Any feed back on SARMS?

[Xlgx]

Hope you aren't getting any nasty sides.

So far so good. Will post back if anything changes.

 

[heady muscle]

YK11
Full Name: (17-alpha,20E) 17,20-[(1-methoxyethylidene)bis(oxy)]3-oxo-19-norpregna-4,20-diene 21-carboxylic acid methyl ester

A novel steroid compound, (17α,20E)-17,20-[(1-methoxyethylidene)bis(oxy)]-3-oxo-19-norpregna-4,20-diene-21-carboxylic acid methyl ester (YK11), was found to be a partial agonist of the androgen receptor (AR) in an androgen responsive element (ARE)-luciferase reporter assay. YK11 accelerates nuclear translocation of AR. Furthermore, YK11 does not induce amino/carboxyl-terminal (N/C) interaction and prevents 5-α-dihydrotestosterone (DHT)-mediated N/C interaction. Thus, YK11 activates AR without causing N/C interaction, which may in turn be responsible for the partially agonistic nature of YK11 observed in the ARE-luciferase reporter system. YK11 acts as a gene-selective agonist of AR in MDA-MB 453 cells. The effect of YK11 on gene expression relative to that of androgen agonist varies depending on the gene context. YK11 activated the reporter gene by inducing the translocation of the AR into the nuclear compartment, where its amino-terminal domain (NTD) functions as a constitutive activator of AR target genes. Our results suggest that YK11 might act as selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM).


https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article...3_318/_article


So has anyone tried this? Have a solid Src? Is it worth it?

 

[Spooby]

@Demondosage

RAT CARCINOGENICITY STUDY WITH GW501516, A
PPAR DELTA AGONIST.
L. E. G
eiger
1
, W. S. Dunsford
2
, D. J. Lewis
2
, C. Brennan
3
, K. C. Liu
3
and S. J.
Newsholme
1
.
1
Safety Assessment, GlaxoSmithKline, King of Prussia, PA,
2
Safety
Assessment, GlaxoSmithKline, Ware, United Kingdom and
3
Huntingdon Life Sciences,
Huntingdon, United Kingdom.
GW501516, a non-genotoxic PPARδ agonist, was assessed for carcinogenic poten-
tial by daily administration (oral gavage) to Han Wistar rats for a period of 104
weeks. Males were given 0, 5, 15 or 30 mg/kg/day for the first 6 weeks of the study.
For the remainder of the study males were given 0, 5, 20 or 40 mg/kg/day. Females
were given 0, 3, 10 or 20 mg/kg/day for the entire study. GW501516 produced test
article-related neoplastic findings in multiple tissues at all doses. Increased mortal-
ity was seen with females given GW501516 at all doses and uterine endometrial
adenocarcinoma contributed to death in a high proportion of these animals.
Neoplasms considered test-article related occurred in the liver (hepatocellular ade-
noma at ≥10 mg/kg/day), urinary bladder (transitional cell carcinoma in males
given 20 and 40 mg/kg/day), thyroid (follicular cell adenoma at
≥3 mg/kg/day and carcinoma in males at ≥20 mg/kg/day), tongue (squamous cell papilloma in males at 5 mg/kg/day and 40 mg/kg/day), stomach (squamous cell papilloma in males at ≥5 mg/kg/day and a female at 20 mg/kg/day, and carcinoma in a male at 40 mg/kg/day and a female at 3 mg/kg/day), skin (inverted squamous cell papilloma in males at ≥5 mg/kg/day and females at 3 or 20 mg/kg/day), Harderian glands (ade-noma in males at ≥5 mg/kg/day and adenocarcinoma in a male at 40 mg/kg/day),
testes (interstitial cell adenoma at 40 mg/kg/day), ovary (Sertoli cell adenoma at
≥10 mg/kg/day) and uterus (polyp and endometrial adenocarcinoma at≥3
mg/kg/day). Some of the tumor types observed in this study have not been reported
with either PPARα or PPARγ agonists and may reflect tumor promotion mediated though
PPARδ agonism.

Holy shit balls batman!

 

[Spooby]

I did ostarine for 8 weeks, was fine, I slept better, strength increased dramatically, probably just noob gains since I had only been lifting 8 months at the time. Tried s4, vision sides were bad, did 6 weeks of that, dried me out pretty well. I wouldn't do it again. Tren is better (;

 

[shreddn1]

Where y'all getting you're sarms ? Who's legit ?? Pm me!

 

[Spooby]

When I tried them in 2014 I used uniquemicals. I mean I guess it was legit lol some people must've gotten bunk shit

 

[jaymaximus]

Coming here and talking about SARMS is like going to Ruth Chris steakhouse and asking for chicken fingers

 

[Spooby]

Basically, sarms are overpriced bullshit. Wish I had spent the money on AAS, far more benefits from it. Idk why anyone would choose then over AAS other than being scared to come to the dark side (;

 

[heady muscle]

I am running RAD 140 now with Test, Trest, Mast E. I started the RAD week four of the cycle which was two weeks ago. The biggest thing I have noticed at this point is I feel fuller and harder since starting it. My muscle don't ever feel flat. I will report back in a week or so.

 

[Eve89]

I have worked with Sarms in clinical studies in Germany. I'm telling you Sarms is the future. We would never test a Sarm in powder form, the properties are conducive to liquid suspension. Think of it this way, does Test have anabolic properties in powder form? Yes it does, is it much better and more anabolic in Suspension Hell yes. Its the same with Sarms.

Are the Sarms that are available right now as powerful as AAS, nope. But Sarms are the runner up when it comes to Anabolic return.

As I said the problem with Sarms is finding a good source, there are a few out there, just like their is a huge amount of good sources out their with AAS, but they also have a bunch of bunk crap.

Lets look at this way with powder formed Sarms, pretty straight forward on this one. Look at the companies that are pushing powdered Sarms, every single one of them pushed Pro Hormones. New law takes effect, your money maker gone, have tons of product left over. Buy some cheap Sarms and mix it with left over stock. Bam profit, get caught a little fine from the FDA. Also these companies where supplement companies now all of a sudden their research companies. There putting the middle finger up at the FDA, they market it like a supplement hell most of them are so ballsy that they don't even put For reseach purposes only on the bottle.

I like the fact that you actually worked on research on that. That's a whole different level of credibility. While keeping updated and being educated enough to read primary sources is important, we all know that in order to publish, some important results are not necessarily revealed. Also, sampling makes some publications less useful than they could be. While someone with their hands on the bench is an asset.

 

[Wunderpus]

Coming here and talking about SARMS is like going to Ruth Chris steakhouse and asking for chicken fingers

Best analogy I've seen in a while