Cardarine feedback?

[chadmack282]

All I’m saying is that for something to get approved by the fda it has to pass a common toxicity test. The rats are susceptible to cancer around 33 months, these rats got cancer as early as 6 weeks. There’s plenty of other things out there that we can take that didn’t kill all of the test subjects that’s my entire point. Also the real human equivalent dose is much lower than what I hear parroted on the internet. I didn’t say it causes cancer in humans if you go back and read what I wrote, I just encourage guys not to take it because based on what we know it’s probably at the very least risky Mr Katsup

But also rodent studies are the gold standard of toxicity testing and have to be completed before moving on to human trials lol

I don't care either way never used but pharma doesn't want to cure anything.
Profits are in continuous life long treatment, cures cut profit margins.

 

[JACKED_]

is it true that lab rats are born with a disposition to getting cancer?





key word here is cure.

the money is in making you sick and then selling you things to manage your symptoms, not cure you.

If everyone suddenly had better cholesterol numbers, that would effect the bottom line of the cholesterol drugs.

Yes they get cancer around 33 months. This causes cancer around 6-12 weeks.

To your big pharma point sure they want to make money I understand that and curing diabetes would make every medication we have for it obsolete, making this single handedly one of the most profitable drugs in existence. Americans will always eat chips and McDonald’s lol.

My entire point I’m trying to make is that by looking at the evidence the compound is very clearly toxic. It has some positive benefits absolutely, but it also has some pretty extreme negatives. Liver scarring being one of them that’s not cancer.

 

[JACKED_]

I guess it’s up to you how many times you want to roll the dice. We’re already doing it with the steroids and food volume. It’s just one more dice roll that’s all, and for what it does I’ll choose to not chance it. If it didn’t make me so much weaker I might consider using it again here and there. If you guys don’t know my background I used to use it months at a time. I’ve ran thousands of miles lol

 

[JACKED_]

I don't care either way never used but pharma doesn't want to cure anything.
Profits are in continuous life long treatment, cures cut profit margins.

I get the conspiracy minded take but there has to be a failsafe to not let toxic shit hit the market, granted lots of shit gets through yes. Some drugs show so much toxicity in trials that they can’t even try them on humans. If a couple mice lived maybe they could have done a meaningful trial on humans. There’s 1 human trial to my knowledge where they gave 15 different overweight men 5mgs and 10mgs a day for 15 days. All saw an improvement in cholesterol numbers.

 

[Smokey3]

Didn't do shit for me as far as endurance. I felt more from MOTS-C and SS31.

 

[Meetketchup]

My entire point I’m trying to make is that by looking at the evidence the compound is very clearly toxic.

You have yet to prove anything remote to justify that statement in humans. We can name compounds that humans consume all that time that in some cases cause cancer in rodents all day long, but not correlated to humans.

I'm so not trying to argue. I truly respect you and your opinion is totally cool man...seriously. But you make statements like the one bolded above that is simply not factual. I asked for 1 human that has contracted cancer from Cardarine with a citation and you can't provide one. Do you see where I'm coming from?

It's just weird that you are so hell bent on this one compound when you'll casually recommend hefty dosages of androgens all day long including tren when we know the havoc it can cause to blood work and organs.

 

[chadmack282]

Bottom line rodents shouldn't use cardarine.

 

[JACKED_]

You have yet to prove anything remote to justify that statement in humans. We can name compounds that humans consume all that time that in some cases cause cancer in rodents all day long, but not correlated to humans.

I'm so not trying to argue. I truly respect you and your opinion is totally cool man...seriously. But you make statements like the one bolded above that is simply not factual. I asked for 1 human that has contracted cancer from Cardarine with a citation and you can't provide one. Do you see where I'm coming from?

It's just weird that you are so hell bent on this one compound when you'll casually recommend hefty dosages of androgens all day long including tren when we know the havoc it can cause to blood work and organs.

