Another thread about cardarine and cancer.

[Old Witch]

Hey, I love cardarine. I think it’s probably the most underused ped we have. Here’s a video I just saw today, which reflects most of what my own reading has turned up.

https://youtu.be/MZuIxVK5JQ0

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I’m going to watch this video. If it gets HED wrong I’m going to be very disappointed lol.

 

[Old Witch]

I’m going to watch this video. If it gets HED wrong I’m going to be very disappointed lol.

They actually explain HED very succinctly. What they don’t touch on is that if you read the specific study he is citing, the rats already had cancer induced prior to the study. This is the same study everyone cites. There are more studies but you and I both know they all have roughly same results.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Ok. He got the HED right, and actually showed his math. That's a good start. But he sort of misunderstood the purpose of the study using such high doses. It's to establish a safety factor. If you read the same "Guidance for Industry" document that lays out the formula for HED conversion, you'll also see that they establish a safety factor. From the paper: "In general, one should consider using a safety factor of at least 10." Now if you take the doses of ~50 and ~200 mg and apply a relatively conservative (their recommended MINIMUM) safety factor of 10, you now have 5mg and 20mg doses to begin testing in human subjects. BUT, and this is a big but, these doses WERE NOT found to be safe, so you'd really have to start your human trials with doses lower than any of these doses.

Source:
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidances/ucm078932.pdf

Not to mention that a relatively common belief is that cardarine may not actually "cause" cancer itself, but may "only" exacerbate the growth of cancer, or potentiate other carcinogens, and many people are using it in conjunction with a myraid of anabolic steroids and other drugs that may themselves promote cancer. So by trying to manage the negative effects of steroid use by using cardarine on-cycle, you may actually be increasing the risk of developing cancer by taking the two together. We simply do not know.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

There was also a study that used 10mg/kg in mice, or roughly 64mg for an 80kg human that noted that it "promotes the growth of intestinal adenomas in Apcmin mice" after only 6 weeks. Granted, these mice also developed the adenomas either way like the video discusses, but still, something that promotes cancer in those predisposed to it still isn't necessary something you want to use in an attempt to reduce the potential detrimental health effects of steroid use lol.

You can read through all the studies here:
https://www.tga.gov.au/book-page/12-cardarine

TL;DR: You're taking a gamble using it at anything more than 10mg/day for more than a few weeks. 20mg/day is unknown territory, and using WITH steroids is MAJOR uncharted territory. To argue otherwise is asinine.

You do you. It's your body, and only you can determine what is an acceptable balance/ratio of risk vs reward.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

He NEVER even attempts to prove that it's safe, only that the one study is INCONCLUSIVE. He says that it's safe to use because this one study doesn't conclusively show it's unsafe in humans. That's incredibly disingenuous man. Surely he knows more than GSK and Ligand, the companies who developed and subsequently abandoned the drug, right? He also NEVER addressed that even if he is correct, and in only promotes cancer that would have already grown, you're taking a potential major risk to take it with anabolic steroids that may themselves promote cancer growth.

TL;DR: this video doesn't even come remotely close to showing that cardarine is safe. AT BEST it shows that we can't conclusively say it's not safe. There is a MAJOR distinction to be made there. I can't overstate this enough.

 

[Old Witch]

There was also a study that used 10mg/kg in mice, or roughly 64mg for an 80kg human that noted that it "promotes the growth of intestinal adenomas in Apcmin mice" after only 6 weeks. Granted, these mice also developed the adenomas either way like the video discusses, but still, something that promotes cancer in those predisposed to it still isn't necessary something you want to use in an attempt to reduce the potential detrimental health effects of steroid use lol.

You can read through all the studies here:
https://www.tga.gov.au/book-page/12-cardarine

TL;DR: You're taking a gamble using it at anything more than 10mg/day for more than a few weeks. 20mg/day is unknown territory, and using WITH steroids is MAJOR uncharted territory. To argue otherwise is asinine.

You do you. It's your body, and only you can determine what is an acceptable balance/ratio of risk vs reward.

