From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 25 2002 - 14:45:21 MST
Hal Finney wrote:
> Supposedly animal tests showed that it actually *decreased* lifespan?
>
> Unfortunately I haven't had success using Google; the enormous number
> of sites selling and touting HGH is swamping any which have objective
> information on the product. Even the Life Extension Foundation, which
> has a pretty good reputation, is pushing HGH and didn't say anything
> about problems.
>
> For those here who are knowledgeable about supplements, what is your
> current opinion about HGH? Anyone here who used to take it but has
> now stopped because of the recent results? Or is it still considered
> beneficial, overall?
>
### HGH is bad, bad, bad. Persons with too much HGH (acromegalics) live
shorter, persons with too little HGH, some dwarfs, at least the ones whose
HGH deficiency is not caused by a tumor, live normal lifespans. HGH acts
through insulin-like growth factor II, and it promotes aging.
BTW, I stopped listening to AM and FM some time ago - now there is XM and
Sirius. Sirius is commercial-free, and even the XM channels have very little
chaff. I heard more good music in the last 4 weeks on XM than for a year on
regular radio.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:22 MST