SARMs Before and After Pictures (Typical Results)

Two main questions that surround SARMs are:

1. How do the results compare to steroids?
2. Are they safer than steroids?

In this article, we will feature several SARMs before and after transformations, giving you anecdotal evidence of the amount of muscle mass and fat loss being experienced by users.

SARMs Before and After Transformation

This is a 5-week before-and-after picture published on Reddit that demonstrates the combined effects of:

1. RAD 140 (Testolone)
2. LGD-4033 (Ligandrol)
3. MK-677 (Ibutamoren)

RAD 140 and LGD-4033 are two of the most potent SARMs available today. Dr. Anthony Hughes says RAD 140 is one of the best performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) he has come across, especially relating to body composition, muscular strength, and neurological effects. This claim is noteworthy considering Dr. Hughes also has vast experience with anabolic-androgenic steroids.

MK-677 is technically a growth hormone secretagogue (GHS), although it is often stacked with SARMs.

Moderate Muscle Growth

This Reddit user has clearly experienced improvements in muscle hypertrophy, with a visual gain of 10–15 pounds. However, there is an argument that a SARM cycle may be less potent than a typical steroid cycle.

• In early human trials, researchers analyzed the effects of SARMs vs. steroids, specifically testosterone enanthate.
• They found that testosterone users built 5–7 kg of lean mass, compared to just 1–1.5 kg in the SARMs group, over 4–6 weeks (1).

However, based on this user’s results, who has achieved a thicker overall look, particularly in the quadriceps, it would seem unrealistic that steroid users would experience 5x his results.

Visceral Fat

This user appears to have experienced a notable increase in visceral fat, creating a more bloated or protruding effect on the midsection.

We have also found visceral fat accumulation to be common among steroid users, raising estrogen levels and consequently causing insulin resistance and lipogenesis.

SARMs are not inherently estrogenic, as the aromatase enzyme is not present; however, they raise estrogen levels indirectly.

This female hormone can still spike due to SARMs’ high affinity when binding to AR (androgen receptors).

Typically, our natural testosterone would bind to AR; however, SARMs have a higher binding affinity, and thus our natural testosterone production loses out. Instead, there is now more readily available testosterone that can convert to estrogen and dihydrotestosterone (DHT). This can cause estrogen dominance, potentially causing:

• Visceral fat storage
• Edema
• Gynecomastia

DHT dominance can also lead to:

• Androgenetic alopecia
• Acne vulgaris
• Benign prostatic hyperplasia

SARMs’ tissue selectivity aims to inhibit the above side effects; however, in reality, we still see them occur via this indirect mechanism.

Beard Growth

Increased DHT levels from SARMs can promote androgenization and beard growth, as hair follicles are more sensitive to this androgenic hormone in comparison to testosterone (2). Such beard growth is evident in the above user, increasing the overall masculine appearance of his facial region.

MK-677 and Gut Hypertrophy

MK-677 (Ibutamoren), one of the compounds administered in this user’s stack, can exacerbate visceral fat storage. This is due to the increased GH (growth hormone) secretion, with MK-677 acting as a ghrelin receptor agonist and thus stimulating the pituitary gland to increase production of GH.

GH, similar to estrogen, increases blood sugar levels, causing insulin resistance and this distended gut appearance.

Interestingly, research on rats has shown MK-677 to increase peak GH concentrations by 1.8-fold over a six-week cycle (3). However, MK-677 also decreased SST receptor (SSTR)-2 mRNA expression in the pituitary gland, consequently failing to increase the size of the rodents.

Disclosure: We do not accept any form of advertising on Inside Bodybuilding. We monetize our practice via doctor consultations and carefully chosen supplement recommendations, which have given our patients excellent results.

Best SARMs Company in 2025

SARMs Before and After Transformation: 12 Weeks

This Reddit user performed a 12-week cycle of RAD 140 (Testolone) at 17 mg/day.

He gained 5 pounds in weight; however, he ate in a small calorie surplus, thus contributing to some adipose tissue accumulation.

Muscular Strength

Despite experiencing minimal muscle gains, he reported significant improvements in muscular strength, which were particularly noticeable from week 6. Although all of his lifts increased drastically, he specifically reported adding 90 pounds to his flat and incline bench presses.

Low Testosterone

The user experienced dramatic testosterone suppression, dropping from 750 to 193 ng/dL, indicating damage to the HPTA (hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis) and hypogonadism.

Generally, we find this to be a transient effect, with testosterone levels set to recover post-cycle, assuming no other anabolic substances are administered.

Liver and Heart Health

The above user also reported aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) liver enzymes being excessively high post-cycle, in conjunction with his blood lipids deteriorating. Thus, SARMs can increase the risk of atherosclerosis and hepatic peliosis.

