It is not a universally accepted best sarm brand or the best sarms supplier, which can be determined by online sarm reviews or by the promotions placed on their website. Scientific compound evaluation must be based on the evidence of its identity, quality and safety — not a pretty website.

The key to grasp is the distinction between what the seller says and what can be substantiated. This does not guarantee purity, uniformity or suitability for a specific product.

Useful questions include:

Are the chemical names unambiguously defined?

Do you have a batch specific COA?

Is the analytical report specific with regard to method used for testing and the laboratory?

Are the results reported reproducible?

Does the intended use and applicable regulatory restrictions clearly state?

While a certificate of analysis may be helpful, it is only as useful as the lab and methods employed, as well as the sample being analyzed and whether it is the actual batch of product or a different batch. It also does not provide proof of the safety of a compound toward people.

It is important to pay equal attention to the safety evidence. According to a 2023 systematic review, 33 studies with 2,136 participants, 1,447 of whom were exposed to SARMs were included. The authors noted the occurrence of reports of drug-induced liver injury and tendon rupture and other adverse events.

If you need more technical information, please check out LRG Labs and don’t assume that a brand name is a quality assurance.

The key to the practical lesson: filter out the marketing from measurable evidence. In fact, research quality, clear research documentation and adherence to relevant regulations are much more important than claims of superiority.

The data have been extracted from Systematic Review of Safety of Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators in Healthy Adults, 2023.