junkyarddogzz
Active Member
I would always give the body a small break in between.
Sarm S4
- Thread starter Darron Bryant
- Start date
I would always give the body a small break in between.
ModernLats
Active Member
Read a log from Russianstar (sp?) and he mentioned since they both are different and both are selective to the receptor one could run them both and have much different results then running one individually.
Please do not quote me on that but that was what I got from his post. I myself have both S4 and O on the way and will run them in the near future once I am below 10%bf.
Also from what I've seen S4 has your libido up and down for some users while the latter has yet to show that problem from logs and results I've seen.
junkyarddogzz
Active Member
more dry hardness with the sarms s4. More of a primo feel woth the osta-sarms.
MK9
Active Member
I'm throwing this question out there just cause I would like to know...
What are the reasons people are taking this, or any other performance enhancer for that matter?
Have you truly reached your genetic peak, or do you want to get there faster? Are you an athlete who wants to get that edge training wise and keep that momentum going?
Or perhaps you dont have the genes you wish you did and this will help you get there regardless if you plan on being an olympian or just enjoy working out in general.
Now, can these results be achieved naturally. I know working out and just eating and throwing in some test boosters gave me 4-5 pounds in 1 month, but I wasnt working out for 15 years either, so newbie gains or not, I liked seeing the results.
Keep the logs coming by the way, cool to read up on your adventures
MK9
What are the reasons people are taking this, or any other performance enhancer for that matter?
Have you truly reached your genetic peak, or do you want to get there faster? Are you an athlete who wants to get that edge training wise and keep that momentum going?
Or perhaps you dont have the genes you wish you did and this will help you get there regardless if you plan on being an olympian or just enjoy working out in general.
Now, can these results be achieved naturally. I know working out and just eating and throwing in some test boosters gave me 4-5 pounds in 1 month, but I wasnt working out for 15 years either, so newbie gains or not, I liked seeing the results.
Keep the logs coming by the way, cool to read up on your adventures
MK9
ModernLats
Active Member
I'm hoping I can get a hard look and steady fat loss while keeping muscle on low cals with S-4 and with the latter I'd like a lean bulk with close to no increase in bf. From what I've read whats common with O is an increase in LBM around two to three pounds per week (one user reports) and overall just a great hardening feeling with S-4.
I'm throwing this question out there just cause I would like to know...
What are the reasons people are taking this, or any other performance enhancer for that matter?
Have you truly reached your genetic peak, or do you want to get there faster? Are you an athlete who wants to get that edge training wise and keep that momentum going?
Or perhaps you dont have the genes you wish you did and this will help you get there regardless if you plan on being an olympian or just enjoy working out in general.
Now, can these results be achieved naturally. I know working out and just eating and throwing in some test boosters gave me 4-5 pounds in 1 month, but I wasnt working out for 15 years either, so newbie gains or not, I liked seeing the results.
Keep the logs coming by the way, cool to read up on your adventures
MK9
I would say this would be best used for those not wanting to potentially harm themselves with the misuse of prohormones. With Sarms used correctly no pct would be needed although a natty test booster recommended from most users.
junkyarddogzz
Active Member
yes, I have used HCgenerate just to be safe.
ModernLats
Active Member
More information I'm finding about S4 the more I'm going to stay clear of that and looking only at the other if I do decide to run it. I forgot where I seen the last tid bit of information regarding functions of the drug and possible long term effects that has me worried about s4 but if I find it again I'll post.
junkyarddogzz
Active Member
Lol....sarms s4 is safer than any prohormone, go to EF, there is probably 40 logs over at EF.
ModernLats
Active Member
I never implied they weren't effect I believe they are to an extent but from what I'm reading on the possible side effects of S4 one might want to reevaluate what they want long term in life.
Example
I'm ok with the possibility of lower sperm count, possible life long hrt ect from ph or AAS use /abuse but from what I'm reading about S4 so far I'm not ok with the possibilities of having long term.
In addition I've spoken to a few research companies, so far two have told me of the negative information they have gotten from S4 studies and that they will only carry the other brand. Call it marketing or whatever so far I'm going to wait on my usage possibly indefinitely till I read otherwise on possible side effects.
I for one was all for testing the product but as a consumer I'm now advocating more research before guinea pigging the product.
tygy96
Member
oooh mysterious... what long term sides are you talking about? vision sides?
junkyarddogzz
Active Member
There are no long term side effects from s4.
chim_chim
Active Member
Let me throw this into the discussion:
The research on SARMs seems to all be at much lower doses than would be used by a bodybuilder. Is there research on S4 at 50/100/150mg a day? And what exactly is the mechanism that is different than AAS? This seems to me to basically be a low dose AAS, with a relatively high anabolic:androgenic ratio. The research over a number of years is pretty conclusive that if you interact with the adrogen receptor enough to cause substantial growth (NOT the "grandma" doses in the SARM studies), you will get shutdown.
Put another way: what am I getting at $2.50-5.00/day of S4 that I wouldn't get from 20mg Dianabol/day (which has been shown in studies to cause little to no shutdown), or, if you want to stay OTC, 2.5mg/day of Superdrol, or 5mg/day of Epi, or 12.5mg/day of Halodrol.
Besides vision sides, that is. Quick calculation show the above anabolics to cost more like $0.10/day, without the vision sides... AND you're buying from a legitimate company with a physical presence, rather than some gray/black-market individual that is probably filling bottles out of his garage.
I think you would get the same slow, gradual growth (let's say 5 lbs. over 2 months), with minimal suppression, and -- just as a guess -- minimal lipid problems or hepatotoxicity.
Again, just throwing that out for discussion, but when I see users saying they were "somewhat shutdown" / "badly shutdown" / "not sure" with S4, and they were DEFINITELY getting ocular side effects, and they were DEFINITELY spending a bunch of money, the cost/benefit ratio has to be given strong consideration.
The research on SARMs seems to all be at much lower doses than would be used by a bodybuilder. Is there research on S4 at 50/100/150mg a day? And what exactly is the mechanism that is different than AAS? This seems to me to basically be a low dose AAS, with a relatively high anabolic:androgenic ratio. The research over a number of years is pretty conclusive that if you interact with the adrogen receptor enough to cause substantial growth (NOT the "grandma" doses in the SARM studies), you will get shutdown.
Put another way: what am I getting at $2.50-5.00/day of S4 that I wouldn't get from 20mg Dianabol/day (which has been shown in studies to cause little to no shutdown), or, if you want to stay OTC, 2.5mg/day of Superdrol, or 5mg/day of Epi, or 12.5mg/day of Halodrol.
Besides vision sides, that is. Quick calculation show the above anabolics to cost more like $0.10/day, without the vision sides... AND you're buying from a legitimate company with a physical presence, rather than some gray/black-market individual that is probably filling bottles out of his garage.
I think you would get the same slow, gradual growth (let's say 5 lbs. over 2 months), with minimal suppression, and -- just as a guess -- minimal lipid problems or hepatotoxicity.
Again, just throwing that out for discussion, but when I see users saying they were "somewhat shutdown" / "badly shutdown" / "not sure" with S4, and they were DEFINITELY getting ocular side effects, and they were DEFINITELY spending a bunch of money, the cost/benefit ratio has to be given strong consideration.
smith_69
Well-known member
um, NO