Join Evolutionary Forums


napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
sarms-forsale
needtobuildmuscle
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 73

Thread: Sarms vs Steroids - what if you ran them at the same dosages?

  1. #1
    Moderator Mobster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    28,742
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews

    Sarms vs Steroids - what if you ran them at the same dosages?

    Inspired by Dylan G's video (https://www.evolutionary.org/forums/...lli-79846.html) and Nelson M's questions I'll ask the question here.

    So we all know sarms are typically run at lower doses than steroids right? Equally, when run at those doses, side effects tend to be less. Finally those gains we all want tend to be smaller. With me so far?

    So Nelson has asked, several times, a few 'what if' questions

    1) What if you ran Sarms at the same doses we typically run steroids?
    2) Would those side effects for sarms be on a par with steroids
    3) Would the muscle, strength or power gains for those sarms be the same?

    It would be remiss of me to not point out the bleeding obvious - much like PH having the choice of AAS or Sarms is one we make for ourselves. So not having to run AAS is great. Not having to run Sarms at the same kind of doses is even better.

    Now, if the gains on a sarms cycle, with those doses often 1/5th to as much as 1/10th of an AAS cycle (and that's just assuming the AAS cycle is a sensible one) are 40-50% it's kind of a cool pay off. Put it this way - less than a 5th of the dose for half the gains and far less chance of any side effects.

    I'll also add, as I've addressed before, there are a ton of things you can do to retain those gains between cycles.

  2. #2
    Moderator stevesmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    51,904
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by Mobster View Post
    Inspired by Dylan G's video (https://www.evolutionary.org/forums/...lli-79846.html) and Nelson M's questions I'll ask the question here.

    So we all know sarms are typically run at lower doses than steroids right? Equally, when run at those doses, side effects tend to be less. Finally those gains we all want tend to be smaller. With me so far?

    So Nelson has asked, several times, a few 'what if' questions

    1) What if you ran Sarms at the same doses we typically run steroids?
    2) Would those side effects for sarms be on a par with steroids
    3) Would the muscle, strength or power gains for those sarms be the same?

    It would be remiss of me to not point out the bleeding obvious - much like PH having the choice of AAS or Sarms is one we make for ourselves. So not having to run AAS is great. Not having to run Sarms at the same kind of doses is even better.

    Now, if the gains on a sarms cycle, with those doses often 1/5th to as much as 1/10th of an AAS cycle (and that's just assuming the AAS cycle is a sensible one) are 40-50% it's kind of a cool pay off. Put it this way - less than a 5th of the dose for half the gains and far less chance of any side effects.

    I'll also add, as I've addressed before, there are a ton of things you can do to retain those gains between cycles.
    easy answer on all those 3 questions

    1. NO
    2. NO
    3. NO

    steroids and sarms are just not comparable. it would be like saying if i run a ton of fadogia i would get my test levels to 5000 instead of taking 500mg of cyp a week for 5 weeks. it just isn't the same comparison.

    sarms are already ran at PED dosages. the therapeutic dosage of LGD for eample is 3mg a day. but we run it 10-20mg a day or more. now if you ran LGD at 100mg a day you still would not match steroids effects whether it be sides, strength or size. and if you ran steroids (let's say cyp at 90mg a week) which are non PED dosages you would not get the same sides, strength or size gains either. so comparing the two to me makes no sense

    the benefit of sarms is you don't get those androgenic, estrogenic, inflammation, or reproductive sides that steroids give you. and when it comes to shut down even 90mg a week test will shut you down completely, while sarms will not even at PED dosages.
    Last edited by stevesmi; 05-23-2021 at 03:44 PM.
    Masters degrees in science-human nutrition/psychology
    Now taking clients for 1 on 1 consults
    Looking for a steroid source? click> https://www.evolutionary.org/forums/...ued-79912.html
    http://goo.gl/kDk0zS <save 10% on bloodwork
    http://goo.gl/bVJ44F <supp store deals
    https://goo.gl/Vy5WA7 <Ebooks 4sale



