What do you know about AC 262 563 sarm

RageAgainst

New member
Awards
0
Hi, i saw this new sarm (ac 262 563 or accadrine) i would run it with lgd,for a winter bulk, any info about this sarm?
 

Humbl3

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
There is this..

Sorry. Don’t know why it has a warning on it ..I just thought it was a good read and good info on something fairly new.
 
Last edited:

Humbl3

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
Dude ... You posted a warning symbol.
Take it easy Homie, it was just an eyecatcher to get him to read the article. What everyone should be doing before they ask questions here as do their own research. Just catching his eye. I read it for the first time just now just like you
 

Humbl3

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
The hazard symbol with an LOL next to It SHOULD have been obvious.
 
Last edited:
Renew1

Renew1

Legend
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
Take it easy Homie, it was just an eyecatcher to get him to read the article. What everyone should be doing before they ask questions here as do their own research. Just catching his eye. I read it for the first time just now just like you
Honest feedback and advice is helpful.

Stuff other than that Is NOT.
And quite frankly, BS.

OP, ignore those posts.
 
StarScream66

StarScream66

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
There is this..

Sorry. Don’t know why it has a warning on it ..I just thought it was a good read and good info on something fairly new.
That article makes a lot of claims, but has absolutely no references at the bottom detailing where they got the info. I searched Google Patents for this compound, but came up with nothing. Searching Google pops up a lot of sites in Russia and Eastern Europe. I'll repeat what I said in another thread about all these new SARMs popping up. Sure, you might get some anecdotal info on them, but there's literally (as far as I can find) no real research from anywhere on this compound. So, do you want to be a human guinea pig for this random compound that just popped up out of the blue? I would err on the side of caution.

EDIT: I searched the name of that pharmaceutical company along with the compound and came up with one study done on rats.



That appears to be the only study on it. So, do you want to take something that's only been studied in rats? According to the articles, the compound has been in development since 2007. So you would think if it was so promising they would have done more studies on it than just one on rats.

The molecule itself also does not look like an androgen, it's not a 4 carbon atom, and who knows how it's being sourced or if you're really getting the real thing?
 
Last edited:
BCseacow83

BCseacow83

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
That article makes a lot of claims, but has absolutely no references at the bottom detailing where they got the info. I searched Google Patents for this compound, but came up with nothing. Searching Google pops up a lot of sites in Russia and Eastern Europe. I'll repeat what I said in another thread about all these new SARMs popping up. Sure, you might get some anecdotal info on them, but there's literally (as far as I can find) no real research from anywhere on this compound. So, do you want to be a human guinea pig for this random compound that just popped up out of the blue? I would err on the side of caution.

EDIT: I searched the name of that pharmaceutical company along with the compound and came up with one study done on rats.



That appears to be the only study on it. So, do you want to take something that's only been studied in rats? According to the articles, the compound has been in development since 2007. So you would think if it was so promising they would have done more studies on it than just one on rats.

The molecule itself also does not look like an androgen, it's not a 4 carbon atom, and who knows how it's being sourced or if you're really getting the real thing?
Well if it has been studied in rats it still has a leg up on YK-11. Everything in life is risk/reward. OP ask yourself what are the actual possible reward from using a completely unknown compound? Even IF the reward was great you cannot make an honest appraisal without knowing the potential risk, which is COMPLETELY UNKNOWN at this point. I personally would at least stick to something a little more well known.
 
StarScream66

StarScream66

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
Just as a bit of aside on this, I searched the pharmaceutical company that was developing this website, and it looks like they mostly develop drugs for Parkinson's disease and the compound isn't even listed on their website, so my guess is they abandoned R&D on it - for who knows what reasons.

 

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Not enough research, less than ACP-105 and barely any anecdotal reports. Acp 105 seems promising , though and I believe they are similar
 

RageAgainst

New member
Awards
0
I chanced my plan i would run M1t and LGD 4033😂
 

Similar threads


Top