At the risk of sending readers to sleep, as supporting evidence that Growth Hormone does not work I will list published studies and reviews and their outcomes related to hGH in the sporting context. Each study is prefaced by year, primary researcher, type of study and/or dosages of hGH used and conclusion.

For the hGH ‘does not work’ argument:

2007 – Nelson A: 2 mg daily for eight weeks: No improvement in hGH group compared to placebo
2006 – Saugy M: Review: not able to prove one way or another
2006 – Healy ML: 0.2 u/kg for four weeks: increased fat and glucose metabolism did not affect performance
2005 – Ehrnborg C and Berggren A: 0.1-0.2 u/kg for four weeks: Did not find increase in power output or oxygen uptake
2004 – Tokish JM: Review: no scientific study has shown that GH is an effective PED
2004 – Van der Lely AJ: Review: excessive GH action due to GH misuse seems to be ineffective in improving muscle power
2003 – Pelissier-Alicot AL: Review: the potential benefit of large doses of GH on acute exercise is not clearly demonstrated
2002 – Dean H: Review: there is no evidence of increased muscle strength with GH in trained athletes
2002 – Lange KH: Single dose of 2.5 mg: found increased lactate levels which correlated with decreased performance
2001 – Jenkins PJ: Review: the ergogenic effects of systematic administration of GH by athletes and bodybuilders remains unproven
2001 – Bidlingmaier M: Review: there is no controlled study demonstrating a profound effect of GH administration on workload capacity

'hGH suppliers' slick websites and phony testimonials have fooled almost everyone, but the controlled studies paint a different picture'


And so on, and so forth (another six reviews back to 1991)

For the hGH ‘does work’ argument:

2003 – Healy ML: 0.67mg/kg for four weeks: found increased leucine (amino acid) production and reduced leucine oxidation ‘suggesting’ an anabolic affect

Overall, I found 17 studies concluding that there was no evidence of a performance benefit and just one claiming an anabolic effect. The sham hGH suppliers would have you believe that the only accurate study is the latter. Their slick websites and phony testimonials have fooled almost everyone but the controlled studies paint a different picture. An interesting observation also is that none of the studies even bothered to use hGH in pill form. Why? Because it’s as useless as sugar pills.

By contrast, almost every study without exception involving blood doping has shown significant performance improvements not just statistical aberrations, but changes with real and practical implications.

To sum up, this is how I see the status of GH doping:

1. GH doping by genetic manipulation in all likelihood will work
2. GH doping by injection of synthetic hGH may provide at best a small benefit but probably does more harm than good
3. GH doping by pill form is no better than sucking on a jellybean

I’ll let readers make their own minds up but rest assured that injecting hGH will probably make some users sick or even kill them, allegedly as in the case with the untimely death of Flo Jo (Florence Griffith Joyner) at just 38 years of age.