  3. #3
    V.I.P. - Author nelson montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,171
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by stevesmi View Post
    easy answer on all those 3 questions

    1. NO
    2. NO
    3. NO

    steroids and sarms are just not comparable. it would be like saying if i run a ton of fadogia i would get my test levels to 5000 instead of taking 500mg of cyp a week for 5 weeks. it just isn't the same comparison.

    sarms are already ran at PED dosages. the therapeutic dosage of LGD for eample is 3mg a day. but we run it 10-20mg a day or more. now if you ran LGD at 100mg a day you still would not match steroids effects whether it be sides, strength or size. and if you ran steroids (let's say cyp at 90mg a week) which are non PED dosages you would not get the same sides, strength or size gains either. so comparing the two to me makes no sense
    I think you missed the point. It isn't a "what if" in the imaginary or even the hypothetical sense. It's a direct correlation. It's completely tangible.

    Let me put it simpler.

    There MUST be a SARMS dosage comparable to 200 mgs of test and 10 mgs of D-bol a day. And I sure hope nobody comes on and says 'THAT WON'T DO ANYTHING!" because it sure as hell will if you know how to train. (It won't if you'v edepended on drugs for too long as is the very often the case). That's been proven thousands of time. Okay...so what would be a comparable effective dosage of SARMS? 40 mgs a day? 50? Use THAT as the comparison.
    In that profile pic, I'm 64 years old. On only 100 mgs of TRT a week. Designer and Developer of N2GUARD and BRIDGE. www.needtobuildmuscle.com

  4. #4
    Moderator Mobster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    28,742
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson montana View Post
    I think you missed the point. It isn't a "what if" in the imaginary or even the hypothetical sense. It's a direct correlation. It's completely tangible.

    Let me put it simpler.

    There MUST be a SARMS dosage comparable to 200 mgs of test and 10 mgs of D-bol a day. And I sure hope nobody comes on and says 'THAT WON'T DO ANYTHING!" because it sure as hell will if you know how to train. (It won't if you'v edepended on drugs for too long as is the very often the case). That's been proven thousands of time. Okay...so what would be a comparable effective dosage of SARMS? 40 mgs a day? 50? Use THAT as the comparison.
    1) Stevesmi says no.
    2) You don't actually know based on your reply. That's fine. Else you'd say then present evidence to say what happens.

  5. #5
    Moderator dylangemelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    20,640
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson montana View Post
    I think you missed the point. It isn't a "what if" in the imaginary or even the hypothetical sense. It's a direct correlation. It's completely tangible.

    Let me put it simpler.

    There MUST be a SARMS dosage comparable to 200 mgs of test and 10 mgs of D-bol a day. And I sure hope nobody comes on and says 'THAT WON'T DO ANYTHING!" because it sure as hell will if you know how to train. (It won't if you'v edepended on drugs for too long as is the very often the case). That's been proven thousands of time. Okay...so what would be a comparable effective dosage of SARMS? 40 mgs a day? 50? Use THAT as the comparison.
    i 100 pecent get your question and am not going to mix words etc... heres the problem, its just not accurately comparable... for example, and im absolutely sure you will appreciate this... you and i both know because weve done it several times... primo at 400 mg does plenty for both of us where many people say you MUST run 500-600 etc. and you will get X amount of results by doing so... we both know, at least in OUR experience, thats not necessarily true however for some, they may actually need that much to get results... so as we have to point out constantly, everyone is different... different on wants, needs, body responses etc... you cant say, X amount of s4 will be the same as X amount of anavar... there's no real way to tell that and in all honesty, i dont see s4, although very similar in LIKE results as winstrol, would ever be on par... the main thing here is while they give somewhat comparable results, they are not as strong as steroids... its an alternative... so for me to come out and say 100 mg of s4 would equate 30 mg of winstrol, may be fair to say, but thats never going to be accurate enough for people because some will tell you that even s4 is stronger at that dose than a low dose of winstrol... we can only go on peoples' accounts of how things turned out and there's too many variables...

