Perhaps as medicine advances they might arise as a result of treatment for other diseases. Im not educated at all on the topic so this might be nonsense. But an example, muscle mass is one of the biggest predictors for surviving cancer, anavar for burn victims, SARMs for osteoporosis.
The last time there was any innovation in the field of new anabolics to get jacked was in the prohormone era. It took big brained muscle guys going through old medical texts and theorizing new compounds to finally get new anabolics onto the market. Stuff like superdrol, methyl sten and M1T came from this era.
Trestolone was brought into being as a possible male contraceptive drug, so not for anabolic purposes at all.
Pharmaceutical companies have no interest in something that will add slabs of mass and get you ripped.
If someone wants to do it themselves, the gray market that popularized superdrol and the like no longer exists.
I think we are stuck with what we’ve got unless another pharmaceutical anabolic fluke like Trest pops up again one day.
Sure. SARMs are currently developed and trialed for osteoporosis and other conditions to achieve minimal side-effects while targeting metabolic tissues.
They’re very effective… for their targeted uses. “Bigger than Tren” just isn’t one of their targets.
No one is doing research into ‘bigger than Tren’. The closest thing you’ll find is ‘sneakier than Clean.’
Maybe perhaps someone will come out with a myostatin inhibitor which would be a powerful new avenue of enhancement.
More complex anabolic will come out someday, but mostly we won’t see as many with all the other new alternatives that are being researched.
As of now they're pretty much the best option for these diseases. It's not that big of a market so drug companies aren't spending a lot of money on R&D when there are more profitable things to focus on.
They invented clean. Because cheating at pro sports is a good incentive. But whatever small secret pharma is making now, we aren’t gonna know for another ten years or so.
I think peptides is the growth area, itself easier to market them as longevity products instead of just getting jacked.
As for AAS i don’t think there’s any medical reason to develop more. We already have compounds that are effective for their designed medical use. Test, Deca and anavar are safe and effective at medical doses, they don’t need a compound that adds 50lb of lean tissue.
I think as the stigma for performance and image enhancing drugs is lessened, and if these drugs are made legal, then probably. But as it stands, why would big pharma invest in making powerful steroids when the market isn’t there
IMO AAS have really been destigmatised in the past five years, more than we often realise because we are "In the space".
5 Years ago 90% of people thought people built like the Rock were natural. Now, if you ask anybody even somewhat committed to the gym or man in their 20s, they have a rough idea that those sort of phyiques are enhanced.
Who knows where we will be at in 20 years times.
Obviously, this post is speaking to the development of new drugs.
"effective" is arbitrary. 500 Test long term will destroy your lipids. Yes thats alot of test, hence why im talking about NEW drugs that surpass our current baseline of a minimally harmful protocol.
You can get pretty damn good results at 200-250 test long term and avoid a lot of the health issues. But to answer your question, no, I don’t think there is a large enough market for it.
I completely agree, im a big proponent for 200 test myself. Just thinking about the future, where we might look back and think the results of 200 test sucked compared to now.
I know little about hormones and steroids, and maybe somebody with more knowledge can correct me, but would mRNA and/or CRISPR be new possible pathways with room for big advancement?
I would imagine hormones at this point have been explored and mostly exploited but those methods remained untapped.
For new children being born absolutely. I've researched this subject extensively and I believe in 50 years all sports will be dominated by children modified with specific gene insertions that give them massive advantages.
Myostatin inhibition, pre-determined muscle insertions, dictating the ration of fast/slow twitch muscle fibers, and all sports of crazy possibilities.
I'm hopeful we'll see some promising new compounds in the coming years. There's always scientists out there innovating and trying to develop the next best thing.
Getting AAS that are super effective for gains yet have minimal side effects would be ideal. I don't think that's impossible but it'll take a lot of trial and error.
Probably not, we’ve been using the same drugs since the 60’s and modern medicine isn’t progressive enough to give af about AAS.
Perhaps as medicine advances they might arise as a result of treatment for other diseases. Im not educated at all on the topic so this might be nonsense. But an example, muscle mass is one of the biggest predictors for surviving cancer, anavar for burn victims, SARMs for osteoporosis.