When in human studies were the doses of 5mg and 20mg found to be unsafe? And yes, while using cardarine in an attempt to mitigate, say, prostate growth would be stupid at best, however, for lipid and heart health it’s pretty much the cream of the crop. Doses as low as 5mg are effective in humans.


Also, remember that in both the mice and rats, in nearly all studies, the drug was given for nearly two thirds the animal’s natural lifespan. That’s insane. Nobody here is saying to use cardarine for life nonstop. Maybe Dr Huge... but I certainly am not.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

When in human studies were the doses of 5mg and 20mg found to be unsafe? And yes, while using cardarine in an attempt to mitigate, say, prostate growth would be stupid at best, however, for lipid and heart health it’s pretty much the cream of the crop. Doses as low as 5mg are effective in humans.


Also, remember that in both the mice and rats, in nearly all studies, the drug was given for nearly two thirds the animal’s natural lifespan. That’s insane. Nobody here is saying to use cardarine for life nonstop. Maybe Dr Huge... but I certainly am not.

The HIGHEST human dose I've seen was 10mg/day, and it was a VERY SHORT TERM study, meaning that NOTHING can be concluded or said about longer term safety or adverse effects. If something causes cancer in 12 weeks in humans, you have a HUGE problem. If you can't make this distinction, I'm sorry, but if you can't, then there's no point in continuing this discussion.

Also, what I'm saying is that if you're using it ON CYCLE to mitigate the deleterious effects of steroids on heart health, you're running a risk, and going into entirely uncharted territory, even at doses of 5-10mg. But its your body, so it's your decision.

Just don't draw misleading conclusions.

The rodent studies were intentionally long term to establish a SAFETY FACTOR. You can decide that you think safety factors are unnecessary or overly cautious, but that means you're, BY DEFINITION, taking a RISK. That much is not up for debate. What is up for debate is if you think the risk is worth the reward. That is all.

 

[Old Witch]

What they definitely did prove is that cardarine does not cure cancer in animals who would already have gotten it otherwise. That’s for sure.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

It’s insane to suggest that the study is “flawed” because t was in rats. Is he suggesting first starting to determine the safety of new drugs by testing it if causes cancer in humans? That would NEVER get ethical approval in a civilized country, and for good reason.

 

[Old Witch]

It’s insane to suggest that the study is “flawed” because t was in rats. Is he suggesting first starting to determine the safety of new drugs by testing it if causes cancer in humans? That would NEVER get ethical approval in a civilized country, and for good reason.

Well, I wouldn’t say never. I mean in the US some years ago we took a bunch of deserters and gave them the choice of a death sentence of experimentation. Then we starved them and documented the results. Pretty sure we can get a few traitors or something to take cardarine for the rest of their lives and see. Granted that isn’t practical in a timely manner but it would be effective. Or a chimpanzee study... which actually would be less likely to happen in today’s climate...

 

[muscleupcrohn]

What they definitely did prove is that cardarine does not cure cancer in animals who would already have gotten it otherwise. That’s for sure.

Ok. Tell me how that means its safe to use for humans?
Hint: it doesn't.

Extra Credit: Tell me how this means it's safe to consume in conjunction with anabolic steroids that may themselves promote cancer growth?
Hint: it doesn't.

All his video "proves," at very best, is that we can't conclusively say it's not safe for humans. That's not at all the same thing as saying it is safe for humans. Period.

 

[Old Witch]

Ok. Tell me how that means its safe to use for humans?
Hint: it doesn't.

Extra Credit: Tell me how this means it's safe to consume in conjunction with anabolic steroids that may themselves promote cancer growth?
Hint: it doesn't.

All his video "proves," at very best, is that we can't conclusively say it's not safe for humans. That's not at all the same thing as saying it is safe for humans. Period.

I didn’t imply anything of the sort. And I meant these studies, not the video. The video can’t prove anything, a study has to do that. The video can only talk about studies.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Well, I wouldn’t say never. I mean in the US some years ago we took a bunch of deserters and gave them the choice of a death sentence of experimentation. Then we starved them and documented the results. Pretty sure we can get a few traitors or something to take cardarine for the rest of their lives and see. Granted that isn’t practical in a timely manner but it would be effective. Or a chimpanzee study... which actually would be less likely to happen in today’s climate...

