
optimal for all diabetics — around 7 on a measurement scale known as
the A1C.

"We obviously were surprised. We were hoping for a positive outcome,
but the reason we do this research is we don't know that," said study
researcher Dr. Hertzel Gerstein of Canada's McMaster University.

The findings contradict previous research suggesting that the lower
diabetics can make their blood sugar, the better. That had specialists
cautioning Wednesday that it's too soon to know if the finding among
heart patients was a fluke, or a real sign of how exquisitely tailored
to each patient's risk factors diabetes care must be.

"Everything else has suggested, for 50 years or more, that tight
control was good," said Dr. James Dove, president of the American
College of Cardiology. "We've got half a century of literature that is
put on the back burner right now by one study. ... It may not be the
final decision."

Some 21 million Americans have diabetes, meaning their bodies can't
properly regulate blood sugar, or glucose. Diabetics already are at
increased risk of heart disease. Type 2 diabetes, the most common
form, is linked to obesity, which in turn harms the heart. Plus, high
blood sugar over time damages blood vessels.

The A1C test tracks average glucose levels over two or three months.
People without diabetes have A1C levels as low as 5.

The American Diabetes Association has long recommended that diabetics
aim to get their A1C level below 7, far below the long-common 8 or 9.
Every point-drop lowers the risk of serious complications, such as
blindness or kidney failure, by 25 percent to 40 percent.

Recent research shows that about half of U.S. patients have succeeded,
and that "this overall level of glucose control appears to be of great
benefit rather than harm," the ADA said Wednesday.

Getting too far below an A1C of 7 is very difficult, and very few
patients outside of research studies succeed. The NIH study aimed to
have aggressively treated patients dip below a level of 6, into
near-normal range. Only half got below 6.4, compared to an A1C of 7.5
among study volunteers getting standard treatment.

Wednesday's announcement does not change that guideline. Rather, the
NIH's National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute added the nuance that
diabetics with heart disease stop at a level of 7 rather than dip
below, while researchers try to figure out what happened. They have
switched all the study participants to standard therapy, and will
track their health until June 2009.

___

I am a 60 y/o male and a type I diabetic for 30 years.  My A1C's
have always been 6 or below.

Ellis: [6.1 = 140 mg/dl average... that is "Terrible" "according
to Ellis" and "Excellent" according to the American Diabetes
Association... So who are you gonna believe?  I might not be
right, but if I am not right, it won't hurt you to lower your
blood glucose below 100 mg/dl if you can. - Ellis]


I am in excellent health and very fit.  I began hGh injections
12 months ago and have slowly brought my levels from 80 to 250.
I have greatly improved my energy levels and other "youthful"
benefits have developed.  I plan to raise my hGh to 300 and
keep it there.

I am planning to begin Sustanon 250 injections of 1ml every
2-3 weeks soon.

Question:  Will I definitely need to take the estrogen blocker
Arimidex or is that on a case by case basis?.

Thx,
Byron
SF

Ellis: [Hello Byron... you will definitely need to take the
estrogen blocker Arimidex.    - Ellis]

Hi Ellis

    Im responding to "surgery recovery" with HGH.  I also had
cosmetic surgery: removal of ruptured breast implants. This usually
results in a  feeling of being "hit by a MACK TRUCK", for a few days
after surgery.

My  physician knew I was on HGH, and we observed my post op recovery
to see if HGH  improved this component of surgery, since the medical
journals indicate it does  so.

True to research results, I did not have a TRACE of post  op fatigue.
My physician stated I recovered quicker than her 30 somethings do.
And I am almost 70 !!!!

I went out to dinner after surgery... rather than being in bed for
a few days !!!!

Pat   RN MSN  Student Nurse  Practitioner

Ellis: [Hello Pat... Wow!  That's a great testimonial for the
power of HGH to aid in healing.

I'm curious to know if your physician learned a lesson, and if
she did, does she now prescribe HGH to her patients before surgery?

- Ellis]



**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300000002\
5
48)

I live in Boca Raton Florida and I was curious to know who to
see to receive hgh therapy. I was under the impression that
it wasn't legal at first. Obviously this is not the case.


Ellis:[It is absolutely legal, since growth hormone is made by
Eli Lilly and Genentech in the U.S.A. and other brands are
imported from Denmark and France and Sweden and registered with
the F.D.A.   It is like driving a car, you should have a license
to drive... if you don't, you can get fined and maybe the car
will be taken away, but you won't go to jail unless you harmed
somebody.  I recommend you should have a prescription.
  - Ellis]



I am 32 years old and was recently in a car accident where I
sustained some injuries to my back.

I have been taking opiates and am so sick of it. I need to get
stronger but my energy levels are little to none. When I do
attempt to weight train I end up hurting myself again.

Who can help me?

Ellis: [Dr. Brizell can help you.   Allyn A. Brizell, MD
3400 Old Milton Pkwy Suite 380
Alpharetta, GA 30008
USA
Telephone: 770-777-7707
Fax: 770-777-7789
E-Mail: brizelmd@...
Website: www.natural-hrt.com

You might also try hyperbaric oxigen therapy, which you can get
at Ocean Hyperbaric Oxygen center, in Boca Raton.
http://www.oceanhbo.com

It has become difficult to get a prescription for HGH in the
U.S.A. for legitimate reasons but I understand that something
is being worked out between the F.D.A. and the doctors, to define
who and how they can prescribe HGH.  I think your case would be
one that they would NOT give you a prescription, because you
are not a child, or an old man, and you are not HIV+... back
aches and car accidents and normal aging don't count...

I wonder if there is an EFFORT on the part of the Government of
some countries to stop people from getting too healthy with HGH
and other anti aging therapies because of ECONOMIC considerations
(eg: Social Security, etc.)?  It surely seems that the groups
that should be promoting HGH and other anti aging therapies always
write to say it doesn't work, it isn't good, it is dangerous,
etc.

Write to me to etoussier(at)yahoo.com Subject: Rejuvenation
Subscriber and I will help you to get well.  - Ellis]

Everybody knows your body is not able to work with more then 1.5 iu because even
when you were young HGH doses released in your body
were not higher then 1.5 iu.


Ellis: [Who says "everybody knows"?   I didn't know this.

How do YOU know that when we were young the dose released was not
more than 1.5 iu?

1.5 iu is much less than the dose that DOCTORS prescribe to make
young children grow taller... and that is equivalent to half as
much in an adult body, which means that a dose in an adult body
is equivalent to twice as much in a young body.  So 8 iu in a young
boy is 16 iu in an adult, or 8 iu in an adult is like 4 iu in a
young boy.  The dose for persons who are HIV+ to build up the
immune system is 15 or 18 iu in one day.  - Ellis]


Bodybuilders take 10iu per day spread out over the day.
HGH halflife is 1.5-hours.


Ellis: [HGH halflife is 1.5 hours but IGF-1 lasts a long time.

Once upon a time I stopped taking HGH for 30 days, to see if
my pituitary was still "alive"....   I took an IGF-1 blood test
on the day I stopped and I got 550... the next day I took
another blood test, without having taken HGH for one full day...
and I got IGF-1 =400...

I didn't take anymore HGH for thirty days... and I took blood
tests during those 30 days... IGF-1 went down from 400 to 280 to
220... and finally to 201 after 30 days...

http://www.rajeun.net/day30.html

So... Maybe I might get more "Bang for the Buck" if I would
take 8 iu spread out over a one day period... But 8 iu in one
shot worked wonders... TWELVE HOURS after I took the 8iu, I
looked at myself in the mirror and I thought to myself:
"WOW!  You Look Great!"

And somebody else told me I looked very good too, so it wasn't
my imagination.   And I tried it again a few days later, and it
happened again.

So... maybe "everybody knows" that your body is not able to work
with 1.5 iu... but it works anyways. - Ellis]


secondly they use burst theory.

Michel.

ps. do you sell Neorecormon?

Ellis: [I don't know what is "burst theory."  Can you tell us
what that means?  No, I'm sorry, I only sell growth hormone and
EPO... - Ellis]





To: Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com
From: etoussier@...: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:41:41 +0000
Subject: [Rejuvenation] * * * Which is the OPTIMUM DOSE?

I received this question by e-mail, I answer it here, too:

Question: I was taking 2 unit a day. Is that too much?

