Steroid + Sarm cycle question
- Thread starter widthbrah
- Start date
BCseacow83
Well-known member
I would personally NOT add a SARM to that cycle. Chances are your HDL will be sh*t with the VAR as is and I can't see the SARM making a considerable difference. Also if you have never run either sarm before it would be best to run them with just test to get a real idea of what, if anything, they do for you. If you absolutely had to add anything I would go with another oil based AAS.
Basically more stress for a poor return IMO.
Basically more stress for a poor return IMO.
widthbrah
New member
i responded insanely well to 15mg of rad-140 in the past, and put on a lot of mass on 12mg yk-11 as well, (separately) which was why i was thinking of adding one of those in to my cycle. in theory it would be another growth pathway but i dont know if the gains would be miniscule for added health risk
BCseacow83
Well-known member
There is no growth pathway that either of those sarms is going to work through that the var and test are not already. You are of course free to do as you please.
I suppose you could make a case for yk-11 being a progestin and you don't have one of those with the test or var but I still think a nandrolone or even low dose tren would give you far more bang for your buck and would IMO be less strain on the system if doses were reasonable.
I suppose you could make a case for yk-11 being a progestin and you don't have one of those with the test or var but I still think a nandrolone or even low dose tren would give you far more bang for your buck and would IMO be less strain on the system if doses were reasonable.
ValiantThor08
Board Sponsor
If YK11 can inhibit myostatin then I can see the benefit of using it at the end of a test cycle.
widthbrah
New member
im pretty sure its proven that it does, which was why i was including it as an option. in theory that should work pretty well
BCseacow83
Well-known member
Thats a huge IF IMO.
Invalid Link Removed
To my knowledge there is zero evidence that yk-11 inhibits myostatin in humans, let alone to a degree needed to influence muscle mass. I am of the opinion that yk-11 more or less works like a traditional AAS. There is no doubt the compound works but I would look at it like I would adding in any other oral to a cycle that already includes 10 weeks of an oral.
Whisky
Well-known member
I was going to say the YK11 ‘May’ make some sense but I don’t use (or like) sarms so not researched them enough.
however @Leakydelts is probably the man who could give a much better view given his current blast includes it.
however @Leakydelts is probably the man who could give a much better view given his current blast includes it.
Leakydelts
Member
YK-11 is a lot more exciting than a simple myostatin inhibitor; it acts to massive increase levels of follistatin. While follistatin increases are tied to a reduction in myostatin, the gains in lean muscle from raising levels of follistatin are additive to those from a mere reduction of myostatin.
Adding adequately dosed LGD + YK-11 at the end of a blast will obliterate your plateaus.
Some snips from my discord server as this gets brought up fairly often so I have the info handy:
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Adding adequately dosed LGD + YK-11 at the end of a blast will obliterate your plateaus.
Some snips from my discord server as this gets brought up fairly often so I have the info handy:
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
ValiantThor08
Board Sponsor
That is very cool info.
BCseacow83
Well-known member
Invalid Link Removed
So this shows that in C2C12 cell lines yk-11 increases follistatin.
C2C12 are mouse myoblast cells:
Invalid Link Removed
YK-11 works but I still feel it is going on faith that it is due to folli increases vs traditional androgen receptor activation.
So this shows that in C2C12 cell lines yk-11 increases follistatin.
C2C12 are mouse myoblast cells:
Invalid Link Removed
YK-11 works but I still feel it is going on faith that it is due to folli increases vs traditional androgen receptor activation.