Is a month enough time for a S4, Osta and GW50 Cycle

[MiamiBadBoyBOSS]

What's up guys!




I've been beating up the search button, like a pimp beats his low rent whores, researching the use of CJC-1293, Ipamorelin, S4, Osta and GW50, but there's so much info out there, that I'm getting information overload. Now I may be a noob here, but not to the game. The thing is, I've never use these compounds before.


BTW - here's my "Hello" so you guys know where I'm coming from

http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/new-members-begin-here/183511-hey-guys-girls.html


Anyways, on August 12th, I will be leaving for the Merchant Marines; I will be at their facility in Piney Point Maryland for a year, during boot camp and training, so what I am trying to do is get get my fat ass in better shape, since I know they're going to work me like that pimp works his $2 whores.


Now getting to my question... from my research, the peps will be pointless to start, since I will be leaving in August. From my understanding, you really need to be on them fro a good 4 to 6 months to see any real results. Now if I am wrong, please let me know.


As for the SARMs, giving that it's the 23rd and I still need to place the order, then allotting time for shipping, maybe a week, that will give me basically a month to be on it. Is that enough time to get any real benefit out of it?


I am in the gym 5 days a week. I have been focusing on cardio, doing 55 mins on the treadmill. I have just started incorporating weight training these last 2 weeks, but I mainly want to focus on getting my BF down.


As for my diet, I have been doing a low carb, high protein, high fat diet... basically the Atkins diet. I do my cardio on an empty stomach, save for an Optimum Nutrition 100% Whey shake (3g of carbs), mixed with Flax seed oil, and a BSN NO Xplode drink. My meal is a shit ton of sweet dead cow, pig, fish or foul flesh and 2 cups of broccoli. I try to keep my carbs around 20 net carbs a day. My BIGGEST issue with eating is I DON'T eat. Most days, I'll have that one shake and then the one meal, however on weight days, I've been making a point to take in a double scoop shake and some BCAA after the workout, for the rapid protein intake. I did buy some Atkins snack bars to eat through out the day, but I know... I know... it's not the same.


So... as for doing a cycle of S4, Osta, and GW50, is it pointless to do it for a month? I was thinking about bring it with me, but with classes, details, and everything else I will be doing, who know what kind of gym time I'll get in.


Thanks guys!


MB

 

[Mike Arnold]

I would be very leary of the GW501516 at this point. WADDA just released a health warning about GW, saying it was pulled from clinical trials because of toxicity/carginogenic concerns. When GW was tested in animals...it gave EVERY rat which was tested tumors...in multiple oragans...at ALL dosages! It is uncommon to see these kind of health warnings from this organization. Clearly, the research behind this drug shows it to be unacceptably danergous in animals...do you want to take the same risk?

 

[jerome simpson]

I've heard the tumors in rats part before, but the ALL dosages? I thought they were giving them dosages/body weight at X times what people are using it at. I'd like to see a source if you have it (genuinely, not calling you out).

 

[MiamiBadBoyBOSS]

I've heard the tumors in rats part before, but the ALL dosages? I thought they were giving them dosages/body weight at X times what people are using it at. I'd like to see a source if you have it (genuinely, not calling you out).

This is exactly what I heard, as well. The rats were given crazy amounts for a very extended time. Plus I read that the research is fairly old and out dated.

MB

 

[XXL]

if thats true... fuck.. im gonna die... and that not funny.. i need to read this article your reading

 

[Mike Arnold]

I've heard the tumors in rats part before, but the ALL dosages? I thought they were giving them dosages/body weight at X times what people are using it at. I'd like to see a source if you have it (genuinely, not calling you out).

All dosages they used in the rats during the studies. I don't know what dosages were used, but it is still quite disturbing that all the dosages used in the clinical trials led to tumor formation.

 

[Mike Arnold]

This is exactly what I heard, as well. The rats were given crazy amounts for a very extended time. Plus I read that the research is fairly old and out dated.

MB

I think the research was done in 2009 or right around that time....hardly considered old or out of date. The problem is that the reserach results were not released (or made known) until recently.

 

[Mike Arnold]

if thats true... fuck.. im gonna die... and that not funny.. i need to read this article your reading

I believe that the majority of tumors were benign, which reduces risk, but even if one is malignant...one is all it takes to cause big problems. Obviously, this does not necessarily mean that humans will encounter the same problem at any dosage, but the study results had researchers concerned enough for them to not only discontinue research, but to issue a health wanrning regarding its use. I am a risk taker by nature, as are most steroid users...and I have used the majority of research chems without reservation, but this recent warning concerns me enough that I will no longer be using GW unless further research proves its safety, which is unlikely to happen, as no further clinical reserach will be taking place with this drug. Whenever legitimate drug makers decide to discontinue research based on a drug's potential health consequences, especially when the compound at hand has already exhibited considerable promise in the treatment of multiple common medical conditions, it should five any cause for concern. Pharmacies are in the market to make money...and as most people know, they have often taken risks with the public's health in order to make those dollars, so when they decide to forgo potential profits with promising drug therapies, they usually have a pretty good reason. Now, anyone can choose to ignore these warnings and they may end up just fine...or they might not. Personally, I would rather abstain.

 

[XXL]

I believe that the majority of tumors were benign, which reduces risk, but even if one is malignant...one is all it takes to cause big problems. Obviously, this does not necessarily mean that humans will encounter the same problem at any dosage, but the study results had researchers concerned enough for them to not only discontinue research, but to issue a health wanrning regarding its use. I am a risk taker by nature, as are most steroid users...and I have used the majority of research chems without reservation, but this recent warning concerns me enough that I will no longer be using GW unless further research proves its safety, which is unlikely to happen, as no further clinical reserach will be taking place with this drug. Whenever legitimate drug makers decide to discontinue research based on a drug's potential health consequences, especially when the compound at hand has already exhibited considerable promise in the treatment of multiple common medical conditions, it should five any cause for concern. Pharmacies are in the market to make money...and as most people know, they have often taken risks with the public's health in order to make those dollars, so when they decide to forgo potential profits with promising drug therapies, they usually have a pretty good reason. Now, anyone can choose to ignore these warnings and they may end up just fine...or they might not. Personally, I would rather abstain.

Well said. I couldnt agree more. I'm all for a risk here and there but I was shady about this from day one cause there was such limited research but a lot of bro science was enough to make me go ahead with gw and, osta. This new sarm lgd I won't even look at.
Ill stick to aas. At least then I KNOW what I am walking into.