Source comparison
Hyperplasia vs Hypertrophy: Evidence vs Bro-Science
The most repeated marketing claim is that IGF-1 LR3 causes hyperplasia, meaning new muscle fibers rather than just bigger existing ones. The biology is partly real and partly overstated. IGF-1 does activate satellite cells, and that machinery resembles the pro
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- The most repeated marketing claim is that IGF-1 LR3 causes hyperplasia, meaning new muscle fibers rather than just bigger existing ones. The biology is partly real and partly overstated. IGF-1 does activate satellite cells, and that machinery resembles the processes seen in developmental muscle growth (Adams, J Appl Physiol, 2002).
- The overstatement is the leap to large, permanent fiber counts in trained adult humans. Localized IGF-I infusion produced hypertrophy in rat muscle, but human data for injectable IGF-1 LR3 bodybuilding use is essentially absent. Most measurable IGF-I muscle growth in research combines satellite cell activation with increased protein synthesis in existing fibers, not dramatic new-fiber formation. Treat "hyperplasia gains" as unproven in humans. For how this differs from anabolic steroids, see peptides vs steroids.