There are so many better drugs that’s don’t kill all the test subjects. I’m saying air with caution. The guy wanted a recommendation, I gave him one with some data points to back it. We use rodents to find out baseline toxicity of compounds. Give the mice some test and they don’t get rapid cancer in 6 weeks. There’s hundreds of other things that are deemed safe enough to test on humans. I don’t think there’s some grand conspiracy to keep this miracle drug off the market. I understand that your going to defend it until the end of time and that’s fine but if we look at the very little data we have I think it’s objectively reasonable to stay away from it.

Also casually recommending hefty dosages all day long? I always advise against tren and orals in most cases I can’t think of a single instance I’ve ever recommended anyone take tren. I’m not against running higher dose cycles that is correct. I don’t think I recommend high dose cycles all day long not sure where that’s coming from.

I knew the personal attack was coming because you’re frustrated with the information I laid out, on a compound you like so much. It’s all good

I think this one is pretty straight forward, common sense. Take it if you want, look at the human equivalent dose, look at the studies we have, decide for yourself.

 

[Battousai]

You have yet to prove anything remote to justify that statement in humans. We can name compounds that humans consume all that time that in some cases cause cancer in rodents all day long, but not correlated to humans.

I'm so not trying to argue. I truly respect you and your opinion is totally cool man...seriously. But you make statements like the one bolded above that is simply not factual. I asked for 1 human that has contracted cancer from Cardarine with a citation and you can't provide one. Do you see where I'm coming from?

It's just weird that you are so hell bent on this one compound when you'll casually recommend hefty dosages of androgens all day long including tren when we know the havoc it can cause to blood work and organs.

This is one thing I've thought about recently. People being hell bent on certain compounds being bad while slamming tren. I'm guilty of this myself. Like "no I want touch blood pressure meds because all medication is trash, but oh, tren tren tren all day." That line of thinking is just insane. Tren caused really bad mental side effects on me, plus one of the few compounds that actually elevated my BP rather quickly.

No hate towards anyone. I have disagreements with everyone and that's just part of the game. But we can all have disagreements and be civil about it.

 

[Battousai]

There are so many better drugs that’s don’t kill all the test subjects. I’m saying air with caution. The guy wanted a recommendation, I gave him one with some data points to back it. We use rodents to find out baseline toxicity of compounds. Give the mice some test and they don’t get rapid cancer in 6 weeks. There’s hundreds of other things that are deemed safe enough to test on humans. I don’t think there’s some grand conspiracy to keep this miracle drug off the market. I understand that your going to defend it until the end of time and that’s fine but if we look at the very little data we have I think it’s objectively reasonable to stay away from it.

Also casually recommending hefty dosages all day long? I always advise against tren and orals in most cases I can’t think of a single instance I’ve ever recommended anyone take tren. I’m not against running higher dose cycles that is correct. I don’t think I recommend high dose cycles all day long not sure where that’s coming from.

I knew the personal attack was coming because you’re frustrated with the information I laid out, on a compound you like so much. It’s all good

I think this one is pretty straight forward, common sense. Take it if you want, look at the human equivalent dose, look at the studies we have, decide for yourself.

Just for context a lot of the high doses stuff we say is out of humor, haha.

 

[Wiseguy]

I am completely against personal attack. Zero need. We agree or disagree and move on. No one here has all the answers and you just make your own decisions

 

[Wiseguy]

@Vision he has tremendous knowledge and I respect his opinion.

What is your take and feedback brother?

 

[Vision]

Yes they get cancer around 33 months. This causes cancer around 6-12 weeks.

To your big pharma point sure they want to make money I understand that and curing diabetes would make every medication we have for it obsolete, making this single handedly one of the most profitable drugs in existence. Americans will always eat chips and McDonald’s lol.

My entire point I’m trying to make is that by looking at the evidence the compound is very clearly toxic. It has some positive benefits absolutely, but it also has some pretty extreme negatives. Liver scarring being one of them that’s not cancer.

