ostarine vs andarine

[djbombsquad]

What is the difference?

 

[djbombsquad]

bump?!?!?

 

[Bobaslaw]

Both are SARMs that were created by GTX for different purposes.
It seems the target market for Ostarine is Andropause and the target for Andarine are Cancer Patients as it supposedly flys under the radar of cancer and does not stimulate its growth.

Couple of links:

Ostarine
http://www.ergogenics.org/ostarine.html

Andarine
http://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/stories/2003/04/07/story1.html

 

[djbombsquad]

Thanks. That is what I figured. Im glad you cleared things up for me.

 

[Bobaslaw]

Thanks. That is what I figured. Im glad you cleared things up for me.

NP Wish there was more detailed info, however have not found much more than this...

 

[djbombsquad]

So do you think its safe to start using sarms. I know its fairly new as far as still not in phaze 3 fda testing.

 

[Bobaslaw]

So do you think its safe to start using sarms. I know its fairly new as far as still not in phaze 3 fda testing.

Safe compared to what, a bowl of tapioca pudding??

Not like research peptides are in ANY phase of FDA testing and we use those based on our own research info and anecdotal evidence.
Same can be said about steroids, the way we use them here.

Wait a bit and see if BabyBlu keeps posting while running S-4. As long as he does, thats enough for me

 

[djbombsquad]

Your right. Soon as I can afford it I would love to try it.

I was thinking safe compared to superdrol haladrol pp, epistane etc. Maybe a stack? I still have some HD and PP left and epistane. For a future cycle.

 

[SOLARUS]

Wait a bit and see if BabyBlu keeps posting while running S-4. As long as he does, thats enough for me

i saw the clinical profile on S-4 and was far from impressed....plus i make a point not to listen to the salesman when considering a purchase.

i believe there is a future to SARMs, but i dont think S-4 is it...

 

[Bobaslaw]

i saw the clinical profile on S-4 and was far from impressed....plus i make a point not to listen to the salesman when considering a purchase.

i believe there is a future to SARMs, but i dont think S-4 is it...

I agree. I did not see anything striking about S-4 on paper.

I'd rather wait for SARMS that are not selective for the pituitary and hypothalamus than the prostate and such...

 

[djbombsquad]

On a scale of 1-11 so the effectiveness seems like a 7 out of 11.

 

[Bobaslaw]

On a scale of 1-11 so the effectiveness seems like a 7 out of 11.

hmmm. effectiveness? what effect are you judging. Strength, Hypertrophy, Liver Values, HDL/LDL, etc? What are you comparing this to? Test, Deca, Tren, etc?
Pretty general statement, and in itself has no real meaning.

BTW, why "1-11"?!

On a scale of 9 to -5, my confusion level is a 11 here :think:

 

[djbombsquad]

Well I was thinking like strength, size compared to like superdrol, epistane. I know the sides are way better than something like superdrol hyperdrol etc no liver toxicity; no affect on the prostate no effect on breast tissue no effect on the heart and minimal effect on HPTA I know. I was thinking maybe stack with a low dose of epistane or low dose of superdrol.

 

[SOLARUS]

hmmm. effectiveness? what effect are you judging. Strength, Hypertrophy, Liver Values, HDL/LDL, etc? What are you comparing this to? Test, Deca, Tren, etc?
Pretty general statement, and in itself has no real meaning.

BTW, why "1-11"?!

On a scale of 9 to -5, my confusion level is a 11 here :think:

lol....on a scale of leprechauns to boll weevils my confusion is a Model T Ford.

 

[Bobaslaw]

lol....on a scale of leprechauns to boll weevils my confusion is a Model T Ford.

LOL! I'm still trying to figure out which is the better end of your scale.
Actually I think I'll go with the Leprechaun!

 

[TheCrownedOne]

i saw the clinical profile on S-4 and was far from impressed....plus i make a point not to listen to the salesman when considering a purchase.

i believe there is a future to SARMs, but i dont think S-4 is it...