Ellis:[No, that is not too much... it might be too little... but
it is good enough... I have taken 2 iu almost every day for 10
years... at first I took 1 iu... then 1.5 iu... then 2.0 iu...
then I took 3 iu for about 9 months... then I took a blood test
which showed my IGF-1 was above 700 so I dropped to 2 iu and my
IGF-1 is now about 500 to 550...

I don't know that IGF-1 700 is too high, but at the time I was
too far out in front of everybody else who I knew was taking HGH
and I didn't want to be the brave pioneer who dies for the sake
of science... But... In 10 years, I have heard from body builders
that were taking 8 and 10 iu per day... some overdosed and got
pain and stayed at that dose, because what I think is a side
effect, they think is exactly what they want: they WANT to look
like gorillas, square jaw and big face, like Arnold
Schwartzennegger.

That is their idea of beauty, and they are welcome to their idea.
I don't want to be huge or muscular... I am happy to be healthy
and of average build.But I noted that 15 iu is the dose that is
given to patients who are HIV+... and 15 iu is a dose that will
cause cartilage to grow... so one man's dose with benefit is
another man's dose with side effects. So that is the top side
dose.

One body builder who took 10 iu for several months got pains, so
he dropped his dose to 8 iu and the pains went away...So 10 iu is
a bad dose after several months... and 8 iu can be a dose for
several months without side effects...

Four days ago, after many years taking 2 iu per day, on a whim,
Idecided to take 8 iu for ONE day... The amazing thing was that
the NEXT DAY I looked at myself in the mirror and I couldn't
believe my eyes: MY EYELIDS have opened more and the top eyelid
is not drooping... I had been debating whether to have plastic
surgery to make the upper eyelid not droop, and now it is not
drooping...

And the skin ON MY NECK is pulled tighter... I had been debating
whether to have plastic surgery to tighten the "chicken skin" on
my neck... I had Thermage, then I had Fraxell, to try to improve
my chicken skin on my neck, and it did get better...

But 8 iu of HGH is cheaper than Fraxell, and cheaper than Thermage,
and much cheaper than plastic surgery... I don't know how long it
will last, but TODAY I look terrific. Three days ago I took 2 iu,
two days ago I took 2 iu, one day ago I took 2 iu... I still looked
good, but I wondered what would happen if I take 8 iu for one day,
again.

So today I took 8 iu again... I don't know if it is my imagination
but I think I LOOK BETTER... it is incredible, but I think I look
better, a few hours after the 8 iu... A customer came to my house
to buy Humatrope, and as soon as she saw me she asked "Ellis, what
did you do? You look very good."I didn't do much.

I had Botox a few weeks ago, and that smooths out the forehead, and
I had 8 iu 4 days ago and 8 iu today, and that tightened the skin
of my eyelids and tightened the skin of my neck.

So if growth hormone cost 1 cent per iu, that is, cost is not
aproblem, which is the OPTIMUM dose?

Many doctors, like Hertoghe, recommend THE LEAST DOSE WHICH GIVES
BENEFITS... that is about onehalf iu per day... but I know somebody
who takes one fourth of an iu per day (that is: 8 iu per month) and
gets the benefit that he wants (less pain in his knee...)I agree that
ANY DOSE above ZERO is better than ZERO... but thatstill doesn't say
which is the OPTIMUM DOSE.I have always thought that THE OPTIMUM DOSE
IS THE HIGHEST DOSE THAT GIVES US GOOD BENEFITS BUT DOES NOT CAUSE
ANY SIDE EFFECTS IN THE LONG RUN. Why the highest dose, and not the
lowest dose? Because I think the highest dose that does not cause
side effects will approach the level of HGH that it might have been
40 years ago, if we were a healthy great athlete...

and if we were not a great athlete, maybe our body was lacking some
HGH...???In any case, NOBODY KNOWS which is the OPTIMUM DOSE... and
if growth hormone cost 1 penny per iu, then I would probably try 3
  or 4 iu per day for a while, especially since I already took 3 iu
for 9 months and had no side effects...

So that is the reason why I decided I should TRY 8 iu for ONE DAY...
and that gave me such a stunning result that now I think that the
optimum dose FOR ME might be 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 iu... - Ellis]






_________________________________________________________________
Jouw nieuws en entertainment, vind je op MSN.nl!
http://nl.msn.com/

Hello  Ellis!!

I am not making any  progress with local Dr's that are in my area.
I believe that they are all scared  of the word getting out that
they are sympathetic to people who are below  average with all of
their tests. And certainly the insurance companies would rather not
have to payout for prescriptions that might be considered anti-aging.

Ellis: [I wish I was the C.E.O. of an insurance company... I would
raise premiums, but I would include mandatory blood tests, glucose
testing, growth hormone, etc.  I would much rather insure HEALTHY
PEOPLE who STAY HEALTHY than healthy people who lose their health
over the years.  - Ellis]

It is all too new to them and too expensive.

Ellis: [It is much more expensive to pay a claim.  They should
want to avoid claims, but nobody does this.  - Ellis]


I have tried to open my search to anything within 150 miles but
again with the bad press that has been in the news they have clammed
up and do not want to encourage anybody.  So they make it difficult
by telling you that you are Normal to Low but not  deficient for
your age.

I am like many others  who work for a living at a job where long
hours and much stress is expected . It has taken it's tole on me over
the years and as I approach a  point where I am nearing retirement
I am looking for ways to improve my physical  and mental health.

I have detailed that in our previous correspondences. I am  looking
to retire in the next 5 years but I am worried that if my health
continues to decline as much in the next 5 years as it has in the
past 5 years that my retirement very disappointing and "Low average"
on all accounts- Just  like my Low average Blood and hormone scores
I wonder if you might  comment on Mail order testing. -Blood spot and
saliva testing. are these  accurate?

Ellis: [I don't know how accurate they are.  I have never taken
a blood test that is not in a laboratory, except for blood glucose
which I test on my glucose meter.  If anybody that has taken saliva
tests or home tests can comment on this, please do.  - Ellis]

Are they a last resort for those who are having a difficult time
seeking answers?

My local Red Cross  keeps pestering me to donate blood. I have been
a lifelong Multiple gallon donator but looking at the blood work
that I have and as you pointed out to me-  my red blood cell count
is pretty low.


I think I probably should tell them to take me off their call list.


Ellis: [Yes, I agree.  Your hematocrit (42.8% see below) is too low
for you to donate blood.  You need your blood cells. - Ellis]

I have changed what I can do following your 8 points.

-I have switched over from GNC Men's 50 Plus Vitapac to the Life
Extension  Mix
-Along with that I  take Glucosimine and chondroitin which gives me
some pain relief to some of my  problem joints. (Torn rotator cuffs.

Hips knees backpains) -I watch what I eat  and follow the lo-carb
diet- This has always helped me to keep my weight down.  and gives
me relief with my Diverticulitis problems

-I take a baby aspirin  a day- this because I do have a heart health
history.

-I take 1- 25mg DHEA  along with my vitamins.

-My skin- My age is  beginning to show in my face and hands and arms
Thinner skin and more translucent. Does not recover well from the
pinch test. It reminds me that I am  getting old. I have all of the
Classic symptoms that HGH therapy might lessen  but the skin is
like a flag in my face.

Ellis: [The translucency is due to low red blood cells.  Doctors
would not call 42% hematocrit "low" but I call it LOW.  Even one
point below 45% is one point below 45%. Why should you be 2 or 3%
less than AVERAGE?  Why should you be AVERAGE if you can be
HIGHER THAN AVERAGE?  After all, it is OXYGEN we are talking about.
- Ellis]


-Exercise- My foot is still slow to heal from the surgery- But I
keep pushing it as far as I can. I have another follow-up appointment
with the Podiatrist tomorrow and hope that I soon will be  able to
use the treadmill again (Foot surgery for 2- hammertoes and bunion-
three pins and three screws to rep air- 27 Nov 07).

I continue to lift weights I avoid exercises that give me joint
pain-I have found a number of them that I can  do that avoid the
rotator joint.

For Chelation I have tried Kelatox and wonder if you have ever heard
of  this treatment-

_http://www.kelatox.com/_ (http://www.kelatox.com/)
Any Comments on  it?

[No, I don't know anything at all about it. - Ellis]


It looks like Vermox is a prescription drug. I remember that as a boy
I had several bouts with  parasites- I grew up on a farm with all
types of livestock.

