HGH Cancer?

[fivefold]

Ok, this is part of the radiology report that was transcribed by the doctor after receiving a scrotal ultrasound b/c of pain. I had just finished a cycle w/ HGH/deca/test. I have read since that GH can cause cancer etc etc. Just wanted to get some feed back from anyone with a similar experience. I don't think it is anything pre-cancer, but can't be too sure.
SCROTAL ULTRASOUND

REASON FOR EXAM: Scrotal pain.

COMPARISON: None.

FINDINGS: The right testicle measures 5.9 x 3.8 cm in mid sagittal dimension.
The left testicle 5.7 x 3.9 cm. Near homogenous testicular echogenicity.
Occasional tiny millimeter-sized echogenic foci are seen in both kidneys.
These are slightly more numerous on the left than on the right side. 5-6 foci
left, 2-3 on the right. This is most in keeping with testicular
microlithiasis. No discrete spacing occupying mass lesion is appreciated.
Color Doppler flow demonstrates symmetric blood flow the testicular parenchyma.
The epididymal heads are symmetric in size at 1 cm. A tiny left epididymal
head cyst on the order of 2-3 mm is identified. Physiologic fluid is
visualized in the scrotal sac. No evidence for varicocele and Valsalva
maneuver.

IMPRESSION:

1. Symmetric blood flow to the testicles visualized.

1. Testicular microlithiasis left greater than right testicle.

1. Small left epididymal head cysts, 2-3 mm.

 

[Zyglamail]

Who says GH causes cancer? It can speeds cancerous growth but I dont buy that it will cause it any more than any other naturally occuring hormone.

 

[Indy]

Who says GH causes cancer? It can speeds cancerous growth but I dont buy that it will cause it any more than any other naturally occuring hormone.

EXACTLY, It expedites growth if it is a pre-existing condition, I am SO TIRED of writing this everyday of the week, HGH DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER !

 

[fivefold]

Thanks for clearing that up. That answers my question. k to both of you.

 

[HGH man]

I was found to have cancer after 3½ years of HGH and there was no sign of cancer in the first place. I had a large tumor grow on one of my kidneys as a result of it and had to lose that kidney. I had surgery to remove my kidney june 28th this year. My endocrinologist called me the next day I found out I had cancer and said "Stop the HGH,it cause's tumor growth to grow much quicker". So the question is what caused my tumor growth? Human grade steroids or HGH ?

 

[kbrkbr]

So the question is what caused my tumor growth? Human grade steroids or HGH ?

What makes you think your tumor was caused by either steroids or hgh? The VAST majority of people who suffer tumors have never used either. So what caused their tumors?

Glad they caught yours in time.

 

[buckwheat1]

Cancer is a condition where the cells grow uncontrollable. In fact, they become immortal. Most of the cells in our body have a finite lifespan. They can divide only so many times. This is refered to as the Hayflick limit. Cancer cells don't prescribe to this limit. I believe cancer is caused when DNA is damaged. But damage to DNA does not mean you have cancer.

When DNA damage is done the cell increases production of p53. p53 is a potent inducer of cell death, this caused the cell to die. It is possible that the cell could have been cancerous if it had not be induced to commit suicide.

IGF-1 on the other hand inhibits cell death (apoptosis). In fact, I believe androgens can also inhibit cell death in androgen dependant cancer (prostate) and estrogen (breast cancer).


So IGF-1 , androgens, or testosterone may not cause the DNA damage but these substance could cause the controls within our bodies to become out of balance and allow a situation that would have been prevented to occur.


There is very little talk of anti-cancer nutrients on the steriod board. But I read a lot of the anti-aging literature. There are substances like ellagic acid that increase p53 expression. Myself, I take a host of substances whose purpose is anti-cancer.

Antioxidants on the other hand help prevent damage to the DNA in the first place.

 

[fivefold]

And K 2 u too. Thanks

 

[bigtravis]

i hold this subject in the same regard as "the deaths due to aas" you really cant prove it. BUT. my personal physician back home was big into anti aging remedy and he was diagnosed with cancer. and i mean bad. he had to give up practice like a couple months later. but whos to say.

 

[buckwheat1]

i hold this subject in the same regard as "the deaths due to aas" you really cant prove it. BUT. my personal physician back home was big into anti aging remedy and he was diagnosed with cancer. and i mean bad. he had to give up practice like a couple months later. but whos to say.

The current state of anti-aging therapy is at best the reduction of the probability of disease. It certainly doesn't mean that if someone subscribing to anti-aging theories is not going to get cancer.

The question rather is if we take 1000 people that make use of certain anti-aging protocols do they live longer or live healther than 1000 people who do not adhere to such practices.


I don't believe we have such data, but there are many studies for particular substances like lycopene, green tea, fish oil, curcumin, I3C, reservertrol and other things that show reductions in types of cancer and heart disease. In some cases, studies with fruit fly (increase in lifespan).

I do believe that androgens and GH have a place in anti-aging even if the possbily increase the chances of getting cancer. It is matter of quality of life versus longevity. Testosterone has been linked to mental state, preventention of bone loss and muscle loss , etc.