Second that.

 

[comacho]

once my injury heals i will do a full two month cycle of S4 at 200mg/day

i maybe running that with some peps but depends on timing.

currently doing 3on 4 off using S4 (200mg/day),its a new way of pulsing, talked to some people that has done that with mdrol and such with no sides for months, where regular pulse fck people up.

lets not debate about that pulse...just letting you know i will be logging soon after my tri's heal.

so far on 'ON' days, i feel good psychologically, not much growth, just hardness i feel during 3days of on, wonder how others will do at higher dosage and longer duration?


when i first heard of S4 i was let down that it still affected HPTA, but nontheless it sounds interesting so im taking it.

i would love to try future SARM's that wont affect HPTA and only muscles....sweeet! i will be on something like that rest of my life.

imagine females using these stuff with no androgenic sides, thats going to replace alot of chemicals in the future, anxillary and so on. **** it will replace everything for both men and women.

 

[babyblu]

Well I havent seen any conclusive research evidence that S-4 has a significant negative impact on the HPTA. In fact GTX claims that SARMS enhance libido. I know that my libido currently is about normal for me. Ejaculate amounts are not down. I think the thing that most people forget about the human studies done on S-4 is that the sample group were men in their 60s-80's I believe. So people look at the study and say that the amount of LBM increase after 3 months was only like 6 lbs. But I would wager that 500mg of test enth a week would not put on much more LBM on men in their 60-80s with NO exercise. Now of course test enth would probably put on a significant amt of water weight to men no matter their age but actual lbm (again in light of no exercise routine) would be minimal. So you have to put S-4 studies (like everything in this world) into the proper context.

Im not making any projections on this stuff. Im just hopeful and also I did notice an increase in vascularity the last couple of days. Last night I noticed a 'new' vein in the lower palm of my hand, under my thumb. Odd.

bb

 

[djbombsquad]

Humm. This is defiantly the future.

 

[Bobaslaw]

Last night I noticed a 'new' vein in the lower palm of my hand, under my thumb. Odd.
bb

Damn, thats pretty intense BB. If things keep up at this pace, pretty soon you may have to change your name to "BabyBluVeins"

 

[pistonpump]

Your right. Soon as I can afford it I would love to try it.

I was thinking safe compared to superdrol haladrol pp, epistane etc. Maybe a stack? I still have some HD and PP left and epistane. For a future cycle.

arent you like 18 or something?

 

[djbombsquad]

Would you like me to be 18?

My biological age is 16 but I am a lot older than 18.

 

[pumbertot]

Would you like me to be 18?

My biological age is 16 but I am a lot older than 18.

i think he saying at such a young age you shouldnt be f*cking around with hormones.

 

[pistonpump]

i think he saying at such a young age you shouldnt be f*cking around with hormones.

exactly. too young.

 

[djbombsquad]

I am around the corner to becomming 25. I don't know how young that is in comparison to 18 years of age but I think thats not to too young and plus I was just curious.

 

[Bobaslaw]

Would you like me to be 18?

My biological age is 16 but I am a lot older than 18.

I am around the corner to becomming 25. I don't know how young that is in comparison to 18 years of age but I think thats not to too young and plus I was just curious.

Dude, you are confusing as hell to have a reasonable conversation on this topic.... You're biological age is 16 and youre close to becoming 25!?! WTF!?!

 

[djbombsquad]

My chronological age is 24 my actual years but I am aging at at a slower rate so the doctor said Im around the age of 16. I think I said it correctly.

 

[Bobaslaw]

My chronological age is 24 my actual years but I am aging at at a slower rate so the doctor said Im around the age of 16. I think I said it correctly.

Ahh... I see. If I may ask, what are you diagnosed with exactly? If that's too personal for the forum, I completely understand. Just wanted to know if you are biologically still in a pubertal phase as exhibited by your endogenous hormonal levels (test, IGF-1, etc).

