No, twas an anti ageing clinic. Yes, that’s pretty much what happened. There are also clinics online here that’ll prescribe you ostarine, LGD-4033, GHRP/GH secretagogues and more. All it takes is for one to get bloods, have a phone consult with a physician and boom you’ve got a private script. It costs an arm and a leg and isn’t something I’d do again though. As a matter of fact I never used the ostarine.
I do, though I am on testosterone replacement therapy for this. Ostarine would be an inferior treatment protocol for hypogonadism. I’ve seen the data pertaining to the potential for SARMS being used as adjunct therapy to treat sarcopenia/age related hypogonadism but I have my qualms. I was prescribed the ostarine because “I wanted to build muscle”.
Firstly, the notion of SARMs being superior towards select demographics is in part due to the prospect of tissue selectivity. There is a lot of worry/gerrymandering going on revolving the potential effects TRT has on the prostate, as TRT may aggravate things for those with a genetic predisposition for BPH. The jury on TRT and rates of prostate cancer amongst said demographic being treated is still out, though it doesn’t appear to significantly increase risk/mortality rates associated with prostate cancer unless you initiate treatment whilst already on. There is also some interesting data indicative those who are hypogonadal who acquire prostate cancer may be more likely to have aggressive forms of the disease.
The thing is, the number of AR in the prostate doesn’t appear to be malleable as is the case with skeletal muscle. Said existing AR can be upregulated though, but only to an extent. If you don’t have the genes that allow androgenic stimulation of the prostate to reach a degree that it causes BPH/cancerous mutation chances are it ain’t going to happen.
But lets say you are prone to BPH/you’ve had prostate cancer and you have hypogonadism/associated medical pathology associated with a lack of testosterone (insulin resistance, osteopenia, loss of muscle mass, lack of energy/libido etc). nonsteroidal sarms sound great in theory as a tissue selective substrate for the androgen receptor, but in practical application they aren’t.
They don’t have affinity for the ER/5ar enzymes and on paper appear to impart highly selective effects regarding the tissues of which they bind to androgen receptors in (favouring skeletal muscle as opposed to test which binds to AR everywhere including cardiac myocytes, bone marrow, the brain etc).
But this doesn’t appear to be the case. Plenty of men/women who use injectable SARMS (or oral), even in relatively low dosages report androgenic effects like acne, hirsutism (women), occasionally androgenic alopecia etc (concerning) and more. To boot, the effect imparted on cholesterol through sarms appears on par, if not worse than c17-aa AAS. We already have anabolic steroids that have been designed to be more “tissue selective”. We know (sort of) what the long term implications associated with these meds are, SARMS are a wildcard. In the end I think they’ll be on par with AAS in terms of how dangerous they are.
In a last resort scenario you’d probably be better off giving a old person something like Metenolone. It’ll hit lipids, albeit not as harshly as SARM’s, it’s less androgenic than testosterone and although it does increase cardiovascular risk it probably does less so than an equitable dose of testosterone if we are talking like 100mg/wk (11bHSD inhibition, 20-Hydroxyeicosatetraenoic Acid release and subsequent RAAS dysregulation etc). This only accounts for those highly predisposed to adverse effects mediated through testosterone. For the majority 100mg test = safer than 100mg primo, though this equation doesn’t maintain exact proportions. I’d argue 1000mg primo is probably safer than 1000mg test, though using either drug in such a manner likely imparts long term repercussions.
I don’t know, I’m not an expert. You seem like a smart guy, let me know your opinions on the matter of age related hypogonadism/treatments (if you’re interested in having that conversation). It doesn’t appear as if sarms are the magic bullet they’re made out to be and I find it very frustrating supplement companies are marketing this stuff to kids/young adults as a safe alternative to steroids when they’re not…