First SARM Cycle Input

MAGICBUMM328

New member
Awards
0
I have been digging & doing research about SARMs and PHs as I am looking to do my first ever cycle of something. Never used anything that would impact endogenous hormones. I want to do this as correctly and safely as possible and would like feedback.

For reference, stats are:
Age: 30
Training age: 10yrs ish
BW: 180lbs
BF: 8-10%

I am looking to run LGD for 6 weeks with a PCT for a total of 10 weeks. The plan is the following:

LDG: 10/10/10/10/15/15 (Covers me for 2, 300mg bottles)
Arimistane: On hand if high estrogen sides appear.
PCT(Nolva): 40/40/20/20

What I would want to know:
• Is this sufficient to put on a little mass and maintain the body fat? My ideal goal physique is 190lbs at <10% BF. I know this may not get me there but it's the dream.

• Should I buy some OTC cycle support like CEL Cycle Support? If so do I take while on the PCT as well?

• Should I use a test base to help prevent libido issues and lethargy? If so, is there a recommendation for that?

• Is the AI Arimistane from Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals solid or is there something better I should be using? Should I increase the dose during PCT?

• Is the Nolva overkill at that dose?

• Bloods before and at the very least post PCT will be done. Outside Test levels and CMP is there something else I should get done?

Thanks for any input
 
Last edited:
KvanH

KvanH

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • RockStar
6 weeks is a bit short for a sarm run and I'd consider it the bear minimum, but as it's your first cycle I think it's ok. 8 weeks is more typical and many consider that as a minimun lenght.

An AI should allways be on hand when running anything hormonal and also in this case even though lgd won't convert to E. But Arimistane won't cut it. It's bearly an AI, it's super weak. Exemestane (Aromasin) would be my choice. Use only if needed. Meaning if gyno or other high E symptoms arise or blood work shows the need.

AI's are not typically used in pct, except sometimes when coming off of the serm. Like if serm pct is weeks 1-4, then AI would be used weeks 2-6. Maybe want to taper it down in the last 2 weeks. But the AI use is not allways necessary at all. Same rule applies to AI use in pct as on cycle - use if needed.

Test base is not necessary, but usually makes the cycle more enjoyable and can make it more productive too. With only 6 weeks you could be fine without, but then again may not be.. For me it's tough to say anything definitive on that. Transdermal 4-Andro is pretty solid test base, since I'm assuming you are not going to pinn test. Dermacrine is another solid option.

Cycle support is never a bad idea and the CEL you mention is a good one. It would be most important to run during the cycle, but again running it in pct too is not a bad idea either.

That Nolva dose is higher than many would run with the cycle you are planning, but Tamox is not really a harsh compound so there shouldn't be a "overkill" risk with that dose per se. I usually do 20/20/10/10 and bloods have shown it to be sufficient so far. If having hard time deciding on wether to go lower or the better safe than sorry route, then maybe do 20/20/20/20. That's a pretty solid dosing scheme imo.

Bloods to check
Hormonal:

Total Test
SHBG
Free Test, calculated (should be added automatically if you take TT and SHBG)
E2 (sensitive test if possible)
LH
FSH

Then you could check Prolactin, but it shouldn't be high from lgd run.

General health:

LDL
HDL
GFR
ALT
AST

These are pretty basic, sure there's more that can be checked.

About your goal; you are basically looking to add 10 lbs of lean mass without any fat increase. I presume you won't do that in 6 week cycle. Your weight might rise that much or more, but some of it will come down after cycle. That's just normal and not to be discouraged about. There's glycogen storage and water and yada yada.

There's some of my thoughts.
 
Last edited:

MAGICBUMM328

New member
Awards
0
6 weeks is a bit short for a sarm run and I'd consider it the bear minimum, but as it's your first cycle I think it's ok. 8 weeks is more typical and many consider that as a minimun lenght.

An AI should allways be on hand when running anything hormonal and also in this case even though lgd won't convert to E. But Arimistane won't cut it. It's bearly an AI, it's super weak. Exemestane (Aromasin) would be my choice. Use only if needed. Meaning if gyno or other high E symptoms arise or blood work shows the need.

AI's are not typically used in pct, except sometimes when coming off of the serm. Like if serm pct is weeks 1-4, then AI would be used weeks 2-6. Maybe want to taper it down in the last 2 weeks. But the AI use is not allways necessary at all. Same rule applies to AI use in pct as on cycle - use if needed.

Test base is not necessary, but usually makes the cycle more enjoyable and can make it more productive too. With only 6 weeks you could be fine without, but then again may not be.. For me it's tough to say anything definitive on that. Transdermal 4-Andro is pretty solid test base, since I'm assuming you are not going to pinn test. Dermacrine is another solid option.

Cycle support is never a bad idea and the CEL you mention is a good one. It would be most important to run during the cycle, but again running it in pct too is not a bad idea either.