For something like a cancer study to have any significance, you'd have to have a fair number of subjects, as, like you said, some people/animals will develop cancer anyway. You'd need a lot of deserters to test something like this. Not to mention that a study of this nature would likely be very covert, and would never see the light of day in public, at least not for decades lol. But my point still stands. No university or other academic institution would approve of this.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I didn’t imply anything of the sort.

You shared a video that did. Do you want me to quote the exact words he said?

 

[Old Witch]

For something like a cancer study to have any significance, you'd have to have a fair number of subjects, as, like you said, some people/animals will develop cancer anyway. You'd need a lot of deserters to test something like this. Not to mention that a study of this nature would likely be very covert, and would never see the light of day in public, at least not for decades lol. But my point still stands. No university or other academic institution would approve of this.

Would 100 be enough?

 

[muscleupcrohn]

You shared a video that did. Do you want me to quote the exact words he said?

The concluding remark from the video:

I personally feel that cardarine is safe for human consumption...

LITERALLY nothing in his video even comes remotely close to supporting, yet alone justifying, this conclusion/claim.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Would 100 be enough?

I'd have to do more research lol. But this is so tangential to the actual discussion. Unless you run some covert military operation with its own shady team of scientists of course. Do you work for HYDRA? Or at least the Weapon X program? Are you a Marvel villain?

 

[justhere4comm]

I'd have to do more research lol. But this is so tangential to the actual discussion. Unless you run some covert military operation with its own shady team of scientists of course. Do you work for HYDRA? Or at least the Weapon X program? Are you a Marvel villain?

I sense a movie plot..

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I sense a movie plot..

Yes. It's the plot to Deadpool 3, just don't tell anyone you heard it from me. They give Cardarine to Wade Wilson and it cures him of his cancer. But it also takes away his superpowers for some reason, so the rest of the movie he has to try to figure out how to get cancer again to regain his powers. Hijinks ensue.

 

[Old Witch]

I'd have to do more research lol. But this is so tangential to the actual discussion. Unless you run some covert military operation with its own shady team of scientists of course. Do you work for HYDRA? Or at least the Weapon X program? Are you a Marvel villain?

I am in fact a Marvel Villain. Rich Piana as Thanos. You’ve uncovered my plot to give all the athletes cancer. Blast!

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I am in fact a Marvel Villain. Rich Piana as Thanos. You’ve uncovered my plot to give all the athletes cancer. Blast!

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I am in fact a Marvel Villain. Rich Piana as Thanos. You’ve uncovered my plot to give all the athletes cancer. Blast!

No. Not all of them. Half of them. Perfectly balanced...

 

[jim2509]

Something tells me Sarms and MK677 are perhaps not worth the risk and theres more studies being published in 2019 around this issue of cell mutation/Hyperplasia. There just isnt enough studies to warrant saying these products are safe and dont cause/promote cancer.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Something tells me Sarms and MK677 are perhaps not worth the risk and theres more studies being published in 2019 around this issue of cell mutation/Hyperplasia. There just isnt enough studies to warrant saying these products are safe and dont cause/promote cancer.

It really depends on the compound in question. Some are still in clinical trials and have a great deal more research than others. Some have been abandoned, and some are still in development/trials. I've seen a one year study on MK677 at 25mg/day. It's still not a true long-term study, but it's a lot longer than a 12 week study at 1/2 the dose that most people use, which was the longest we have for Cardarine.

 

[jim2509]

It really depends on the compound in question. Some are still in clinical trials and have a great deal more research than others. Some have been abandoned, and some are still in development/trials. I've seen a one year study on MK677 at 25mg/day. It's still not a true long-term study, but it's a lot longer than a 12 week study at 1/2 the dose that most people use, which was the longest we have for Cardarine.

This is a sensible response. It's really down to the individual as to whether they want to take SARMS or MK677 based on current research. I for one am going to hold fire on my MK677 until more is known. If it turns out its safe then great....if not then great i didnt increase my risk of cancer etc.

