Printable View
Ok mind my ignorance but how many bottles of lions s4 do I need to run it for about 4 or 6 weeks..... The question is more like do I need kore than one bottle... Would you guys choose 1 month of SARM at a not so elevated dose( I really don't know what Is and what is not an elevated dose or even a standard dose) or 1 month of 30 mg of var?
100-150 mg a day.
So that comes out to more than 30 bottles of s-4 from him. Good luck if thats where you bought it.
I wouldn't do either of those options.Quote:
Originally Posted by elpropiotorvic
They both suck IMO.
Dammnnn that makes it completely out of the budget... We should get equate to make the cheaper version lol
I'd try running var for 50 mg for 7-8 if I wasn't so dammn expensive but I have a phobia for needles so no t for me ... I'll stay working hard and eating properly
VAR is very very expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by elpropiotorvic
If you have a needle problem STEROIDS are not for you man.
It really does not physically hurt. Its the mental factorthat is hard. Hell My neighbor is on trt . Ill go over and give his shot to him(because he is a PU$$Y) and he can not feel it.
MAN UP . Or do it naturally. Orals can be very dangerous.
The only thing I feel comftortable with is var... Little sides... None in my case ( I guess the little dose plus had nolva on hand just in case) needles... I don't know ... They are not for me ... In my family only my mom can take them... My dad and I pass out (very embarassing I know) once 10 nurses tried to restrain me ( bad) they couldNt I didn't let them and I just ended up meditating cause moving would really screw up the pinch...But I don't know I'm still young I'll stay not natty( already ran var) but like this ... Been doing. Well so far ...but back to the initial post which is why d section named sarms ... Does any body have a price that they know it's reasonable that's around ( or not around I should say this SARMs are a rare thing) is that wrong to ask in the forums
We have taken down the SARMs Liquid S4 from the site, there seems to be a problem with the label and the way it reads. We are looking into the problem and will keep you updated. Sorry for the inconvenience.
-LION
ahh, thank God there is an error, i was sad to see how expensive this could get. i look forward to your update Lion. Thanks.
Thank u thank u thank u :) let's hope for a pocket friendlier version
Well that is not good enough i think there suld be free s4 to all of us for the inconvinience :-P
Oh Really
i think it was an operator error
Ok if i remember somebody saying that they asked Lionel for the dosing of the SARM on the label, and he told them that they were way off on the dose, i alzo remember CHAP and OHYEAH saying something like the dose is around 150mg a day, but I found this, and even if it was done on elderly men, if we were to triplify the maximum dose (3mg) we wouldn't come close to the 150 mg range, imean they are not trained athletes at all but..... Still would tryplifying the dose cause something on us?
MEMPHIS, Tenn., Dec. 8,2006 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- GTx, Inc. (Nasdaq: GTXI), the Men's Health Biotech Company, today announced that ostarine, a first-in-class selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM), met its primary endpoint in a Phase II proof of concept double blind, randomized, placebo controlled clinical trial in 120 subjects (60 elderly men and 60 postmenopausal women). Without a prescribed diet or exercise regimen, all subjects treated with ostarine had a dose dependent increase in total lean body mass (muscle), with the 3 mg cohort achieving an increase of 1.3 kg compared to baseline and 1.4 kg compared to placebo (p<0.001) after three months of treatment. Treatment with ostarine also resulted in a dose dependent improvement in functional performance measured by a stair climb test, with the 3 mg cohort achieving a clinically significant improvement in both speed (p=0.006) and power (p=0.005). Ostarine continued to demonstrate a favorable safety profile, with no serious adverse events reported. Ostarine also exhibited tissue selectivity with beneficial effects on lean body mass and performance and with no apparent change in measurements for serum PSA (prostate), sebum production (skin and hair), or serum LH (pituitary) compared to placebo.
"These results are exciting," said William J. Evans, Ph.D., Professor of Geriatrics, Physiology, and Nutrition at the Donald W. Reynolds Institute of Aging of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. "Not only was there a change in lean body mass in the clinically significant range, but a significant change in functional performance was also seen. A clear anabolic effect with little to no unwanted androgenic effect was demonstrated, which should be the hallmark of a SARM."
The Phase II clinical trial evaluated four doses of ostarine (0.1 mg, 0.3 mg, 1 mg, and 3 mg) versus placebo for three months in 60 elderly men (average age 66 years) and 60 postmenopausal women (average age 63 years). The trial was conducted in five clinical sites in the United Kingdom and Germany.
A summary of the topline data is as follows:
- Primary endpoint: total lean body mass (LBM) measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) at baseline compared to three months
Among all subjects (n=114), ostarine treatment resulted in a dose dependent increase in total lean body mass, with an increase of 1.3 kg compared to baseline and 1.4 kg compared to placebo (p<0.001) at the 3 mg dose.
Among females (n=56), ostarine treatment resulted in a dose dependent increase in LBM with the 3 mg dose having an increase of 1.7 kg compared to baseline and an increase of 1.4 kg compared to placebo (p=0.02).
Among males (n=58), treatment with a 1 mg dose of ostarine resulted in a LBM increase of 0.7 kg compared to baseline and an increase of 1.2 kg compared to placebo (p=0.03), and treatment with a 3 mg dose of ostarine resulted in an increase of 1.0 kg compared to baseline and an increase of 1.4 kg compared to placebo (p=0.005).