That Nolva dose is higher than many would run with the cycle you are planning, but Tamox is not really a harsh compound so there shouldn't be a "overkill" risk with that dose per se. I usually do 20/20/10/10 and bloods have shown it to be sufficient so far. If having hard time deciding on wether to go lower or the better safe than sorry route, then maybe do 20/20/20/20. That's a pretty solid dosing scheme imo.

Bloods to check
Hormonal:

Total Test
SHBG
Free Test, calculated (should be added automatically if you take TT and SHBG)
E2 (sensitive test if possible)
LH
FSH

Then you could check Prolactin, but it shouldn't be high from lgd run.

General health:

LDL
HDL
GFR
ALT
AST

These are pretty basic, sure there's more that can be checked.

About your goal; you are basically looking to add 10 lbs of lean mass without any fat increase. I presume you won't do that in 6 week cycle. Your weight might rise that much or more, but some of it will come down after cycle. That's just normal and not to be discouraged about. There's glycogen storage and water and yada yada.

There's some of my thoughts.
First off, thank you for answering the questions in an organized fashion like you did. Much appreciated.

I also appreciate the input. I will look for a better AI. I was also thinking Dermacrine as well for the test base. I'll see what I can do for the bloods. It's hard to order these tests myself it seems in MD at a reasonable price, but that is about what I thought I would need to check.

Not sure your level of knowledge on this but are there levels of a given blood result that would indicate I shouldn't run the cycle? Or that I should have to address the issue some how during cycle? Or is there a resource you could point me too that may help me uncover such information?
 
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
So @KvanH has given you a great answer and loads of good info brother.

just in terms of your goals. With 10 years training and if your BW and BF are correct then unless your pretty tall it is likely your very close to your genetic limit for natural growth (your also at an age where hormones will start to work against you).

that dose of LGD simply won’t add 10lbs contractile tissue (I know you’ve noted that), however, in reality it’s probably only going to add a couple of lbs lean mass in 6 weeks and there is a very good chance you’ll end up losing all that in pct (plus worsening your body comp as your hormones realign)

my point is I simply wouldn’t run anything with your stats. If I was going to run anything it needs to be test for 12 weeks imo. Your seeking to go above a genetic limit here bro. Imo you won’t get there with this cycle and you won’t sustain it without being on. My prediction is you run this, you get some results, you come off and lose everything but the fact you were able to gain again like you did in your early 20s will make you cycle again and within a couple of years you’ll be blasting and cruising test.

what won’t happen is you getting to 190lb @ 10% and then sustaining that without gear.

truthfully bro, it sounds like you have a great physique already. I wouldn’t touch anything, it’s a one way street, but if you start walking down this path be prepared to go balls deep, and I don’t mean balls slapping on the ass deep, I mean where you push them suckers into the butthole deep....

just my thought anyway
 

MAGICBUMM328

New member
Awards
0
So @KvanH has given you a great answer and loads of good info brother.

just in terms of your goals. With 10 years training and if your BW and BF are correct then unless your pretty tall it is likely your very close to your genetic limit for natural growth (your also at an age where hormones will start to work against you).

that dose of LGD simply won’t add 10lbs contractile tissue (I know you’ve noted that), however, in reality it’s probably only going to add a couple of lbs lean mass in 6 weeks and there is a very good chance you’ll end up losing all that in pct (plus worsening your body comp as your hormones realign)

my point is I simply wouldn’t run anything with your stats. If I was going to run anything it needs to be test for 12 weeks imo. Your seeking to go above a genetic limit here bro. Imo you won’t get there with this cycle and you won’t sustain it without being on. My prediction is you run this, you get some results, you come off and lose everything but the fact you were able to gain again like you did in your early 20s will make you cycle again and within a couple of years you’ll be blasting and cruising test.

what won’t happen is you getting to 190lb @ 10% and then sustaining that without gear.

truthfully bro, it sounds like you have a great physique already. I wouldn’t touch anything, it’s a one way street, but if you start walking down this path be prepared to go balls deep, and I don’t mean balls slapping on the ass deep, I mean where you push them suckers into the butthole deep....

just my thought anyway
Again I appreciate your answer man and I know I got some great info in the last reply. This place has been super helpful!

Height wise, I'm 6' even. I've struggled with injuries a lot (low back) and my strength suffers because of it but I do know what I'm doing and I'm naturally a lanky SOB. I can maintain this 180lbs easily at over 3000cals a day. I'm just kinda soft I suppose. The muscle I have doesn't seem dense to me if that makes sense. I do also hold most of my fact around my low back/love handles. But I would love to thinken up just a little or I guess dry the **** out.

