A quick blog post to answer a question that has popped up a few times regarding SARMS.
Some say they can only be taken via a liquid suspension.
Some say they are fine to be capped.
Some question the efficacy of each.
So what's the deal....?
Let’s clear this up. ALL – yes ALL – SARMS start as raw powder.
Prior to a lab receiving the powder, they would have decided, in advance, how this powder will be used. They would have taken into account cost of delivery of the SARM, the legality of the country they reside in, they would have worked out what way they can make the most money. That is before they have received the SARM powder – all this would have been worked out in advance as the vast majority of companies run these types of businesses as purely that a business.
As cliché as it sounds, I have care, concern and a responsibility to my customers, as a few online companies already know. I fully back companies that call out the bullshitters, scammers etc and I have voluntarily donated products for testing. I am also still in the midst of having our goods 3rdparty tested. Some labs will test certain things, but for a lab to test a peptide chemical structure, it costs A LOT. Purity testing via HPLC/MS – not so much. But we are getting there and working with a few individuals who are focused on driving the crap OUT of the market. I want to supply the best in research products, after all, how the hell can you conduct specific research, if the product is not exactly as it should be to start with?
When it comes to research chemicals – a lot also depends on implying that when a product is presented in a certain way, i.e. liquid or capsule, one will look to ‘imply’ its usage by how its presented. We provide our SARMS in capsules. In the UK, SARMS are legal for research use and as dietary supplements and are not to be treated as medication etc. In the US, I know things are tighter and getting tighter daily.
So, the guys in the US – no offence to any individual or company – will need to push the whole ‘sorry bro, your sarm needs to in liquid, here check out this site I recommend, and don’t forget use my code for xxx amount off’
OK, I get why they say this. Its business. But beware – companies that say you have to buy something for it to be effective, in a specific way, always have a reason why. If you look at things from say a pharmaceutical perspective, why would the vast majority (at least 95%+) of such companies deliver their goods in capsule/tablet form? If ‘absorption’ is an issue, or bio-availability is an issue, why is every drug produced out there, not in a high grain alcohol content liquid solution?
In a nutshell:
Capsulated SARMS are easier to use, appeal to more users and researchers, have a longer exp period, have an easier way to take them and have a greater appeal.
Liquid SARMS are easier to dose e.g. if your experiment requires gradual and low incremental dosage increments, they are great. For those in the US, liquid sarms are safer from a legal perspective.
To put it bluntly – efficacy and bioavailability of SARMS in Liquid or Capsule form = THE SAME. If you have conducted relevant authentic research showing different, I would love to read more, so please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you for your time,