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

GW 0742 and other "new" variations of SARMs

I recall when AAS were first making it into the mainstream, the negative hype surrounding it included increased prostate cancer risk. I do not recall if this was based on lab rodent data or the assumption the increased DHT adversely affected the prostate.

I am not comparing the two, these are two different products introduced at different times with different test/lab data methodology. I do know there are a multitude of reasons a drug does not hit the market, including but not limited to cancer risk.
 
jim2509 said:
Also Cardarine has been used since the 1990's by hundreds of thousands and maybe more.....you would of thought by now cause and effect would of been linked if people had been diagnosed with ill effects, yet it hasn't happened.
Click to expand...

Cancer generally takes 10-20 years to develop and form, it's not an instant overnight thing. That's why smokers don't get cancer after smoking for a few years, it takes years for the chemicals to change the RNA/DNA and create tumors in the body.
 
StarScream66 said:
Cancer generally takes 10-20 years to develop and form, it's not an instant overnight thing. That's why smokers don't get cancer after smoking for a few years, it takes years for the chemicals to change the RNA/DNA and create tumors in the body.
Click to expand...


Way to ignore the human studies the man posted.
 
hercules_22 said:
Way to ignore the human studies the man posted.
Click to expand...

I'm just telling you from experience. Cancer tales a LONG time to develop.

Scientists have found that for most breast and bowel cancers, the tumours begin to grow around ten years before they’re detected. And for prostate cancer, tumours can be many decades old.

“They’ve estimated that one tumour was 40 years old. Sometimes the growth can be really slow,” says Graham.
Click to expand...

Invalid Link Removed

There's many more studies out there that show most cancers are very slow growing and slow to develop.
 
bigdadybry said:
Here is the article I referenced earlier, which cited research I have not looked up yet:

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
They didn't mention anything about cancer in that article. Or was that the other GW (Cardinie/Cardimine/whatever) I can't keep the two separate in my mind.
 
Also, just fyi, if you want to get access to the full articles you're citing, I made a helpful guide on getting them for free:

Invalid Link Removed
 
StarScream66 said:
They didn't mention anything about cancer in that article. Or was that the other GW (Cardinie/Cardimine/whatever) I can't keep the two separate in my mind.
Click to expand...
Apologies. I confused this thread with another thread where I mentioned I started to research the GW-0742.

Invalid Link Removed

I am confusing the two as well. :)

The cancer comparison post/link between the two compounds is in the post before the one you quoted (#56). It is definitely not stating they are non-cancerous. They only looked at one cancer line (I skimmed the article). I only mentioned it because it was the first one I came across that compared the two compounds.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top