 

[Old Witch]

This is a sensible response. It's really down to the individual as to whether they want to take SARMS or MK677 based on current research. I for one am going to hold fire on my MK677 until more is known. If it turns out its safe then great....if not then great i didnt increase my risk of cancer etc.

Well... mk677 absolutely HAS TO be carcinogenic, lol it’s a GH secretagogue! GH is a carcinogen!

 

[Old Witch]

It really depends on the compound in question. Some are still in clinical trials and have a great deal more research than others. Some have been abandoned, and some are still in development/trials. I've seen a one year study on MK677 at 25mg/day. It's still not a true long-term study, but it's a lot longer than a 12 week study at 1/2 the dose that most people use, which was the longest we have for Cardarine.

If cardarine is a stronger cancer growth factor than GROWTH HORMONE, Ill eat my hat. (Hint: it’s impossible)

 

[muscleupcrohn]

If cardarine is a stronger cancer growth factor than GROWTH HORMONE, Ill eat my hat. (Hint: it’s impossible)

I’ll reserve a final verdict until more research is available. A GH secretogogue (spelling?)may have different effects than supraphysiological GH administration. Unless you’re going to tell me that exercise induced growth hormone release contributes to cancer by virtue of being a cancer growth factor? Don’t be disingenuous man...

 

[Whisky]

In no way do I have enough knowledge to debate whether or not gw is safe or otherwise (personally I use it at end of cycle/in pct).

However

To me one big inference made was that the big drug companies intentionally sabotaged the drug because it might be a cure for cancer, diabetes and heart disease (all of which obviously make big pharma a huge amount of money).

In this current day and age I personally struggle to believe that. I have no doubt there is a significant degree of underhand practices within any large industry but I don’t see drugs that could provide significant health benefits being sabotaged that way. Shame as it discredited the video a bit for me but the rest of it was pretty objective in laying out the facts.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

In no way do I have enough knowledge to debate whether or not gw is safe or otherwise (personally I use it at end of cycle/in pct).

However

To me one big inference made was that the big drug companies intentionally sabotaged the drug because it might be a cure for cancer, diabetes and heart disease (all of which obviously make big pharma a huge amount of money).

In this current day and age I personally struggle to believe that. I have no doubt there is a significant degree of underhand practices within any large industry but I don’t see drugs that could provide significant health benefits being sabotaged that way. Shame as it discredited the video a bit for me but the rest of it was pretty objective in laying out the facts.

That claim, that it was intentionally sabotaged because it cures cancer is legitimately one of the most asinine things I have ever heard.

For one, it completely misses why high dose and long, long term studies were conducted. It’s to establish a SAFETY FACTOR before going to more human research. If you want to use 10mg in humans, you’d use the converted dose equivalent to at least 100mg with a safety factor of 10. There’s your FDA recommended reason for testing the high dose. Nothing to do with self sabotage.

Second, there is money to be made on a cure. Sure, if Company X comes out with a cure, it’ll screw Companies A,B, and C who have competing drugs, but Company X doesn’t care about that in the least. Furthermore, Company X’s Cardarine would still likely have to be taken regularly, so it would still make bank as a treatment/cure; and EVERYONE in the world with said illness would use it. That’s a TON of money for them, and the prestige and recognition of literally having THE medical breakthrough of the millennium.

To elaborate on this, GSK and Ligand developed Cardarine. If GSK only wanted to make money by treating illness chronically, why the hell would they have multiple vaccines in their catalogue? Vaccines prevent what could be decades or repeated drug use, but GSK still makes them because there’s still money in it. If they make vaccines, it stands to reason they’d also make cures/treatments.

Lastly, the video NEVER even came close to proving that Cardarine is safe for human use. It was never even argued. All it did, at best, is say that that one study can’t conclusively prove it is unsafe for human use. There’s a HUGE distinction there.

 

[Old Witch]

I’ll reserve a final verdict until more research is available. A GH secretogogue (spelling?)may have different effects than supraphysiological GH administration. Unless you’re going to tell me that exercise induced growth hormone release contributes to cancer by virtue of being a cancer growth factor? Don’t be disingenuous man...