-I have no sources for  Vermox, EPO, HGH, testosterone or any other
anti-aging prescriptions.  Can  you help with that?


Ellis: [... You are speaking to the King.  That is like
asking Bill Gates if he can help you to get Windows.

Of course I can help with that, but we must keep it legal so
that I don't help you to get into trouble, and I get into trouble
also.   So... write to me to etoussier(at)yahoo.com   Subject:
Rejuvenation Subscriber and I'll help you to get all of these
legally.  You might have to come to Mexico, but you will get them
legally.  - Ellis]




>It would simplify things a lot for me if I could get them through
you.

Ellis: [That is like Food meeting Hunger.  I am glad I simplify
things for you, but you also simplify things for me too, because
you help me to stay alive... and you help me to help you and others
to stay alive too.  There are easier ways to make a living, but
there is none that can give ME more satisfaction than to help you
and others to stay in ultra good health. - Ellis]


>I have been following Anti-aging therapy with interest for a long
time - but it has always been out of  my grasp.  I would like to use
your 8 point anti-aging program but will need help supplying  it.

My previouse info for  reference.

Glucose Tolerance  Test  400  ml Orange juice test
Start  -----------71
20  min---------103
30  min----------119
45 min---------109
60 min-----------93
75 min---------102
90 min-----------97
120 min---------89
Fasting  Glucose
96  mg/ dL    (--A year ago when I was at  250Lbs- it was 133- Now I'm at 200
lbs and it is down to 96.)
PSA .76  ng/mL

Following is my last Blood lab
Hemotology
-White  Cell count               9.9  K/uL
-Red  cell count                 4.55 M/uL
-Hemoglobin                     14.7  g/dL
-Hemocrit                       42.8 %
-MCV                            94.2  fL
-MCH                            32.2  pg
-MCHC                          34.2   g/dL
-Platelettes                    282   K/ul

Lipid  Profile
-Cholesterol                     181   mg /  dL
-Triglyceride                    115   mg /  dL
-HDL                              42   mg /  dL
-LDL (calculated)                116   mg /  dL
Morning  temperature
96.1
Morning blood  pressure
130/85

Thanks  Ellis!!!

Regards, Pat


Ellis: [Well, you're not diabetic... so you have the most important
part of the game under control.  I don't see any problems in your
blood test, except red blood cells down a bit, which makes you
feel a little slower... I think you will have no problem with HGH
or other anti aging therapies.   Write to me and three months from
now you will be your own younger brother.  Thanks for writing. -
Ellis]

Diabetes Study Partially Halted After Deaths

By GINA KOLATA
Published: February 7, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/health/07diabetes.html?th&emc=th

By GINA KOLATA
Published: February 7, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/health/07diabetes.html?th&emc=th


For decades, researchers believed that if people with diabetes lowered their
blood sugar to normal levels, they would no longer be at high risk of dying from
heart disease. But a major federal study of more than 10,000 middle-aged and
older people with Type 2 diabetes has found that lowering blood sugar actually
increased their risk of death, researchers reported Wednesday.

The researchers announced that they were abruptly halting that part of the
study, whose surprising results call into question how the disease, which
affects 21 million Americans, should be managed.

The study's investigators emphasized that patients should still consult with
their doctors before considering changing their medications.

Among the study participants who were randomly assigned to get their blood sugar
levels to nearly normal, there were 54 more deaths than in the group whose
levels were less rigidly controlled. The patients were in the study for an
average of four years when investigators called a halt to the intensive blood
sugar lowering and put all of them on the less intense regimen.

The results do not mean blood sugar is meaningless. Lowered blood sugar can
protect against kidney disease, blindness and amputations, but the findings
inject an element of uncertainty into what has been dogma that the lower the
blood sugar the better and that lowering blood sugar levels to normal saves
lives.

Medical experts were stunned.

çIt's confusing and disturbing that this happened,ç said Dr. James
Dove, president of the American College of Cardiology. çFor 50 years, we've
talked about getting blood sugar very low. Everything in the literature would
suggest this is the right thing to do,ç he added.

Dr. Irl Hirsch, a diabetes researcher at the University of Washington, said the
study's results would be hard to explain to some patients who have spent years
and made an enormous effort, through diet and medication, getting and keeping
their blood sugar down. They will not want to relax their vigilance, he said.

It will be similar to what many women felt when they heard the news about
estrogen, Dr. Hirsch said.  Telling these patients to get their blood sugar up
will be very difficult.

Dr. Hirsch added that organizations like the American Diabetes Association would
be in a quandary. Its guidelines call for blood sugar targets as close to normal
as possible.

Ellis: [HA! THAT'S A BIG LAUGH!  The American Diabetes Association recommends
HbA1c = 7 !!!  That is average blood glucose about 170!!!

That is "as close to normal as possible"????  Notice how they claim to be the
Good Guys, and everybody assumes that whatever the Good Guys claim is good, must
be good. - Ellis]



And some insurance companies pay doctors extra if their diabetic patients get
their levels very low.

The low-blood sugar hypothesis was so entrenched that when the National Heart,
Lung and Blood Institute and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases proposed the study in the 1990s, they explained that it
would be ethical. Even though most people assumed that lower blood sugar was
better, no one had rigorously tested the idea. So the study would ask if very
low blood sugar levels in people with Type 2 diabetes the form that affects 95
percent of people with the disease would protect against heart disease and save
lives.

Some said that the study, even if ethical, would be impossible. They doubted
that participants whose average age was 62, who had had diabetes for about 10
years, who had higher than average blood sugar levels, and who also had heart
disease or had other conditions, like high blood pressure and high cholesterol,
that placed them at additional risk of heart disease would ever achieve such low
blood sugar levels.

Study patients were randomly assigned to one of three types of treatments: one
comparing intensity of blood sugar control; another comparing intensity of
cholesterol control; and the third comparing intensity of blood pressure
control. The cholesterol and blood pressure parts of the study are continuing.

Dr. John Buse, the vice-chairman of the study's steering committee and the
president of medicine and science at the American Diabetes Association,
described what was required to get blood sugar levels low, as measured by a
protein, hemoglobin A1C, which was supposed to be at 6 percent or less.

Many were taking four or five shots of insulin a day, he said. Some were using
insulin pumps. Some were monitoring their blood sugar seven or eight times a
day.

They also took pills to lower their blood sugar, in addition to the pills they
took for other medical conditions and to lower their blood pressure and
cholesterol. They also came to a medical clinic every two months and had
frequent telephone conversations with clinic staff.

Those assigned to the less stringent blood sugar control, an A1C level of 7.0 to
7.9 percent, had an easier time of it. They measured their blood sugar once or
twice a day, went to the clinic every four months and took fewer drugs or lower
doses.

So it was quite a surprise when the patients who had worked so hard to get their
blood sugar low had a significantly higher death rate, the study investigators
said.

The researchers asked whether there were any drugs or drug combinations that
might have been to blame. They found none, said Dr. Denise G. Simons-Morton, a
project officer for the study at the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute.

Even the drug Avandia, suspected of increasing the risk of heart attacks in
diabetes, did not appear to contribute to the increased death rate.

Ellis: [Whoa!  This is a cover-up.  What is this about the drug Avandia not
appearing to contribute to the increased death rate?  Give us the details about
this.  Who used Avandia and did die and who used Avandia and did not die?  And
who did not use Avandia and did die, and who did not use Avandia and did not
die?  - Ellis]

Nor was there an unusual cause of death in the intensively treated group, Dr.
Simons-Morton said. Most of the deaths in both groups were from heart attacks,
she added.

For now, the reasons for the higher death rate are up for speculation. Clearly,
people without diabetes are different from people who have diabetes and get
their blood sugar low.

It might be that patients suffered unintended consequences from taking so many
drugs, which might interact in unexpected ways, said Dr. Steven E. Nissen,
chairman of the department of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic.

Or it may be that participants reduced their blood sugar too fast, Dr. Hirsch
said. Years ago, researchers discovered that lowering blood sugar very quickly
in diabetes could actually worsen blood vessel disease in the eyes, he said. But
reducing levels more slowly protected those blood vessels.

And there are troubling questions about what the study means for people who are
younger and who do not have cardiovascular disease. Should they forgo the low
blood sugar targets?

No one knows.

Other medical experts say that they will be discussing and debating the results
for some time.