 

[babyblu]

I am lowering my dosage of S-4 from 150mg to 100mg/day. I am VERY aggressive and moody and irritable.

bb

 

[pistonpump]

ive read the write up but what exactly is s-4

 

[Bobaslaw]

ive read the write up but what exactly is s-4

S-4 is an easier way of saying:

S-3-(4-acetylamino-phenoxy)-2-hydroxy-2-methyl-N-(4-nitro-3-trifluoromethyl-phenyl)-propionamide

Here is another good full text writeup on S-4:

Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator Treatment Improves Muscle Strength and Body Composition and Prevents Bone Loss in Orchidectomized Rats

Abstract below:

Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator Treatment Improves Muscle Strength and Body Composition and Prevents Bone Loss in Orchidectomized Rats


The partial agonist activity of a selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM) in the prostate was demonstrated in orchidectomized rats. In the current study, we characterized the full agonist activity of S-3-(4-acetylamino-phenoxy)-2-hydroxy-2-methyl-N-(4-nitro-3-trifluoromethyl-phenyl)-propionamide (a structurally related SARM referred to in other publications and hereafter as S-4) in skeletal muscle, bone, and pituitary of castrated male rats. Twelve weeks after castration, animals were treated with S-4 (3 or 10 mg/kg), dihydrotestosterone (DHT) (3 mg/kg), or vehicle for 8 wk. S-4 (3 and 10 mg/kg) restored soleus muscle mass and strength and levator ani muscle mass to that seen in intact animals. Similar changes were also observed in DHT-treated (3 mg/kg) animals. Compared with the anabolic effects observed in muscle, DHT (3 mg/kg) stimulated prostate and seminal vesicle weights moire than 2-fold greater than that observed in intact controls, whereas S-4 (3 mg/kg) returned these androgenic organs to only 16 and 17%, respectively, of the control levels. S-4 (3 and 10 mg/kg) and DHT (3 mg/kg) restored castration-induced loss in lean body mass. Furthermore, S-4 treatment caused a significantly larger increase in total body bone mineral density than DHT. S-4 (3 and 10 mg/kg) also demonstrated agonist activity in the pituitary and significantly decreased plasma LH and FSH levels in castrated animals in a dose-dependent manner. In summary, the strong anabolic effects of S-4 in skeletal muscle, bone, and pituitary were achieved with minimal pharmacologic effect in the prostate. The tissue-selective pharmacologic activity of SARMs provides obvious advantages over steroidal androgen therapy and demonstrates the promising therapeutic utility that this new class of drugs may hold.

 

[broken7]

Is ostarine S-4 or some other SARM ?

 

[Bobaslaw]

Is ostarine S-4 or some other SARM ?

Ostarine and Andarine are both aryl propionamide analogs. From this writeup it seems that S-4 is a further altered version.

http://molinterv.aspetjournals.org/cgi/reprint/5/3/173.pdf

When the idea of trifluoromethylation was utilized by our laboratory to discover novel aryl-propionamide AR agonists, we identified novel and important in vitro SARs for the AR-binding affinity and agonist activity (30, 31), including a para-nitro group in the A-ring, a trifluoromethyl group linked to the chiral carbon (R-isomer), a thio-ether linkage, and a halo or para-N-alkylamido group in the B-ring. When these compounds were tested in vivo, however, no pharmacologic
activity was observed owing to their unfavorable pharmacokinetic properties (32). Further structural modification was made to overcome this problem by changing the thio-ether linkage to an ether bridge, which resulted in the successful discovery of the first member, S-4, of a new series of SARMs

 

[chuckisnutz]

This is something I am definitely interested in. what are we looking at in regards to pricing? legality? potential unwanted interactions w/ other substances (aas and otherwise)?

