Myth: SARMs = AAS gains without AAS problems.
Reality: SARMs are more selective for muscle and bone than classical anabolic-androgenic steroids, but they still hit the endocrine system and can reproduce many of the same issues. Selective is not the same as harmless, and selectivity fades as doses climb.
Reality: SARMs are more selective for muscle and bone than classical anabolic-androgenic steroids, but they still hit the endocrine system and can reproduce many of the same issues. Selective is not the same as harmless, and selectivity fades as doses climb.
What SARMs are good at
- Tissue bias: compared to most AAS, SARMs preferentially activate androgen receptors in muscle and bone. That usually means fewer prostate issues and a lower rate of overt androgenic sides.
- Liver and lipids: generally less hepatotoxic than 17-aa oral steroids and typically less punishing on HDL/LDL. âLess badâ is not âgood,â but it matters.
- Estrogenic side-effects: most SARMs donât aromatize, so gynecomastia, water retention, and blood pressure spikes are less common.
- Suppression spectrum: many SARMs are less suppressive than most AAS. Not all. S-23 is a notable exception with heavy suppression.
The SARMs compromise
- Weaker anabolics: for building muscle and strength, most SARMs underperform well-designed AAS cycles. Advanced athletes often find them underwhelming. Thatâs the price of a gentler profile.
- Side-effects still exist: acne, hair shedding, mood changes, changes in libido, sleep disruption, and blood pressure drift can happen. Andarine can cause visual tints; RAD-140 is notorious for irritability in some; LGD and MK have documented HPTA suppression. âLess likelyâ â âcanât happen.â
The elephant in the room: little long-term data
- Human trials were short and limited. No SARM is approved for general medical use. Most human studies are small, weeks to a few months, and focused on frailty or cachexia endpoints, not multi-year cardiometabolic or fertility outcomes.
- Notable unknowns:
- Cardiovascular events over years, not weeks
- Fertility and recovery timeline for men and women
- Neurocognitive effects
- Carcinogenicity risks with chronic or repeated use
- Bone quality after cycling on/off for years
- Market reality: the consumer supply is a grey market. Mislabeling, under/over-dosing and contamination happen. Your âSARMâ may contain prohormones, stimulants, or nothing at all. Any risk/benefit analysis assumes you know what youâre taking; most donât.
Where SARMs can make sense
- Beginners: as an entry point when someone refuses to touch AAS, accepts slower progress, and prioritizes a milder side-effect slope.
- Off-season or bridge phases: modest anabolic support without the bloat, estrogen management, and hepatic stress of harsh orals.
- Women: very careful use only. Lower androgenic risk than many AAS, but virilization is still possible.
Practical guardrails
- One compound at a time. Stacking hides cause and effect and multiplies unknowns.
- Cycle length conservative. Use for a few weeks. Respect suppression.
- Bloodwork. Before, during, after. CBC, CMP, AST/ALT, lipid panel, fasting glucose/insulin, TT/FT, LH/FSH, SHBG, prolactin, thyroid panel and blood pressure.
- Post-cycle planning: donât assume âno PCT needed.â Suppression varies by compound and dose.
- Sourcing: if you canât verify identity and purity, youâre running a lottery, and most people do that.
- Goal honesty: if you want advanced, competition-level progress, AAS are simply more effective. If you want mild, incremental improvements with fewer headaches, SARMs might be the compromise.
Summary of SARMs
- AAS are superior anabolics. They build more muscle and strength, period.
- SARMs arenât side-effect free. Theyâre âless badâ at some things, still problematic at others, and their long-term profile is largely unknown.
- They still have a niche. Beginner cycles and off-season phases where a lighter touch is acceptable.
- Data gap = caution. When the scientific record is shallow, your risk management has to be deep.