"It is a great study and very well run," Dr. Dove said.  "And it certainly had
the right principles behind it."

"But maybe," he said, "there may be some scientific principles that don't hold
water in a diabetic population."

C.Marley wrote:

>casswinthrop wrote:
>
>
>
>>However, I have experienced increased blood pressure and I seem
>>to be gaining fat/weight around my midsection.
>>
>>
>>
>>No, these are not side effects of using insulin.  These are
>>side effects of incorrect diet.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>One of the well known side effecte of insulin IS weight gain.  The
>reason is that insulin promotes the uptake of sugar by the cells.
>
>
>[The REASON that there is weight gain is because they are not
>eating the RIGHT AMOUNT OF FOOD.  They are OVEREATING.  Therefore
>they require a greater dose of INSULIN.
>
>Dr. Bernstein calls it, "the Law of Small Numbers" which is that
>you require less insulin if you eat less, and you get fat if you
>eat too much and inject large doses of insulin "to compensate"...
>
>It doesn't matter that insulin promotes the uptake of sugar by
>the cells, which I agree it does.  But if you eat the right
>amount of carbs, which is about 12 to 20 grams OF CARBS per
>meal, then there is no extra sugar to be stored in the cells.
>
>So again: these are side effects of incorrect diet.  - Ellis]
>
>The tissues of diabetics have a better than normal ability to
>store calories.  This probably accounts for the high incidence of
>diabetes  and obesity among groups who had a small number of
>founding ancestors who were exposed for generations to starvation
>- like the Polynesians and some groups of Southwest Native
>Americans - mostly those who have lived for thousands of years
>in desert environments.
>
>Natural selection favored those who were efficient at storing
>calories for hard times.
>
>Now, in an environment of plenty, their physiology is still
>operating for survival of scarcity.
>
>CM. M.D.
>
>
>[So then we agree that if they overeat in the environment of
>plenty, insulin will store sugar in the cells.  So if they do
>not overeat in an environment of plenty, then they will not get
>fat.
>
>So then you should agree with what I wrote: it is a side effect
>of incorrect diet.


Only partly true, Ellis.  The efficient metabolism people (diabetics
on insulin) actually require fewer calories to get fat. They can get
fat on the same diet that others eat and maintain a normal weight.

And when they diet, their metabolism goes into starvation mode,
which makes them even more efficient at conserving calories.
Taking insulin also makes it difficult to adhere to a strict diet
without having frequent bouts of hypoglycemia.

Diabetics are in a vicious cycle: Their diabetes encourages the
storage of fat, and the fat makes them insulin resistant, which
exacerbates their diabetes.

CM


Ellis: [Hello Dr. Marley... It must be very difficult to be
a diabetic, and not to have the help of your pancreas... but
what is really difficult is to eat correctly if it means
giving up potatoes and rice and pizza and orange juice, etc.
.... And it is even more difficult when they have doctors
who want to be "nice guys" with their patients, so they
tell them it is not their fault, and to take it easy, diabetes
is not that bad...

Are there any diabetics subscribed to Rejuvenation?  Please
write and tell us what you think of this.  And tell us if you
are controlling blood glucose "tightly" below 6.0 or at "7.0"
(note: I think 6.0 is "Terrible"... )- Ellis]

I want to start using HGH.  But I am concerned about cancer in women.

What are the risks ?

Ellis: ["According to Ellis" HGH does not cause cancer, or make it
worse if you have it.  In nearly 10 years of following the news
and discussions here on Rejuvenation, I have NEVER read that HGH
actually caused anybody cancer.  - Ellis]




If their is a high risk of cancer in the family.. should one be
concerned  about HGH usage and cancer risk?

Ellis: ["According to Ellis" you do not have a greater incidence
of cancer if you use HGH than if you do not.   But I am only saying
this because nobody has ever written to tell us that they got
cancer for using HGH, except one boy who had not used HGH in
6 years, and then he got cancer.  And I said that he had perhaps
gotten cancer BECAUSE HE WAS NOT USING HGH.  So that was
inconclusive.  Nobody else.  - Ellis]


What tests should be done for women before starting HGH?


If you are drug sensitive could I be at risk for more side effects
than others?

If I take steroids( for my asthma in  rare cases...) I get evil and
mean.  Does this act like a steroid on ones body..or does it have a
calming effect?  Because at my age I seem to be crabby about
everything because of low hormone balance!

I am 53 and have had to have plastic surgery to look young. I'm tired
of surgeries. ! I want to keep my health but look young without
surgery and still be safe! Please help!

Ellis: [I declare myself incompetent to help you, and I pass you
to the women who are subscribed to Rejuvenation... Please answer
some of these questions, because I can't since I am neither a
doctor with women patients, or a woman with me as a patient.  I
THINK that HGH does not act as a steroid... and I think that you
will not have any more side effects from using HGH than others,
in fact very few if any side effects at all, and they are not
serious (if you don't overdose...)

I think HGH will help you to keep your health, but you might want
to also have surgery.  Fighting against Time is not an easy fight,
but I think it is easier with Growth hormone, + Keep your blood
glucose controlled, + balance the female hormones too, + keep your
red blood cells at 45% or higher, and lower than 55%...

Women, let's hear you. - Ellis]

I guess this question is for whom ever is in charge {Ellis?}.

Call me slow I don't mind, but I need a step by step program on
how to best utilize HGH & other chemicals to the highest benefit.

Don't get technical on me either or my eyes will wander within a
couple of sentences. Yeah, I'm that slow.


1 - I'm 48 years old & in reasonable health except for arthritis
in my knees, & bipolar syndrome. No, I'm not a nut, but it does
effect my concentration & moods. I'm a rapid cycler. Under stress I
might have two or three mood swings in a day. My mother is dying,
so obviously I'm under a lot of stress right now. Uh-oh...

2 - I'm impotent. This might be because of my depressed mood, as
fully half the pleasure of sex to me was watching my partner get
off. Right now I'm dead inside. Who cares about her? Love is out
of the question. OR it could be the meds.

The third possibility is low testosterone levels. I have been
diagnosed on the 'low end of normal.' Around 400 to 450. My
endocrinologist is reluctant to give me more than 2.5 mgs. of
Androgel as both my mother and father had sex organ related cancer.

My grandmother died from the same.

3 - How do I get my life back? I can't discontinue the psychotropic
drugs. I gave that a whirl a couple of times & it was pure hell.
Couldn't even read a newspaper. I laid in bed all day.


4 - Step by step now. I am 5'-9" & 187 lbs. I'm not fat or flabby.
However, I'm not as big in the upper body as I'd like, nor do I see
substantial gains when working out. I get solid. Not big. I want my
libido, AND as long as I'm at it why not see some gains at the gym
for all the effort I put out?

5 - What drugs should I take? In what quantities?
Are there cycles to observe? Where do I get them? Are they reputable
suppliers?

Could I get in trouble? I don't like the idea of getting cornholed in a Mexican
jail.

[Ha!  Blame it on Mexico.  Why would you get cornholed in a
Mexican jail, if you can buy these products without a prescription
in Mexico?  You are afraid of the wrong country, my friend. - Ellis]


What's the cost? What should my diet be? How often should I work out?

Pretty tough without a physical, eh? I never said I wasn't high
maintenance.

After that I want my horoscope. Yes, I'm pretty sarcastic.
I learned that a long time ago; to laugh at myself rather than cry.

And I'm deadly serious about my inquiries. I want to take control of
whatever remaining time God has allotted me. Right now I'm watching
life go by. That's depressing. I have low self-esteem but am
cognitive of the fact I don't look half bad. I just shy away from
relationships because of my impotence.

Any help is appreciated. Keep it simple.

