Why would anyone take SARMs

skibidimaster69

skibidimaster69

Destined roider
Joined
Dec 7, 2024
Posts
662
Reputation
580
I understand that teenagers who lack knowledge always resort to SARMs as their PED of choice because they’re quite effective with ‘less risk than steroids’ wrong. Yes SARMs are effective but I don’t get where they are deemed as safer than steroids, I’m going to use the most basic PED/steroid as my comparison, testosterone. Testosterone undoubtedly yields more results compared to any SARM, and it is also less dangerous/risky. Testosterone literally yields more results for less risk. Your body already knows that testosterone is, the recovery process is much easier and so is your probability of fully recovering your testosterone levels and fertility, and you keep significantly more muscle after your cycle. SARMs yield less results compared to testosterone, have more risk, lower chance of reaching back to hormonal baseline levels after cycle and you keep less gains assuming you return back to natural. Oh and they’re much more expensive than test

The only situation I see SARMs somewhat useful is if your pairing it with a testosterone base, even then, there’s other compounds that are superior.
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill, bosnian, tomahawk and 1 other person
Testosterone > SARMs
In every single way
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill, bosnian, iamnotgrayipromise and 1 other person
I understand that teenagers who lack knowledge always resort to SARMs as their PED of choice because they’re quite effective with ‘less risk than steroids’ wrong. Yes SARMs are effective but I don’t get where they are deemed as safer than steroids, I’m going to use the most basic PED/steroid as my comparison, testosterone. Testosterone undoubtedly yields more results compared to any SARM, and it is also less dangerous/risky. Testosterone literally yields more results for less risk. Your body already knows that testosterone is, the recovery process is much easier and so is your probability of fully recovering your testosterone levels and fertility, and you keep significantly more muscle after your cycle. SARMs yield less results compared to testosterone, have more risk, lower chance of reaching back to hormonal baseline levels after cycle and you keep less gains assuming you return back to natural. Oh and they’re much more expensive than test

The only situation I see SARMs somewhat useful is if your pairing it with a testosterone base, even then, there’s other compounds that are superior.
sarms legal, test not legal, teen broke no money and stupid, wants quick result
 
  • +1
Reactions: James holder, cash.org and skibidimaster69
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill and iamnotgrayipromise
  • +1
Reactions: skibidimaster69
also SARMS like ostarine are safer and easier to do and hide
 
They’re too scared to pin

Some SARMs are good
 
  • +1
Reactions: skibidimaster69
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill
  • +1
Reactions: YouMirinBrah and skibidimaster69
Fat loss
Hair loss prevention
GH stimulation
Sarms dont give you more gh, if I’m right it has the same risk for hair loss as test and steroids and test are superior for fat loss
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill and boxing-cel
it’s a good way to get into pharma

it does a little bit with basically no risk
Yea you’re right, I wouldn’t deem it worth it though
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill and cash.org
  • +1
Reactions: skibidimaster69
Not to sound like a faggot but Mk isn’t a sarm, it’s always grouped with sarms though, don’t even know where that came from, it’s not androgenic or suppressive at all but I do 100% get your point, I’ve made previous threads about how I think Mk is underrated
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill and boxing-cel
Not to sound like a faggot but Mk isn’t a sarm, it’s always grouped with sarms though, don’t even know where that came from, it’s not androgenic or suppressive at all but I do 100% get your point, I’ve made previous threads about how I think Mk is underrated
I know what you mean but yeah. I just lump RU, MK etc with SARMs
 
  • +1
Reactions: skibidimaster69
I know what you mean but yeah. I just lump RU, MK etc with SARMs
Yea people often do I don’t blame them, mk is definitely underrated, not for hypertrophy tho it’s ass
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill and boxing-cel
Sarms are just oral steroids but less toxic honestly.

Time and place
 
  • +1
Reactions: skibidimaster69
Less toxic? Debatable
The molecular structure of oral steroids make them inherently more toxic.

Both are shit, but really sarms mogs oral anabolics apart from like superdrol
 
  • +1
Reactions: tomahawk
The molecular structure of oral steroids make them inherently more toxic.

Both are shit, but really sarms mogs oral anabolics apart from like superdrol
Anadrol>super?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Bitchwhipper2
Anadrol>super?
Bloats you and causes gyno + hairloss.

Superdrol is more toxic, but as a looksmaxxer you gotta pick your poison
 
Last edited:
The molecular structure of oral steroids make them inherently more toxic.

Both are shit, but really sarms mogs oral anabolics apart from like superdrol
I was using testosterone as my comparison
 
  • +1
Reactions: iblamewill and Bitchwhipper2

Similar threads

Prominental
Replies
2
Views
98
Fr0sty
F
TajManzoor
Replies
6
Views
265
TajManzoor
TajManzoor
F
Replies
14
Views
368
JporkFoid
JporkFoid
nuke84
Replies
18
Views
603
muhisss
muhisss

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top