Lowering blood free fatty acids (FFA) – for example by fasting, a low‑carb diet, or a drug like acipimox – makes the pituitary release more growth hormone on its own and dramatically boosts the GH spikes you get from GHRH, GHRP‑6, or a combo of both. The effect is additive and works no matter which GH‑releasing stimulus you use.

Increases in plasma free fatty acids (FFA) inhibit the GH response to a variety of stimuli; however, the role of FFA depression in GH control is far from understood. In the present work, FFA reduction was obtained by the administration to normal subjects of acipimox, a lipid-lowering drug devoid of side-effects. Each subject tested underwent two paired tests. In one, acipimox was administered orally at a dose of 250 mg at -270 min and at a dose of 250 mg at -60 min; in the matched test, placebo was given at similar intervals. To induce GH release, four stimuli acting through different mechanisms were used: pyridostigmine (120 mg, orally) at -60 min, GHRH (1 microgram/kg, iv) at 0 min, GH-releasing peptide (GHRP-6; His-D-Trp-Ala-Trp-D-Phe-Lys-NH2; 1 microgram/kg, iv) at 0 min, and finally, GHRH plus GHRP-6 at the same doses at 0 min. GH secretion was analyzed as the area under the secretory curve (AUC; mean +/- SE, micrograms per L/120 min). Acipimox pretreatment alone (n = 6) induced a reduction in FFA levels compared with placebo treatment. The FFA reduction led to a sustained GH secretion that increased from 2.4 +/- 1.8 micrograms/L at -120 min to 14.2 +/- 4.0 at 120 min. The GH AUC for placebo was 266 +/- 100, and that for acipimox was 1781 +/- 408 (P < 0.05). In the pyridostigmine-treated group (n = 6), the acipimox-pyridostigmine AUC (2046 +/- 323) was higher (P < 0.05) than the placebo-pyridostigmine AUC (764 +/- 101), but was not different from the AUC of acipimox alone. Previous FFA reduction nearly doubled the GHRH-mediated GH secretion (n = 6; placebo-GHRH AUC, 1817 +/- 365; acipimox-GHRH test, 3228 +/- 876; P < 0.05). A similar enhancement was observed when the stimulus employed was GHRP-6 (n = 6; placebo-GHRP-6 AUC, 2034 +/- 295; acipimox-GHRP-6, 4827 +/- 703; P < 0.05). Furthermore, even the most potent GH stimulus known to date, i.e. GHRH plus GHRP-6, was enhanced by the FFA suppression (placebo-GHRH-GHRP-6 AUC, 2034 +/- 277; acipimox-GHRH-GHRP-6, 5809 +/- 758; P < 0.05). The enhancing effect of lowering FFA levels was additive regardless of the stimulus employed. These results indicate that 1) FFA reduction per se stimulates GH secretion with a delayed time of action; 2) FFA reduction enhanced in an additive manner the GH secretion elicited by such different stimuli as pyridostigmine, GHRH, and GHRP-6; and 3) the observation that FFA reduction enhanced the response to the most potent GH stimulus, GHRH plus GHRP-6, suggests that FFA suppression acts by a separate mechanism. FFA reduction may have value in the clinical setting for assessing GH reserve.