  Brandon

[Hello Brandon.  You need more help than I can give you on
Rejuvenation.  You need to go to a good anti aging doctor and
take a blood test, and perhaps some other tests, to determine
what is the reason why you are impotent, because I don't think
that you should be impotent if your testosterone is 400...
a little slow, maybe, but not impotent... Something else is
the matter, not lack of testosterone.  And unless you get that
other reason fixed, you won't become potent again with only
testosterone.  Perhaps your circulatory system is clogged up,
I don't know... Perhaps you have a problem in the prostate, I
don't know.  Perhaps the medicines that you take for bi-polar
syndrome are causing your impotence, I don't know.  Growth
hormone would probably make you feel BETTER but it won't fix
up all of your problems, like bi-polar syndrome etc. which are
caused by something else.  Good luck.  Go to an anti-aging
doctor.  - Ellis]

To: Rejuvenation@...: ebyron@...: Thu, 7 Feb 2008
11:17:32 -0800Subject: [Rejuvenation] Testosterone therapy




I am a 60 y/o male and a type I diabetic for 30 years. My A1C's have always been
6 or below. Ellis: [6.1 = 140 mg/dl average... that is "Terrible" "according to
Ellis" and "Excellent" according to the American Diabetes Association... So who
are you gonna believe? I might not be right, but if I am not right, it won't
hurt you to lower your blood glucose below 100 mg/dl if you can. - Ellis]I am in
excellent health and very fit. I began hGh injections 12 months ago and have
slowly brought my levels from 80 to 250. I have greatly improved my energy
levels and other "youthful" benefits have developed. I plan to raise my hGh to
300 and keep it there.I am planning to begin Sustanon 250 injections of 1ml
every 2-3 weeks soon. Question: Will I definitely need to take the estrogen
blocker Arimidex or is that on a case by case basis?. Thx,ByronSFEllis: [Hello
Byron... you will definitely need to take the estrogen blocker Arimidex. -
Ellis]

Ellis wrote:

Ellis: [Hello Pat... Wow! That's a great testimonial for the
power of HGH to aid in healing.

I'm curious to know if your physician learned a lesson, and if
she did, does she now prescribe HGH to her patients before surgery?

- Ellis]

Hi Ellis

Because of what she observed with me She now knows that HGH.... does
do.... what the medical journals say it does.....reduce post operative
fatigue. She was  AMAZED that it actually did that.  She has shared
that information with  other physicians.....but I doubt she prescribes
it.

She may tell other patients about it.....or she may observe other
patients on HGH to see if their  recovery is as excellent as mine was.

AS you know..."traditional"  physicians are SLOW to change their actual
practice... Too bad...

Pat RN MSN SNP

Ellis: [If I was a doctor and I happen to see one patient get
amazing results from using HGH, I would be jumping at the chance
to try the same on ME... What does it take to get some doctors
to believe that growth hormone might be good for them?

As you said: Too bad... Too bad for the doctor... I often am
told by doctors that HGH is very dangerous, and that I have to be
very careful...  Doctors will always be doctors... Imagine them
giving ME advice to leave HGH... Not very convincing... - Ellis]








Hi Ellis

Im responding to "surgery recovery" with HGH. I also had
cosmetic surgery: removal of ruptured breast implants. This usually
results in a feeling of being "hit by a MACK TRUCK", for a few days
after surgery.

My physician knew I was on HGH, and we observed my post op recovery
to see if HGH improved this component of surgery, since the medical
journals indicate it does so.

True to research results, I did not have a TRACE of post op fatigue.
My physician stated I recovered quicker than her 30 somethings do.
And I am almost 70 !!!!

I went out to dinner after surgery... rather than being in bed for
a few days !!!!

Pat RN MSN Student Nurse Practitioner

Ellis: [Hello Pat... Wow! That's a great testimonial for the
power of HGH to aid in healing.

I'm curious to know if your physician learned a lesson, and if
she did, does she now prescribe HGH to her patients before surgery?

- Ellis]

Hi ELLIS

I'm responding to your paste on NIH stops diabetes trial.  As you
know, I'm almost 70, been on HGH for 9 years, and have a fasting
blood sugar  of 85... up from 70 when I was 30.

It is well known in the medical journals that HGH activates stem
cell replacement when pancreatic beta cells die off from a  "natural
death" estimated to be 10% per decade.

Replacement of lost cells, along with your theory of keeping the
blood sugar low to prevent cell death from  "sugar overload" are
the ONLY two ways to prevent diabetes.

I'M GLAD WE ARE SO SMART......

Pat  RN MSN Student Nurse Practitioner  (GPA  4.5)


Ellis: [HA! You made me laugh.  But you are right, I am
glad that we have figured this out, too... I wish they would
figure it out, but they are a bit slow...

Do you know when some doctors will believe that we are right
and they are wrong? (I refer to the doctors who say that using
HGH is bad, and keeping blood glucose low is dangerous, etc.)

In about 40 years, when we will be 110 years old, and we'll
still be young and writing articles.  Maybe we will appear on
the Larry King Live show, and I don't know how Larry King will
look in 40 years... but you and I will be looking great, I know
it.

Until then, they will think we look young because we are lucky
to have "good genes"... or "good skin"... etc. - Ellis]












**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300000002\
5
48)

Question, below...

--- In Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com, Byron Hurey <ebyron@...> wrote:
>
> I am a 60 y/o male and a type I diabetic for 30 years.  My A1C's
> have always been 6 or below.
>
> Ellis: [6.1 = 140 mg/dl average... that is "Terrible" "according
> to Ellis" and "Excellent" according to the American Diabetes
> Association... So who are you gonna believe?  I might not be
> right, but if I am not right, it won't hurt you to lower your
> blood glucose below 100 mg/dl if you can. - Ellis]
>
>
> I am in excellent health and very fit.  I began hGh injections
> 12 months ago and have slowly brought my levels from 80 to 250.
> I have greatly improved my energy levels and other "youthful"
> benefits have developed.  I plan to raise my hGh to 300 and
> keep it there.
>
> I am planning to begin Sustanon 250 injections of 1ml every
> 2-3 weeks soon.
>
> Question:  Will I definitely need to take the estrogen blocker
> Arimidex or is that on a case by case basis?.
>
> Thx,
> Byron
> SF
>
> Ellis: [Hello Byron... you will definitely need to take the
> estrogen blocker Arimidex.    - Ellis]

Question for Byron: How much HGH are you using to get to 250?

Thx,  D

Ellis: [I will GUESS that Byron is using about 1.5 iu - Byron
can you tell us what is the dose that got your IGF-1 up to
250?  Thanks.   Ellis]

"I've had this happen on Revolucion for no reason
whatsoever, and have seen it done to others"



My question is "what are you doing shopping at a
pharmacy on Revolucion"?? That is where Americans go
to buy oxycontin, anabolic steroids and other
controlled substances. No wonder you've been
harrassed!

I have been buying HGH in Tijuana since 1993, and most
recently about two months ago. You absolutely do NOT
need an Rx to buy it, and if you shop in reputable
pharmacies, the quality and service are good.

There was a time when only Lilly Humatrope was
available, but recently both that and Saizen are
available.

In theory, American citizens are supposed to be
permitted to bring back a three-month supply for
personal use of pharmaceuticals that are not
controlled substances.

However, it is a "hit or miss" affair when crossing
back into the US. No matter what your rights are, you
are still at the mercy of some over-zealous Customs
inspector. I once had to walk back into Mexico and get
a prescription for the medications I was carrying.
By the time I returned to customs, the shift had
changed and there was a different inspector who waved
me right through!

A prescription is easy to obtain for a fee, so if you
want a hassle-free return, you may want to consider
doing this.

Good instincts here, Ellis!


[Hello Kay.  I don't know Tijuana, so I don't know
where is Revolucion or where is the place where you
don't get harassed by police... But... I deliver HGH
to the office of Estafeta (the courier within Mexico
that gets my boxes delivered the next day...) and
nobody has ever been harassed picking up a box at
Estafeta.  And I agree with you that a prescription is
easy to obtain for a fee... and difficult or easy,
what is important is that you should get a prescription...
because it can save you from getting into trouble in
some countries (North of Mexico and South of Canada...)

In Mexico City, there are some pharmacies that have a
doctor's office attached, and for the grand sum of $2
you can have a prescription for HGH, or EPO, or insulin,
or testosterone... etc.

Viva Paradise.  It is the small things in life that
make me happy, and I am happy to live in Mexico.

BY THE WAY, talking about Paradise: Anybody who would
like to stay THREE NIGHTS at a Fiesta Americana in Cabo
San Lucas or Can Cun for $199 for 3 nights...

Fiesta Americana are Super-First-Class 5 Star Hotels
in Mexico... they are affiliated with Hilton Grand
Vacation Clubs in the U.S. so you know we're talking
FIRST CLASS.