Do I want to live longer but in a wasted state or live less years but actual live those years. I think this is the debate with hormone replacement. If have already seen this with estrogen for women. Possible a increase in cancer. But estrogen improves the quality of life.

 

[bigtravis]

no. he was also big into his own supply. is what i was getting at.

 

[missionpossible]

So IGF-1 , androgens, or testosterone may not cause the DNA damage but these substance could cause the controls within our bodies to become out of balance and allow a situation that would have been prevented to occur.

Bingo, this is that part about the IGF that scares the crap outta me. I've seen several articles that mention this, not that it causes it, but that it may let it get started where otherwise, our bodies would knock it out. Definitly something to think about as it would be several years until you would find out. Seems it has been aassociated more with prostate cancer also, which by the time they find out has a pretty high mortality rate....

 

[Indy]

I was found to have cancer after 3½ years of HGH and there was no sign of cancer in the first place. I had a large tumor grow on one of my kidneys as a result of it and had to lose that kidney. I had surgery to remove my kidney june 28th this year. My endocrinologist called me the next day I found out I had cancer and said "Stop the HGH,it cause's tumor growth to grow much quicker". So the question is what caused my tumor growth? Human grade steroids or HGH ?

Neither CAUSED it, but all of the above will cause it to grow quicker than normal, that's why you are taking those drugs in the first place, yea there is a huge risk associated, if you have a tumor whether cancerous or not, it will grow quicker, just as the muscles will you started taking the gear for in the first place.

 

[buckwheat1]

Neither CAUSED it, but all of the above will cause it to grow quicker than normal, that's why you are taking those drugs in the first place, yea there is a huge risk associated, if you have a tumor whether cancerous or not, it will grow quicker, just as the muscles will you started taking the gear for in the first place.

I would define IGF-1, androgens/estrogens, and GH as possible cancer promoting but not cancer causing.

In one scenario, cancer that you would have gotten regardless if you were using these substances might be accelerated.

In another scenario, I believe that cancer may be formed that other wise might not have been formed if one might be using these substances.


Cancer cannot be caused unless mutations occur in the DNA strands causes the cells to go haywire. So, no mutations, no cancer. I have seen nowhere where Androgens, GH, IGF-1 have been accused of causing DNA damage.

So these substances are not the direct cause of cancer. But...

your body has the ability to kill and/or fix DNA mutations. Problems arise when DNA is not fixed correctly and/or the mutant cell is not killed.

The prominent tumor suppressor gene is the p53 gene. When this gene is overexpressed, cancer is reduced but parodoxically aging is accelerated. When p53 expression is inhibited, then cancer becomes more likely.

IGF-1 might oppose the action of p53. If this were true, then IGF-1 might cause a mutation that would have been killed to survive and multiply and cancer sets in.


They say that there are approx. 50-60% more cancers among obese people. Obviously, fat is not causing DNA mutations either. So being fat is not a direct cause of the cancer. But something about being very overweight is influencing the rate of cancer. They suspect it may be hormones - testosterone/estrogen, insulin, or igf-1. Whatever it is , if obesity was reduced, we probably will get less cancer cases.

The point I am making (if it is not obvious at this point) is that direct cause and cancer promoting really is just semantics when you really come down to it. But I will give one more example, to try to clarify .


The common cold is caused by a virus. If you do not have the virus, you cannot get common cold. But just being exposed to the common cold virus does not mean that you will catch the cold. The amount of the virus that enters your system as well as your immune system health are major factors in the end.

If I take a substance that lowers my immune system and I get sick. I cannot say that I would have still gotten sick but having a suppressed immune system caused me to get it faster. My compromised immune system might allow me to get sick and not be able to fight off an attack that a health immune system would have beaten.

If IGF-1, testosterone, GH are found to promote cancer, then I think they we must also say that their use might initiate cancers that would not have occured without their use. We cannot just say they made a cancer more aggressive.

 

[Jam070]

I know I am bumping an old thread, but just want to state that my friend did 4 cycles of Blue Tops and his share of T , and in 13 months a seemingly perfectly heathy 42 year old has a tennis ball size tumor on his kidney. He was watched closely throught the GH and T therapy, but alot of our studys go along that, if you have a defect, the GH and T and other candy may promote growth or cause it to wake up. No family history and blood tests were performed monthly. Imbibe carefully.

 

[Myfortress]

EXACTLY, It expedites growth if it is a pre-existing condition, I am SO TIRED of writing this everyday of the week, HGH DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER !

you guys argguing like a bunch of bitches, however are both correct that it does not cause cancer.HoweverTwo studies showed that men with higher than normal IGF-1 levels had an increased risk for cancer. IGF-1 levels reflect the amount of HGH in the body if you didnt already know. Regarding the results of these two studies we know that IGF-1 decreases with age so if high IGF-1 levels are associated with cancer shouldn't the risk for any sort of cancer decrease with aging rather than increase? Got you there i bet?????? MD. Also i do research on this stuff so PM with further substantualy question or bliss arguements agianst what i have said Thank you. MD.

 

[clarkken1972]

realy interestin hipothèse