SARMS and cancer research

Brain5ick

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
So I watched a recent video and did a little digging and asking around on this. In the video it talks about an unpublished study in the UK on Osta specifically that will be released in the US/globally in either early or mid 2019 that shows that at higher doses Osta can cause certain genes to mutate and encourage cancer and the survival of dying cells (which in turn leads to tumor growth and cancer).
I’ll try to post the video in this thread but my app has been acting odd lately. Anyhow, what’re your thoughts on this? Regardless of if the video is legit or not (I guess we will see soon) would you still take Osta? This makes me think about the possibility of other sarms ability to do the same thing. Either way though, it peaked my interest.
 
Noteboom

Noteboom

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well this is concerning. My next cut cycle was going to be S4 and osta. Following for info
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
AAS can also do this. So yes. I would still take sarms.
 
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
AAS can also do this. So yes. I would still take sarms.
Androgenes can make prostate cancer progress faster. Or if your AAS is hepatotoxic can lead to liver cancer in long run but they don’t mutate genes and cells to become cancerous like OP mentioned for SARMS.
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Androgenes can make prostate cancer progress faster. Or if your AAS is hepatotoxic can lead to liver cancer in long run but they don’t mutate genes and cells to become cancerous like OP mentioned for SARMS.
Actually aas cause faster dna transcription which is a slightly mutated code from what is called a “normal” muscle tissue. So really, they do.
 
jim2509

jim2509

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Best Answer
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
MK677 it is then.....and of course no beer, or even perhaps breathing due to air pollution.

I always thought there was a question mark over Sarms......i'll wait for the study.
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
MK677 it is then.....and of course no beer, or even perhaps breathing due to air pollution.

I always thought there was a question mark over Sarms......i'll wait for the study.
Man all that stuff causes cancer too. Just live your life as responsibly as you feel comfortable and try to think ahead a bit. I really don’t think sarms are what’s going to end us, personally. I smoked for 20 years. And I still use snus pouches. If I get cancer it’s because of that.
 
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Actually aas cause faster dna transcription which is a slightly mutated code from what is called a “normal” muscle tissue. So really, they do.
What do you mean by slightly mutated? Not all DNA mutations are cancer inducing mutations. And what we are more concerned in regard to cancer is mutation of other cells than muscle tissues, (Hepatic, pancreatic, etc...). You mentioned that AAS induces DNA mutation in muscle tissues, does it do the same in other tissues? I haven't seen any proof of that, or maybe I didn't look for it enough.
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
What do you mean by slightly mutated? Not all DNA mutations are cancer inducing mutations. And what we are more concerned in regard to cancer is mutation of other cells than muscle tissues, (Hepatic, pancreatic, etc...). You mentioned that AAS induces DNA mutation in muscle tissues, does it do the same in other tissues? I haven't seen any proof of that, or maybe I didn't look for it enough.
Well, ostarine and lgd have been shown to not even attach to any other tissues than the ones in the skeletal muscle and skeletal tissues. Whereas AAS attach to all tissues where ARs are found including those in the heart, lungs, fat cells, and other internal organs. They control dna transcription in any cell nucleus they attach onto. AAS as you already said may cause testicular or prostate cancer, and yes this would be by the same means: mutated dna transcription. I would suspect brain cancer to be an associated risk as well as they will attach in the brain, sarms and AAS alike.

In the attached video above he mentions in the new study on sarms they found that in the dna transcription the genes were mutated. What he does not mention is that this is no different from what AAS do.
 

user567

Active member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
I have not watched the video but can someone post the papers on the studies so I dont have to watch 2 BROs discussing SARMS trolling for views/clicks?
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
I have not watched the video but can someone post the papers on the studies so I dont have to watch 2 BROs discussing SARMS trolling for views/clicks?
Post the unpublished studies that won’t be published til sometime next year supposedly?
 
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
How can these guys know about an unpolished study?
Not all studies are published so we have little chance to see the study even next year.
 

Brain5ick

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
How can these guys know about an unpolished study?
Not all studies are published so we have little chance to see the study even next year.
Well one claims to have access due to his profession but it could be BS. We will see next year I guess.
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
I’m telling you right here and now this is straight up BS. Even if what they said is true, it literally changes nothing. Sarms are still exactly what they are: chemicals that act like steroids but cant attach to organ tissues. If they exacerbate cancer then they are just that much more like steroids because they do the exact same thing.
 
YoungThor

YoungThor

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
There’s so many question marks with sarms and they’re no cheaper than AAS so it’s getting to the point where sarms users may as well switch to AAS. Of course sourcing is more difficult and some people are afraid of legal repercussions.
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
There’s so many question marks with sarms and they’re no cheaper than AAS so it’s getting to the point where sarms users may as well switch to AAS. Of course sourcing is more difficult and some people are afraid of legal repercussions.
I still think they’re easier on the liver, or some of them are. So that’s a bigger plus than we realize. We lost most of the good non methylated oral aas like 1AD, 1T, 4AD etc etc that a guy could take for extended lengths without need for pinning and at the right doses similar or same results. Sarms fill that gap somewhat. We just haven’t figured out the doses.