If you are already going to Cabo or Can cun, and want
to extend 3 days, cheap cheap... write to me and I will
get you an invitation... Just listen to their Vacation
Club spiel, which I listened to and bought immediately
because it gives me HUGE discounts ANYTIME at Fiesta
Americana and also Hilton Grand Vacation Club if they
are not 100% full, which means: almost anytime.

But you are not obliged to buy, and if you don't buy
you remain friends.  I own 7 weeks of Timeshares in
Can Cun, and this is the first time I ever bought anywhere
else because I really really like the thought that I
will be able to go to Fiesta Americana in Acapulco or
Can Cun anytime that there is empty space, for $80 for a
luxurious suite, probably worth about $300 or $400 if
not for the discount...  Man, That's a deal!

I put a page about it, here:

http://www.rajeun.net/clubvaca.html

(note: If you go, and buy, I receive POINTS which I can
use on my vacations... but I am RECOMMENDING it
because I BOUGHT IT myself, and I know this is really
good if you travel (or would like to travel) a lot.)
- Ellis]


- Ellis]

--- In Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com, "dames100" <dames100@...> wrote:
>
> Question, below...
>
> --- In Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com, Byron Hurey <ebyron@> wrote:
>
> I am a 60 y/o male and a type I diabetic for 30 years.  My A1C's
> have always been 6 or below.
>
> Ellis: [6.1 = 140 mg/dl average... that is "Terrible" "according
> to Ellis" and "Excellent" according to the American Diabetes
> Association... So who are you gonna believe?  I might not be
> right, but if I am not right, it won't hurt you to lower your
> blood glucose below 100 mg/dl if you can. - Ellis]


> I am in excellent health and very fit.  I began hGh injections
> 12 months ago and have slowly brought my levels from 80 to 250.
> I have greatly improved my energy levels and other "youthful"
> benefits have developed.  I plan to raise my hGh to 300 and
> keep it there.
>
> I am planning to begin Sustanon 250 injections of 1ml every
> 2-3 weeks soon.
>
> Question:  Will I definitely need to take the estrogen blocker
> Arimidex or is that on a case by case basis?.
>
> Thx,
> Byron
> SF
>
> Ellis: [Hello Byron... you will definitely need to take the
> estrogen blocker Arimidex.    - Ellis]

============================
> Question for Byron: How much HGH are you using to get to 250?
>
> Thx,  D
>
> Ellis: [I will GUESS that Byron is using about 1.5 iu - Byron
> can you tell us what is the dose that got your IGF-1 up to
> 250?  Thanks.   Ellis]
=============================

Byron: I am 5'9, 175# with 20% body fat.  I started at 1 iu
(4-6 weeks), then 1.5 (10 months). Then tested again and was at 250.

Ellis: [Bingo!]



Byron: Now 2 iu for the last 2 months and looking to go to 300
and remain at that level.  I think the 2 or something just less
will get me there. I go 6 days ON and one OFF.

My insulin requirements about double during the 6 ON period.

Ellis: [Really?  That's interesting... What is your insulin
requirement when you take HGH and what is your insulin requirement
on the single day that you don't take HGH?  And why do you
suppose your insulin requirement is greater when you take HGH
than when you don't take HGH?  Is your food the same or different,
or do you do more or less exercise?

I take HGH 7 days a week, so I don't have an OFF day, so my
insulin requirement is always the same.  (I take 20 iu of Lantus
in the A.M. and 10 iu at night, and this gives me about 85 mg/dl
after good meals, and before breakfast.  I take much fewer Humalog
doses since I began to take Lantus, and even fewer when I tried
20 in the AM and 10 in the PM.  - Ellis]


Byron: I am very pleased with the HGH protocol, well-being greatly
improved.

The testosterone replacement has always been in the back of my mind
and I will begin that next week.

(FYI, all my levels were at "Normal range for my age" but I talked
my 40 year old internist into supporting me in this HRT program
anyway.)

Truth be told, he comes off somewhat skeptical but I think he is
fascinated by all this. Frankly like Sly Stallone said last week:
"in ten years this HRT thing will be mainstream, over the counter
stuff."  Let's hope!

Ellis, great site and thanks for your efforts as a health pioneer!!
- Byron


Ellis: [Thanks for the nice words....  I am amazed by my website,
myself.  I can't believe that I wrote the pages I have written,
but I did write them... And I wrote them only because I learned
as much as I did, right here on Rejuvenation.  I have a plan to
make it even better.   I will always have a "free" level which I
hope will someday have 5,000 or more subscribers... but I have to
have a section with a very limited membership, so that I can take
care personally of a few really motivated persons, better.
- Ellis]

I PASTE BELOW THE STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS (AACE) RE: THE TWO POSTS WHICH I
SENT YESTERDAY TO THE EFFECT THAT A STUDY WAS STOPPED BECAUSE
BETTER GLUCOSE CONTROL RESULTED IN MORE DEATHS FROM HEART
ATTACKS THAN WHAT WAS EXPECTED (IE, FEWER DEATHS FROM
HEART ATTACKS.)

http://www.aace.com/newsroom/press/2008/index.php?r=20080104

I PUT IN CAPITALS WHAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO NOTICE.
IN PARTICULAR, THEIR CRITERIA IS THAT A1C = 7.5% REPRESENTS
"GOOD CONTROL" PERHAPS BECAUSE IT IS LESS THAN 8% OR 9% ALL OF
WHICH WILL RESULT IN A DEAD PATIENT, SOONER.  (HBA1c = 7.5%
CORRESPONDS TO AVERAGE BLOOD GLUCOSE OF 190 mg/dl, WHICH I
CONSIDER TO BE CLEARLY "SUICIDAL")

I AM GLAD THAT THE AACE RECOMMEND THAT PATIENTS SHOULD CONTINUE
TO MAINTAIN GOOD CONTROL, BUT WHEN THEY SAY THAT HBA1C = 7.5% IS
"GOOD CONTROL" THEN I WONDER IF THEY UNDERSTAND THEIR TOPIC AT
ALL... BECAUSE I AM NOT A DOCTOR, BUT I KNOW WITHOUT A DOUBT
THAT AVERAGE BLOOD GLUCOSE OF 190 mg/dl WILL KILL THE PATIENT,
EVENTUALLY... SLOWLY... BUT SURELY.

AND I AM INTRIGUED THAT THERE WERE SO MANY AND SUCH SEVERE CASES
OF HYPOGLYCEMIA... THERE IS NO REASON TO HAVE HYPOGLYCEMIA IF
YOU EAT THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF FOOD AND ALSO TAKE THE RIGHT DOSE
OF INSULIN... BUT THERE MIGHT BE A REASON, IF YOU DON'T EAT THE
RIGHT AMOUNT OF CARBS AND ALSO YOU ATTEMPT TO CONTROL IT WITH
AVANDIA RATHER THAN INSULIN.  I WONDER WHY THEY DON'T GIVE THEIR
PATIENTS INSULIN, WHY DO THEY WANT THEIR PATIENTS TO USE A
SUBSTITUTE FOR THE NATURAL HORMONE?

SO WHOSE FAULT IS IT IF THE PATIENT GETS HYPOGLYCEMIA?  THE
PATIENT'S... BUT WHO TOLD HIM TO USE AVANDIA INSTEAD OF INSULIN?
THE DOCTOR WHO HAS LEARNED TO BE SCARED OF USING INSULIN SO HE
PRESCRIBES A SUBSTITUTE FOR A PERFECTLY GOOD NATURAL HORMONE.
SURE, YOU HAVE TO USE IT CORRECTLY, BUT ANYBODY CAN LEARN TO
USE INSULIN CORRECTLY, STARTING WITH DOCTORS.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I AM NOT A DOCTOR, AND I DON'T HAVE ANY
PATIENTS... SO I DON'T REALLY KNOW THE DIFFICULTY OF TRYING TO
GET PATIENTS TO USE INSULIN CORRECTLY.  MAYBE THEY REALLY ARE
DUMB. - ELLIS






JACKSONVILLE, FL. February 6, 2008  AACE (American Association of
Clinical Endocrinologists) advises patients with diabetes to check
with their physician regarding their own care, BUT TO CONTINUE TO
MAINTAIN GOOD CONTROL OF THEIR GLUCOSE LEVELS.

