anyone have experience with GW 50156?

dead93mau5

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
53
Location
Detroit, MI
I am thinking about running this to help aid me in my cardio/fat loss..

does anyone have experience running this compound?

I am assuming it is non-suppressive based off what I have read about it.
 
It is suppressive in higher dosages, and if ran for long periods of time. Run it in teh 10-20mg/day range do not go over 20, the returns are not worth the extra dosing. I liked it at 10mg/daily. Run it in the 12week range for length. Be strict with your diet to make the most of it and you will do well with the cardio training.
 
If you're running like a gram a day or more is what the equivalent dose was in rats.
 
WADA issues alert on GW501516
March 21, 2013
It has come to WADA’s attention that the black market substance GW501516 is being sold to and used by some athletes.

The side effect of this chemical compound is so serious that WADA is taking the rare step of warning “cheats” to ensure that there is complete awareness of the possible health risks to athletes who succumb to the temptation of using GW501516 for performance enhancement.

GW501516 was a developmental drug that was withdrawn from research by the pharmaceutical company and terminated when serious toxicities were discovered in pre-clinical studies.

Clinical approval has not, and will not be given for this substance.

However, GW501516 has been available for some months on the black market, through the Internet and elsewhere. Anti-Doping authorities have already seen its use by athletes, as there are a number of positive cases.

Please pass this information on to your athletes as soon as possible.
http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/w...ss&utm_campaign=wada-issues-alert-on-gw501516

GW501516, a non-genotoxic PPARδ agonist, was assessed for carcinogenic potential by daily administration (oral gavage) to Han Wistar rats for a period of 104 weeks. Males were given 0, 5, 15 or 30mg/kg/day for the first 6 weeks of the study. For the remainder of the study males were given 0, 5, 20 or 40 mg/kg/day. Females were given 0, 3, 10 or 20 mg/kg/day for the entire study. GW501516 produced test article-related neoplastic findings in multiple tissues at all doses.
http://www.toxicology.org/AI/Pub/Tox/2009Tox.pdf [no. 895]
 
This paper might be a little more helpful in trying to understand how PPAR agonists seem to have such conflicting results (amazingly beneficial sometimes, lethal at others). Essentially, it seems to be dose-related. At lower doses, it can attenuate the bad things that it potentiates at higher doses. The beneficial doses seem to be within the range of 200mg-1000mg (that would be for, say, an average 220lb bodybuilder). For those who can't access it, this is the most pertinent paragraph:


"The encouraging results from the Phase 2 clinical trials with GW501516 have been shadowed by the preclinical toxicology findings. There are several conflicting studies showing the direct effects of oral dosing rats and mice of GW501516 leading to either the induction or in- hibition of carcinoma (Table 3). Looking closely at the experimental de- sign it seems that there is a direct correlation between dose and outcome, with doses of GW501516 10 mg/kg/day for 6 weeks inducing detrimental side effects such as rectal bleeding in mice (Gupta et al., 2004) and at 10 to 100 mg/kg/day for 104 weeks in rats and mice devel- oping tumours throughout the body (Geiger et al., 2009; Newsholme et al., 2009) and 30 to 275 mg/kg leading to placental malformation in rats (Nishimura et al., 2013). In these animals, this high dosing would lead to agonists reaching the μM range, and therefore the non- genomic and off target effects of PPARβ/δ agonists become apparent. On the other hand, similar or lower doses of GW501516 (2 to 10 mg/ kg for 5 weeks) lead to the inhibition of chemically induced carcinomas in mice when dosed for up to 22 weeks (Marin et al., 2006; Hollingshead et al., 2008), and inhibit growth of human cancer cell lines (Bility et al., 2008). Mice orally dosed with 4 mg/kg/day become more metabolically active (Lee et al., 2006); at 2 mg/kg/day mice, re- cover from chemically induced non-alcoholic steatosis (Nagasawa et al., 2006) and ApoE−/− mice exhibit significantly reduced lesions (Barish et al., 2008). A study of septic shock in mice used a single injec- tion of 0.03 mg/kg GW0742, whose beneficial effects were completely reversed by a selective PPARβ/δ antagonist GW0660 (Kapoor et al., 2010). This study did not measure any changes in cholesterol, although it does clearly indicate that far smaller doses of these compounds may provide us with more PPARβ/δ selective data."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24184294
 
No its not I am running it currently lol and have ran it in the past. When you look at the list of cancer causing compounds there are less things that dont then do.
 
I used to smoke 2 packs a day so I think residual cancer from that is a higher probability than my 20mg/day gw dose I used to take.
 
lol, There is this place called Zihuatenejo just ask for red hes a guy that knows how to get things. BTW if you get the reference with out Googling I commend you sir.
 
^Haha good movie.

Did you get it in a vial or in a powder form? I got the powder previously since it was much cheaper, and the vials are crazy expensive, not sure if the quality is inconsistent or something or they're just making a killing off selling vials when its an oral drug.
 
I have had both currently running it in liquid form, and getting good results, but i never run it alone I always run it with ostirine, some reason that combo just dose well for me. Though individually they are good and have merit together just more of a balanced effect.
 
Really interesting. I've read much about this certain compound and was glad at first that I didn't order these GW-50156 pills as intended after the cancer warning was publicized.

But then I read up about it. And became skeptical, as with many drug-related 'news'. That some vendors still sell it (not very surprising) and people actually still buy it (not -that- surprising either thinking of para-halogenated cathinones, closely related to selective neurotoxins, becoming widespread among RC clubbers..- another link I doubt somewhat, but I won't touch them yet for sure). But certainly the point that (at least one of the most cited) papers actually referred to a strain of mice used in cancer research. One that is predisposed to develop tumors (at least how I understood it). Then there possibly was the involvement of another carcinogenic agent.

And the information quoted above, that below a given threshold dose this compound actually inhibited tumor growth is very interesting indeed.

Could it be that this compound was just 'too good to be true'? Or other reasons for ceasing research on this compound and scare people off it that are completely independent of the drug itself...??
 
Could it be that this compound was just 'too good to be true'? Or other reasons for ceasing research on this compound and scare people off it that are completely independent of the drug itself...??

Just because research has stopped, it doesn't mean there was no prospect of improvement or that a serious issue was about to come out. The company probably has 15-20 compounds at any given time in the pipeworks; it's often easier and cheaper just to move onto another. One day someone may come back to it, something that has happened before. At the moment there are so many potential next big things coming forward that they can afford to be picky.
 
Just because research has stopped, it doesn't mean there was no prospect of improvement or that a serious issue was about to come out. The company probably has 15-20 compounds at any given time in the pipeworks; it's often easier and cheaper just to move onto another. One day someone may come back to it, something that has happened before. At the moment there are so many potential next big things coming forward that they can afford to be picky.

Right...a lot of times companys will look for something absolutely earth shattering once its discovered its not they move onto something else
while not great but effective im sure its grouped in with things to look at in the future out of all the compounds tested
 
Top