Such side effects, regarding liver and cardiovascular toxicity, align with what we have observed from analyzing the labs of 2,000 SARM users over a 10-year period. Consequently, Dr. Thomas O’Connor is now of the opinion that SARMs are more deleterious than steroids.

We find RAD 140’s hepatotoxicity particularly concerning, based on our patient’s LFTs (liver function tests) and additional medical research, with scientists diagnosing a 49-year-old male with hepatocellular-cholestatic liver injury (4). He had taken RAD 140 for 4 weeks with infrequent use afterward.

However, Dr. Rand McClain says he has observed RAD 140 users to have “better bloodwork” compared to other SARMs, including Ostarine, which he has seen have “deleterious” effects on health.

RAD 140 Authenticity

Due to the high amounts of counterfeit SARM products on the market, one could hypothesize that this user’s RAD 140 was potentially diluted or completely void of the true compound, hence his mild results.

However, given the severity of his side effects, notable strength results, and the fact that the specified manufacturer has a positive reputation, this conclusion is unlikely.

• Related: Best SARMs companies (>98% purity)

Hair Loss

This user also experienced telogen effluvium toward the latter stage of his cycle, indicating significantly higher DHT levels. This is unlikely to be an issue for those using SARMs sporadically, as once a cycle ceases, hair typically thickens back to normal levels.

However, with regular SARM use, hair thinning, recession, or loss can be permanent, accelerating male pattern baldness and androgenetic alopecia.

SARMs’ Results Compared to Steroids

The before and after pictures above are typical results from a first SARM cycle. Thus, it is evident that SARM users are hypo-responders, compared to steroid users, who are hyper-responders, in terms of muscularity and fat loss.

Novice Steroid Progress

The before and after pictures below demonstrate typical gains from a first steroid cycle.

This YouTube user administered conservative dosages of testosterone, adding roughly 20 pounds of lean mass while also significantly reducing his body fat percentage and enhancing muscle definition.

In contrast, SARM users are likely to experience negligible reductions in subcutaneous body fat, with only small increases in muscle hypertrophy, equating to roughly 5 pounds.

These are exceptional results considering the above user only utilized testosterone instead of stacking it with other potent steroids, such as:

• Trenbolone
• Anadrol

From Natural to SARMs

This YouTube user is natural on the left, and the picture on the right is after regular S4, Ostarine, and GH (growth hormone) cycles. Increased thickness in the back is evident, as is growth all over the body.

From SARMs to Steroids

The left photo is post-SARM use, and the right photo is post-steroid use, with Deca Durabolin and Anadrol being two steroids regularly utilized.

This shows the vast difference in potency between SARMs and steroids, with the latter being more effective at adding muscle mass.

However, Deca Durabolin and Anadrol will shut down testosterone levels, with Anadrol also causing exceptional fluctuations in cholesterol and liver enzymes due to it being a C-17 alpha-alkylated oral compound. Anadrol is also an estrogenic steroid, with edema and gynecomastia being possible due to its direct stimulatory effect on estrogen receptors.

Anecdotal Results

The following are anecdotal reports posted by SARM users on Facebook, documenting their experiences.

I’m halfway through my first RAD 140 cycle. It definitely boosted strength; recovery time is still the same, and endurance has gone up. I’ve got everything ready to start Test E after this.

---

The SARMs work pretty well; what I like about them is how “keepable” the gains are. But I’ve also never had any bad side effects from any SARM except YK-11.

---

I am 4 weeks in on Ostarine 10 mg, LGD 4033 10 mg, and MK-677 20 mg. My weight has gone up 8–10 lbs, and my strength and endurance are at an all-time high. The only downside is that my libido is slightly lower. I’m considering upping the Ostarine and MK-677 by 10 mg for optimal gains, but I’m not sure if it’s worth it.

---

Summary

Non-steroidal SARMs are not FDA-approved, only being formulated in the last 20 years, thus making them investigational compounds (5).

Therefore, anyone who takes SARMs is essentially conducting their own human trial.

• It is already evident that initial claims of SARMs being safer than anabolic steroids are not entirely accurate, with evidence of transaminasemia, hyperlipidemia, and diagnoses of acute myocarditis (6).
• Thus, from existing research and our practical experience treating patients who have taken SARMs, we are seeing that they are just as toxic as steroids.

We find that SARMs only mimic a portion of the muscle-building effects of steroids. Thus, anabolic steroids such as testosterone may be more favorable from a clinical perspective for the treatment of cachexia.

Dr. Rand McClain supports this idea, asserting that testosterone may be more optimal than SARMs because:

• Testosterone appears to be less cardiotoxic.
• Research indicates testosterone to be more anabolic.
• Testosterone has more clinical studies detailing its effects.

In short, a cycle of testosterone may produce superior results compared to SARMs in terms of muscle hypertrophy and subcutaneous fat loss, without deteriorating hepatic health. Studies have shown, however, that testosterone can cause moderate negative effects on cholesterol (7).

Co Authors :