 

[SOLARUS]

i just dont quite get it....the stuff appears to work just like nandrolone. it provides next to no androgenic support:

(DHT (3 mg/kg) stimulated prostate and seminal vesicle weights moire than 2-fold greater than that observed in intact controls, whereas S-4 (3 mg/kg) returned these androgenic organs to only 16 and 17%

so unless you want to stack it with T or DHT or proviron or masteron or something, you're not going to have much in the way of libido during a cycle...and obviously, all those steroids impact the prostate, so what's the point again?

 

[Bobaslaw]

i just dont quite get it....the stuff appears to work just like nandrolone. it provides next to no androgenic support:

(DHT (3 mg/kg) stimulated prostate and seminal vesicle weights moire than 2-fold greater than that observed in intact controls, whereas S-4 (3 mg/kg) returned these androgenic organs to only 16 and 17%

so unless you want to stack it with T or DHT or proviron or masteron or something, you're not going to have much in the way of libido during a cycle...and obviously, all those steroids impact the prostate, so what's the point again?

I'm not impressed with the studies on S-4 at all.

The main selectivity (lack of actually)I care about there being would be non-selectivity for the HPTA...
Thats where the gold would be for performance enhancement...

 

[isoc]

hopefully the answer of suppression will be answered soon. I like the fact that it does appear to be "safer" than the orals I have access to (I can only use legally obtainable research items), non methyl, easy on prostate, etc. and the gains seem to be very lean, slow and maintainable, not a size monster obviously since no or low aromitization. But I do agree that non-suppressive would be great, but we will see. If it is not, I am hoping that recovery will be quick and easy.

 

[djbombsquad]

neat.

 

[SOLARUS]

hopefully the answer of suppression will be answered soon.

what question is there?? this product is highly suppressive, period.

"...significantly decreased plasma LH and FSH levels in castrated animals in a dose-dependent manner."

that's pretty much all there is to it. test + S-4 would be a fun cycle (as long as you kept the T dose high enough to keep your libido), but S-4 solo sounds like deca solo....fine for some, but not for most.

 

[isoc]

You are right based on the studies, but we all know of times where animal studies did not cross over 100% into human use. And part of it may be my hope that it is not suppressive. Either way, we should be getting some real world results, I think at least one fellow is going to have blood work done and he will have been researching it at the dosage most others are using and for a decent amount of time, I think about 6 weeks. We as individuals sometimes differ a little as well, but his bloodwork should give us another bit of information about this compound. I do agree about the s-4 and something else, this is supposed to be 100% s anabolic as test prop, but only 33% as androgenic, again based on activity in animal studies, but the results so far on people; fat loss, lean body mass, slow or little actual weight gain, decent strength, speak of an anabolic substance. It is possible that this could be basically an effective non-methyl oral, so still good to use and possibly less harsh on the body. As I am always trying to keep my eye on safety, while at the same time taking some risks, this still sounds like a good product even with shutdown, as long as it doesnt turn out to be more suppressive than anything we currently have access to.

 

[SOLARUS]

this still sounds like a good product even with shutdown, as long as it doesnt turn out to be more suppressive than anything we currently have access to.

there's a distinction you are perhaps not clear on - suppression isnt what kills your libido and makes for a less than pleasant cycle...suppression PLUS subpar androgenicity does that. on a Test E cycle you are virtually completely shut down within 3 weeks....but your libido is great, and you feel fantastic. on, i dunno, epistane, you are also shut down within a few weeks (this is conjecture but likely), but you dont feel it too much, because epi has a pretty solid androgenic potency also (93% of T i believe)....BUT, on a nandrolone, you shutdown quickly but you have no libido, because nandrolone is only 37% as androgenic as T.

note: this theory breaks down a bit with a few compounds, but the reasons vary and can involve binding affinities, 5AR interactions, etc...for tbol (which has nil androgenicity but doesnt seem to impact libido), tren (high androgenicity but no libido support) this approach doesnt work.

