GW (Cardarine) & Cancer

[Shanhax]

After reading the article on evo a few weeks back on how GW DOESNT cause cancer because the initial test results they did on mice/rats was the equivalent of 900 mg of GW per day I was relieved to throw aside my insecurities with the product.

After doing more research, I found out that indeed the conversion was wrong. They did not account for Human Equivalent Doses (HED).

The trials on rats were dosed at 5 mg/kg which is converted using a 6.2 factor to account for HED (5 mg/kg / 6.2) = 0.81mg/kg.

Given a 200 lb bodybuilder, that is 73 mg a day (which is cutting it pretty close to the daily dosage recommended).

<Source: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM078932.pdf> - Table 3

This was very alarming, infact I put off starting my GW for 2 weeks now reading information like this.

Can anyone shed more discussion and talk about this.

It just seems odd that this product was almost brought into pharmaceuticals then it just suddenly stopped development and put away...

 

[JackSteel]

Big pharma politics. We'll never know. Sun causes cancer too if you're in it too much. In the right amounts it is essential to life. Same goes for almost anything.


Ask me about Phurious Pharma!
Use code 'JS5' for 5% off any order!
Order at [email protected]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rockmfhudd]

you would never even come close to 73 mg a day on GW. but there is always a study to say this to contradict that. we are all dying we may as well look good whilst doing it right? I can tell you I have been on it for a year and I don't have cancer, or do I?

 

[drb_iac]

There are some many different types of cancer and all cancers are poorly understood, and probably caused by many different mechanisms. The only cancer understood right now is estrogenic breast cancer because it can be found in the genes on a DAN test.That is why you may have heard women getting mascetomies without having breast cancer.They do it because they know they will get it.Everything else,and other cancers are not understood. usually if you take a rat and give him a huge dose of anything the they will get cancer. I would not worry about GW and it is a low dose. People smoke 40 cigs per day and don't always get cancer.

 

[Shanhax]

you would never even come close to 73 mg a day on GW. but there is always a study to say this to contradict that. we are all dying we may as well look good whilst doing it right? I can tell you I have been on it for a year and I don't have cancer, or do I?

Of course everything has potential to cause cancer.

But why recommend something that may expedite it?

 

[rockmfhudd]

there is a recommendation on the bottle it says not for human consumption. so you have a choice. im not sure what you are getting at here? you have a choice to take it or not. just because some quack wrote his opinion on it doesn't make it factual

 

[Shanhax]

Im trying to spark conversation and discussion.

Of course it comes down to the user.

And some quack didn't write it, it was scientifically tested...

Just want a pool of discussion with studies. Not trying to prove anything to anyone.

 

[rockmfhudd]

Oh ok well i dont really believe what i read alot of the time i go on personal experience


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rockmfhudd]

Im sure the study was prolly backed by some government which is a variable in the outcome


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DylanGemelli]

After reading the article on evo a few weeks back on how GW DOESNT cause cancer because the initial test results they did on mice/rats was the equivalent of 900 mg of GW per day I was relieved to throw aside my insecurities with the product.

After doing more research, I found out that indeed the conversion was wrong. They did not account for Human Equivalent Doses (HED).

The trials on rats were dosed at 5 mg/kg which is converted using a 6.2 factor to account for HED (5 mg/kg / 6.2) = 0.81mg/kg.

Given a 200 lb bodybuilder, that is 73 mg a day (which is cutting it pretty close to the daily dosage recommended).

<Source: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM078932.pdf> - Table 3

This was very alarming, infact I put off starting my GW for 2 weeks now reading information like this.

Can anyone shed more discussion and talk about this.

It just seems odd that this product was almost brought into pharmaceuticals then it just suddenly stopped development and put away...

there's a lot to take into consideration... duration of use... dosage etc... 73 mg per day is FAR FAR FAR more than 20 mg per day... there are many things that can be harmful in excessive doses... for fucks sake, vitamins can be heavily toxic when you get crazy doses like this... 73 mg compared to 20 mg is a CRAZY amount... of course this could cause some sort of adverse reaction... plus rat testing is FAR different than human testing... its a rat... plain and simple...


its fine you want to spark discussion... im completely lost because that's what your getting... people are giving their input on what you wrote... so im confused as to why you got defensive so quickly... you made the post.. you wanted the discussion and you got the answers from several people who jumped in to add their thoughts... im confused...

 

[drb_iac]

It was almost brought to pharma but there are a thousand reasons why something may not make it. You do know that all of the oct drugs and pct drugs were all on the market for women's issues right? Then BB's begin using them and then you have off label use. This means it can be prescribed for conditions other than what it was approved for. There are thousands of drugs brought to the fda that stall or do not make the cut. How many of them may be great for something else? All it takes is a good chemist who gets an idea. Studies must be done and in the case of yk nothing has been done.

 

[RickRock]

There is also a study performed that PPar ligands like GW-501516 do not promote tumorogenesis in humans, which totally contradicts the other study and basically renders it useless when comparing humans to rats.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17693664

Humans do not react to them like rats do. It's completely different


(PM me for a price list for Biotech Labs and 10% discount)

 

[DylanGemelli]

There is also a study performed that PPar ligands like GW-501516 do not promote tumorogenesis in humans, which totally contradicts the other study and basically renders it useless when comparing humans to rats.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17693664

Humans do not react to them like rats do. It's completely different


(PM me for a price list for Biotech Labs and 10% discount)

thanks for posting this one... this just goes to show the difference!