AACE applauds the caution exercised by the National Heart, Lung
and Blood Institute, and the ACCORD (Action to Control
Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) trial investigators in stopping
the intensive glycemic treatment arm of their study because of the
recommendation of their Safety Committee.  The decision was clearly
based upon the finding that IN THEIR PATIENTS WITH A HIGH RISK FOR
CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE, after an observation period of an average
of four years, the group with a treatment goal of an A1c of 6.4% or
less had a higher overall mortality rate than the comparison group.

Both treatment groups, however, had excellent care from outstanding
health care teams and BOTH GROUPS HAD A SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER
MORTALITY RATE THAN WHAT HAS BEEN REPORTED FOR SIMILAR GROUPS IN
OTHER STUDIES AND IN POPULATION STUDIES.

In the intensive treatment group, 257 of the study patients died,
as opposed to only 203 in the standard group, a difference of
approximately 3 patients/1,000 participants/yr.

These data were sufficient to lead the investigators to stop that
arm of the study and to carefully study the differences.  Their
decision represented an appropriate protective response for the
study participants, but, as often is the case, many questions
remain regarding the meaning of these important findings.

For some patients with type 2 diabetes and a high degree of
cardiovascular risk, the goal of an A1c of 6.4% or less led to a
poorer outcome than those in the study with a less intensive
effort to improve their glycemic control. Both groups actually
improved significantly from the baseline, pre-study  A1c levels,
and the non-intensive group had a mean A1c of 7.5%, WHICH IS
GOOD CONTROL.   [Ellis: ?!!!]

The factors that may have played a role in the relatively higher
death rates of the intensive treatment group have not yet been
elucidated.  At this time we do not know whether the results could
have been due to chance, since the hazard ratios and full
statistical analysis are not yet available.

Currently we have no information as to whether the patients with a
more complicated regimen had more frequent errors in following the
regimen, or more depression because of the increased degree of
difficulty. We do know that THEY HAD A SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER
INCIDENCE OF SEVERE HYPOGLYCEMIA, but we do not know whether that
incidence was important in causing errors in judgment that could
have led to morbidity or death.

We do not have an analysis of the higher incidence of sudden death
in the intensive therapy group.  How many of them were due to
hypoglycemia, or how many may have been due to accidents?   We do
not yet know whether Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems were
used in any sub-group and whether this method of glucose monitoring
would have been helpful in patients with higher cardiovascular risk
WHO WERE ON BETA BLOCKERS and intensive therapy.

For the time being, it is best to be cautious in our recommendations
with our patients.  A target of an A1c of 6.4% or less may not be
either possible, wise or safe in type 2 patients with a higher risk
of cardiovascular disease or those with established cardiovascular
disease.  Since the risk/benefit ratio from any therapy will differ
from patient to patient, the clinician will need to make individual
judgments about what is most appropriate for them at any particular
time in their clinical course.

In conclusion, we support the decision to stop the lower A1c target
arm of the ACCORD trial prematurely because of the safety concerns.

We are looking forward to learning more about the important details
about these key findings.  We encourage doctors to individualize
the A1c target goals on patients with Type 2 diabetes at higher
risk.  An A1c target of 6.5% or less is useful for many, including
patients with Type 1 diabetes, and probably Type 2 patients at lower
cardiovascular risk, but this goal is clearly not appropriate for
all type 2 patients.

However, more data later today will be available to show the
long-term value of intensive therapy for type 2 diabetes, and this
story is far from finished.

About AACE: AACE is a professional medical organization with 6,000
members in the United States and 85 other countries.  Founded in 1991,
AACE is dedicated to the optimal care of patients with endocrine
problems.  AACE clinical endocrinologist's advanced, specialized
training enable them to be experts in the care of endocrine disease,
such as diabetes, thyroid disorders, growth hormone deficiency,
osteoporosis, cholesterol disorders, hypertension and obesity.  For
further information about AACE visit www.aace.com.

Hey Ellis,

Okay, so I come to Mexico City and get a prescription.

With a valid Mexican prescription authorizing refills, is it
possible for you to send refills to me in the US?

Is it legal in the US for me to continue to import through
Ellis, as per a Mexican prescription, by an international
shipper or whatever?

This part has really been worrying me, as I can't just go to
Mexico to carry three months worth at a time, and my US doctor
quit writing for it.

Thanks,
rustleofwings

Ellis: [I am not a U.S. lawyer so I don't know the answer to
your question.  I suggest you should call U.S. Customs or the
F.D.A. and tell them that you are a very sick man and that you
have been unable to get medical treatment in the U.S. so you are
going to go to a foreign country to consult with a doctor who has
been highly recommended to you... Ask them if you will be allowed
to bring back medicines that he might prescribe to you?

And if so, ask them if you will be allowed to import your medicines,
or buy them in the U.S., in the future?  Tell them that you have a
doctor in the U.S. who will supervise the treatment that the foreign
doctor will prescribe to you.

What I can tell you is that I often deliver HGH to tourists
from many countries who are in Mexico, and they always take their
products back with them to their country (U.S. or other) and so
far none has ever had their growth hormone taken away.  HGH is
a legal medicine, made legally, sold and bought legally...

I don't know any country where the Customs officials have been
instructed to take away legal medicines away from returning citizens
because baseball players are accused of using the same medicine to
break baseball records "unfairly" according to whoever thinks it
is "unfair" to be healthier than Babe Ruth.

- Ellis]

Dear Ellis,

This speaks to the heart of my concern.

Re: upregulation and downregulation of receptors on cell
membranes.  Some people make "plenty" of insulin but for some
reason the number of receptors is downregulated.  In other
words some of these people could have plenty of insulin in
their blood but with few active receptors they will "still have"
high glucose levels.

The other extreme on the other hand are people whose pancreas
does not make enough glucose.  For years this was believed to
be the root cause - but, it was not lack of insulin, but rather
the lack of adequate number of insulin receptors - and glucose
could not get into the cells where it was needed...

The same is true of many other cellular receptors - they are
constantly being upregulated and downregulated according to the
amount of hormone/drug present.

One of the few exceptions is testosterone which is lipid soluble
and needs "no" cellular receptor.  It goes virtually straight to
the cellular DNA and induces protein synthesis.

My concern about HGH is really not a concern at all - I would
love to take it along with my testosterone.  My only worry is
that at some future date my cells would no longer respond to it -
hence rapid aging at that point - but, isn't that what we all
prefer?  Compression of morbidity?

Ellis: [I have taken HGH for nearly 10 years... I know somebody
who has taken HGH for 14 years... If I was starting today, I would
take HGH for ONE year, and get the benefit that I can out of
that first ONE YEAR...

In the meantime, I will let everybody know if *I* ever start aging
rapidly... My friend who has taken HGH for 14 years will let ME
know if he suddenly starts aging rapidly, so that I will stop
taking HGH...

So far, that has not happened.  And in any case, if your cells no
longer respond to HGH, that is the same as if your cells can't
respond to HGH because IT ISN'T THERE... so...

If I was starting today I would not be afraid of what might
POSSIBLY happen, since it hasn't happened to us who have taken
HGH for many years so far... I would take the benefit that I
can get with very little or zero risk, and I'll let you know
when the risk begins, if it ever begins.

I think from the experience of thousands of persons who have taken
HGH for one year, the first year is risk free.  So if I was starting,
I would take that first year, and worry about the second year
when I get to the end of the first year.

I'll let you know 10 years from now if I had any problem in the
first 20 years.  I think I will not have any problem, unless I
stop taking HGH, or unless I change my dose to 8 iu per day and
it turns out to be too much.  I don't intend to do either one.
  - Ellis]


You probably are already aware of this but, HGH is really not the
active molecule.  It goes to the liver where it induces the
production of various growth factors - many of which we are still
learning about.  These would in theory have their own cellular
receptors since these are all peptide or protein hormones.


Ellis: [I am lucky that I am not a doctor.  I don't worry about
the details of how it is done, I am only happy to look at the
results and see that it is done.  I know that HGH goes to the
liver and induces the production of IGF-1, and maybe other
growth factors... But that is an interesting detail, and
nothing else to me.

I am not worried about growth factors that we are still learning
about, or of cell receptors... I will be 63 years old in August,
so I don't have the luxury of being able to wait for a committee
to decide what are the effects of all the unknown cellular
receptors, etc.

All I know is that I am younger at age nearly 63 than I was at
age nearly 53.  How many people do you know who are healthier and
feel younger and look better 10 years later than they were 10
years before?