 

[pistonpump]

good post solarus id have to agree with you on that theory, sounds....Sound.

 

[isoc]

I see what you mean now, yes I agree that could be a problem, although some of the researchers have been reporting no libido change. It is still new, and we will have to see how the theory, and animal trials cross over into human research. I have not tried this my self, but am following some reviews of it. Solarus, I did miss the point of lack of androgen effects, though I have felt them before and did not miss the point then. I am definitely not as well versed in the science behind these compounds, and do not want to seem as defending them, just waiting to see how things turn out. Thanks for the help!

 

[babyblu]

I guess the question is if this stuff is supposed to be theoretically so horrible on the libido then why is GTx claiming SARMS enhance libido: http://www.gtxinc.com/tech/serm.htm

 

[SOLARUS]

I guess the question is if this stuff is supposed to be theoretically so horrible on the libido then why is GTx claiming SARMS enhance libido: http://www.gtxinc.com/tech/serm.htm

that "overview" is 100% worthless, IMO.

however, there was a GTx-sponsored study that found little change in levator ani muscles with SARM use, despite a reduction in every other factor of androgenicity...but i dont think it was a long trial, but my memory might be off.

libido is affected by a number of factors, so it hard to predict.

remember when...who was it, Merck? "found" that finasteride only impacts the libido in like 4% of men who use it??? bwahaha, once released, it was reported by like 50% of users.

so anyway, i am "cautiously but hopefully skeptical" about SARMS keeping libido up.

 

[babyblu]

About Ostarine's Phase I Multiple Ascending Dose Clinical Trial Results

The Phase I multiple-ascending dose clinical trial evaluated the safety, tolerability and specific pharmacodynamic characteristics of ostarine in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 48 healthy male volunteers, 18-45 years of age, and 12 elderly males with truncal obesity, who averaged 68 years of age.


Safety and pharmacodynamic measurements were taken at the beginning of the study and after 14 days of daily oral dosing. These measurements included routine blood chemistry and hematology, sex hormones and gonadotropins, serum prostate specific antigen, metabolic markers of bone and muscle, cutaneous sebum analysis and DEXA scanning for body composition.


Ostarine is designed to have anabolic building activity without unwanted androgenic side effects on prostate and skin sebaceous glands. Overall, clinical laboratory values and hormonal effects determined from the study were consistent with anabolic activity. Comparisons of DEXA assessments from the beginning of the study to DEXA assessments after 14 days showed positive changes in body composition, with lean body mass and fat mass in study patients moving in a direction consistent with anabolic activity.


Based on other tests, ostarine did not appear to have unwanted side effects on the prostate or the skin. GTx believes that these observations support the potential ability of ostarine to selectively modulate androgen receptors in a tissue-specific manner.


There were no drug-related serious adverse events related to ostarine in the clinical trial. Doses that were found to be safe in this study were selected to enter Phase II testing later this year.

 

[babyblu]

Personally I do think this stuff will have a negative effect on HPTA in long term usage or even after a month or so.

bb

 

[SOLARUS]

Personally I do think this stuff will have a negative effect on HPTA in long term usage or even after a month or so.

bb

i dont think that's an opinion - it's fact. LH and FSH were in the gutter, which pretty much confirms that it bound to the hypothalamus.

unless ostarine somehow differs from S-4 in a meaningful way...

 

[babyblu]

Its never been confirmed to my knowledge that Ostarine is conclusively S-4.

Funny though that you never responded to my other post. You must love salt the way you stay on my nuts....

bb

 

[SOLARUS]

Its never been confirmed to my knowledge that Ostarine is conclusively S-4.

Funny though that you never responded to my other post. You must love salt the way you stay on my nuts....

bb

this thread was first in my email box. if you think i am either a) somehow scared of you, or b) unable to pose a superior argument to yours every single time i am called upon to do so, then you are either dimmer than i thought or you have poor short-term memory.