I hold you in high esteem, brother, and value our relationship built on respect and open dialogue. Though we may agree or disagree, our exchanges often lead to new insights. Nevertheless, in this particular case, I must correct you - your facts are inaccurate, especially those I brought to your attention (highlighted in your quotation)
_________________

This concept has been discussed in many online forums for a long time, but it is often misunderstood.

This was first tested on research rodents that are genetically engineered to be highly susceptible to cancer and have a maximum lifespan of three years, the WISTAR rat.

This specific rodent is an outbred stock, used in all fields of medical and biological research.
Its longevity and high rate of spontaneous tumours make it an ideal choice for ageing studies..

This translation is they are extremely sensitive and prone with getting tumors and displaying cancer growth at excessive rates, with a vast majority of drugs, chemicals and other compounds, the majority of them will develop cancer anyway, however these rodents are used because the younger models will show a much faster on set compared to the older models that eventually developed cancer and Will ultimately soon expire.

With these animal models, the dosages varied considerably, however, the majority that received some of the lowest dosages were equivalent to 45-50mg in human use, furthermore the studies that were conducted in some of these rats were for long durations with long exposure..

Now the recreational use in human beings is 10-20mg..

This research since has and was moved on to humans but not right after it was abandoned and discontinued on the animal models, with that being said humans were given 10mg with displaying almost zero negative or adverse effects..

It would be literally impossible to pinpoint who has developed cancer since, Yet people are developing cancer at an alarming rate for many things, and a lot of these people have never heard of cardarine nor is it even remotely near their lifestyle..

The testing in these animal models is greatly flawed.
Now the probability with the potentials of people getting cancer, it will be foolish to say that it could never happen, Yet there it still lacks concrete evidence that it's likely, with that being said it's simply speculated and slim to nil..

This is something that basically comes down to user beware, people should use it at respectable dosages, specifically 10mgs and only for short durations.

People get wrapped up in these cancer studies and they run from this compound, as if it's the erupting volcano of Pompeii. Yet a good portion of these people don't pull blood work, and they're running compounds that have their RBC through the roof and their blood is thick as ragu sauce.

 

[Meetketchup]

I knew the personal attack was coming because you’re frustrated with the information I laid out, on a compound you like so much. It’s all good

Don't see the personal attack you are noting, but it's all good. Thought I was very respectful actually and was just asking for evidence. Maybe a miscommunication on my part.

For the record, I will never let my feelings or opinions get in the way of evidence regardless of whether or not I "like" it.

Squashed.

 

[Vision]

Don't see the personal attack you are noting, but it's all good. Thought I was very respectful actually and was just asking for evidence. Maybe a miscommunication on my part.

For the record, I will never let my feelings or opinions get in the way of evidence regardless of whether or not I "like" it.

Squashed.

Your leadership in the face of miscommunication is truly commendable, as you rise above the debate of right or wrong and offer a progressive perspective, I applaud you for your leadership and for declaring the issue resolved, you are a shining example of effective leadership.

 

[Vision]

In addition many articles came out with the extremely positive results in cholesterol. Do you know how many billions of dollars are pharmaceuticals making from it?

I need to see legitimate human studies From several different legitimate hospitals to be concerned.

Again the beauty of the forum to politely agree or disagree. I appreciate all the feedback and only speaking in my behalf and not others.

First Phase 1 Human Trial
The first clinical trial was conducted on 24 healthy men for 2 weeks.

Each volunteer was either given placebo, 2.5 mg Cardarine, or 10 mg Cardarine per day.

Cardarine significantly improved HDL Cholesterol levels and reduced Triglycerides [R].

These lipid profile improvements are a result of Cardarine's ability to induce the upregulation of human skeletal muscle fat utilization, ABCA1 expression and enhanced serum fat clearance rates.

A fat feeding study was conducted where subjects were fed a high-fat breakfast on days 0 and 13 of the study 1 hour after taking their daily Cardarine dosage.

Triglyceride analysis was performed to assess how much (if at all) Cardarine would influence how efficiently the body processed those fats and how much nutrient partitioning in general was enhanced.