But all that aside, I truly appreciate your input man. I'm sure if I push through another couple years without another major set back (this year injury wise has been a god send thankfully) I could hit my goal 190lbs at sub 10% but idk if there is much more left outside of that. I've been 200lbs one time and I was puffy AF and had to eat over 5000cals a day to get there and I can't sustain that. I've maintained 190 in the past though briefly but had the higher BF. I can get there and do it, but I'm 30. Ain't gunna be able to stay that way much longer.

I may hold off and just try and find the good stuff a little later down the road and do a real cycle as you said. As you said, seems like I might as well commit
 
KvanH

KvanH

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • RockStar
First off, thank you for answering the questions in an organized fashion like you did. Much appreciated.

I also appreciate the input. I will look for a better AI. I was also thinking Dermacrine as well for the test base. I'll see what I can do for the bloods. It's hard to order these tests myself it seems in MD at a reasonable price, but that is about what I thought I would need to check.

Not sure your level of knowledge on this but are there levels of a given blood result that would indicate I shouldn't run the cycle? Or that I should have to address the issue some how during cycle? Or is there a resource you could point me too that may help me uncover such information?
Seems like you got some good perspective from @Whisky and maybe the plans are on hold for now. It's allways important to consider all the possible outcomes and to be fully content with them with these compounds.

But to answer your question; regarding hormonal levels I don't know if theres anything other than levels being so low that it would raise a question if it looks like it's gonna be one cycle and -> trt (that could happen with any kind of pre levels, but I think being close to the bottom of the ref range is more suspectiple for the need of trt after the cycle). For general health bloods the ref ranges are typically good enough indicators. If lipids are out of range or close to it, I would address that issue first and get it sorted out before making it worse with ped's. Same with liver values. On cycle those might get out of range, but should get back to normal after stopping the gear. Would be good to have a blood pressure meter also and you can get medical grade cuffmeters for under 100$ from convinient stores. Tudca and nac are good for on cycle liver support. There are other on cycle support supps too.

For the resources of information I'd say Google and this forum = )

Might want to check out some of the natty supp talk on the supplement section here while you're deciding on wether or not to jump to the 'dark side'.
 
Last edited:
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Seems like you got some good perspective from @Whisky and maybe the plans are on hold for now. It's allways important to consider all the possible outcomes and be fully content with them with these compounds.

But to answer your question; regarding hormonal levels I don't know if theres anything other than levels being so low that it would raise a question if it looks like it's gonna be one cycle and -> trt (that could happen with any kind of pre levels, but I think being close to the bottom of the ref range is more supectiple for the need of trt after the cycle). For general health bloods the ref ranges are typically good enough indicators. If lipids are out of range or close to it, I would address that issue first and get it sorted out before making it worse with ped's. Same with liver values. On cycle those might get out of range, but should get back to normal after stopping the gear. Would be good to have a blood pressure meter also and you can get medical grade cuffmeters for under 100$ from convinient stores. Tudca and nac are good for on cycle liver support. There are other on cycle support supps too.

For the resources of information I'd say Google and this forum = )

Might want to check out some of the natty supp talk on the supplement section here while you're deciding on wether or not to jump to the 'dark side'.
interesting question re bloods

I’’do come at it from this angle

if anything like lipids, cholesterol, kidney or rbc were out of whack at all I wouldn’t start a cycle (they’ll only worsen it and you need to get that sorted first).

ironically if test and free test is low I’d be more inclined to run a cycle as regardless your more likely to be on trt soon for quality of life and you’re also more likely to benefit from a cycle. If you have great natural test levels then in theory you should be able to gain muscle/lose fat naturally (more too it but generally speaking)......in that case I’d stay natty
 
KvanH

KvanH

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • RockStar
interesting question re bloods

I’’do come at it from this angle

if anything like lipids, cholesterol, kidney or rbc were out of whack at all I wouldn’t start a cycle (they’ll only worsen it and you need to get that sorted first).

ironically if test and free test is low I’d be more inclined to run a cycle as regardless your more likely to be on trt soon for quality of life and you’re also more likely to benefit from a cycle. If you have great natural test levels then in theory you should be able to gain muscle/lose fat naturally (more too it but generally speaking)......in that case I’d stay natty
That's a good point and I do agree. I'm thinking a situation where one is really not eager on getting on trt, as many beginning to dabble with ped's and going for sarms are not (by my presumption). They could go on with not optimal T levels for years still, maybe 10 years. But with one cycle it could be trt time immediately. And even with high T levels if natty limit is achieved or close to it, then the T levels won't matter in the difficulty on trying to gain more as natty.

The low T levels are my 'excuse' for my use 😁 I wasn't smart and informed enough to test my levels before my first run ever, but I've allways suspected myself to have low T levels due to multiple reasons and now that I know they are crappy, I tell myself I didn't ruin my T with ped's, it was allways low 😆
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Supplements 1
Supplements 1
widthbrah Anabolics 10
Zvch Anabolics 2
Zvch Anabolics 83

Similar threads


Top