Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
SARMS: Will It Soon Make Steroids Obsolete?
As you may have heard, SARMS is a fascinating step in the field of anabolic enhancement. It’s a drug that is “selective” in its muscle building properties in that instead of having all the effects of testosterone, it essentially is targeted specifically to muscle. In this way most of the negative side effects are avoided. A dream drug, right? Well, maybe. But there’s a catch. There’s always a catch. But in a straight up evaluation SARMS is pretty damn impressive.
I won’t get too much into the science. I’m not sure even the experts can tell you how and exactly why this stuff works. Oh sure, they’ll tell you about molecule rings and subdivisions of nano particles and all that, but nobody seems to know the full story and the bottom line on all of this is it’s application for bodybuilding purposes and in that regard, SARMS is so new, it’s really a matter of speculation and personal experience. This is mine.
I’m not big on experimentation or pioneering at this stage of my life, but SARMS was too intriguing to pass up, so I gave it a go. I kept dosages at 30 mls, reason being there’s a weird side effect of blurred vision at higher dosages. It isn’t so much the side effect itself that bothers me as much as WHY this side effect occurs that CONCERNS me. (Answers? Anyone?) Also, anecdotal evidence shows that mega dosing does not bring significantly increased results. Like many drugs, such as aspirin, there’s a “sweet spot” where this stuff works best. Plus, contrary to claims that SARMS is non suppressive some studies show that it indeed is suppressive at high dosages or over extended periods of time. This is only logical. I’ve made this argument about Proviron. The literature says it does not suppress but that is under controlled conditions. ANY exogenous source of anything MUST be suppressive to some degree.
Right off the bat I heard the taste was awful so I put the drops in a capsule and took it that way. As far as how I’d apply the dosing, I debated whether I should keep my standard 100mgs a week of HRT or replace it completely with the SARMS. I decided it would be most accurate to split the difference and do a half dose. In this way I didn’t rely too much on the SARMS, nor would the fact that it was “extra” distort my perspective.
No doubt, the stuff works. Within a few days I started felling mildly“ juiced” -- not super explosive gains, (though I used a conservative dosage) but a little denser, harder and fuller, so I know it’s effective and that’s all I need to know. At this point, I don’t need to gain 20 pounds, nor do I have the inclination to do so. There’s been no bloat at all, which was nice. Libido was good. On occasion, I run a double dose of HRT and this was very similar.
It became apparent to me that in terms of effects, this stuff was very similar to oral Primobolan, which is also a non 17AA oral that is non suppressive at low dosages. And although SARMS isn’t cheap, anyone who’s used oral Primobolan knows that it’s a real bank account breaker and ultimately impractical. SARMS is an attractive alternative.
So how can this stuff best be used? That’s up to the user. For guys looking to do a cycle with fewer sides, it makes a great stack with most anything. For advocates of short cycles you can probably start the cycle with SARMS (with minimal suppression) and even taper off with it after PCT begins. In that way you can stretch a 6 week cycle into a 10 week cycle with little or no further suppression. I see no benefit of using it as a part of PCT however. I assume it will not restore HPTA function. I don't see how it could. I may be wrong.
In my case, I’m considering using it as an occasional alternative HRT. Once every 2 months I do a shot of either HCG or HMG and then use a half dosage of T for a week or two. (Since natural T is elevated). Using SARMS in place of the enanthate seems like a logical choice since it would extend the effects of the HCG and HMG. I may be able to use them less often. We’ll see. Anthony Roberts has said he’s completely replaced his standard HRT with SARMS and would never go back. Then again, Anthony is still in his 20’s. Things change as you get up in years.
Since SARMS is far more anabolic than testosterone (again, similar to Primobolan or Anavar), it requires massive amounts of protein to show its true muscle building potential. A high protein diet is essential as well as having some protein drinks or maybe some GEAR on hand to fill in the gaps. I can’t say for sure what a cycle of SARMS would be like though my gut instinct tells me some testosterone would still be needed for best gains. Then again, doing that sort of thing defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?
If the idea of increased anabolism without suppression appeals to you, (and why not? ) then maybe some SARMS is the way to go. Experienced juicers may miss the benefit of the increased libido and aggression that goes along with a cycle with testosterone though. I guess it all depends on how greedy you want to get. : )
Personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing more tests on this stuff. Exactly how much does it raise total T? How about FreeT? DHT? Does it have the pro-heart factor of real testosterone? Does it avoid ALL potential prostate problems? How are lipid and liver values after long term use? How suppressive is it at mega doses for muscle building purposes? Maybe the point is moot because of the vision problems. Applications as of now appear a bit limited, but that’s not to say they’re without merit. Rememeber, there aren’t any tests on veterinary steroids either. Not on humans at least. Why does EQ cause anxiety? Why does Tren cause coughing? That’s enough to keep me away, but to others, it’s just a mild inconvenience. The results are worth it. Are the results of SARMS worth it? Then again, maybe they’re LESS risky than any steroid. That’s the big question. And a fascinating on at that, wouldn’t you say?
