SARM suppression

[Mr Giggles]

One thing I have never understood is why people think SARMS are suppressive? From what I heard, most people using SARMS that were suppressed, were actually using products spiked with prohormones (which WILL suppress you). I have read the research and in no paper is their mention of any meaningful suppression .

Needless to say, those I have spoken to who were able to get a pure SARM noticed no suppression following their SARM cycle.

So, isn't clomid or nolvadex overkill for a SARMS only cycle?

 

[Old Witch]

No, you’re wrong. And your friends are wrong.

 

[Mr Giggles]

No, you’re wrong. And your friends are wrong.

I don't mind being wrong. But can you point towards any scientific publications which have investigated this?

 

[Mathb33]

Wrong. That’s what people who do no bloodwork say. How can you believe your friends / people online if you don’t see bloodwork before/after? Most of people just pretend something wasn’t suppressive because they didn’t feel suppressed but that’s naive and wrong dude. Sarms definately can suppress you and they certainly did to me before I was on TRT and bloods showed that

 

[Mathb33]

I wouldn’t argue that most of the time the pct and comeback will be much easier though.

 

[Old Witch]

I don't mind being wrong. But can you point towards any scientific publications which have investigated this?

Sure, every single human sarm study, including the ones used to show you there isn’t suppression. There is, if you look, you can plainly see that the levels do drop. They also returned to normal quickly. However in the case of s23 this is not true, with s23 it took one particular applicant in he most noted study a considerable time to return to testicular normative function.

 

[Old Witch]

I’ll tell you flat out that if you see someone who isn’t suppressed off of 20mg lgd4033 or 30mg osta or rad for 12 weeks, they’ve got bunk ****. Period.

They won’t feel it, but it’s there.

 

[Old Witch]

And then, pct depends entirely on how far suppressed you are. The idea of a one size fits all pct is really not viable. There definitely is a difference in the amount and type of chemicals used. For sarms, some nolva, 40/20/20/10 should be plenty. No need for the hcg and clomid and other ****, unless you’re straight up shut down from some good ol AAS.

 

[Rad83]

Wrong. That’s what people who do no bloodwork say. How can you believe your friends / people online if you don’t see bloodwork before/after? Most of people just pretend something wasn’t suppressive because they didn’t feel suppressed but that’s naive and wrong dude. Sarms definately can suppress you and they certainly did to me before I was on TRT and bloods showed that

Quick Q...are you on trt because of sarms?

 

[AnabolicGuru]

There’s literally studies online showing that lgd caused significant suppression in doses of 1mg (which is a fraction of what people are using). So in summary, your friends are dumber than a bag of rocks to simply say “durrr they’re not suppressive” without actually getting bloodwork to prove it, not to mention that they probably did little to no research.

 

[Mathb33]

Quick Q...are you on trt because of sarms?

No, Definitely not!

 

[BamBam54]

Researching on line I saw that same story line that sarms are not suppressive, and that is must be laced with Prohormones... and that story always went back to the same guys named DG and his buddy Rock-whatever. Because it seems they want to scare you into buying from the brand they rep. No bueno.

 

[BamBam54]

Read this paper for example

The Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Effects of LGD-4033, a Novel Nonsteroidal Oral, Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator, in Healthy Young Men

Concerns about potential adverse effects of testosterone on prostate have motivated the development of selective androgen receptor modulators that display tissue-selective activation of androgenic signaling. LGD-4033, a novel nonsteroidal, oral selective ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Mathb33]

Exactly. This whole **** that happend back in 2012-2014 is the reason everybody believe sarms are not suppressive. Because mainly any research you do will bring you to that idiots forum. People filled the internet with threads saying sarms didn’t suppress them yet none of these 193883827 person had bloods done or they simply lied about it. So nowadays any new comers that will do a quick search on the internet will be like oh nice proof that sarms aren’t suppressive!