I’d venture that yes, all GH secretions are carcinogenic by nature.

 

[Old Witch]

Remember, people get cancer without drugs all the time. It’s not just supraphysiological GH and steroids doing it. Also, I’d argue that taking MK would be a supraphysiological dosage of GH as that’s exactly the intent and function: ramping up every GH secretion by a factor of 2-4x

 

[Old Witch]

That claim, that it was intentionally sabotaged because it cures cancer is legitimately one of the most asinine things I have ever heard.

For one, it completely misses why high dose and long, long term studies were conducted. It’s to establish a SAFETY FACTOR before going to more human research. If you want to use 10mg in humans, you’d use the converted dose equivalent to at least 100mg with a safety factor of 10. There’s your FDA recommended reason for testing the high dose. Nothing to do with self sabotage.

Second, there is money to be made on a cure. Sure, if Company X comes out with a cure, it’ll screw Companies A,B, and C who have competing drugs, but Company X doesn’t care about that in the least. Furthermore, Company X’s Cardarine would still likely have to be taken regularly, so it would still make bank as a treatment/cure; and EVERYONE in the world with said illness would use it. That’s a TON of money for them, and the prestige and recognition of literally having THE medical breakthrough of the millennium.

To elaborate on this, GSK and Ligand developed Cardarine. If GSK only wanted to make money by treating illness chronically, why the hell would they have multiple vaccines in their catalogue? Vaccines prevent what could be decades or repeated drug use, but GSK still makes them because there’s still money in it. If they make vaccines, it stands to reason they’d also make cures/treatments.

Lastly, the video NEVER even came close to proving that Cardarine is safe for human use. It was never even argued. All it did, at best, is say that that one study can’t conclusively prove it is unsafe for human use. There’s a HUGE distinction there.

Does the video claim to prove anything? Did I claim this video proves anything? I did claim the studies proved something: that cardarine does NOT cure cancer. That’s the only claim of proof I recall being mentioned. The video wasn’t meant as proof as far as I can tell, it’s an argument: one side of a debate. And thank you for cogently forming the other side.

 

[Old Witch]

Oh, also, we are mistaken in believing these are abandoned drugs. In fact that’s part of the “big deal” behind the sarms boom, the codenamed research drugs aren’t abandoned yet and are largely all still patented.

 

[jim2509]

Remember, people get cancer without drugs all the time. It’s not just supraphysiological GH and steroids doing it. Also, I’d argue that taking MK would be a supraphysiological dosage of GH as that’s exactly the intent and function: ramping up every GH secretion by a factor of 2-4x

This is true but its clear then that MK677 could cause or increase the risk of cancer through hyperplasia or downregulation and there is NO current research to suggest it doesnt?

Its scarey that young people are buying these as supplements completely unaware of the potention pit falls.

 

[Old Witch]

This is true but its clear then that MK677 could cause or increase the risk of cancer through hyperplasia or downregulation and there is NO current research to suggest it doesnt?

Its scarey that young people are buying these as supplements completely unaware of the potention pit falls.

I would hope that anyone taking GH related drugs understands that GH is a carcinogen and by raising their levels of GH they risk cancer.

 

[Cgkone]

In this for the gainzzzzz!

 

[Old Witch]

This is true but its clear then that MK677 could cause or increase the risk of cancer through hyperplasia or downregulation and there is NO current research to suggest it doesnt?

Its scarey that young people are buying these as supplements completely unaware of the potention pit falls.

We have a year long study... thats it.

 

[Old Witch]

Rats and mice do not live more than maybe three years at best. To give a rat anything for months would be the same as a human taking that thing for 2x that number in years. So if it was six months, then twelve human years roughly, if six weeks, then three years.

The studies on rats wherein control rats developed tumors as well are highly flawed in the first place simply by the very merit that those rats are too prone to cancer to be proof of ANYTHING. It could be argued that every rat in a study who developed tumors would have done so regardless of the study. That’s a real shame.

Cardarine has been on the market now for long enough that we should start seeing an increase in cancer diagnoses soon if it’s as potent a carcinogen as alarmists are attempting to infer. This should be worse than smoking, by far.

