The Intelligent & Relentless Pursuit of Muscle™
Steroids
 
SARM Legality
1
 

egnatiosj
Level

Join date: Feb 2008
Posts: 505

Does anyone know the current legal status of sarms? I have ran into a company selling them as a research product, is this possible? Or more likely, just a scam?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Bill Roberts
Level 5

Join date: Mar 2003
Posts: 8669

They are not controlled substances.

Why on Earth anyone would want to use them for bb'ing over anabolic steroids, I cannot imagine, other than being concerned on legality and not caring about their having no track record in the bb'ing application. Or from believing claims of differential effect which I think have no greater basis to them than the old claims of "separation of effects" of anabolic steroids.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

whotookmyname
Level

Join date: Nov 2008
Posts: 692

No guarantees that my information is correct, but AFAIK they aren't currently illegal to possess. I'm almost positive they aren't scheduled (yet), and in fact, I'm not even sure if Ostarine (S4) has undergone level III trials... and since it's not an FDA approved drug, I don't think it would even be a minor problem. In other words, it seems to occupy far less of a gray area than liquid tamox, viagra etc...

Ostarine, and perhaps the whole general SARM class (WADA usually uses very broad wording) has already been banned in sports, though.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

egnatiosj
Level

Join date: Feb 2008
Posts: 505

Bill Roberts wrote:
other than being concerned on legality


you got it sir! I understand and appreciate the disadvantages but it would IMO be a whole lot better than the legal "prohormones" they are selling now.

EDIT: I just realized you answered my question in your first sentence, thanks Bill!

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

egnatiosj
Level

Join date: Feb 2008
Posts: 505

whotookmyname wrote:
No guarantees that my information is correct, but AFAIK they aren't currently illegal to possess. I'm almost positive they aren't scheduled (yet), and in fact, I'm not even sure if Ostarine (S4) has undergone level III trials... and since it's not an FDA approved drug, I don't think it would even be a minor problem. In other words, it seems to occupy far less of a gray area than liquid tamox, viagra etc...

Ostarine, and perhaps the whole general SARM class (WADA usually uses very broad wording) has already been banned in sports, though.


It is indeed in stage three-according to Inteleos, Thanks for the response WTM.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

whotookmyname
Level

Join date: Nov 2008
Posts: 692

egnatiosj wrote:
whotookmyname wrote:
No guarantees that my information is correct, but AFAIK they aren't currently illegal to possess. I'm almost positive they aren't scheduled (yet), and in fact, I'm not even sure if Ostarine (S4) has undergone level III trials... and since it's not an FDA approved drug, I don't think it would even be a minor problem. In other words, it seems to occupy far less of a gray area than liquid tamox, viagra etc...

Ostarine, and perhaps the whole general SARM class (WADA usually uses very broad wording) has already been banned in sports, though.

Any idea on who I could contact to look this up? Thanks for the response WTM


If you want to shoot me a PM with the specific issue / facts regarding your friend's situation I'll try to get back to you asap.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

BenceJones
Level

Join date: Apr 2009
Posts: 341

I thought the whole appeal was that they don't shut you down? Something to run during PCT?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Bill Roberts
Level 5

Join date: Mar 2003
Posts: 8669

I could likewise provide a study already done showing that Dianabol "doesn't shut you down."

I have not seen a line of reasoning presented that makes sense, nor a study actually proving the point, that these are categorically different than AAS in this regard.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

egnatiosj
Level

Join date: Feb 2008
Posts: 505

Bill Roberts wrote:
I could likewise provide a study already done showing that Dianabol "doesn't shut you down."

I have not seen a line of reasoning presented that makes sense, nor a study actually proving the point, that these are categorically different than AAS in this regard.


Wow really, if you have it available, do you know at what dose? Just for curiosity sake.

I believe it is lack of inhibition is caused by the same mechanism that causes oxandrolone to rip fat off you, 16 wk cycles to be logical, and other "known" facts that can only be comprehended by those known as "bros". : )

In all seriousness, the limited information I have on SARMS have shown them to be inhibitory but not completely.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Brook
Level

Join date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4262

egnatiosj wrote:

Wow really, if you have it available, do you know at what dose?


IIRC in someone with a fully functioning HPTA a 50mg/day dose will not cause full suppression and a 30mg/day dose causes something like a 10-20% drop in function only.
I read it very recently just on this site.

I have known for years - long enough to have mildly forgotten and been reminded - that Dbol was not as suppressive as Test. I learnt that around 2000.


I believe it is lack of inhibition is caused by the same mechanism that causes oxandrolone to rip fat off you, 16 wk cycles to be logical, and other "known" facts that can only be comprehended by those known as "bros". : )


What does this say?


In all seriousness, the limited information I have on SARMS have shown them to be inhibitory but not completely.


I have gathered from your posts that it is primarily an inhibitory standpoint followed by a legal one? Due to your interest in Dbol of course.

You do normal AAS usually - why no more?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

egnatiosj
Level

Join date: Feb 2008
Posts: 505

Brook wrote:
egnatiosj wrote:

Wow really, if you have it available, do you know at what dose?

IIRC in someone with a fully functioning HPTA a 50mg/day dose will not cause full suppression and a 30mg/day dose causes something like a 10-20% drop in function only.
I read it very recently just on this site.

I have known for years - long enough to have mildly forgotten and been reminded - that Dbol was not as suppressive as Test. I learnt that around 2000.

I believe it is lack of inhibition is caused by the same mechanism that causes oxandrolone to rip fat off you, 16 wk cycles to be logical, and other "known" facts that can only be comprehended by those known as "bros". : )

What does this say?

In all seriousness, the limited information I have on SARMS have shown them to be inhibitory but not completely.

I have gathered from your posts that it is primarily an inhibitory standpoint followed by a legal one? Due to your interest in Dbol of course.

You do normal AAS usually - why no more?


Hey Brook! The one sentence above, about anavar was just a joke. Sorry if it didn't make sense : /...

My interest in it is SOLELY for legal purposes, PM me for why I stopped with the illegal drugs (its a long story). Although, I am also slightly interested in trying it for curiosity sake.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Brook
Level

Join date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4262

egnatiosj wrote:

My interest in it is SOLELY for legal purposes, PM me for why I stopped with the illegal drugs (its a long story). Although, I am also slightly interested in trying it for curiosity sake.



Ahh i see - i can't PM, if i can then i can't see replies!

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
1
Topic is Locked
This thread has reached its maximum number of replies. Click HERE to start a new topic.