There have been a lot of new supplements on the market this year, and a few more coming out in 2010,some of which I am proud t have helped design. It’s exciting to see new potential. But the thing with all these supplements is that they’re using time tested natural ingredients. When it comes to chemical manipulations, be it the form of a pro-hormone or a research chemical, the “unknown” factor is far greater, even if the science is more sophisticated.
I don’t think SARMS will ever be a “sole” compound for anyone looking for massive gains. So that puts us at square one. Where does this stuff belong? Or maybe, just maybe, it’s the first step in a new direction of anabolics.
For now, I’d be conservative with SARMS. Although it’s touted as a healthier alternative to testosterone, there’s still a big question mark regarding long term effects. The bottle reads “Not for human consumption” so obviously this is not legal or approved for any purpose. But the more adventurous among you may want to replace one of the compounds in your next cycle with a dosing of SARMS and see for yourself how it works out for you. I would, however, like to see the legit companies come out and openly discuss applications. Those familiar with AG guys know the frustration of hiding behind the “you’re not supposed to take this but… wink, wink, “ approach. Why not be up front with the community you’re dealing with? If the authorities are going to come down on these companies I doubt the “For research only” disclaimer is going to make much difference. Meanwhile, I believe a lot of consumers would feel better if the product was what it claimed, especially since ANYBODY can use the SARMS title, even if it isn’t legitimate SARMS. There are even SARMS “supplements” which have absolutely no active ingredients. They’re just cashing in on the name and using the SARMS literature as a marketing hype.
So is SARMS too good to be true or is it the wave of the future? Maybe it’s something in-between. If it turns out to be nothing more than a mild anabolic with few side effects it may very well be a nice addition to the bodybuilders lifestyle. But be careful. Since the stuff in not regulated there’s already a bunch of bogus stuff floating around. Proceed with caution – on all fronts. For me, I’ll continue to use it in moderation. For now.
As you may have heard, SARMS is a fascinating step in the field of anabolic enhancement. It’s a drug that is “selective” in its muscle building properties in that instead of having all the effects of testosterone, it essentially is targeted specifically to muscle. In this way most of the negative side effects are avoided. A dream drug, right? Well, maybe. But there’s a catch. There’s always a catch. But in a straight up evaluation SARMS is pretty damn impressive.
I won’t get too much into the science. I’m not sure even the experts can tell you how and exactly why this stuff works. Oh sure, they’ll tell you about molecule rings and subdivisions of nano particles and all that, but nobody seems to know the full story and the bottom line on all of this is it’s application for bodybuilding purposes and in that regard, SARMS is so new, it’s really a matter of speculation and personal experience. This is mine.
I’m not big on experimentation or pioneering at this stage of my life, but SARMS was too intriguing to pass up, so I gave it a go. I kept dosages at 30 mls, reason being there’s a weird side effect of blurred vision at higher dosages. It isn’t so much the side effect itself that bothers me as much as WHY this side effect occurs that CONCERNS me. (Answers? Anyone?) Also, anecdotal evidence shows that mega dosing does not bring significantly increased results. Like many drugs, such as aspirin, there’s a “sweet spot” where this stuff works best. Plus, contrary to claims that SARMS is non suppressive some studies show that it indeed is suppressive at high dosages or over extended periods of time. This is only logical. I’ve made this argument about Proviron. The literature says it does not suppress but that is under controlled conditions. ANY exogenous source of anything MUST be suppressive to some degree.
Right off the bat I heard the taste was awful so I put the drops in a capsule and took it that way. As far as how I’d apply the dosing, I debated whether I should keep my standard 100mgs a week of HRT or replace it completely with the SARMS. I decided it would be most accurate to split the difference and do a half dose. In this way I didn’t rely too much on the SARMS, nor would the fact that it was “extra” distort my perspective.
No doubt, the stuff works. Within a few days I started felling mildly“ juiced” -- not super explosive gains, (though I used a conservative dosage) but a little denser, harder and fuller, so I know it’s effective and that’s all I need to know. At this point, I don’t need to gain 20 pounds, nor do I have the inclination to do so. There’s been no bloat at all, which was nice. Libido was good. On occasion, I run a double dose of HRT and this was very similar.
