Sublingual V Oral Administration

Shamelessly lifted without permission from https://www.reddit.com/r/PEDs/comments/92mvu3/sublingual_vs_oral_administration_lgd4033/as while it's speculation as far as SARMs go, it's a great hypothesis... Full credit to /u/LuxuriousBottleCap. My editing and formatting. It's a pretty interesting topic, and while it's speculation as far as SARMs, it's logical that sublingual should be better than oral, just the same that in vitro is better than oral.

The question of oral vs sublingual is usually more a question of bioavailability. Is the oral dose weaker than it if it were injected? If it is, then it will also be more effective sublingually.

Here's a study looking at various methods of marijuana effectiveness. You can see that oral cannabis has terrible bioavailability of 6%. While inhalation is 3x higher at 18%. This is why blunts beat brownies, and bongs beat blunts.

Just looking at the particular sublingual example of cannabis delivery. which was unfortunately on rabbits, we see that sublingual is about 2x as powerful as using an oral dose. Now rabbits... are not the absolute best test subjects and it may not hold true for humans. But they're fairly good analogs to humans. So it's probably pointing in the right direction.

Now of course if we look at each study, it may even imply that vaping sarms would be more effective than sublingual administration. But I actually assume that sarms have better bioavailability than cannabis.

I read one overview that looked at numerous studies (in a physical book) over 10 years ago. But I have no idea what book it was. Something random from my mother's library (she was a nutritionist). That was what convinced me on sublingual vs oral. It found that on average sublingual was equally effective at 1/2 the dose. If the liver was involved it was usually 50-300% more effective. Though there were at least a few zeroes in the differences.

From what little I've seen of the two compared sublingual basically = injection for a lot of substances. Which is why it ultimately tails back to bioavailability.

https://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read-the-journal/all-issues/2010-2019/2016/vol-129-no-1436-10-june-2016/6920

So my conclusion is: Most sarms are probably not 100% bioavailable. If they are not, then they are probably more effective when taken sublingually. But both of these statements are just educated guesses. There really haven't been any studies on bioavailability of sarms. No one can say for sure.