Exactly, Rad 140 was developed for breast cancer treatment, LGD 4033 also for muscle and bone wasting.
The last time there was any innovation in the field of new anabolics to get jacked was in the prohormone era. It took big brained muscle guys going through old medical texts and theorizing new compounds to finally get new anabolics onto the market. Stuff like superdrol, methyl sten and M1T came from this era. Trestolone was brought into being as a possible male contraceptive drug, so not for anabolic purposes at all. Pharmaceutical companies have no interest in something that will add slabs of mass and get you ripped. If someone wants to do it themselves, the gray market that popularized superdrol and the like no longer exists. I think we are stuck with what we’ve got unless another pharmaceutical anabolic fluke like Trest pops up again one day.
Sure. SARMs are currently developed and trialed for osteoporosis and other conditions to achieve minimal side-effects while targeting metabolic tissues.
Sure, but SARMS have been around for (dont quote me on this) like 8 years now? and they aren't very effective.
They’re very effective… for their targeted uses. “Bigger than Tren” just isn’t one of their targets. No one is doing research into ‘bigger than Tren’. The closest thing you’ll find is ‘sneakier than Clean.’ Maybe perhaps someone will come out with a myostatin inhibitor which would be a powerful new avenue of enhancement. More complex anabolic will come out someday, but mostly we won’t see as many with all the other new alternatives that are being researched.
As of now they're pretty much the best option for these diseases. It's not that big of a market so drug companies aren't spending a lot of money on R&D when there are more profitable things to focus on.
I wonder where we would be if, for whatever reason, big pharma was incentivised to really try and develop some good AAS.
They invented clean. Because cheating at pro sports is a good incentive. But whatever small secret pharma is making now, we aren’t gonna know for another ten years or so.
I think peptides is the growth area, itself easier to market them as longevity products instead of just getting jacked. As for AAS i don’t think there’s any medical reason to develop more. We already have compounds that are effective for their designed medical use. Test, Deca and anavar are safe and effective at medical doses, they don’t need a compound that adds 50lb of lean tissue.
I think as the stigma for performance and image enhancing drugs is lessened, and if these drugs are made legal, then probably. But as it stands, why would big pharma invest in making powerful steroids when the market isn’t there
IMO AAS have really been destigmatised in the past five years, more than we often realise because we are "In the space". 5 Years ago 90% of people thought people built like the Rock were natural. Now, if you ask anybody even somewhat committed to the gym or man in their 20s, they have a rough idea that those sort of phyiques are enhanced. Who knows where we will be at in 20 years times.
Lots of peptide progress in improving quality of life/performance. But doubt we will get updates to the classics. They work.
It’s called testosterone
unless testosterone was just synthesised, it isn't a "new effective AAS".
Testosterone is the very effective and minimally harmful AAS
Obviously, this post is speaking to the development of new drugs. "effective" is arbitrary. 500 Test long term will destroy your lipids. Yes thats alot of test, hence why im talking about NEW drugs that surpass our current baseline of a minimally harmful protocol.
You can get pretty damn good results at 200-250 test long term and avoid a lot of the health issues. But to answer your question, no, I don’t think there is a large enough market for it.
I completely agree, im a big proponent for 200 test myself. Just thinking about the future, where we might look back and think the results of 200 test sucked compared to now.
I know little about hormones and steroids, and maybe somebody with more knowledge can correct me, but would mRNA and/or CRISPR be new possible pathways with room for big advancement? I would imagine hormones at this point have been explored and mostly exploited but those methods remained untapped.
For new children being born absolutely. I've researched this subject extensively and I believe in 50 years all sports will be dominated by children modified with specific gene insertions that give them massive advantages. Myostatin inhibition, pre-determined muscle insertions, dictating the ration of fast/slow twitch muscle fibers, and all sports of crazy possibilities.
Maybe not to the same extent but I thought those technologies could still work with adults.
People design them but don't release them. They are kept for high level sports
I'm hopeful we'll see some promising new compounds in the coming years. There's always scientists out there innovating and trying to develop the next best thing. Getting AAS that are super effective for gains yet have minimal side effects would be ideal. I don't think that's impossible but it'll take a lot of trial and error.