What do you know about AC 262 563 sarm

RageAgainst

New member
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?
 
There is this..
Invalid Link Removed

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:
Renew1 said:
Dude ... You posted a warning symbol.
Click to expand...
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
 
The hazard symbol with an LOL next to It SHOULD have been obvious.
 
Last edited:
Humbl3 said:
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
Click to expand...

Honest feedback and advice is helpful.

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

OP, ignore those posts.
 
Humbl3 said:
There is this..
Invalid Link Removed

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.
Click to expand...

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.

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

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:
StarScream66 said:
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.

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.

Invalid Link Removed
 
Not enough research, less than ACP-105 and barely any anecdotal reports. Acp 105 seems promising , though and I believe they are similar
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top