sarms cycle

[599josser]

Hey Dylan, first I would like to that I love your content and follow you regularly on youtube. I had a quick question on sarms, as far as SR9009 goes I constantly hear that it is not bio available so I was wondering if I could get some light on it, and secondly for S4 does it suppress you heavily enough to require a pct?
As far as my cycle goes I am planning on doing a stack of rad 140, ostarine, s4, and cardarine. Then because of the “possible cancer” risk cycle off with clomid, arimistane, and sr9009. Thank you for any info!
Best regards,

 

[Aussymatt]

I cant help on SR9009 I haven't ran it yet or know much about it . As for S4 yes you require a PCT. It is suppressive . Also im not sure what you mean by possible cancer risk? if you meaning the GW studies those results hold a grain of salt . You need to look into the doses those rodents where given . Give a rat too much aspirin and bad things happen . Excessive anything can increase risk to health.

 

[DylanGemelli]

s4 does require a pct, yes and sr9009 has shown excellent results year after year so i think that pretty much speaks for itself

 

[599josser]

I cant help on SR9009 I haven't ran it yet or know much about it . As for S4 yes you require a PCT. It is suppressive . Also im not sure what you mean by possible cancer risk? if you meaning the GW studies those results hold a grain of salt . You need to look into the doses those rodents where given . Give a rat too much aspirin and bad things happen . Excessive anything can increase risk to health.

Sorry that I wasn’t too specific, I wrote this when I was at work. But as you said for the GW cancer, my main concern is I have heard that companies through Sr9009 labels on GW so if I buy Sr9009 I don’t want it to be faked and be GW instead because at that point it would be too much. I was hoping to pct with Sr9009 for the beneficial effects and as a kind of “cancer killer” just in case. Haha, I’m newer to sarms so I hope that make sense.

 

[RickRock]

Sorry that I wasn’t too specific, I wrote this when I was at work. But as you said for the GW cancer, my main concern is I have heard that companies through Sr9009 labels on GW so if I buy Sr9009 I don’t want it to be faked and be GW instead because at that point it would be too much. I was hoping to pct with Sr9009 for the beneficial effects and as a kind of “cancer killer” just in case. Haha, I’m newer to sarms so I hope that make sense.

There is not a cancer risk with gw bro. That study on rats was flawed for a thousand reasons. Rats were given a dose relative to bodyweight that was equivalent to 500 to 3000mg of gw per day if it were a 200lb human. And it was a year straight. Take anything up to 150 times the recommended dose and it's going to cause issues. There has never been one single case of gw related cancer in humans

 

[DylanGemelli]

Sorry that I wasn’t too specific, I wrote this when I was at work. But as you said for the GW cancer, my main concern is I have heard that companies through Sr9009 labels on GW so if I buy Sr9009 I don’t want it to be faked and be GW instead because at that point it would be too much. I was hoping to pct with Sr9009 for the beneficial effects and as a kind of “cancer killer” just in case. Haha, I’m newer to sarms so I hope that make sense.

that is laughable to say the least... show me one instance where this has happened... just one... other than ONE rat study, show me any other time this has happened, please...