None of the SARMs yet developed are truly selective for anabolic effects in muscle or bone tissues without producing any androgenic effects in tissues such as the prostate gland, however the compounds tested so far show a ratio of anabolic to androgenic effects of at
least 3:1 and even up to as much as 10:1, whereas all known anabolic steroids have a ratio of around 1:1.[1][2][3]
This suggests that while SARMs are likely to show some virilizing effects when used at high doses (e.g. recreational abuse by bodybuilders), at lower therapeutic doses they may well be effectively selective for anabolic effects, which will be important if SARMs are to have clinical application in the treatment of osteoporosis in women. One substantial advantage of even the first-generation SARMs developed to date is that they are all o
rally active without causing liver damage, whereas most anabolic steroids are not active orally and must be injected, and those anabolic steroids which are orally active tend to cause dose-dependent liver damage which can become life-threatening with excessive use. Research is continuing into more potent and selective SARMs, as well as optimising characteristics such as oral bioavailability and increased half-life in vivo, and seeing as the first tissue-selective SARMs were only demonstrated in 2003, the compounds tested so far represent only the
first generation of SARMs and future development is likely to produce greatly superior agents compared to those available at present.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by jnewton86
