T Nation

Well At Least One SARM Works

I’ll spare you the details, but data from the phase two trial of VK5211, formerly known as LGD4033 was released, and the results were impressive.

At 2mg/d for 12 weeks the lean body mass gains were 9.1%. Now this was in men and women >65 years old who had recently suffered hip fractures.

Taken on its face we can hypothesize that VK5211 is effective at not only sparing muscle tissue during what would normally be a catabolic state, but that it can actually increase anabolism without heavy exercise (people with broken hips tend not to be lifting while recovering). Now it’s entirely possible that these results get diminished in a healthy, active adult, but for now the evidence points to this SARM being medically useful (and safe within the parameters of the trial). So now we have some real science that can take the place of the broscience that’s surrounded SARMs for the last few years.

I’ll link to the study results if anyone wants to read it.

I would like to read the study

This is the research report. Pages 2-3 are the science parts for VK5211. The actual clinical trial data are no longer archived on Viking’s site (or at least both that I could readily find). This includes all of the relevant information for this forum’s purposes.

Buddy takes it and loves it. He hasn’t had any side effects. I guess they are cracking down on it in the marketplace though?

So it was always a grey market. Technically, while a chemical or biological drug is still in the investigatory stage it’s not a controlled substance, for the purposes of possession, manufacture, or distribution for research. Once it gets approval it’s a different story. So for the SARM buyer they’re still operating within the bounds of the murky law…sort of. Once one of these is approved to treat something—anything—they become a controlled substance and that’s game over. But Congress is looking to crack down on them before that happens.


Have you used any of these compounds?

Sweet, who wants to be the first guini pig! People are selling this stuff in powder form on eBay, quite frankly, I still wouldn’t touch it until we know of its long term implications, however these trial results look VERY promising!

I have a good friend that just wrapped up a cycle of LGD 4033. He loved it. I personally ran a cycle of ostarine 2 years ago and I enjoyed it. There is no comparison to testosterone. On Ostarine I found my sense of well being was incredible. I didnt gain any weight or strength for that matter. I did get shredded. Once i started trt my strength levels went through the roof.

I hate these studies. They just don’t translate in any reasonable way to people like us. No interest from me.

1 Like

They serve as a baseline for whether or not something works in specific conditions. And all this gives people is another datapoint. It’s not indicative of overall efficacy for the broader population, but it tells us that this drug has the ability to aid in muscle growth in those who are sedentary and, in many cases, in a calorie deficit. That information may very well be useless to you (and it is to me as I wouldn’t use the stuff) but it’s information nonetheless.


i hear ya.

I mean, I’m of the belief that all the SARMS out there ‘work’. For me, it’s always been a question of ‘what is the downside/longterm effect’, and ‘how effective are they vs other products that have been on the market for a long time’. Those are the questions I haven’t seen answered. Most of the SARMS that have been around to this point have started out with a ton of hype, and they just haven’t lived up to it. Maybe LGD will be different. Give it enough time, and we’ll see. If it’s as usesful as some people claim it to be, it will find a spot in the bodybuilding world.

1 Like

I dont think any of them will compare to anabolics. I am fairly confident that the plan is to use these compounds for trt. Replacing the need for testosterone and injections. They are oral. They are pharmaceuticals. The price will go through the roof so there will be money to be made as opposed to cheap testosterone cypionate. It will become a racket. 2 years ago when I was low t… it made me feel amazing. I loved ostarine. Ran it for 60 days at 12.5 mg and didnt want to stop.

1 Like

I’ve read some anecdotes about RAD-140 being considered as a future TRT drug. I don’t know if we ever get to a place where replacing testosterone with testosterone is not the preferred method, but you could well be right.

Its gonna be a racket and they will make their money. Hell there’s probably tons of guys on here that will go on it. It doesn’t turn into estrogen. Bam. Most guys on t replacement forum gone. That’s why most of them are here. Dudes that dont like needles. Gone. Rad 140 has a side effect that protects the prostate. It’s the future. Limitless drugs.

Wait what?
Tamoxifen (Nolvadex) or a liquid form (brand name: Soltamox) is the oldest and most-prescribed selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM). Its been working for years.

SARM and SERM aren’t the same thing. The way you can tell is by identifying the fact that they’re different acronyms with different spellings.


I’ve used Ostarine and S4 for 8 weeks before. I was able to ‘look’ leaner whilst on it and got some decent pumps. S4 is supposed to be the strength Sarm but I didn’t see any changes whilst on it, it just gave me good pumps during training.

**** that shit gona start and stick to AAS

I can understand SARMS being used in an older population who may be sensitive to the androgenic effects of testosterone, however for a younger male populace will SARM’s be able to cut it? The androgenic profile of testosterone stimulates the development of secondary sexual characteristics, maintainence of adequate libido etc. Will SARM’s be able to fulfill these purposes, think we have a kid with Klinefelters syndrome ( or kallmans or whatever stopped the kid from properly completing puberty) testosterone replacement will help this individual with fat redistribution (particularly in Klinefelters), increased muscle mass, potentially with insulin sensitivity (esp Klinefelters), libido and development of body/facial hair. While choosing a SARM in place of TRT will help in the muscle mass department and potentially in the fat redistribution department (depends on how SARMS affect fat mass and distribution), I don’t see how a SARM can help out with the development of secondary sexual characteristics and increased libido that testosterone gives, am I missing something here? It just seems silly to use something that isn’t testosterone for… Testosterone replacement, if an individual doesn’t like injections, well methyltestosterone and fluoxymesteorne (halotestin) are still approved agents for trt, halo can be prescribed up to 20mg/day and methyltestosterone up to 50mg/day, toxicity be damned, apparently some people would prefer that over a tiny injection, I actually can’t believe these medications are still approved in the USA, there’s a ton of methyltestosterone unused just sitting around, can’t believe it hasn’t made its way onto the BM yet. And at least these two agents are derivitaves of and structurally closely resemble testosterone!

Estrogen is required for optimal bone density, libido and wellbeing among a host of other positive effects, using a SARM in place of TRT will tank natural testosterone levels, possibly leaving estrogen production in the gutter, seriously, how can this be a good idea, I must be confused somehow. There’s absolutely no WAY doctors would prescribe these drugs in place of TRT if it was riskier than TRT

Most sarms do not tank natural testosterone. You would still have your natural testosterone levels and you would still be making estrogen. The people you see claiming sarms crashed them were probably buying pro hormones packaged as sarms. Designer drugs are the future my friend. As soon as they can get them approved.

I have to disagree, but in a very narrow way. There have been posts on other forums that included blood work showing how several different SARMs were suppressive. So I will say that they can have an impact on natural testosterone production, with the caveat being “we don’t know nearly enough to determine the size of the impact or the purity of the substance ingested”.

On a side note, there was a pretty big investigation done regarding what’s actually in many of the popular SARMs sold by major brands and research chem companies. If you know what you’re looking at you can determine which line of data corresponds to which brand. A good deal of them were, at the time of the investigation, selling pure, accurately labeled stuff. Some brands…were absolutely not. Not a big shocker I suppose.