 

[Old Witch]

My argument is that it cannot possibly be a stronger cancer growth factor than GH, and that it has not been shown to cause cancer in animals who didn’t already HAVE CANCER. no study has been done on animals (other than humans) who were not already pre induced with abnormal tissue.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Oh, also, we are mistaken in believing these are abandoned drugs. In fact that’s part of the “big deal” behind the sarms boom, the codenamed research drugs aren’t abandoned yet and are largely all still patented.

Nope. You are mistaken. Cardarine IS abandoned. Some are still in development, but Cardarine is not. It may still be patented, but it was scrapped, and they’ve moved on to testing something similar but new.

Further development of cardarine was abandoned in 2007 for safety reasons when preclinical toxicology showed that it caused various cancers.

https://www.tga.gov.au/book-page/12-cardarine
My points one more time, then I’m done, as it’s the same circus every time:

-The most this video, or any video or article has proved is that we can’t conclusively say that it causes cancer and is therefore unsafe in humans.

-Studies used large doses for very long times in rodents as a safety factor; a standard practice in studies recommended by the FDA.

-There is insufficient evidence to say that it is safe. It’s inherently a risk to use it, especially at more than 10mg/day, and especially with steroids.

-Use at your own risk.

 

[Old Witch]

Does the video claim to prove anything? Did I claim this video proves anything? I did claim the studies proved something: that cardarine does NOT cure cancer. That’s the only claim of proof I recall being mentioned. The video wasn’t meant as proof as far as I can tell, it’s an argument: one side of a debate. And thank you for cogently forming the other side.

Reread this here.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Reread this here.

It’s an inherently flawed argument. He calls one study into question, and then says that since we can’t prove conclusively that it’s not safe, we can say, or recommend, that it is safe. Terrible logic. Terrible.

 

[user567]

My argument is that it cannot possibly be a stronger cancer growth factor than GH, and that it has not been shown to cause cancer in animals who didn’t already HAVE CANCER. no study has been done on animals (other than humans) who were not already pre induced with abnormal tissue.

GH does not cause cancer. Rather helps it grow and spread more quickly. That is very different than causing the cancer in the first place.

 

[Old Witch]

GH does not cause cancer. Rather helps it grow and spread more quickly. That is very different than causing the cancer in the first place.

Which is exactly as cardarine has shown and not any more or less as it seems.

 

[user567]

Which is exactly as cardarine has shown and not any more or less as it seems.

I have posted this many times but if your interested in GW50156 read this

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/a-pill-to-make-exercise-obsolete

But, in 2007, GlaxoSmithKline decided to shelve 516. The company was about to embark on Phase III trials—the large, expensive, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that are required for F.D.A. approval—when the results of a long-term-toxicity test came in. Mice that had been given large doses of the drug over the course of two years (a lifetime for a lab rodent) developed cancer at a higher rate than their dope-free peers. Tumors appeared all over their bodies, from the tongue to the testes. The results made GlaxoSmithKline’s decision all but inevitable.

 

[Old Witch]

That’s a newspaper article. Show me the studies whose results are as such in animals who were not pre induced.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

That’s a newspaper article. Show me the studies whose results are as such in animals who were not pre induced.

They weren’t so much “pre-induced” as they were just rats that were genetically predisposed to developing said cancers. No one actually gave them (induced) cancer before starting the trial so much as the rats were just likely to develop cancer regardless; it was “just” found that the rats that were given GW developed the cancer sooner/more than the other rats. I don’t know what’s so hard for you to understand about this...

 

[Old Witch]

They weren’t so much “pre-induced” as they were just rats that were genetically predisposed to developing said cancers. No one actually gave them (induced) cancer before starting the trial so much as the rats were just likely to develop cancer regardless; it was “just” found that the rats that were given GW developed the cancer sooner/more than the other rats. I don’t know what’s so hard for you to understand about this...

Because you’re literally factually incorrect. If you go ahead and read some of the preliminaries on a bunch of these (all the ones I have read) they used rats who were INDUCED WITH CANCER.