It became apparent to me that in terms of effects, this stuff was very similar to oral Primobolan, which is also a non 17AA oral that is non suppressive at low dosages. And although SARMS isn’t cheap, anyone who’s used oral Primobolan knows that it’s a real bank account breaker and ultimately impractical. SARMS is an attractive alternative.
So how can this stuff best be used? That’s up to the user. For guys looking to do a cycle with fewer sides, it makes a great stack with most anything. For advocates of short cycles you can probably start the cycle with SARMS (with minimal suppression) and even taper off with it after PCT begins. In that way you can stretch a 6 week cycle into a 10 week cycle with little or no further suppression. I see no benefit of using it as a part of PCT however. I assume it will not restore HPTA function. I don't see how it could. I may be wrong.
In my case, I’m considering using it as an occasional alternative HRT. Once every 2 months I do a shot of either HCG or HMG and then use a half dosage of T for a week or two. (Since natural T is elevated). Using SARMS in place of the enanthate seems like a logical choice since it would extend the effects of the HCG and HMG. I may be able to use them less often. We’ll see. Anthony Roberts has said he’s completely replaced his standard HRT with SARMS and would never go back. Then again, Anthony is still in his 20’s. Things change as you get up in years.
Since SARMS is far more anabolic than testosterone (again, similar to Primobolan or Anavar), it requires massive amounts of protein to show its true muscle building potential. A high protein diet is essential as well as having some protein drinks or maybe some GEAR on hand to fill in the gaps. I can’t say for sure what a cycle of SARMS would be like though my gut instinct tells me some testosterone would still be needed for best gains. Then again, doing that sort of thing defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?
If the idea of increased anabolism without suppression appeals to you, (and why not? ) then maybe some SARMS is the way to go. Experienced juicers may miss the benefit of the increased libido and aggression that goes along with a cycle with testosterone though. I guess it all depends on how greedy you want to get. : )
Personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing more tests on this stuff. Exactly how much does it raise total T? How about FreeT? DHT? Does it have the pro-heart factor of real testosterone? Does it avoid ALL potential prostate problems? How are lipid and liver values after long term use? How suppressive is it at mega doses for muscle building purposes? Maybe the point is moot because of the vision problems. Applications as of now appear a bit limited, but that’s not to say they’re without merit. Rememeber, there aren’t any tests on veterinary steroids either. Not on humans at least. Why does EQ cause anxiety? Why does Tren cause coughing? That’s enough to keep me away, but to others, it’s just a mild inconvenience. The results are worth it. Are the results of SARMS worth it? Then again, maybe they’re LESS risky than any steroid. That’s the big question. And a fascinating on at that, wouldn’t you say?
There have been a lot of new supplements on the market this year, and a few more coming out in 2010,some of which I am proud t have helped design. It’s exciting to see new potential. But the thing with all these supplements is that they’re using time tested natural ingredients. When it comes to chemical manipulations, be it the form of a pro-hormone or a research chemical, the “unknown” factor is far greater, even if the science is more sophisticated.
I don’t think SARMS will ever be a “sole” compound for anyone looking for massive gains. So that puts us at square one. Where does this stuff belong? Or maybe, just maybe, it’s the first step in a new direction of anabolics.
For now, I’d be conservative with SARMS. Although it’s touted as a healthier alternative to testosterone, there’s still a big question mark regarding long term effects. The bottle reads “Not for human consumption” so obviously this is not legal or approved for any purpose. But the more adventurous among you may want to replace one of the compounds in your next cycle with a dosing of SARMS and see for yourself how it works out for you. I would, however, like to see the legit companies come out and openly discuss applications. Those familiar with AG guys know the frustration of hiding behind the “you’re not supposed to take this but… wink, wink, “ approach. Why not be up front with the community you’re dealing with? If the authorities are going to come down on these companies I doubt the “For research only” disclaimer is going to make much difference. Meanwhile, I believe a lot of consumers would feel better if the product was what it claimed, especially since ANYBODY can use the SARMS title, even if it isn’t legitimate SARMS. There are even SARMS “supplements” which have absolutely no active ingredients. They’re just cashing in on the name and using the SARMS literature as a marketing hype.
So is SARMS too good to be true or is it the wave of the future? Maybe it’s something in-between. If it turns out to be nothing more than a mild anabolic with few side effects it may very well be a nice addition to the bodybuilders lifestyle. But be careful. Since the stuff in not regulated there’s already a bunch of bogus stuff floating around. Proceed with caution – on all fronts. For me, I’ll continue to use it in moderation. For now.
Last edited:
