Arginine and growth hormone-releasing hormone restore the blunted growth hormone-releasing activity of hexarelin in elderly subjects.
Arvat. E E; Gianotti. L L; Grottoli. S S; Imbimbo. B P BP; Lenaerts. V V; Deghenghi. R R; Camanni. F F; Ghigo. E E
Key Findings
- Hexarelin (2 µg/kg IV) produces a larger GH spike than an equivalent dose of GHRH in both age groups.
- Combining hexarelin with GHRH further increases GH output, but the additive effect is much weaker in elderly subjects.
- Adding arginine (0.5 g/kg) to hexarelin markedly enhances GH release in elderly men, but not in younger men.
Practical Outcomes
- For biohackers interested in GH‑based anti‑aging strategies, hexarelin appears to be a potent GH secretagogue, especially when paired with arginine in older adults. However, the study used intravenous dosing, which limits direct translation to typical sub‑cutaneous or oral protocols, and safety data are limited. If pursuing this approach, consider low‑dose IV administration (≈2 µg/kg) with arginine supplementation for older users, but be aware of regulatory and safety considerations.
Summary
The study shows that the peptide hexarelin can trigger a strong growth‑hormone (GH) surge in both young and older men, but the boost is smaller in the elderly. Adding growth‑hormone‑releasing hormone (GHRH) makes the response even bigger, especially in younger people. In older participants, mixing hexarelin with the amino‑acid arginine dramatically improves the GH release, while arginine has little effect in the young.
Abstract
Although both spontaneous and stimulated GH secretion undergo an age-related decline, the secretory capacity of somatotrope cells is preserved in human aging. In the present study we compared the GH responses to hexarelin, GHRH, and the combined administration of hexarelin and GHRH or arginine in young and elderly subjects. Thirteen young (24- to 30-yr-old) and 16 elderly (65- to 84-yr-old) normal males were divided into 2 groups. The first group (7 young and 8 elderly subjects) received the following as single iv injections during 3 different treatment sessions: hexarelin (2 micrograms/kg), GHRH (2 micrograms/kg), or hexarelin (2 micrograms/kg) plus GHRH (2 micrograms/kg). The second group (6 young and 8 elderly subjects) was administered single iv injections of hexarelin (2 micrograms/kg) or hexarelin (2 micrograms/kg) plus arginine (0.5 g/kg) during 2 different treatment sessions. In both groups basal IGF-I levels in the elderly were lower than those in young subjects (114.5 +/- 18.7 vs. 211.5 +/- 19.1 micrograms/L; P < 0.001). In the first group the GH response to hexarelin was greater in young compared to elderly subjects (area under the curve from 0-120 = 4849 +/- 601 vs. 2112 +/- 683 micrograms.min/L; P < 0.001). GHRH elicited a lower GH response than that induced by hexarelin in both young (1455 +/- 102 micrograms/h.L; P < 0.02) and elderly subjects (563 +/- 87 micrograms/min.L; P < 0.02). GHRH potentiated the somatotrope response to hexarelin in both young (7725 +/- 503 micrograms/min.L; P < 0.02) and elderly subjects (3895 +/- 612 micrograms/min.L; P < 0.02), but to a lesser extent in the latter (P < 0.001). In the second group, the GH response induced by hexarelin was also higher in young subjects than in elderly subjects (4819 +/- 668 vs. 1649 +/- 459 micrograms/min.L; P < 0.001). The GH response to hexarelin was potentiated by arginine in elderly (4139 +/- 1057 micrograms/min. L; P < 0.001), but not in young subjects (4743 +/- 774 micrograms/min.L). This study shows that the maximal effective dose of hexarelin releases more GH than the maximal effective dose of GHRH in both normal young and elderly subjects. The effect of hexarelin on GH secretion is age dependent, and the GH response to the combined administration of hexarelin and GHRH was significantly higher in young subjects compared to elderly subjects. Arginine does not potentiate the GH response to hexarelin in young subjects, whereas it significantly enhances it in elderly subjects.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
Study Information
pubmed
1994
10.1210/jcem.79.5.7962341