    ive been asked likely a million times "how much mk677 would equal 2 ius of hgh" and once again, i just dont see how you can answer that because mk677 will never be hgh... it is about as close as you can get to hgh but i dont think its a fair comparison... i think your question is very very fair and i hate to not give a concrete, definitive answer, but unfortunately, there just isnt one... just like i can actually say X amount of say GHRP-2 and GHRP-6 stacked would give this amount of HGH results etc... you just cant say that with accuracy... you can imply some numbers and possibly be right for one person but you and I also both know that people create their own remembrances of things as well... its just a basically impossible answer becuase noone will ever be happy with the answer given...

    I could easily just start throwing numbers at you, figure out a way to justify it by finding certain circumstances but know in truth there are other accounts that would go right against it... its just way too difficult to say with accuracy... all i can do is give you each sarm, show you its "similar" steroid counter part and explain what they do and how they differ etc... i can do that all day and all night

    its a very fair question for sure but its just too subjective and complex to say with certainty and i despise not having a definitive answer...




  6. #6
    V.I.P. - Author nelson montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,171
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by Mobster View Post
    1) Stevesmi says no.
    2) You don't actually know based on your reply. That's fine. Else you'd say then present evidence to say what happens.
    Not sure exactly what you mean here. I was referring to Steve's comparison of using fadogia to test. That's a bit of a false analogy. I was talking about a direct comparison in regard to desired result. (If that makes sense). Once that is established, then we can go about discussing the merits one way or another.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by dylangemelli View Post
    i 100 pecent get your question and am not going to mix words etc... heres the problem, its just not accurately comparable... for example, and im absolutely sure you will appreciate this... you and i both know because weve done it several times... primo at 400 mg does plenty for both of us where many people say you MUST run 500-600 etc. and you will get X amount of results by doing so... we both know, at least in OUR experience, thats not necessarily true however for some, they may actually need that much to get results... so as we have to point out constantly, everyone is different... different on wants, needs, body responses etc... you cant say, X amount of s4 will be the same as X amount of anavar... there's no real way to tell that and in all honesty, i dont see s4, although very similar in LIKE results as winstrol, would ever be on par... the main thing here is while they give somewhat comparable results, they are not as strong as steroids... its an alternative... so for me to come out and say 100 mg of s4 would equate 30 mg of winstrol, may be fair to say, but thats never going to be accurate enough for people because some will tell you that even s4 is stronger at that dose than a low dose of winstrol... we can only go on peoples' accounts of how things turned out and there's too many variables...

    ive been asked likely a million times "how much mk677 would equal 2 ius of hgh" and once again, i just dont see how you can answer that because mk677 will never be hgh... it is about as close as you can get to hgh but i dont think its a fair comparison... i think your question is very very fair and i hate to not give a concrete, definitive answer, but unfortunately, there just isnt one... just like i can actually say X amount of say GHRP-2 and GHRP-6 stacked would give this amount of HGH results etc... you just cant say that with accuracy... you can imply some numbers and possibly be right for one person but you and I also both know that people create their own remembrances of things as well... its just a basically impossible answer becuase noone will ever be happy with the answer given...

    I could easily just start throwing numbers at you, figure out a way to justify it by finding certain circumstances but know in truth there are other accounts that would go right against it... its just way too difficult to say with accuracy... all i can do is give you each sarm, show you its "similar" steroid counter part and explain what they do and how they differ etc... i can do that all day and all night

    its a very fair question for sure but its just too subjective and complex to say with certainty and i despise not having a definitive answer...
    I agree with all of that, but I'll add that when people say they don't get X result from X compound, very often their perspective is skewed. There are guys who take Primo and sit on their ass eating Doritos and say it doesn't do anything, meanwhile they'll take Anadrol, sit on their ass and eat Doritos and gain 10 pounds and think it's awesome! LOL