This works, it is good for my good health, and that is all I care
about. - Ellis]



Wishing you the best of health and longevity,

Peter Draganac

Ellis: [Thanks! Stay with us.  Keep watching me. - Ellis]


PS My only hope - and maybe it is for the best - that your active
promotion of HGH does not contribute to the current hysteria in
Washington over anabolic steroids, HGH and baseball... Don't know
if you keep up with USA news ... but it could impact your business ..

I sincerely hope not.  Perhaps it will ultimately get these people
(Congress) to realize that aging can be treated like the disease
it is  ...

Ellis: [The current hysteria is like any hysteria, it does not
make sense...  People are allowed to smoke and to drink alcohol
without limit... These are KNOWN health hazards... People are
allowed to eat all the chocolate cakes and candies and potato
chips that they want to, and these are KNOWN health hazards...

But they make a big fuss about Baseball Players taking GROWTH
HORMONE, which is a hormone that REPAIRS the body.  If taken
under the supervision of a DOCTOR who knows what he is doing,
there is ZERO risk of it doing them any harm.

So why waste time and money making such a fuss about whether or
not athletes are taking something that is GOOD for their health?
Let them take HGH UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF A DOCTOR, and ALL OF
THEM will be healthier, nobody will have an unfair advantage, and
the sport will be as clean as a whistle...

And all of them will set A GOOD EXAMPLE to young children.   It
is when the regulators have a mixed up set of reasons to regulate
something that is GOOD that .  How can they be AGAINST baseball
players using HGH to RECOVER FROM AN INJURY sooner?

But they are against it.  Why?  I don't understand why.

Yes, it can impact my business.  Let me tell you that I am very
PROUD of "MY BUSINESS"... I invented my business... it was not
a business until people started to learn what I am doing, and then
it became a business because they began to call me by telephone,
or come to Mexico to learn from me.  And I mean, doctors too...

I am not a doctor, and somehow I have become like a doctor for
many thousands of people, even for many doctors... Many people
call me "doctor" even if I always say I am not a doctor, because
one of them told me "to me, you are a doctor."

My plastic surgeon and my doctor of hyperbaric oxygen and my
doctor for EDTA chelation don't charge me when I go to them,
because they learn from me, and they say they don't charge doctors.

So that is my business, but I am not a doctor, and I don't give
medical advice to anybody.  I tell them what I do, I tell them
how I do it, I tell them why I do it, and I tell them the results.
But I don't tell anybody to do what I do.

I take my customers to my doctors, and I teach them what the
doctor approves for them (often my doctors will call me to ask
me what dose to prescribe to their patients...)

"My business" is to stay healthy and to teach everybody who wants
to learn what I do, how to stay healthy.  And I do hope that the
hysteria over men using male hormone testosterone, or men and
women using the master hormone HGH to stay in good health for
longer will not impact my business of teaching people to stay
healthy.

Thanks for writing. - Ellis]




Ellis Toussier Bigio <etoussier@...> wrote:                              
I paste this, which you can read at
  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080206/ap_on_he_me/diabetes_heart_trial

  It says that the NIH's National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
  researchers are trying to figure out what happened... I already
  figured out what happened and I can tell you immediately what
  happened: they did NOT try to control blood glucose with INSULIN,
  rather, they used AVANDIA.

  AVANDIA is not INSULIN.  If they had used LANTUS or Humulin-R
  in correct doses, and checked blood glucose levels before and
  after injecting, they would have had the results that they
  thought they would get (ie, they thought that lower blood glucose
  would result in less deaths from heart attack.)

  But now they have given keeping glucose levels tightly controlled
  using insulin (in the manner of Dr. Bernstein) a bad name.

  But PLEASE TAKE NOTE that INCIDENCE OF HEART ATTACK was lowered
  by lower HbA1c... about 10% less, in this study which only was
  shooting for HbA1c of around 6.  HbA1c of 6 is equivalent to an
  average blood glucose of about 140 (which I call TERRIBLE).  They
  did not attempt to lower HbA1c to 4.5% or 5.0% (between 83 and 100
  mg/dl) as Dr. Bernstein aims to do...

  This means that SOME HEART ATTACKS ARE CAUSED BY HIGH HbA1c...
  and incidence of heart attack is probably even less at the HbA1c's
  that Dr. Bernstein recommends.  - Ellis

  ========================
  By LAURAN NEERGAARD and RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, Associated Press Writers
  Wed Feb 6, 6:24 PM ET

  WASHINGTON - The government abruptly halted aggressive treatment
  in a major study of diabetes and heart disease after a surprising
  number of deaths among patients who pushed their blood sugar to
  super-lows — findings that call into question a growing
  movement in diabetes care.

  Wednesday's move doesn't affect health guidelines for most Type 2
  diabetics, but it raises concern about a particularly vulnerable
  group: Patients at especially high risk of heart attack or stroke.

  The 10,000-patient study, dubbed ACCORD, was supposed to answer a
  big question: Could pushing blood sugar to near-normal levels,
  below today's recommended target, help protect these high-risk
  patients' hearts?

  Instead, the National Institutes of Health took the rare step of
  halting part of the study 18 months early — citing 257
  deaths among aggressively treated patients compared to 203 among
  diabetics given more standard care.

  That translates into an extra three deaths for every 1,000
  participants per year, and researchers were at a loss to explain
  why. Diabetics' blood sugar wasn't too low, a condition known as
  hypoglycemia. And a close look at the multiple medications patients
  used, including the drug Avandia that is suspected of being
  heart-risky, showed no sign that any were to blame.

  Ironically, the study's death rate was well below what doctors
  usually see in Type 2 diabetics, probably due to the extra care
  and monitoring they received as part of the research.

  Moreover, the aggressively treated patients suffered about 10
  percent fewer heart attacks overall than their counterparts, said
  Dr. William Friedewald of Columbia University, who helped monitor
  the study.

  "However, it appeared that if a heart attack did occur, it was more
  likely to be fatal" in that group, Friedewald said. "In addition, the
  intensive treatment group had more unexpected sudden deaths, even
  without a clear heart attack."

  So for now, the NIH's message: Diabetics with heart disease shouldn't
  strive for near-normal glucose, but to a level long described as
  optimal for all diabetics — around 7 on a measurement scale
  known as the A1C.

  "We obviously were surprised. We were hoping for a positive outcome,
  but the reason we do this research is we don't know that," said study
  researcher Dr. Hertzel Gerstein of Canada's McMaster University.

  The findings contradict previous research suggesting that the lower
  diabetics can make their blood sugar, the better. That had
  specialists cautioning Wednesday that it's too soon to know if the
  finding among heart patients was a fluke, or a real sign of how
  exquisitely tailored to each patient's risk factors diabetes care
  must be.

  "Everything else has suggested, for 50 years or more, that tight
  control was good," said Dr. James Dove, president of the American
  College of Cardiology. "We've got half a century of literature that
  is put on the back burner right now by one study. ... It may not be
  the final decision."

  Some 21 million Americans have diabetes, meaning their bodies can't
  properly regulate blood sugar, or glucose. Diabetics already are at
  increased risk of heart disease. Type 2 diabetes, the most common
  form, is linked to obesity, which in turn harms the heart. Plus, high
  blood sugar over time damages blood vessels.

  The A1C test tracks average glucose levels over two or three months.
  People without diabetes have A1C levels as low as 5.

  The American Diabetes Association has long recommended that diabetics
  aim to get their A1C level below 7, far below the long-common 8 or 9.
  Every point-drop lowers the risk of serious complications, such as
  blindness or kidney failure, by 25 percent to 40 percent.

  Recent research shows that about half of U.S. patients have
  succeeded, and that "this overall level of glucose control appears
  to be of great benefit rather than harm," the ADA said Wednesday.

  Getting too far below an A1C of 7 is very difficult, and very few
  patients outside of research studies succeed. The NIH study aimed to
  have aggressively treated patients dip below a level of 6, into
  near-normal range. Only half got below 6.4, compared to an A1C of 7.5
  among study volunteers getting standard treatment.

  Wednesday's announcement does not change that guideline. Rather, the
  NIH's National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute added the nuance that
  diabetics with heart disease stop at a level of 7 rather than dip
  below, while researchers try to figure out what happened. They have
  switched all the study participants to standard therapy, and will
  track their health until June 2009.

  ___