Aren't steroid only cycles better than sarm only cycle

[SouthAfricancel]

Wouldn't you just be better off using a steroid like anadrol, turinabol, anavar even without a test base vs. using sarms? There are studies that show even after 6 months of continuous 100mg anadrol usage, testosterone was only suppressed to 250ng/dl which is low but is still higher than you will see in the bloodwork of most sarms cycles. I've seen several people run ostarine and they have like 100ng/dl post cycle bloods. There are studies on elderly men where 20mg of anavar for 12 weeks resulted in 60-70% testosterone suppression which is probably still on par with most sarms cycles. Even something like tbol will spike your SHBG, raising free test for the first few weeks before suppression starts to kick in. So wouldn't you be better off running a cycle like say 50mg of turinabol for 6-8 weeks, versus running 20mg of rad140 for 8-12 weeks? Just seems like you would make twice as much gains for similar suppression. Of course you would need a PCT.


Anadrol study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3562853/

 

[SouthAfricancel]

Bump

 

[SouthAfricancel]

@Bitchwhipper2 @whitebitchslayer @chadbeingmade

 

[SouthAfricancel]

@jeff1234

 

[SouthAfricancel]

Bump

 

[SouthAfricancel]

@imontheloose

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

Suppression is probably more managable on sarms given that they (especially lgd) are more tissue selective.

Then theres also the fact that anavar is a pain in the ass to source and expensive as fuck.

Also anecdotes are all over the place and cant really be used as data, as I hear from people running like 20mg lgd which would be on par with 40mg var claiming no suppression whatsoever.

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

All in all, I definitely think sarms have their place given their increased tissue selectivity compared to every steroids and see no reason to cut them out entirely going "roids better". When in reality theres no difference.

Sarms are just steroids called sarms while also tending to be more favorable to muscle and bone

Differentiating between orals and injection is a way better line to draw imo.

 

[SouthAfricancel]

Suppression is probably more managable on sarms given that they (especially lgd) are more tissue selective.

Then theres also the fact that anavar is a pain in the ass to source and expensive as fuck.

Also anecdotes are all over the place and cant really be used as data, as I hear from people running like 20mg lgd which would be on par with 40mg var claiming no suppression whatsoever.

So at the end you're suppression is all up to your genetics

 

[imontheloose]

PCT is overhyped. Not necessary.

 

[Iraniancel]

PCT is overhyped. Not necessary.

Iirc there are olympia competitors who went off cold turkey/had multiple kids. There is so much fear mongering when it comes to steroids.

 

[Bitchwhipper2]

So at the end you're suppression is all up to your genetics

Probably, yea.

Suppression is kinda cope though. Hcg mogs

 

[org3cel.RR]

Wouldn't you just be better off using a steroid like anadrol, turinabol, anavar even without a test base vs. using sarms? There are studies that show even after 6 months of continuous 100mg anadrol usage, testosterone was only suppressed to 250ng/dl which is low but is still higher than you will see in the bloodwork of most sarms cycles. I've seen several people run ostarine and they have like 100ng/dl post cycle bloods. There are studies on elderly men where 20mg of anavar for 12 weeks resulted in 60-70% testosterone suppression which is probably still on par with most sarms cycles. Even something like tbol will spike your SHBG, raising free test for the first few weeks before suppression starts to kick in. So wouldn't you be better off running a cycle like say 50mg of turinabol for 6-8 weeks, versus running 20mg of rad140 for 8-12 weeks? Just seems like you would make twice as much gains for similar suppression. Of course you would need a PCT.


Anadrol study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3562853/

Sarms are utter dog shit

 

[whitebitchslayer]

Wouldn't you just be better off using a steroid like anadrol, turinabol, anavar even without a test base vs. using sarms? There are studies that show even after 6 months of continuous 100mg anadrol usage, testosterone was only suppressed to 250ng/dl which is low but is still higher than you will see in the bloodwork of most sarms cycles. I've seen several people run ostarine and they have like 100ng/dl post cycle bloods. There are studies on elderly men where 20mg of anavar for 12 weeks resulted in 60-70% testosterone suppression which is probably still on par with most sarms cycles. Even something like tbol will spike your SHBG, raising free test for the first few weeks before suppression starts to kick in. So wouldn't you be better off running a cycle like say 50mg of turinabol for 6-8 weeks, versus running 20mg of rad140 for 8-12 weeks? Just seems like you would make twice as much gains for similar suppression. Of course you would need a PCT.


Anadrol study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3562853/

Yea

 

[jeff1234]

Wouldn't you just be better off using a steroid like anadrol, turinabol, anavar even without a test base vs. using sarms? There are studies that show even after 6 months of continuous 100mg anadrol usage, testosterone was only suppressed to 250ng/dl which is low but is still higher than you will see in the bloodwork of most sarms cycles. I've seen several people run ostarine and they have like 100ng/dl post cycle bloods. There are studies on elderly men where 20mg of anavar for 12 weeks resulted in 60-70% testosterone suppression which is probably still on par with most sarms cycles. Even something like tbol will spike your SHBG, raising free test for the first few weeks before suppression starts to kick in. So wouldn't you be better off running a cycle like say 50mg of turinabol for 6-8 weeks, versus running 20mg of rad140 for 8-12 weeks? Just seems like you would make twice as much gains for similar suppression. Of course you would need a PCT.


Anadrol study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3562853/

SARMs are mostly shit. There are good ones but most won’t have any benefit for you.