Also, legal or not, sarms have effects that do differ from aas. They’re far better at preserving muscle tissue, or ostarine and lgd are anyhow, for one thing. A small sarm stack with some aas as the main working stack and I think some veterans might see increased results, etc. in fact I’ve seen such things around. Just not on this forum. Of course those dudes would pin drano if you told em it’d bring on the GAINZ.
 
Old Witch

Old Witch

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
I’ll add, at the doses I’m taking of LGD and ostarine right now, I’m seeing results from every session that are actually fully lasting til the next session which is something that usually takes quite a bit of aas for me to do. The pounds aren’t packing on, but then I’m not eating like I should. Just getting a bigger pump every time at this point. I budgeted wrong, ran out of food for the week and this stuff just kicked in last week. I did get in a PR squat 335 x1 (attempted 2) which is great because I haven’t squatted in years after breaking my neck right where the bar sits.
 

Ripple2352

Member
Awards
0
So would these cancers be sarcomas? I guess without having the study we dont know. We'd also need to know which Sarm/s. Seeing as how they are designed to only bind to ARs in skeletal muscle, I dont see how they would directly cause, say, colon or prostate cancer, or any other cancer besides a sarcoma, unless they're about to say that the compounds themselves are a bit carcinogenic. Am I understanding that correctly?
 

Brain5ick

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
So would these cancers be sarcomas? I guess without having the study we dont know. We'd also need to know which Sarm/s. Seeing as how they are designed to only bind to ARs in skeletal muscle, I dont see how they would directly cause, say, colon or prostate cancer, or any other cancer besides a sarcoma, unless they're about to say that the compounds themselves are a bit carcinogenic. Am I understanding that correctly?
This study that’s supposed to drop is only on Ostarine. I believe the way it is explained is it keeps cells that are supposed to die off when replaced, alive. Thus eventually creating a tumor. I guess we will see in the study!
 
jim2509

jim2509

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Best Answer
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
Other than these two talking about a 'Supposed' Cancer risk with Sarms...here in the UK i cannot find ANY further information about this so called study and as pretty much every supplement company here is selling Sarms i find it rather odd that the authourities would not jump all over the selling of Sarms if they had a sniff of evidence they would cause cancer on their own....I call BS.

There is tons of things that may/maynot cause cell mutation or prevent cell death 'possibly' leading to cancer...how the hell can you predict what will or will not cause the average Joe cancer...let alone those who exercise and take Sarms...utterly ridiculous and if what these fellas say is true where's the Sh*tstorm of interest here in the UK.....er there is NONE!!
 
jim2509

jim2509

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Best Answer
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
Oh and the Researcher i forgot to mention....Conor Ross has said that he was concerned about the effects seen at HIGH DOSAGES....didnt say of what SARM as his pal kept cutting him off in the video hmmm?

So i did a bit more digging and it appears he was talking about the study where they gave rats the human equivalent of 1000mg a day of Cardarine for a month (about swallowing a bottle a day)..which led to liver cancer.

So this video was edited which then leads to some questions about the researchers confidence in the research which hasnt been peer reviewed. I will say now that if it is released the results will show as with AAS...significant long term high dosages of ******?? 'May' lead to Cancer.

You dont say. Non story.
 

saderboy80

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
****, there’s also studies linking grilled meat to higher risk of colorectal cancer. Due to the formation of excess heterocyclic amines (carcinogens) from the charing effect of high heat.

But that isn’t going to stop me from grilling a thick ribeye.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Oh and the Researcher i forgot to mention....Conor Ross has said that he was concerned about the effects seen at HIGH DOSAGES....didnt say of what SARM as his pal kept cutting him off in the video hmmm?

So i did a bit more digging and it appears he was talking about the study where they gave rats the human equivalent of 1000mg a day of Cardarine for a month (about swallowing a bottle a day)..which led to liver cancer.

So this video was edited which then leads to some questions about the researchers confidence in the research which hasnt been peer reviewed. I will say now that if it is released the results will show as with AAS...significant long term high dosages of ******?? 'May' lead to Cancer.

You dont say. Non story.
Some studies used doses equivalent to 50mg/day. And considering that these were the lowest doses studied, we don’t know if lower doses, or how low doses, would be much safe(r) or not. Typically a safety factor of 10 is recommended when going from rodent to human studies, but we don’t really know the safe dose for rodents, just that it may be less than 50mg, so that’d give us 5mg/day for humans. That said, short term studies with 5-10mg/day in humans seems to be well tolerated, and it’d have to be INSANELY carcinogenic to increase cancer growth in a month or two. But I still wouldn’t use more than 10mg/day for a few months, if you’re deadset on using it, and using it with other anabolics that may themselves increase cancer growth is also uncharted territory, do figure out the risk/reward balance yourself I guess.

Here you can read the research on Cardarine yourself:
https://www.tga.gov.au/book-page/12-cardarine
 

Similar threads


Top