Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Go pro with SARMs?

Fresher

New member
It one is aiming to be a pro bodybuilder and really wants to go for it, what age could one start taking sarms?

I've read a lot of posts saying to wait untill 20-22 while others say start early if you want yo go pro.

At what age should you really start and what do you recommend that age?
 
I don't know about the age question, but I would question going pro with Sarms. No doubt they can help in your contest prep, with wise usage you can probably eek out significant results from them, but I don't see how they could possibly help you crack a pro scene by themselves; you will need stronger compounds with them my guy. Unless we were talking really low tier contests or something. I am of the opinion now that Sarms by themselves aren't really worth it, unless that's the only thing you can get your hands on.
 
maximillia said:
I don't know about the age question, but I would question going pro with Sarms. No doubt they can help in your contest prep, with wise usage you can probably eek out significant results from them, but I don't see how they could possibly help you crack a pro scene by themselves; you will need stronger compounds with them my guy. Unless we were talking really low tier contests or something. I am of the opinion now that Sarms by themselves aren't really worth it, unless that's the only thing you can get your hands on.
Click to expand...
I understans going pro with just sarms is not going to work that well.

Let me clarify a bit, my true goal is to turn pro. However, before going on real AAS my plan is to start with SARMs before moving on to stronget compunds.

Im just wondering what age someone that is planing on going pro and use AAS in the future could start with SARMs as a first step?
 
Fresher said:
I understans going pro with just sarms is not going to work that well.

Let me clarify a bit, my true goal is to turn pro. However, before going on real AAS my plan is to start with SARMs before moving on to stronget compunds.

Im just wondering what age someone that is planing on going pro and use AAS in the future could start with SARMs as a first step?
Click to expand...

I thought you might have meant that. In that case, I think this is an alright plan, but again, these things aren't really that much safer than the real deal steriods and they will shut you down hard as well. Not as hard, but hard. Keeping this in mind, If you are trying to avoid any ill effects and shutdown by doing something safe until you are all grown up, these won't be much help. In my opinion, you should just move directly to AAS when you are of age. If you don't care about shutdown, you could do them before hopping onto AAS when you are 21 or older, that's the general advice. I don't recommend it though. Basically, if you are hoping to minimally affect your HPTA, sarms don't cut the bill, so you may as well just do AAS. I don't think it's wise to mess with your HPTA before turning 21, even if you want to go pro. You still have decades to make it, what's the rush? there's no real first mover advantage here.
 
maximillia said:
I thought you might have meant that. In that case, I think this is an alright plan, but again, these things aren't really that much safer than the real deal steriods and they will shut you down hard as well. Not as hard, but hard. Keeping this in mind, If you are trying to avoid any ill effects and shutdown by doing something safe until you are all grown up, these won't be much help. In my opinion, you should just move directly to AAS when you are of age. If you don't care about shutdown, you could do them before hopping onto AAS when you are 21 or older, that's the general advice. I don't recommend it though.
Click to expand...
Alright thanks!

Now im not saying i will and i probably will wait untill 21 but lets say i started a cycle with one of the milder sarms at age 19, what effects could this have that are different form when using them at age 21?

Or why is the age 21 recommended?
 
Fresher said:
Alright thanks!

Now im not saying i will and i probably will wait untill 21 but lets say i started a cycle with one of the milder sarms at age 19, what effects could this have that are different form when using them at age 21?

Or why is the age 21 recommended?
Click to expand...

21 Years of age is recommended (in many circles it's 23-25 tbh) because that's when your Endocrine and other relevant systems of the body have done growing and maturing, running exogenous substances before the complete development of such systems can result in hampered growth and permanent reduction in long term T levels. Now I am not trying to scare you, but it can happen, so you have to weigh the risks and the rewards carefully. I know you are hankering for those sweet gains, but is it worth taking such a risk? that's for you to decide, but I would really be mindful of this. Now sarms are supposed to be easier to recover from, and I think this is true, but how much easier? That's harder to answer, and there's no research on this. is it so much easier that you can do them safely while still growing and not bear any risk of permanent damage? I don't know, and I think nobody does, it's an unknown quantity. You won't be gaining enough considering the risks IMHO. My advice would be to keep your natural T levels, build as much muscle as you can naturally and take natural T boosting stuff and all the right supplements, maximise your natural potential, then hop onto real AAS, and be in a much higher zone of cost effectiveness and health.
 
You’ve had some good advice above bro.

Imo the main issue with sarms is that they are newer and untested (to any great degree) in the main. Thus no one really knows for sure what the longer term effects with be.

Aas have been around many many years and the sides and effects are pretty much well known.

Imo I wouldn’t see sarms as a thing you could start at a younger age on. The ‘safety’ angle is more a sales tool in my view, they are legal to buy and vendors state safer just to sell more. Not saying they are unsafe, just that it’s probably no difference to aas.

I get if you genuinely want to go pro that then starting at a young age is probably required, but it’s worth taking a very honest view on whether you can make it before you go down that road.

Where are you at know with training and nutrition. What are you already achieving?
 
Going pro isn’t about starting early at all - it’s 100% about genetics, from how you’re shaped and built to how you respond to excessive drug usage. There are guys that turn pro in the first few years of them training seriously on drugs all the time. You know who doesn’t usually turn Pro? The guy who busts his ass diligently for 20 years - he doesn’t magically acquire better genes, he just becomes a steadily more jacked version of his still non-aesthetic frame. Not hating - this is most people, including myself.

Bodybuilding is a beauty pageant - ugly women don’t win Miss America because they start wanting it early and continue to for enough years to win. You either have it or you won’t, so don’t rush into the drugs - those are life-affecting decisions.

Learn to train hard and how to eat, and enjoy it. If you have what it takes to be a Pro, waiting a couple years on drugs won’t stop you from dominating.
 
Start early with hard training and nutrition, not the drugs.

You at your age have higher natural test levels than half the guys on trt while cruising, and probably ten times as much growth hormone. Use that to your advantage.
 
I would say no to sarms on going pro. It’s really all due to genetics. Some people are just naturally jacked. Others can’t put on muscle to save their lives running a gram of test per week. I would say my genetics are decent. I have a really good time staying very lean. But, I can’t be a mass monster. I know about 2 guys at my school who I know who are natty who have more muscle than I do yet don’t take lifting as seriously. I can get more cut than them cause I diet better. But their genetics allow them to carry more muscle on their frames. It’s 100% drugs and genetics. Basically, being a pro bodybuilder = 1) how much drugs you can pump into your body without dying 2) how good your genetics are. Training, hard work, and diet make a difference. But let’s not be naive. Those things can only take you so far. Good news is though If you just diet and train hard you’ll still look better than 99% of the population on the beach. But in the fitness world you don’t even lift lol.
 
Solid advise here.

That all said, although there are tons of card carrying pros who started early to break into the national scene, there are also quite a few who report training naturally at the beginning to learn how to train/diet
 
Phil Heath played four years of college basketball, so it’s likely that he didn’t start using, or at least using at any major level, until he was at least ~22. Maybe he used a little in college, who knows, but as others have said, the idea that you have to be roided out by the time you’re legally allowed to drink if you ever want to be a pro is wrong. It’s not like most other sports where you’re over the hill in your early/mid thirties; you can just be getting started then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top