Lipolytic activity was gauged to assess the efficacy of Cardarine relative to placebo and the data revealed that the placebo group's Triglyceride levels went up significantly from high-fat meals, and the 2.5 mg and 10 mg treated groups both respectively lowered Triglyceride levels, even in the presence of the fat dense meals.

Cardarine Fat-Feeding Study Phase 1

Cardarine was shown to be safe and well-tolerated during this trial [R].

Subjects treated with Cardarine did not experience any significant adverse effects, including muscle and liver responses.

Liver enzymes and muscle proteins were measured to assess any potentially negative effects deriving from Cardarine.

None were found.

 

[JACKED_]

I hold you in high esteem, brother, and value our relationship built on respect and open dialogue. Though we may agree or disagree, our exchanges often lead to new insights. Nevertheless, in this particular case, I must correct you - your facts are inaccurate, especially those I brought to your attention (highlighted in your quotation)
_________________

This concept has been discussed in many online forums for a long time, but it is often misunderstood.

This was first tested on research rodents that are genetically engineered to be highly susceptible to cancer and have a maximum lifespan of three years, the WISTAR rat.

This specific rodent is an outbred stock, used in all fields of medical and biological research.
Its longevity and high rate of spontaneous tumours make it an ideal choice for ageing studies..

This translation is they are extremely sensitive and prone with getting tumors and displaying cancer growth at excessive rates, with a vast majority of drugs, chemicals and other compounds, the majority of them will develop cancer anyway, however these rodents are used because the younger models will show a much faster on set compared to the older models that eventually developed cancer and Will ultimately soon expire.

With these animal models, the dosages varied considerably, however, the majority that received some of the lowest dosages were equivalent to 45-50mg in human use, furthermore the studies that were conducted in some of these rats were for long durations with long exposure..

Now the recreational use in human beings is 10-20mg..

This research since has and was moved on to humans but not right after it was abandoned and discontinued on the animal models, with that being said humans were given 10mg with displaying almost zero negative or adverse effects..

It would be literally impossible to pinpoint who has developed cancer since, Yet people are developing cancer at an alarming rate for many things, and a lot of these people have never heard of cardarine nor is it even remotely near their lifestyle..

The testing in these animal models is greatly flawed.
Now the probability with the potentials of people getting cancer, it will be foolish to say that it could never happen, Yet there it still lacks concrete evidence that it's likely, with that being said it's simply speculated and slim to nil..

This is something that basically comes down to user beware, people should use it at respectable dosages, specifically 10mgs and only for short durations.

People get wrapped up in these cancer studies and they run from this compound, as if it's the erupting volcano of Pompeii. Yet a good portion of these people don't pull blood work, and they're running compounds that have their RBC through the roof and their blood is thick as ragu sauce.

I laid out a very strong case. Yes the mice were genetically very susceptible to cancer and typically died of those cancers after about 2.5 years. The mice given cardarine developed more cancers, significantly faster than the non ppar group.

The equation I gave was for the standard dose given to mice 3mg/kg

In order to have a true understanding of why ppar accelerates tumor growth we have to look at what ppar as actually doing. When a cancer cell is starved of glucose it can no longer function properly and its chances of replicating diminish. Ppar creates a special environment where the malignancy can feed of fatty acids. This doesn’t prove that it causes cancer, but it proves that it accelerates its growth.

Cardarine also promotes angiogenesis much more than we would ever see in a scenario without it.

Angiogenesis is the process of creating new blood vessels, which is essential for cancer growth:

Tumor growth: Tumors need a blood supply to grow beyond a few millimeters in size. Tumors can cause angiogenesis to occur by releasing chemical signals.



Tumor spread: Angiogenesis allows tumors to grow larger and spread to other parts of the body.


https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer...chemical signals that stimulate angiogenesis.
Tumor invasion: Angiogenesis is required for tumors to invade surrounding tissues.



Metastasis: Angiogenesis is required for the metastatic spread of tumors.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien...ers to,required for the metastasis processes.
Vision im sorry but what you posted doesn’t really refute anything that I’ve said. We can agree to disagree. I think I’ve shown that this compound should be at the very least thought about long and hard.

We have more studies that use field mice for example. We have a standard field mouse, a genetically modified field mouse with a genetic over expression of ppar, and finally we have a mouse that’s given cardarine (maximum ppar expression)

The findings were an increased likelihood hood of cancer in order of the standard field mouse, to the genetically modified mouse, to the GW mouse.

But we also have studies on human thyroid cells. Human thyroid cells given GW show a significant increase in cancer rates compared to the non GW thyroid cells, and we were able to show that there was a decreased cancer rate in these same human thyroid cells when ppar was suppressed.

This is a subject that I’ve thrown hundreds and hundreds of hours into. I wouldn’t speak so passionately on it if I didn’t believe it was harmful. If one single members reads all of the information I’ve laid out and decides against using it, I will have succeeded in my goal.

So it’s for the members to decide, with all due respect. A rare message from Jacked - Steer clear of this one boys!
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/24206-angiogenesis

 

[JACKED_]

Don't see the personal attack you are noting, but it's all good. Thought I was very respectful actually and was just asking for evidence. Maybe a miscommunication on my part.

For the record, I will never let my feelings or opinions get in the way of evidence regardless of whether or not I "like" it.

Squashed.

I’m totally willing to drop this I think you know exactly how excited I get on this specific subject. I’ll always look up to you and the guidance you give. I’m way too invested into this one and I believe I’m looking at it from a very objective angle but I can leave it there, we can leave it up to the members to make informed decisions for themselves and call it day!

 

[GrindingGray]

My issue is that the compound works and is extremely effective, why would this company throw away billions of dollars on a product that can cure diabetes if they weren’t extremely afraid of the toxic outcomes?

Because a company makes a shit-ton more money treating a disease than it does curing it.

 

[Vision]

You're more likely to hit the moon with a fart-powered pea launcher, than get away with posting unverified info - so go ahead, keep farting peas at the moon, it's a better use of your time!

Compared to these self-proclaimed gurus who are super confident, yet super clueless,
handing out advice like candy at a parade - it's a total joke and a huge disservice to everyone listening, basically a big mess. Not only for the members who are in this community to learn, but also for the silent lurkers trying to get a grip on this lifestyle. Shame on you, some of you people who preach with what you call your truth, yet fail to provide any concrete evidence - you're about as convincing as a kindergartener trying to sell a timeshare.

 

[Omoplata]

Didn't do shit for me as far as endurance. I felt more from MOTS-C and SS31.

MOTS-C, did you lose fat / weight while taking it?

What was your experience like?

 

[JACKED_]

This is one thing I've thought about recently. People being hell bent on certain compounds being bad while slamming tren. I'm guilty of this myself. Like "no I want touch blood pressure meds because all medication is trash, but oh, tren tren tren all day." That line of thinking is just insane. Tren caused really bad mental side effects on me, plus one of the few compounds that actually elevated my BP rather quickly.

No hate towards anyone. I have disagreements with everyone and that's just part of the game. But we can all have disagreements and be civil about it.

Conversations like this are a net positive for the forum. You can essentially get two sides of the debate and make a much more informed decision when choosing a compound. I don’t think this back and forth was uncivil by any means.

 

[Battousai]

Conversations like this are a net positive for the forum. You can essentially get two sides of the debate and make a much more informed decision when choosing a compound. I don’t think this back and forth was uncivil by any means.

 

[JACKED_]

Because a company makes a shit-ton more money treating a disease than it does curing it.

It’s about as effective as a statin when it comes to lowering ldl, and about as effective as metformin when it comes to bg control. I suppose cure isn’t the correct word. Highly effective medication would have been a little more proper.