- Secondary endpoints: performance, fat mass, bone mineral density, and bone turnover markers
In a stair climb functional performance test that measured speed (time to completion) and power exerted (watts), subjects treated with a 3 mg dose of ostarine demonstrated on average a 15.5% faster time to completion (p=0.006) and exerted on average 25.5% more power (p=0.005) than subjects receiving placebo.
Total tissue percent fat decreased compared to placebo in a dose dependent fashion and achieved statistical significance at the 1 mg dose (p=0.02) and 3 mg dose (p=0.006) of ostarine. Total fat mass was lower in subjects receiving either the 3 mg or 1 mg ostarine dose, although not at a statistically significant level (p = 0.08 for both doses). For subjects receiving the 3 mg ostarine dose, total fat on average declined 0.6 kg compared to placebo. The site of fat loss differed among male and female subjects, with males losing fat primarily from the trunk and abdomen, and females losing fat primarily from the thighs and legs.
In this short trial, ostarine had no apparent effect on bone mineral density, and bone turnover markers results were mixed. In preclinical in vitro and in vivo models, ostarine demonstrated both anabolic and antiresorptive activity on bone. A longer clinical study is necessary to demonstrate the actual effects of ostarine on bone.
- Safety
Ostarine continued to demonstrate a favorable safety profile, with no serious adverse events reported.
At the end of three months, no subject had clinically meaningful levels in liver enzyme tests. However, one female discontinued the study per protocol due to elevated liver enzymes which returned to baseline.
Ostarine treatment resulted in a dose dependent decrease in both LDL and HDL cholesterol levels, with the average LDL/HDL ratio for all doses tested remaining in the low cardiovascular risk category.
- Selectivity
Ostarine treatment resulted in no apparent effect on serum PSA (prostate), sebum production (skin and hair), or serum LH (pituitary).
Phase III
Phase III studies are randomized controlled trials on large patient groups (300–3,000 or more depending upon the condition) and are aimed at being the definitive assessment of the efficacy of the new therapy, in comparison with current 'Gold Standard' treatment. Phase III trials are the most expensive, time-consuming and difficult trials to design and run; especially in therapies for chronic conditions. Once a drug has proven satisfactory over Phase III trials, the trial results are usually combined into a large document containing a comprehensive description of the methods and results of human and animal studies, manufacturing procedures, formulation details, and shelf life. This collection of information makes up the "regulatory submission" that is provided for review to various regulatory authorities in different countries, such as the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States for marketing approval.
It is also common practice with many drugs whose approval is pending, that certain phase III trials will continue in an attempt at "label expansion”. In other words, proving additional efficacy for uses beyond the original use for which the drug was designed. Other reasons for performing trials at this stage are to support marketing claims. Studies in this phase are by some companies categorised as "Phase IIIB studies"
While not required in all studies, it is typically expected that there be at least two successful phase III trials, proving a drug's safety and efficacy, for approval from the standard regulatory agencies (FDA, TGA, EMEA, etc.). Though the current trend in recent months seems to be a move toward adaptive (live, changing) studies to expedite the process, there are no formal regulations for these trials in the pharmaceutical industry as of yet.
Phase IV
Phase IV trials involve the post-launch safety surveillance and ongoing technical support of a drug. Phase IV studies may be mandated by regulatory authorities or may be undertaken by the sponsoring company for competitive or other reasons. Post-launch safety surveillance is designed to detect any rare or long-term adverse effects over a much larger patient population and timescale than was possible during the initial clinical trials. Such adverse effects detected by Phase IV trials may result in the withdrawal or restriction of a drug - recent examples include cerivastatin (brand names Baycol and Lipobay), troglitazone (Rezulin) and rofecoxib (Vioxx).
But now lions sarms say 50 mg :s :s :s. Ifthe study is right we shouldnt be using a dose even closer to 150 mg , but nos his bottle says 50mg inly:(
the bottle in my hand right now says 100mg per ml and i am on as we speak 1.5cc a day
and i have read that before just because lion is the only one you know that sells it dosent mean he is the only one that has it or sells it
i dont even see sarms on the site yet so i have no idea what you are looking at ........sarms not sermsQuote:
Originally Posted by elpropiotorvic
Of course, BTW real S4's color is yellow, see this pic:Quote:
Originally Posted by OH REALLY
http://www.gtxinc.com/Pipeline/Ostar...866.aspx?Sid=4
The picture above shows the S4 before it is refined into fine powder.
Is not blue, green or any other color.
Suggested amounts are from 1mg to 3mg per kilogram of bodyweight but most tend to do well on 50mg to 100mg daily dosages.
C
thank you carlito...for clarifing and making things just a little more yellow....lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Carlito B
Said by lion "SARMs Liquid S4 will be available a week from today. Besides the misprint on the label/site, we've adjusted the formulation a bit as well. The site and labels should have read 50mgs/mL. While we've had to put it back a week, i am very happy with this formulation and how it has turned out. "
ok so sorry i didnt read the part where it said 50mg/ml si that jeans that there is enough SARM for almost 6 weeks?... Ireally suck at math u probably noticed
where did lion post that