SARMs, which have been called a “steroid alternative” in recent years, have gained a lot of attention. The term “SARM” refers to a class of non-steroidal experimental medications that were initially created to treat age- and disease-related muscle wasting.
SARMs are still being studied for their potential to treat multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s illness, cancer, sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis, and muscle atrophy. However, it should be emphasized that there hasn’t been much research on SARM use in people. The FDA has not approved SARMs for use in humans, and the SARMs that are now available are solely meant for use in lab experiments.
SARMs have nonetheless attracted the attention of bodybuilders and the athletic community due to their alleged capacity to increase lean muscle mass. As a result, various sporting communities, as well as anti-doping organizations, have outlawed SARMs. Sportspeople shouldn’t take part in clinical studies using SARMs. This article will explain the similarities and differences between two of the most popular, LGD 4033, or Ligandrol, and RAD 140, as well as some of their potential advantages.
The Primary Differences Between Ligandrol and RAD 140
Although Ligandrol and RAD 140 are SARMs with numerous similarities, they also differ significantly in a few key areas. According to the FDA, both medications are still in the experimental stage; however, one has received more mammalian testing than the other and is currently undergoing more advanced clinical studies. Some of the key variations between the two are as follows:
- RAD 140 has received less research than LGD 4033, which is presently through phase II clinical trials.
- Testolone use in mammals has only been the subject of one phase I investigation.
- In terms of strength per milligram, Ligandrol is stronger.
- Both have been prohibited in competitive sports leagues, but players tend to test positive for LGD 4033 much more frequently.
- While RAD 140 and Ligandrol both exhibit strong anabolic effects, RAD 140 also has a slight androgenic potential.
- Because RAD 140 has a longer half-life, fewer doses are required, and the blood levels it produces are more consistent.
- RAD 140 has been investigated in Alzheimer’s disease because it might have possible cognitive advantages and neuroprotective effects.
- The cost of the two varies; RAD 140 for sale is often more expensive than LGD 4033.
Comparing the Potential Side Effects of RAD 140 with LGD 4033
Due to the absence of clinical studies on these best SARMs for bulking, there is little information on the negative effects of RAD 140 vs. LGD 4033. However, researchers have listed some of the more prevalent and harmful probable adverse effects. Observe the following, among others:
Possible Suppression of Natural Testosterone Levels by RAD 140 and Ligandrol
Although SARMS are not steroids, they nonetheless have androgen receptor-based effects, which means these medications may lower natural testosterone levels. Erectile dysfunction, infertility, diminished libido, loss of bone density, muscle weakness, sleeplessness, depression, and weight gain, coupled with a rise in body fat, are all potential side effects of low testosterone.
Some Negative Effects That Could Be Serious
In October 2017, the FDA released a public health advisory letter saying that SARM-using patients have experienced “life-threatening reactions,” such as liver damage. They cautioned that SARMs might possibly raise the risk of cardiovascular events, including heart attacks or strokes. Additionally, impacts on cholesterol have been noticed by researchers, including a decline in HDL, or “good” cholesterol. One of the most typical complaints is that SARMs produce GI problems, and this has been discovered to be true.
Unknown Long-Term Effects
Keep in mind that RAD 140 and LGD 4033 are still being investigated in clinical studies and that SARMs do not yet have FDA approval. Thus, it is unknown what their use will have in the long run. The dearth of studies also restricts our understanding of possible medication interactions.
Please be aware that several athletic leagues have prohibited both of these products. Athletes should not take part in clinical trials for SARMs because they are not dietary supplements or sports supplements.