 

[chadmack282]

This is one thing I've thought about recently. People being hell bent on certain compounds being bad while slamming tren. I'm guilty of this myself. Like "no I want touch blood pressure meds because all medication is trash, but oh, tren tren tren all day." That line of thinking is just insane. Tren caused really bad mental side effects on me, plus one of the few compounds that actually elevated my BP rather quickly.

No hate towards anyone. I have disagreements with everyone and that's just part of the game. But we can all have disagreements and be civil about it.

It's ok to agree to disagree

 

[JACKED_]

First Phase 1 Human Trial
The first clinical trial was conducted on 24 healthy men for 2 weeks.

Each volunteer was either given placebo, 2.5 mg Cardarine, or 10 mg Cardarine per day.

Cardarine significantly improved HDL Cholesterol levels and reduced Triglycerides [R].

These lipid profile improvements are a result of Cardarine's ability to induce the upregulation of human skeletal muscle fat utilization, ABCA1 expression and enhanced serum fat clearance rates.

A fat feeding study was conducted where subjects were fed a high-fat breakfast on days 0 and 13 of the study 1 hour after taking their daily Cardarine dosage.

Triglyceride analysis was performed to assess how much (if at all) Cardarine would influence how efficiently the body processed those fats and how much nutrient partitioning in general was enhanced.

Lipolytic activity was gauged to assess the efficacy of Cardarine relative to placebo and the data revealed that the placebo group's Triglyceride levels went up significantly from high-fat meals, and the 2.5 mg and 10 mg treated groups both respectively lowered Triglyceride levels, even in the presence of the fat dense meals.

Cardarine Fat-Feeding Study Phase 1

Cardarine was shown to be safe and well-tolerated during this trial [R].

Subjects treated with Cardarine did not experience any significant adverse effects, including muscle and liver responses.

Liver enzymes and muscle proteins were measured to assess any potentially negative effects deriving from Cardarine.

None were found.

I’m starting to doubt you even read any of my points because I already stated this.

You're more likely to hit the moon with a fart-powered pea launcher, than get away with posting unverified info - so go ahead, keep farting peas at the moon, it's a better use of your time!

Compared to these self-proclaimed gurus who are super confident, yet super clueless,
handing out advice like candy at a parade - it's a total joke and a huge disservice to everyone listening, basically a big mess. Not only for the members who are in this community to learn, but also for the silent lurkers trying to get a grip on this lifestyle. Shame on you, some of you people who preach with what you call your truth, yet fail to provide any concrete evidence - you're about as convincing as a kindergartener trying to sell a timeshare.

Now I’m certain you didn’t read anything I said

 

[aimanabolic]

So this basically illustrates what I originally replied. Plenty of research posted in this thread now

 

[Vision]

Let's get real, folks, when it comes to these so-called reports, we need to follow the money trail, see who's footing the bill and most importantly, check if they're entangled in some shady legal drama, like fraud lawsuits.

Folks just eat up whatever you feed 'em!

Let's get sleuthy! Check out what you're reading, who wrote it, and who's buttering their bread. Then, follow the money trail - it's like a game of funding musical chairs!

Ever played 'spot the spin'? It's like a game of media hide-and-seek, where you try to find the real story behind the story. Who wrote it, and who paid them to write it? The answer is like a bad joke - it's all about the benjamins, baby!

 

[Vision]

I’m starting to doubt you even read any of my points because I already stated this.



Now I’m certain you didn’t read anything I said

What makes you think I'm running on fumes over here, intellectually speaking? I'm just curious to know what sparked this wild goose chase of a notion?

Now if you believe that, I'm confident that A sombrero would fit your head like dematise.

I'm baffled why you're clinging to this like a bad habit or trying to turn it into some kind of showdown, but if that's your jam, let's recap: I've repeatedly shown you're off the mark, your arguments are like a house of cards, and your go-to move is citing dodgy animal studies or research from places with more legal issues than a lawyer's client list. Do you really think I'm here for that circus?

 

[302]

Cigarettes can keep you lean

Not true.. I’d be shredded