    So my question would be presented under equal circumstances. Yeah, people still respond differently to different compounds but I think we can get closer that way.
    In that profile pic, I'm 64 years old. On only 100 mgs of TRT a week. Designer and Developer of N2GUARD and BRIDGE. www.needtobuildmuscle.com

  7. #7
    Moderator dylangemelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    20,640
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson montana View Post
    Not sure exactly what you mean here. I was referring to Steve's comparison of using fadogia to test. That's a bit of a false analogy. I was talking about a direct comparison in regard to desired result. (If that makes sense). Once that is established, then we can go about discussing the merits one way or another.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I agree with all of that, but I'll add that when people say they don't get X result from X compound, very often their perspective is skewed. There are guys who take Primo and sit on their ass eating Doritos and say it doesn't do anything, meanwhile they'll take Anadrol, sit on their ass and eat Doritos and gain 10 pounds and think it's awesome! LOL

    So my question would be presented under equal circumstances. Yeah, people still respond differently to different compounds but I think we can get closer that way.
    i know …. Fuck sake i know




  8. #8
    VIP Fella Finn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    4,497
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Priceless information sir! I love these videos!






  9. #9
    NPC Champion Npcclassicphysique champ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    1,761
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by Mobster View Post
    Inspired by Dylan G's video (https://www.evolutionary.org/forums/...lli-79846.html) and Nelson M's questions I'll ask the question here.

    So we all know sarms are typically run at lower doses than steroids right? Equally, when run at those doses, side effects tend to be less. Finally those gains we all want tend to be smaller. With me so far?

    So Nelson has asked, several times, a few 'what if' questions

    1) What if you ran Sarms at the same doses we typically run steroids?
    2) Would those side effects for sarms be on a par with steroids
    3) Would the muscle, strength or power gains for those sarms be the same?


    It would be remiss of me to not point out the bleeding obvious - much like PH having the choice of AAS or Sarms is one we make for ourselves. So not having to run AAS is great. Not having to run Sarms at the same kind of doses is even better.

    Now, if the gains on a sarms cycle, with those doses often 1/5th to as much as 1/10th of an AAS cycle (and that's just assuming the AAS cycle is a sensible one) are 40-50% it's kind of a cool pay off. Put it this way - less than a 5th of the dose for half the gains and far less chance of any side effects.

    I'll also add, as I've addressed before, there are a ton of things you can do to retain those gains between cycles.
    1) 2) NO, sarms dosing protocols are different so are side effects.

    3) it's possible to have similar gains from sarms vs steroids.
    For example, winstrol is comparable to andarine S4, that's a fact I've tested this. Around 10-20mgs of winstrol is close to 50-75mgs of andarine s4 (added 25mgs ostarine). The only real problem with andarine is the vision sides, not all can handle vision side effects.
    There was an article about this a while back by Russian Star I think.
    https://www.evolutionary.org/s-4-and...n-to-winstrol/

    I have a few clients that did testolone RAD140 20mgs with 25mgs andarine s4 and 50mgs ostarine, stacked with cardarine gw 20mgs (+ostazol), I would compare those results to a mild steroid cycle for sure. Even had guys prep for shows with his mix.

    Will it be the same for everyone? Hard to say, depends on genetics, diet, training etc.

    I found stacking multiple SARMS can have steroid-like positive effects without the negatives of steroids. Obviously no sarms are ever going to be the same as 500mgs of test and 500mgs of trenbolone but other then the extremes, sarms can be close to a low-milk steroid cycle.

  10. #10
    EVO V.I.P. JasonPriest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Chicago/Miami
    Posts
    1,451
    Supplement Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Source Reviews
    Read All Reviews
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson montana View Post

    There MUST be a SARMS dosage comparable to 200 mgs of test and 10 mgs of D-bol a day. .
    it is unrealistic to make that comparison

    that is like trying to mate a donkey with a horse
    Domestic-Supply.com Team

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •