View Full Version : Got Testosterone?
Simply try it and you'll see heating the oil does have an effect...
Not on the T juice yet :) And from my laymen's perspective I agree with the rest of your post in regards to viscosity, etc. I did just get the female hormone panel (http://www.privatemdlabs.com/lp/Female_Hormone_Testing.php) done to see what estradiol, LH & FSH would come in at with another TT. Cheapest option I found to get all the basics and there's a 10% off link on the far right.
I'm still doing research on the T front and have found some very interesting reading on D Aspartic Acid (DAA). Some reports are indicating a 40% rise in T levels utilizing it.
Also, Clomid has some pretty darn good reports as well. I know these may have been mentioned earlier in the thread but I'd suggest people dig into some of the research on these prior to the T needle route.
I'm contemplating heading down this road and will report back on my experience.
Flankenstein
03-16-15, 15:42
F clomid...
F clomid...
That's not very insightful.
I'm still doing research on the T front and have found some very interesting reading on D Aspartic Acid (DAA). Some reports are indicating a 40% rise in T levels utilizing it.
Also, Clomid has some pretty darn good reports as well. I know these may have been mentioned earlier in the thread but I'd suggest people dig into some of the research on these prior to the T needle route.
I'm contemplating heading down this road and will report back on my experience.
Waste of $$$. There are no OTC "T boosters" I have any faith in, and everyone has fallen flat on its over hyped face once put to legit research methodology. DAA covered HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/supplement-science/d-aspartic-acid-daa-and-test-boosters/) if interested.
As far as Clomid and other meds, the jury is still out in terms of whether they can be a real alternative to TRT (vs adjunct to TRT), and that's covered in some depth HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/mens-health/trt-and-fertility-how-to-get-the-best-of-both-worlds-part-2/) if interested.
When in doubt, search BrinkZone....
Flankenstein
03-16-15, 15:47
That's not very insightful.
Lol. Sorry, I think clomid for TRT is idiotic and I don't have time to expand. I don't think it would take that much research on your end for you to draw a similar conclusion.
Will - This is what I was referring to. I'm headed to your place to read those articles.
The role and molecular mechanism of D-aspartic acid in the release and synthesis of LH and testosterone in humans and rats, Enza Topo, Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 2009, 7:120
Dose:
"Every morning at breakfast for 12 consecutive days subjects in the first group were invited to consume, by mouth a solution of 10 ml of 2.0 M sodium D-aspartate (3.12 g/10 ml) supplemented with vitamin B6, folic acid and vitamin B12 and diluted in half a glass of water or fruit juice. This solution is marketed in Italy under the name DADAVIT"
Result:
Concerning the LH pattern, the results demonstrated that after 12 days of D-Asp treatment, 20 out of 23 (87%) participants had significantly increased concentrations of LH in their blood with respect to basal values (the value of LH found in the same subjects before starting treatment). Statistical analysis demonstrated that the value (mean ± SEM) of serum calculated for all the 23 subjects treated with D-Asp increased by 33.3%. From a basal-level mean of 4.2 ± 0.5 mIU/ml, LH rose to a mean value of 5.6 ± 0.9 mIU/ml (Table 1). The increase was statistically significant (ANOVA with repeated measures: [F(2,82) = 24.279, p < 0.0001]). LH concentration determined in the placebo group after D-Asp treatment compared with the level before treatment had not increased [ANOVA: F(1,82) = 0.643, p > 0.427]), thus indicating that the increase of LH due to D-aspartate treatment was authentic. The effect of D-aspartate on LH increase was time dependent. When subjects drank sodium D-aspartate for 6 days, LH increased only 1.07-fold, and this value was not statistically significant (Table 1). However, when the treatment of D-Asp was continued for 12 consecutive days, the LH concentration in the serum increased significantly (benefit effects). In order to know how long LH remained increased in the blood after the suspension of the treatment, we measured the concentration of LH in the serum 3 days after the D-Asp treatment or the placebo treatment was suspended. The results indicated that 3 days after suspension of D-Asp treatment, LH was still found at a 1.14-fold increased levels compared with the respect of basal level, but not statistically significant (Table 1).
Concerning the effect of D-Asp on the induction of testosterone release, after 12 days of D-Asp treatment, the levels of testosterone in the serum of the participants were significantly increased compared with basal levels. Out of 23 participants, 20 had increased testosterone. From a mean of 4.5 ± 0.6 ng/ml serum at zero time, it rose to 6.4 ± 0.8 ng/ml, a 42% increase (Table 1). Statistical analyses indicated a significant effect [ANOVA with repeated measures: treatment effect: F(1,82) = 7.724, p < 0.0082] and a significant interaction between treatment and days [F(2,82) = 32.599; P < 0.0001]. As with LH, so also with testosterone, the effect of D-aspartate was time dependent. When subjects were treated with sodium-D-aspartate for only 6 days, testosterone was found of 1.15-fold higher than basal levels, but this increase was not statistically significant (Table 1). Interestingly 3 days after the suspension of D-Asp treatment, testosterone was still increased 1.22-fold compared with the basal levels (5.8 ± 0.6 ng/ml against 4.5 ± 0.6 ng/ml). Fisher's post-hoc analysis also revealed a significant difference in the testosterone concentration in the serum 3 days after the end of the treatment (p < 0.01) (Table 1). One plausible explanation of this phenomenon is that since in rats ingested D-Asp remains accumulated in the testes in significant amounts until 3 days after the suspension of D-Asp treatment (see below), if it is assumed that in humans D-Asp also remains significantly increased in the testes 3 days after the suspension of D-Asp treatment, we can deduce that in humans as in rats, D-Asp had remained accumulated in significant amounts in the testes and consequently it continued to stimulate testosterone release.
Lol. Sorry, I think clomid for TRT is idiotic and I don't have time to expand. I don't think it would take that much research on your end for you to draw a similar conclusion.
I've read very negative things about it and very positive things as well. There are quite a few doctors who go that route before TRT as well. I'd be interested in what your thoughts are when you have more time.
Will - This is what I was referring to. I'm headed to your place to read those articles.
The role and molecular mechanism of D-aspartic acid in the release and synthesis of LH and testosterone in humans and rats, Enza Topo, Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 2009, 7:120
.
Read it yes. I linked to a more recent study above, done at an independent US university, in humans, looking at T end points that matter, and they found nadda. Real world lab tests find nadda. etc, etc. OTC "T boosters" = waste O $$$ in my view.
Two, there's no free lunch in human biology, and anything able to produce physiologically relavent changes in T will come with potential downsides, such as increased E2, etc.
Just say no. :cool:
Flankenstein
03-16-15, 16:04
I've read very negative things about it and very positive things as well. There are quite a few doctors who go that route before TRT as well. I'd be interested in what your thoughts are when you have more time.
Ok, I'll poke back in here after work with less brevity. I'll say this though- If I were going to take anything before TRT it would be hCG not clomid.
Ok, I'll poke back in here after work with less brevity. I'll say this though- If I were going to take anything before TRT it would be hCG not clomid.
I'm unclear how/why you'd come to that conclusion, so I'll be interested to see your thought process and or data on that conclusion.
Basic duplication of Will's post.
Flankenstein
03-16-15, 17:17
I'm unclear how/why you'd come to that conclusion, so I'll be interested to see your thought process and or data on that conclusion.
I'm surprised that it is unclear to you. If I'm understanding Irish correctly, he is looking to "kick start" endogenous testosterone production before diving head first into TRT. If that is the case, hCG (w/ low dose arimidex depending on hCG dose and lab work) will do a better job than clomid. Again, excuse my brevity and lack of explanation/links to research.
I'm surprised that it is unclear to you. If I'm understanding Irish correctly, he is looking to "kick start" endogenous testosterone production before diving head first into TRT. If that is the case, hCG (w/ low dose arimidex depending on hCG dose and lab work) will do a better job than clomid. Again, excuse my brevity and lack of explanation/links to research.
That's the case for myself. I am not a "science guy" but I've been doing lots of reading and research. I thought hCG would be primarily used on TRT to keep the testicles functioning and Clomid would be better for a kick start.
I may be off base but I was also under the impression that hCG would mimic LH and possibly reduce the body's own natural output afterwards whereas Clomid would not have the same effect. Again, I'm a layman, trying to understand a lot of this and there is conflicting information throughout from doctors to scientists to end users.
DAA covered HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/supplement-science/d-aspartic-acid-daa-and-test-boosters/) if interested.
What are your thoughts regarding this quote in relation to that paper?
From the intro,
"... the nutrition/sport supplement industry has attempted to take advantage of this information by manufacturing D-ASP–containing products with the intent of these products increasing endogenous testosterone levels, presumably by activation of the HPG axis. Furthermore, these products are being marketed on the premise that increases in endogenous testosterone will result in increases in muscle mass, especially when ingested in conjunction with a resistance training program."
So clearly these guys were going to use real DAA correct? At least analyze what they purchased to make sure if conformed to DAA. Surely one would do that... correct? What did they use?
"The PLC group consisted of the oral ingestion of 4 capsules daily containing 3 g of guar gum, whereas the DAA group involved 4 daily capsules containing 3 g of D-ASP (Better Body Sports, Ventura, CA, USA), based on company guidelines for D-ASP and because the dosage was previously shown effective at increasing endogenous testosterone [2]."
Here is the exact product that was used -> Better Body Sports D-Aspartic Acid 120 Capsules
So the study shouldn't be about DAA but should be about "Better Body Sports D-Aspartic Acid". Well I'm sure they tested blood for DAA. Right? Turns out yes. They tested before the program and after (Day 0 and Day 29). The resistance training and Better Body Sports D-Aspartic Acid program was a 28 day program.
"In the DAA group, there was an increase in the serum levels of D-ASP that was not significantly greater than the levels of day 0 or significantly different from PLC (placebo). For serum DDO, when compared with PLC, there was a significant increase in the levels of DDO at day 29 in the DAA group."
What about estrogen?
"The provision of D-ASP has been shown to increase estrogen levels. There are in vitro data from boar [20] and lizard [8] testes demonstrating that endogenous testicular D-ASP enhances gonad aromatase activity. Therefore, based on the possibility that D-ASP supplementation may increase endogenous estrogen levels, thereby altering the testosterone/estrogen ratio, we assessed the levels of estrogen. However, our results showed estrogen levels to be unchanged by D-ASP supplementation, thereby indicating no effectiveness of D-ASP supplementation on up-regulating aromatase activity."
Is that a failure of DAA or Better Body Sports D-Aspartic Acid?
Well let's go back to the test at day 29 for D-ASP and DDO in blood? Only the DDO was significantly raised. What is that?
"The degradative role of DDO is to catalyze the oxidative deamination of d-amino acids to generate the corresponding 2-oxo acids, along with hydrogen peroxide and ammonia (or methylamine). In rodents, the administration of D-ASP was shown to increase DDO activity [22] and [23], suggesting that DDO activity is induced by increased levels of D-ASP. Based on this information, in the present study, it is possible that because of the higher baseline levels of testosterone, as a means of androgen-regulated feedback of the HPG axis, the level of serum D-ASP induced by supplementation was conceivably being degraded by DDO at a rate that rendered it unable to effectively activate the HPG axis."
By the time they start talking about this in the discussion they are looking for reasons why DAA didn't work in raising testosterone. Could be a good rationale. Could be some good reasoning in there. Sounds so good even bright minds adopted one of them there reasons. Hell we are all bright fellows... but why couldn't they test the OTC supplement product they received to see what exactly it was? How pure is it? How is the structure? Couldn't they have at least tested blood levels for DAA throughout? Sure a raised DDO indicates that there is probably is some DAA in that product. But not necessarily. This enzyme participates in alanine and aspartate metabolism. As an example of what DDO acts on and would presumably be raised in response thereto, "One enzyme was D-aspartate oxidase acting on acidic D-amino acids such as D-aspartate and D-glutamate" - Production, purification and characterization of D-aspartate oxidase from the fungus Trichoderma harzianum SKW-36, Shigekazu Yano, Advances in Bioscience and Biotechnology, 3, 7-13 2012
Anyway... I have no problem with the study as it relates to Better Body Sports. As for conveniently substituting DAA for Better Body Sports... I think that greatly weakens this study... and it makes me look sideways at anyone who wants to trumpet "Ah HA! I knew this stuff was worthless or is only worthwhile in XYZ populations."
It doesn't speak to me that way.
ETA - From a letter to the guy who headed up the story.
I wanted to point out a serious potential flaw with the DAA study published August 15 of this year. Although you speculated that the lack of results and even lack of measurable blood levels were due to increased D-amino oxidase levels (a potential unknown homeostatic mechanism), which is insightful, I believe you may have overlooked another, simpler possibility.
The supplement industry as you know is unregulated. Often-times products are shipped en masse from overseas and COAs (certificates of analysis) are not included, contain errors, are forged, etc. The Ventura, CA supplier from whom you purchased is essentially a bargain bin provider.
I am suggesting that rather than a previously unknown DAA homeostatic mechanism that would require very high levels of D-amino oxidase type enzymes, a simpler "mechanism" (if you will) would be that the product used was weak, or even entirely counterfeit. There is plenty of precedent for such a suspicion.
I already did some footwork and emailed the company, Better Body Warehouse Supplements, and asked for a certificate of analysis under the auspices of making a purchase. The reply I received notified me that the product was no longer going to be carried, and that a new brand would be available soon. No COA was offered or mentioned. The web-page for the product went down immediately after I made the inquiry.
You can draw your own inferences from the above facts.
Seeing as the only significant change in the control vs the group given Better Body Warehouse DAA was serum DAAO, it's important to note that alanine and glutamate metabolism involve DAAO.
I would be very interested to know whether independent lab results were obtained by your team, or if a COA was given from Better Body. If not, I would suggest that the study be appended with a note or editor's note that the purity of the product was questionable and may have skewed results.
Hopefully if not, your team still has some of the product (since it's now discontinued) and would consider performing or funding independent tests of the purity and authenticity.
Flankenstein
03-16-15, 17:50
That's the case for myself. I am not a "science guy" but I've been doing lots of reading and research. I thought hCG would be primarily used on TRT to keep the testicles functioning and Clomid would be better for a kick start.
I may be off base but I was also under the impression that hCG would mimic LH and possibly reduce the body's own natural output afterwards whereas Clomid would not have the same effect. Again, I'm a layman, trying to understand a lot of this and there is conflicting information throughout from doctors to scientists to end users.
Yes, hCG has many applications. Preventing testicular atrophy on TRT is certainly one of them.
]I'm surprised that it is unclear to you[/B]. If I'm understanding Irish correctly, he is looking to "kick start" endogenous testosterone production before diving head first into TRT. If that is the case, hCG (w/ low dose arimidex depending on hCG dose and lab work) will do a better job than clomid. Again, excuse my brevity and lack of explanation/links to research.
Oh, it's not unclear to me, but I don't agree fully either. HCG works at the T level HPTA and does not correct low T from suppressed HPTA acting as LH and does not kick start the actual HPTA to produce T. In fact, it will suppress it. Clomid works at the HP levels of the HPTA and is actually a better kick starter med for the HPTA. Yes, some docs may use HCG as a form of TRT, but the often need for the AI along with it (greatly increasing costs, need for lab work, etc) due to elevated E2, along with possibility of leydig cell desensitization due to long term use of HCG, and a few other issues, makes it a poor mono therapy choice in my view. If one is going to go on TRT, there's no reason to "kick start" it with HCG.
One can get good responses with Clomid and HCG combined to re start the HPTA*, and some will use small amounts of HCG and T (and AI if indicated) to keep the T part of the HPTA working. For men that want to maintain sperm counts and nad size, it's the way to go.
Studies (see linked already) have found Clomid modestly effective for raising T as mono therapy and it's working via the HP part of the axis vs just the T level, which may be the better option.
Neither are a good choice for TRT as mono therapy in my view.
* = Probably the smartest doc I know in this areas uses Clomid, HCG, and Tomox in a very specific doses and schedule that has excellent responses for suppressed HPTA due to long term AAS use or men who want to come off TRT for some reason. He finds all three, due to their different impact on the HPTA, is most effective.
That's the case for myself. I am not a "science guy" but I've been doing lots of reading and research. I thought hCG would be primarily used on TRT to keep the testicles functioning and Clomid would be better for a kick start.
You're correct.
I may be off base but I was also under the impression that hCG would mimic LH and possibly reduce the body's own natural output afterwards whereas Clomid would not have the same effect. Again, I'm a layman, trying to understand a lot of this and there is conflicting information throughout from doctors to scientists to end users.
You have a better handle on it than the majority of docs out there.
What are your thoughts regarding this quote in relation to that paper?
The entire thing can be summed up as: more research is needed. Taking the (essentially) worthless mouse studies, and combined with the US study done in humans, combined with some possible wrinkles added by what you posted, would at best, lead one to conclude more research is needed. I will say, lab work I have seen from users "in the wild" found nadda, and interest by users dropped sharply after that study and general lack of "real world" results by users. I'd also have to go back and look at the materials and methods of the study to see if they tested the product for purity and dose, which they often do.
Interesting paper on the relationship of T and SAT to low T and obesity.
Determinants of testosterone levels in human male obesity
EndocrineInternational Journal of Basic and Clinical Endocrinology
Abstract
Testosterone (T) levels are decreased in obese men, but the underlying causes are incompletely understood. Our objective was to explore the relation between low (free) T levels and male obesity, by evaluating metabolic parameters, subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) aromatase expression, and parameters of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis. We recruited 57 morbidly obese men [33 had type 2 diabetes (DM2)] and 25 normal-weight men undergoing abdominal surgery. Fourteen obese men also attended a follow-up, 2 years after gastric bypass surgery (GBS). Circulating T levels were quantified by LC–MS/MS, whereas free T levels were measured using serum equilibrium dialysis and sex hormone-binding globulin, luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone by immunoassay. SAT biopsies were used to determine adipocyte cell size and aromatase expression by real-time PCR.
Total and free T levels were decreased in obese males versus controls, with a further decrease in obese men with DM2 versus obese men without DM2. There were no differences in aromatase expression among the study groups, and sex steroids did not correlate with aromatase expression. Pearson analysis revealed an inverse association between (free) T and SAT cell size, triglycerides, and HOMA-IR. Multivariate analysis confirmed the inverse association between (free) T and SAT cell size (β = −0.321, P = 0.037 and β = −0.441, P = 0.011, respectively), independent of age, triglycerides, HOMA-IR, obesity, or diabetes. T levels were normalized 2 years after GBS. These data suggest that SAT cell size rather than SAT aromatase expression or parameters of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis is related to low T in male obesity, which points to adipose cell size-related metabolic changes as a major trigger in decreased T levels.
Full Paper:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12020-015-0563-4/fulltext.html
The entire thing can be summed up as: more research is needed. Taking the (essentially) worthless mouse studies, and combined with the US study done in humans, combined with some possible wrinkles added by what you posted, would at best, lead one to conclude more research is needed. I will say, lab work I have seen from users "in the wild" found nadda, and interest by users dropped sharply after that study and general lack of "real world" results by users. I'd also have to go back and look at the materials and methods of the study to see if they tested the product for purity and dose, which they often do.
Cool. Just trying to further the discussion.
Cool. Just trying to further the discussion.
"T booster" supplements are like new AR manufacturers claiming to be better than Colt, gets a big yawn from me as a rule. :ph34r:
I have been on self T injections for the last two years .6 on the syringe every 10 days .
My work switched insurances first of the year and they rejected my prescription. Doc says I need to go off
The testosterone for awhile and give blood work showing I need it .(stupid) then resubmit to insurance company and they should buy it then. Wtf
Anyway how long until my levels drop once I'm off? I have an appointment for blood work 21 days after my last injection.
Is this enough time. Normally I'm on a 10 day cycle given in the thigh.
I have been on self T injections for the last two years .6 on the syringe every 10 days .
My work switched insurances first of the year and they rejected my prescription. Doc says I need to go off
The testosterone for awhile and give blood work showing I need it .(stupid) then resubmit to insurance company and they should buy it then. Wtf
Anyway how long until my levels drop once I'm off? I have an appointment for blood work 21 days after my last injection.
Is this enough time. Normally I'm on a 10 day cycle given in the thigh.
21 days should be long enough depending on which ester of T you were using and the ranges of the lab being used. How going off the T and testing within a month some how "proves" you need it is idiotic, but logic and science is not a strong point of insurance companies. If you have been on T long enough, any mans T will be low in that window of time due to suppression of natural production which takes a long time to rebound, if it ever does.
The doc should be able to tell them in his medical opinion it's indicated and that's that. But, there's still debate as to who is is medically indicated which leaves wiggle room for insurance companies etc.
21 days should be long enough depending on which ester of T you were using and the ranges of the lab being used. How going off the T and testing within a month some how "proves" you need it is idiotic, but logic and science is not a strong point of insurance companies. If you have been on T long enough, any mans T will be low in that window of time due to suppression of natural production which takes a long time to rebound, if it ever does.
The doc should be able to tell them in his medical opinion it's indicated and that's that. But, there's still debate as to who is is medically indicated which leaves wiggle room for insurance companies etc.
Cypionate injection .6 every 10 days so after 21 days of being off my blood work should show low ?
Yes the Insurance company is being ridiculous.
Cypionate injection .6 every 10 days so after 21 days of being off my blood work should show low ?
Yes the Insurance company is being ridiculous.
.6 does not really tell me anything. How many mg of T is that? That will depend on the mg/ml of the T you're using. That sounds like a very low dose BTW. What does that dose bring your total T to? You could wait an even 30 days if you wanted to make sure it was low.
Good article from one of my authors via BrinkZone:
Testosterone and Fat Loss – The Evidence (http://www.brinkzone.com/anti-aging-and-hrt/testosterone-and-fat-loss-the-evidence/)
It is well documented that obesity may cause hypogonadism, and that hypogonadism may cause obesity [1-4] This has generated debate about what condition comes first; obesity or hypogonadism? And what should be the first point of intervention?
In this article I will summarize data from several reviews on the associations of hypogonadism and obesity [1-4], and make the case that these conditions create a self-perpetuating vicious circle. Once a vicious circle has been established, it doesn’t matter where one intervenes; one can either treat the obese condition or treat hypogonadism first. The critical issue is to break the vicious circle as soon as possible before irreversible health damage arises.
Nevertheless, as I will explain here, treating hypogonadism first with testosterone replacement therapy may prove to be a more effective strategy because it to a large extent “automatically” takes care of the excess body fat and metabolic derangements. In addition, treating hypogonadism first also confers psychological benefits that will help obese men become and stay more physically active.
Key Points:
• Traditional obesity treatments with diet and exercise programs are notorious for failing in long-term maintenance of weight loss due to lack of adherence. Anti-obesity drugs have limited efficacy and may not be without adverse effects.
• In the prospective Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS), non-obese men who became obese had a decline of testosterone levels comparable to that of 10 years of aging.
• Testosterone deficiency and obesity each contribute independently to a self-perpetuating vicious cycle.
• Long-term testosterone therapy in men with hypogonadism improves body composition, metabolic syndrome components and quality of life, and thereby can help break the vicious cycle.
• Treatment of hypogonadism with long-term testosterone therapy, with or without lifestyle modifications, effectively treats obesity by correcting testosterone deficiency; one physiological root cause of obesity.
• In contrast to the U-shaped curve for weight loss seen with traditional obesity treatments, which are characterized by weight loss and weight regain, treatment with testosterone therapy results in a continuous reduction in obesity parameters (waist circumference, weight and BMI) for >5 years, or until metabolic abnormalities return to healthy ranges.
• The significant effectiveness of testosterone therapy in combating obesity in hypogonadal men remains largely unknown to doctors. Educational efforts are therefore critical to bring research findings into clinical practice in order to improve patient care and health outcomes.
Cont:
http://www.brinkzone.com/anti-aging-and-hrt/testosterone-and-fat-loss-the-evidence/
Six Feet Under
03-27-15, 10:58
I'd been feeling like crap for years, even though I'm only 25. Continual weight gain, lack of energy, almost no libido, HORRIBLE mood swings, anxiety, impatience, etc. I chalked most of the mental stuff up to residual effects of a shooting I was involved in five years ago (receiving end) and being told I'd never go back to the police academy, be able to lift weights, get full use of my arm back, etc. I had three years of daily struggle between therapy sessions, workouts, and just dealing with the situation and the loss from it before I was able to go back to school and complete it to get hired as a cop. I had gone to see a therapist for a few months afterwards and like everything else I've ever had happen to me, talking it out with the therapist, my family, and my friends helped me get over it. The mood swings and lack of energy had only gotten worse over the last two years.
Long story short:
Finally went and asked my GP for a blood test because I thought I had low T and he agreed with me. Blood test came back, total test was 234. He told me he was basically uncomfortable prescribing injections vs. the gels because he didn't know as much about it as a specialist would, so he referred me to a urologist. Couple visits at the urologist, got my blood tested again, test was 160. He refers me to an endocrinologist about an hour away from my house, he prescribes another blood test, this time it was 135. No changes in diet or activity during this six month time period. Starts me on 1mL of 200mg/mL test-cypionate every two weeks.
After approximately ten to twelve weeks, I got bloodwork done again and my level was 597. The biggest change I've noticed has been the mental change, I feel much more at peace and generally am in better spirits on a regular basis than I have been in a long, long time. I've also noticed a moderate increase in my energy levels, but the libido and weight gain are still about the same that they were pre-test.
Going to start working out again daily here soon, not that it's an excuse but I was working a lot of over time (normally only work 14 days a month and I had three days off in January, not much better in Feb, and I've been working or out of town most of the days this month) and when I had free time I was busy trying to take care of stuff around the house or relaxing. Hopefully with regular weight lifting and bicycling, my last two issues will start improving.
On my recent visit, the endo put me on the same dose, but increased the frequency to every 10-12 days as I told him I've noticed that the last 2-4 days of each two week injection cycle, I notice myself start sliding back toward being lethargic, moody, etc.
On my recent visit, the endo put me on the same dose, but increased the frequency to every 10-12 days as I told him I've noticed that the last 2-4 days of each two week injection cycle, I notice myself start sliding back toward being lethargic, moody, etc.
I'm not an expert by any means, but everything I've read points to the greater the frequency of injections, the better the results. You might try switching to a once weekly protocol or even possibly 2X a week to really try to smooth things out. Personally, more than once a week sounds like a lot, but there are many people in the know who promote it and subscribe to it. Definitely worth checking out the once a week shot in my opinion.
I knwo Will has advocated increased injection frequency and Irish too. I have witnessed it at work. DH used to be on 1.5ml of 200/2000 Tcyp every two weeks. After reading Will's info, we requested an increase in frequency. We now do .75ml weekly and it helped stabilize him a lot. I'd really like to have him on 1ml weekly, but his regular doc isn't willing to do that at this time.
I'd been feeling like crap for years, even though I'm only 25. Continual weight gain, lack of energy, almost no libido, HORRIBLE mood swings, anxiety, impatience, etc. I chalked most of the mental stuff up to residual effects of a shooting I was involved in five years ago (receiving end) and being told I'd never go back to the police academy, be able to lift weights, get full use of my arm back, etc. I had three years of daily struggle between therapy sessions, workouts, and just dealing with the situation and the loss from it before I was able to go back to school and complete it to get hired as a cop. I had gone to see a therapist for a few months afterwards and like everything else I've ever had happen to me, talking it out with the therapist, my family, and my friends helped me get over it. The mood swings and lack of energy had only gotten worse over the last two years.
Long story short:
Finally went and asked my GP for a blood test because I thought I had low T and he agreed with me. Blood test came back, total test was 234. He told me he was basically uncomfortable prescribing injections vs. the gels because he didn't know as much about it as a specialist would, so he referred me to a urologist. Couple visits at the urologist, got my blood tested again, test was 160. He refers me to an endocrinologist about an hour away from my house, he prescribes another blood test, this time it was 135. No changes in diet or activity during this six month time period. Starts me on 1mL of 200mg/mL test-cypionate every two weeks.
After approximately ten to twelve weeks, I got bloodwork done again and my level was 597. The biggest change I've noticed has been the mental change, I feel much more at peace and generally am in better spirits on a regular basis than I have been in a long, long time. I've also noticed a moderate increase in my energy levels, but the libido and weight gain are still about the same that they were pre-test.
Going to start working out again daily here soon, not that it's an excuse but I was working a lot of over time (normally only work 14 days a month and I had three days off in January, not much better in Feb, and I've been working or out of town most of the days this month) and when I had free time I was busy trying to take care of stuff around the house or relaxing. Hopefully with regular weight lifting and bicycling, my last two issues will start improving.
On my recent visit, the endo put me on the same dose, but increased the frequency to every 10-12 days as I told him I've noticed that the last 2-4 days of each two week injection cycle, I notice myself start sliding back toward being lethargic, moody, etc.
I recommend you read through this thread for discussion on frequency. That is a sub optimal frequency and lower doses more frequently yields better results. Two, at your age and those pre treatment levels, I'm surprised the endo didn't recommend a full workup to find out where and why you had such low levels before going the TRT route.
TRT is essentially a life long commitment and a 25 year old male should not have levels that low, so finding out why levels are that low, or at least attempting to, would seem warranted. I hope the long term issues of TRT were discussed with you, such as fertility issues should you want kids, etc.
Six Feet Under
03-27-15, 15:43
I'm not an expert by any means, but everything I've read points to the greater the frequency of injections, the better the results. You might try switching to a once weekly protocol or even possibly 2X a week to really try to smooth things out. Personally, more than once a week sounds like a lot, but there are many people in the know who promote it and subscribe to it. Definitely worth checking out the once a week shot in my opinion.
That's what I mentioned to him on the last visit. I asked about doing .5mL every seven days, but he wanted me to try 1mL every 10-12 days first. To be quite honest, I'll probably end up doing that myself anyways and reporting the results back to him. If he doesn't like it, I can gladly find another endocrinologist. Not like he's the only one. So far he's been fairly open to what I've said.
I knwo Will has advocated increased injection frequency and Irish too. I have witnessed it at work. DH used to be on 1.5ml of 200/2000 Tcyp every two weeks. After reading Will's info, we requested an increase in frequency. We now do .75ml weekly and it helped stabilize him a lot. I'd really like to have him on 1ml weekly, but his regular doc isn't willing to do that at this time.
That's about what I think would work for me, but I'm willing to take it slow and play around with things a little until I find the optimal frequency and dose. Rome wasn't built in a day and the issue of my body being out of whack has been present for years IMO. Either way, I already feel much better than I did before.
I recommend you read through this thread for discussion on frequency. That is a sub optimal frequency and lower doses more frequently yields better results. Two, at your age and those pre treatment levels, I'm surprised the endo didn't recommend a full workup to find out where and why you had such low levels before going the TRT route.
TRT is essentially a life long commitment and a 25 year old male should not have levels that low, so finding out why levels are that low, or at least attempting to, would seem warranted. I hope the long term issues of TRT were discussed with you, such as fertility issues should you want kids, etc.
Without having the actual lab results in front of me to relay exact numbers, I know I had full work-ups done twice (including an exam by the urologist all the way down to the finger up my arse to check my prostate, which was a new experience I don't prefer to have again until absolutely necessary), thyroid function, metabolic panels, and an MRI with/without contrast to determine if I had a pituitary tumor. I believe I've had it done four times now in total: once by the GP, once by the urologist, and twice by the endocrinologist. The city I work for switched insurance providers halfway through all of my testing and instead of going to Quest, I now go to LabCorp. Right now I can only pull up the last two lab results that I had done at LabCorp as I had never registered for the online Quest service until today so I have record of all of them.
On the first set of lab results, IIRC, everything came back within normal range except for LH and FSH, which were about halfway between zero and the bottom of the average range. Test was 234.
On the second set of lab results (approximately six weeks later), LH and FSH were back in the normal range, albeit on the low side. Test was 160.
On the third set of lab results (if I remember right, it was four to six weeks after set #2), everything came back normal again except for creatinine being 0.74 (range is 0.76-1.27mg/dL), glucose (102, range is 65-99mg/dL), and test was 135. At that time I was still on night shift working 6p-6a, so the chance of me having consumed something something past midnight was probably high, which most likely contributed to the raised glucose level.
Between set #3 (taken October 23, 2014) and set #4, I had the MRI completed, which showed everything to be normal in my brain (machine must have been broken, LOL). TRT was started at a rate of 1mL of 200mg/mL Test-C per 14 days. Between shot #1 and shot #2, there was a four or five week gap due to difficulty finding someone new to stick me. Since then it has been every 2 weeks give or take a day, right on schedule.
On the fourth set of lab results (completed March 2nd), the only things that were out of whack were creatinine (0.75, range 0.76-1.27 mg/dL) and HDL cholesterol (36, range is 39 or higher). Test was 597 at this time.
Once I'm able to access the older lab results from Quest I'll post them up in here.
Without having the actual lab results in front of me to relay exact numbers, I know I had full work-ups done twice (including an exam by the urologist all the way down to the finger up my arse to check my prostate, which was a new experience I don't prefer to have again until absolutely necessary), thyroid function, metabolic panels, and an MRI with/without contrast to determine if I had a pituitary tumor. I believe I've had it done four times now in total: once by the GP, once by the urologist, and twice by the endocrinologist. The city I work for switched insurance providers halfway through all of my testing and instead of going to Quest, I now go to LabCorp. Right now I can only pull up the last two lab results that I had done at LabCorp as I had never registered for the online Quest service until today so I have record of all of them.
On the first set of lab results, IIRC, everything came back within normal range except for LH and FSH, which were about halfway between zero and the bottom of the average range. Test was 234.
On the second set of lab results (approximately six weeks later), LH and FSH were back in the normal range, albeit on the low side. Test was 160.
On the third set of lab results (if I remember right, it was four to six weeks after set #2), everything came back normal again except for creatinine being 0.74 (range is 0.76-1.27mg/dL), glucose (102, range is 65-99mg/dL), and test was 135. At that time I was still on night shift working 6p-6a, so the chance of me having consumed something something past midnight was probably high, which most likely contributed to the raised glucose level.
Between set #3 (taken October 23, 2014) and set #4, I had the MRI completed, which showed everything to be normal in my brain (machine must have been broken, LOL). TRT was started at a rate of 1mL of 200mg/mL Test-C per 14 days. Between shot #1 and shot #2, there was a four or five week gap due to difficulty finding someone new to stick me. Since then it has been every 2 weeks give or take a day, right on schedule.
On the fourth set of lab results (completed March 2nd), the only things that were out of whack were creatinine (0.75, range 0.76-1.27 mg/dL) and HDL cholesterol (36, range is 39 or higher). Test was 597 at this time.
Once I'm able to access the older lab results from Quest I'll post them up in here.
Sounds like medical due diligence was performed from what I can see in the above. They can do various tests to see where in the HPTA the problem stems from, but that's a discussion for you and the doc and you may have already discussed it/covered it. Some times, no cause simply can't be determined.
There's a lot of good intel in this thread also that could help with some of the above. It's long, but will supply a ton of info you can use with your doc and for your own knowledge, and worth the effort.
Per discussion in this thread on topical routes vs IM or sub Q:
Injection of Testosterone May be Safer and More effective than Transdermal Administration for combating Loss of Muscle and Bone in Older Men
American Journal of Physiology - Endocrinology and Metabolism Published 21 April 2015 Vol.
Abstract
The value of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) for older men is currently a topic of intense debate. While US testosterone prescriptions have tripled in the last decade (7), debate continues over the risks and benefits of TRT. TRT is currently prescribed for older men with either low serum testosterone (T) or low T plus accompanying symptoms of hypogonadism. Serum T ≤ 300 ng/dL is considered to be low and T ≤ 250 is frank hypogonadism. Treatment for men who have low T without accompanying symptoms remains somewhat controversial. TRT produces benefits including increased muscle mass and strength, decreased fat mass, increased and bone mineral density.
TRT also produces known risks including development of polycythemia, decrease in HDL, breast tenderness and enlargement, prostate enlargement, and increases in serum PSA and prostate-related events. Importantly, TRT does not increase the risk of prostate cancer. Several recent reports have also indicated that TRT may produce cardiovascular (CV) risks, while others report no risk or even benefit. To address the potential CV risks of TRT, we have recently reported via meta-analysis that oral TRT increases CV risk and suggested that the CV risk profile for i.m.
TRT may be better than that for oral or transdermal TRT. Herein, we review the literature which indicates that i.m. TRT produces greater musculoskeletal and may be safer that either oral or transdermal preparations. We also review the literature discussing the use of 5α-reductase inhibitors as a promising means of improving the safety profile of TRT.
Full paper HERE (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/76384972/Injecting%20TESTOSTERONE%20safer%20than%20transdermal%20administration%202015%20AJP.pdf)
I've been taking clomiphene citrate to raise my test levels to a normal level. I'm young, 27, and some blood tests I took about a year ago proved my levels were a little lower than normal.
I've heard mixed theories on long term clomid. Some people mention vision altering side effects.
I'm always playing with the idea of trt injections. But I've read about possible fertility issues. I'm hoping to have kids in the next few years.
I'm hoping to find a GP doctor that will take on my testosterone battle. It will help out the wallet immensely.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've been taking clomiphene citrate to raise my test levels to a normal level. I'm young, 27, and some blood tests I took about a year ago proved my levels were a little lower than normal.
I've heard mixed theories on long term clomid. Some people mention vision altering side effects.
I'm always playing with the idea of trt injections. But I've read about possible fertility issues. I'm hoping to have kids in the next few years.
I'm hoping to find a GP doctor that will take on my testosterone battle. It will help out the wallet immensely.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And did it?
And did it?
It did. I feel much better, can keep muscle mass, and have a ton more energy. My only concern is the issues people discuss about using clomiphene long term.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It did. I feel much better, can keep muscle mass, and have a ton more energy. My only concern is the issues people discuss about using clomiphene long term.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What were the before/after T numbers with the Clomid? I don't know of any long term issued with Clomid. It's an old drug with a long track record.
Just went in to have my blood drawn to see what my levels are. I asked my doctor to increase me from 1.25 ML a week to 2 ML a week. She wants a blood test first. 1.25 was a PITA. My bottles are 1 ML.
Just went in to have my blood drawn to see what my levels are. I asked my doctor to increase me from 1.25 ML a week to 2 ML a week. She wants a blood test first. 1.25 was a PITA. My bottles are 1 ML.
1.25 to 2ML (better to give actual mg/ml here) is a big jump. Why not 1.5?
Flankenstein
07-02-15, 15:36
Just went in to have my blood drawn to see what my levels are. I asked my doctor to increase me from 1.25 ML a week to 2 ML a week. She wants a blood test first. 1.25 was a PITA. My bottles are 1 ML.
@ 200mg/ml...?
@ 200mg/ml...?
Comes in 100mg/ml or 200mg/ml in the US. If the latter, that would be 400mg per week, which well above TRT range for vast majority of men and into low end of bbing doses. Likely the former is my guess.
Flankenstein
07-02-15, 16:52
Comes in 100mg/ml or 200mg/ml in the US. If the latter, that would be 400mg per week, which well above TRT range for vast majority of men and into low end of bbing doses. Likely the former is my guess.
Ah. Never seen 100mg/ml. Learned something new. Agree that 400mg/ml is not a dose many doctors would prescribe.
Ah. Never seen 100mg/ml. Learned something new. Agree that 400mg/ml is not a dose many doctors would prescribe.
The 100mg/ml is far more commonly prescribed.
Flankenstein
07-02-15, 17:23
The 100mg/ml is far more commonly prescribed.
Interesting. Guess I've been lucky.
This is a write up on an important review.
Subjectively, men have consistently reported feeling better and doing better on IM or SubQ TRT vs topical routes as mentioned a few times in this thread, and we are starting to see some objective data as to why that may be the case. More data is needed before conclusive recs are made, but I generally advise those who don't note major improvements on topical TRT go to IM or subQ routes, with almost universal improvements in subjective and objectives measures when they do. This review also helps to start and parse out why there's been some conflicting findings with TRT.
Assessing the Risk and Benefits of Testosterone Replacement Therapies
A research review concludes that older men who receive testosterone replacement via injection may enjoy greater benefits and face fewer risks than those who use transdermal or oral testosterone formulations.
The authors of the new paper, a pair of researchers from the VA Medical Center at the University of Florida, referenced 96 published studies in an effort to compare the safety and efficacy of various testosterone products that physicians can choose for older patients.
They found that injections increase muscle and bone strength significantly more than oral or transdermal testosterone. The study authors also concluded, though with less certainty, that testosterone delivered by injection may be associated with fewer adverse cardiovascular events than testosterone delivered through the skin or the mouth.
“A possible explanation for the latter phenomenon is that transdermal testosterone causes greater elevation of serum dihydrotestosterone, due to significant expression of 5α-reductase in skin, but not in muscle,” they wrote in the American Journal of Physiology—Endocrinology and Metabolism.
“Meta-analysis of existing randomized placebo-controlled trial is, to date, insufficient to definitively assess the cardiovascular effects of testosterone replacement therapy. However, existing data exhibit trends indicting 1) that testosterone replacement therapy may not accelerate underlying early-stage prostate cancer 2) that transdermal testosterone replacement therapy may cause cardiovascular risk and 3) that intramuscularly injected testosterone replacement therapy may cause cardiovascular benefit.”
Cont:
http://www.hcplive.com/medical-news/assessing-the-risk-and-benefits-of-testosterone-replacement-therapies
Here is the current script.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/Testosterone%20Script%20Crop_zpsgpghjmfg.jpg (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/Testosterone%20Script%20Crop_zpsgpghjmfg.jpg.html)
My total Testosterone was 572 last week. This is following more than a month of 2cc's a week.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/T%20July%202015_zpsduarajiw.jpg (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/T%20July%202015_zpsduarajiw.jpg.html)
My total Testosterone was 409 in February 2015 with weekly injections of 1cc.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/T%20Feb%202015.jpg_zpsnlynzv4b.png (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/T%20Feb%202015.jpg_zpsnlynzv4b.png.html)
From what I have read, which is not a ton. 572 is not a high number. I am 43. I feel better now than I did in February.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/20140206_211453_zps2mmhtwis.jpg (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/20140206_211453_zps2mmhtwis.jpg.html)
The more I look at charts of T levels by age the more confused I get. The freaking numbers are all over the place. The lab results lists the range as 175-781. I can only tell my Doctor how I feel. I have hypogondaism as a result of chemotherapy over ten years ago. Not sure if that matters here but I don't think I am making any T on my own following more than ten years of T replacement and two bouts of chemo for hairy cell leukemia.
usmcvet, what is your estrogen level? For that much weekly Tcyp, I would think your levels should be at least 1k...your T might be getting bound up and not bioavailable, or it might be aromatizing to estrogen. Will Brink, what are the tests he needs to run to see what's happening to all the Tcyp he is injecting? I can't remember.
usmcvet, what is your estrogen level? For that much weekly Tcyp, I would think your levels should be at least 1k...your T might be getting bound up and not bioavailable, or it might be aromatizing to estrogen. Will Brink, what are the tests he needs to run to see what's happening to all the Tcyp he is injecting? I can't remember.
I am not sure about my estrogen level. I only had my T tested. I will ask my doctor. I have a note in to her. I am sure it is higher today, I took my shot today. I had my blood work done a week from my last shot. That should be my lowest level of the week.
The more I look at charts of T levels by age the more confused I get. The freaking numbers are all over the place. The lab results lists the range as 175-781. I can only tell my Doctor how I feel. I have hypogondaism as a result of chemotherapy over ten years ago. Not sure if that matters here but I don't think I am making any T on my own following more than ten years of T replacement and two bouts of chemo for hairy cell leukemia.
If all the math adds up here and we are on the same page; if you're taking 400mg per week of T and getting levels in the 500s, something is very wrong. That's almost physiologically impossible. Where the issue is, I can't say, could be as simple as testing methodology issues, to the product itself not containing the claimed dose, to something more complex such as a high conversion to estradiol, very high SGBG levels, etc. Prior chemo is a factor for sure in causes of hypogondaism, but I don't know how/if it would impact your current issue.
Doc should order a battery of tests (covered in this thread some place), change testing lab, change brand of T. Half the dose you're taking will get most people's T levels to the high
"normal" range.
If all the math adds up here and we are on the same page; if you're taking 400mg per week of T and getting levels in the 500s, something is very wrong. That's almost physiologically impossible. Where the issue is, I can't say, could be as simple as testing methodology issues, to the product itself not containing the claimed dose, to something more complex such as a high conversion to estradiol, very high SGBG levels, etc. Prior chemo is a factor or sure in causes of hypogondaism, but I don't know how/if it would impact your current issue.
Doc should order a battery of tests (covered in this thread some place), change testing lab, change brand of T. Half the dose you're taking will get most people's T levels to the high
"normal" range.
Thanks Will. I am waiting to hear back from my doctor.
Doc should order a battery of tests (covered in this thread some place), change testing lab, change brand of T. Half the dose you're taking will get most people's T levels to the high
"normal" range.
I looked. Twice with the search button. Once using "test" then "battery of tests" can anyone point me to a page or year.
I looked. Twice with the search button. Once using "test" then "battery of tests" can anyone point me to a page or year.
I honestly can't. I'd have to do the same searching you would to find that. Total T, free T, E2 (estradiol) and Sex Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG) , would be obvious tests to get a larger picture and should be part of the regular testing, but most only test total most of the time which gives a minimal picture. Tons of good articles also on my site to get important intel on the topic. This is one of those things you have to develop solid knowledge base as few out there have much as it's still a developing science and few bother to take the time to learn up on as they should.
I honestly can't. I'd have to do the same searching you would to find that. Total T, free T, E2 (estradiol) and Sex Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG) , would be obvious tests to get a larger picture and should be part of the regular testing, but most only test total most of the time which gives a minimal picture. Tons of good articles also on my site to get important intel on the topic. This is one of those things you have to develop solid knowledge base as few out there have much as it's still a developing science and few bother to take the time to learn up on as they should.
Thanks. I will do some reading tonight.
I am considering getting tested even though I am only 27, I'm not sure if it's a waste of time or not, but still.
Do I have to actually tell the doc the specific tests I want, do they not know how to test testosterone levels?
I am considering getting tested even though I am only 27, I'm not sure if it's a waste of time or not, but still.
Do I have to actually tell the doc the specific tests I want, do they not know how to test testosterone levels?
Most will simply test total testosterone. A few more savvy docs might test a few others things along with it (read through thread for info) but getting TT done is a good place to start. See:
How Is Testosterone Deficiency “low T” Diagnosed? – Things you need to know before going to your doctor (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/how-is-testosterone-deficiency-low-t-diagnosed-things-you-need-to-know-before-going-to-your-doctor/)
Good write up of interest:
"Long-term testosterone treatment with different testosterone preparations (http://www.brinkzone.com/anti-aging-and-hrt/long-term-testosterone-treatment-with-different-testosterone-preparations-provocative-results-on-diagnosis-and-adherence/) – provocative results on diagnosis and adherence" by BrinkZone.com author Monica Mollica
Due to lack of consistent clear-cut guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of testosterone deficiency, there is a lot of confusion among both health professionals and suffering men. The multiple different testosterone preparations available further add to the complexity of testosterone treatment.
This editorial presents the intriguing results from a notable study that analyzed effects of testosterone therapy with seven different testosterone preparations, in symptomatic men who had previously been denied treatment because of “normal” baseline testosterone levels.[1] The results are quite provocative and highlight several important practical issues relating to diagnosis and treatment of testosterone deficiency…
KEY POINTS
- Symptoms indicative of testosterone deficiency do not correlate with either total or free testosterone levels a baseline. Symptomatic patients with testosterone levels in the “normal range” benefit as much as do those with very low testosterone levels.
- Symptomatic relief may require longer than 1 year to achieve – this underscores the critical importance of long-term adherence to testosterone therapy. This contrasts with the common clinical practice of only giving testosterone therapy to men for 3-6 months to “see if it works”.
- Treatment with testosterone undecanoate injections may confer better symptomatic resolution than other preparations during the first year of treatment.
- None of the commonly available testosterone preparations cause any adverse effects on prostate or cardiovascular related parameters.
- While all commonly available testosterone preparations are safe and effective, risk of excessive increases in hemoglobin or hematocrit and polycythemia may be greater with pellet implants or transdermal testosterone.
Cont HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/anti-aging-and-hrt/long-term-testosterone-treatment-with-different-testosterone-preparations-provocative-results-on-diagnosis-and-adherence/)
Important thread bump:
Testosterone replacement could benefit veterans' cardiovascular health, study shows
Veterans with cardiovascular issues could benefit from testosterone replacement, a new study reveals.
According to the research by the Veterans Affairs, veterans with low testosterone but take enhancements, like gels, patches, or injections, have less chances of suffering from heart attack, stroke, or death compared to those who did not undergo said treatment. However, men who were treated but failed to achieve the normal levels did not benefit from the treatment.
Around 83,010 male veterans ages 50 and above joined in the study. Their condition was documented with low testosterone at the in Veterans Affairs Medical Center from 1999 and 2014.
According to Eureka Alert, the findings of the study could dispel previous notions about testosterone benefits. Likewise, it is expected to make a turn around on the much-debated testosterone therapy and whether or not it is really beneficial or not, particularly for the heart. While their studies were already conducted in the past, mixed results came in, although it is believed that differing patient populations and research methods affected the unstable results.
As move evidence is needed to back claims on testosterone therapy, more clinical trials have to be conducted to offer clear guidance on the use of testosterone treatment. A 2015 guideline issued by the Food and Drug Administration advised health care practitioners against over-using testosterone therapy because it places an individual at risk of heart attack and stroke.
But according to Dr. Rajat Barua, the study's corresponding author and an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Kansas, the right dose of testosterone could yield health benefits.
"It is the first study to demonstrate that significant benefit is observed only if the dose is adequate to normalize the total testosterone levels," Barua and his coauthors explained in the paper published in the European Heart Journal. The researchers also reiterated that only if the testosterone replacement therapy reaches the therapeutic level will the "reduction in [heart attack] or stroke and had significantly less benefit on mortality" be observed.
Researchers advocated active and frequent research on these issues to strengthen the claim of their work study.
"The mechanisms for these effects remain speculative," the researchers wrote, according to UPI.
http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/7093/20150813/testosterone-replacement-could-benefit-veterans-cardiovascular-health-study-shows.htm
Important thread bump:
Testosterone replacement could benefit veterans' cardiovascular health, study shows
Veterans with cardiovascular issues could benefit from testosterone replacement, a new study reveals.
According to the research by the Veterans Affairs, veterans with low testosterone but take enhancements, like gels, patches, or injections, have less chances of suffering from heart attack, stroke, or death compared to those who did not undergo said treatment. However, men who were treated but failed to achieve the normal levels did not benefit from the treatment.
Around 83,010 male veterans ages 50 and above joined in the study. Their condition was documented with low testosterone at the in Veterans Affairs Medical Center from 1999 and 2014.
According to Eureka Alert, the findings of the study could dispel previous notions about testosterone benefits. Likewise, it is expected to make a turn around on the much-debated testosterone therapy and whether or not it is really beneficial or not, particularly for the heart. While their studies were already conducted in the past, mixed results came in, although it is believed that differing patient populations and research methods affected the unstable results.
As move evidence is needed to back claims on testosterone therapy, more clinical trials have to be conducted to offer clear guidance on the use of testosterone treatment. A 2015 guideline issued by the Food and Drug Administration advised health care practitioners against over-using testosterone therapy because it places an individual at risk of heart attack and stroke.
But according to Dr. Rajat Barua, the study's corresponding author and an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Kansas, the right dose of testosterone could yield health benefits.
"It is the first study to demonstrate that significant benefit is observed only if the dose is adequate to normalize the total testosterone levels," Barua and his coauthors explained in the paper published in the European Heart Journal. The researchers also reiterated that only if the testosterone replacement therapy reaches the therapeutic level will the "reduction in [heart attack] or stroke and had significantly less benefit on mortality" be observed.
Researchers advocated active and frequent research on these issues to strengthen the claim of their work study.
"The mechanisms for these effects remain speculative," the researchers wrote, according to UPI.
http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/7093/20150813/testosterone-replacement-could-benefit-veterans-cardiovascular-health-study-shows.htm
I'm bumping this thread with a review paper for the ladies. T is just as important to women as it is for men, and that's overlooked:
Review
Testosterone in women—the clinical significance
The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
Summary
Testosterone is an essential hormone for women, with physiological actions mediated directly or via aromatisation to oestradiol throughout the body. Despite the crucial role of testosterone and the high circulating concentrations of this hormone relative to oestradiol in women, studies of its action and the effects of testosterone deficiency and replacement in women are scarce. The primary indication for the prescription of testosterone for women is loss of sexual desire, which causes affected women substantial concern. That no formulation has been approved for this purpose has not impeded the widespread use of testosterone by women—either off-label or as compounded therapy. Observational studies indicate that testosterone has favourable cardiovascular effects measured by surrogate outcomes; however, associations between endogenous testosterone and the risk of cardiovascular disease and total mortality, particularly in older women, are yet to be established. Adverse cardiovascular effects have not been seen in studies of transdermal testosterone therapy in women. Clinical trials suggest that exogenous testosterone enhances cognitive performance and improves musculoskeletal health in postmenopausal women. Unmet needs include the availability of approved testosterone formulations for women and studies to elucidate the contribution of testosterone to cardiovascular, cognitive, and musculoskeletal health and the risk of cancer.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213858715002843
Thanks for sharing this Will. I really wish the med industry would take this topic more seriously.
Thanks for sharing this Will. I really wish the med industry would take this topic more seriously.
It's slowly happening. We may both be dead by the time they "get it" but there's a trend, with fits and stops, headed in the right direction. Meanwhile, per usual, be well informed and your own advocate to get what you need.
prestonoconnor
09-14-15, 12:35
I wish they would study low T in returning service members. I have struggled with low T and depression for a few years. I got my T up through weekly injections and I feel a thousand percent better recently. I wonder how many soldiers are being treated for PTSD really just have low T
I wish they would study low T in returning service members. I have struggled with low T and depression for a few years. I got my T up through weekly injections and I feel a thousand percent better recently. I wonder how many soldiers are being treated for PTSD really just have low T
Not sure if that's been looked at specifically yet, but I have noted various times that vets seem to have sub par T levels compared to age matched non vet counter parts for reasons I can't explain. I requires some study, but causes such as stress, diet, exposure to various chems, etc are possible suspects. I'd recommend giving this thread a full read and you'll find studies and discussions that will help. There are a few docs who have correlated various hormones to PTSD also I have posted on here in the past. Top of this page is a vet related T study, so vets are a target of study at least.
Flankenstein
09-14-15, 14:27
My new doc says 80%+ her patients are under 35. When I asked if they were steroid abusers, victims of blunt force trauma to the area, or testicular cancer patients/survivors she responded no.
She told me that there is an epidemic of young males with low testosterone now. While I don't entirely disagree with her, epidemic seems like a strong word.
My new doc says 80%+ her patients are under 35. When I asked if they were steroid abusers, victims of blunt force trauma to the area, or testicular cancer patients/survivors she responded no.
Next time ask her what % have a high BMI/obese.
She told me that there is an epidemic of young males with low testosterone now. While I don't entirely disagree with her, epidemic seems like a strong word.
Data does show the average T levels of males in the US has been steadily dropping for decades, so if it seemed like men of your dads or grand dads generation were more "manly" on average, they were. Why that is, remains unclear, and is likely multi factorial without a single cause. I can say, most causes of low T can usually be greatly improved simply by losing weight (high BF lowers T), eating well, and getting some exercise. As obesity is also rampant, it's likely the major cause of low T for the majority of young men with low T.
There are however young men, especially vets I find, who have no typical risk factors for low T I can find, yet still have T levels well below where you'd expect. Hence, the total clinical picture of the individual must be assessed vs simply diagnosis that will lead the person to life long TRT where they may not need it.
Flankenstein
09-14-15, 16:12
Wilco Will, good call on body composition/BMI question. The only thing she mentioned/attributed to the "epidemic" was parabens and other environmental estrogens men (and women) are being exposed to.
Wilco Will, good call on body composition/BMI question. The only thing she mentioned/attributed to the "epidemic" was parabens and other environmental estrogens men (and women) are being exposed to.
One possible culprit, but you'll find a pretty linear relationship with BF going up and T going down. I don't discount other factors at all (having seen plenty of guys who were not fat, ate decent, etc with sub par T levels) but for most men most of the time who are say under 40, the likely reason the boring one they don't want to hear or deal with. Lots of intel on HRT, TRT, T etc on my site as well as this thread BTW.
Flankenstein
09-14-15, 21:28
Thanks, Will. I consider myself more up to speed than most but not necessarily a guru. (This stuff used to really interest me...not as much anymore)
Here's a question for you. New doc has me on"
250mg test cyp/wk
.5g arimidex 2x/wk
400iu hCG 1x/wk
I've never been on such a low dose of hCG nor have I ever been on a 1x/wk injection schedule. I'm skeptical to say the least. She has promised to get me studies that claim that this is now a "best practice".
Thoughts?
[Under doctor's orders I've been on hCG up to 9,000iu/wk (3k 3/wk) then 6,000iu/wk also split in 3, then lastly before this doc 250iu 2x/wk but back to back doses]
Thanks, Will. I consider myself more up to speed than most but not necessarily a guru. (This stuff used to really interest me...not as much anymore)
Here's a question for you. New doc has me on"
250mg test cyp/wk
.5g arimidex 2x/wk
400iu hCG 1x/wk
I've never been on such a low dose of hCG nor have I ever been on a 1x/wk injection schedule. I'm skeptical to say the least. She has promised to get me studies that claim that this is now a "best practice".
Thoughts?
[Under doctor's orders I've been on hCG up to 9,000iu/wk (3k 3/wk) then 6,000iu/wk also split in 3, then lastly before this doc 250iu 2x/wk but back to back doses]
250mg a week? Wow. That's a very high dose. Your T must be upper end or above of the range.
Flankenstein
09-15-15, 10:35
250mg a week? Wow. That's a very high dose. Your T must be upper end or above of the range.
It's been 700-800 in my trough. That's where my old doc wanted me. New doc is ok with that too.
Thoughts on the hCG dose and injection frequency, sir?
It's been 700-800 in my trough. That's where my old doc wanted me. New doc is ok with that too.
I'd expect higher with that dose. That you found a doc at all who "gets" the use of those additional meds is a plus and rare.
Thoughts on the hCG dose and injection frequency, sir?
Dosing of HCG is generally best as it is for other hormones using blood work to determine optimal doses and will vary person to person. A lengthy article by Monica M covers in detail the data:
http://www.brinkzone.com/mens-health/trt-and-fertility-how-to-get-the-best-of-both-worlds-part-2/
Flankenstein
09-15-15, 11:00
My biggest concern with the lower hCG dose (and 1x/wk injection frequency) is testicular atrophy.
Will,
PSA is s-l-o-w-l-y creeping up over the last few 6-month blood work checks. Still within normal limits but inching upward. Been on Test Cypionate since early 2009. Grandfather had prostate cancer (survived it). My doc explained that Test doesn't cause prostate cancer but if you are pre-disposed to it it can be enhanced by Test use. I just hit the big 5-0 last week and keep a steady cardio/weight regimen so the thought of going off of it is disconcerting, especially since my body has long since quit producing testosterone on it's own.
Thoughts?
Options?
Will,
PSA is s-l-o-w-l-y creeping up over the last few 6-month blood work checks. Still within normal limits but inching upward. Been on Test Cypionate since early 2009. Grandfather had prostate cancer (survived it). My doc explained that Test doesn't cause prostate cancer but if you are pre-disposed to it it can be enhanced by Test use. I just hit the big 5-0 last week and keep a steady cardio/weight regimen so the thought of going off of it is disconcerting, especially since my body has long since quit producing testosterone on it's own.
Thoughts?
Options?
It's far from a clear picture at this time. I did post some studies through this thread. Also see:
http://www.brinkzone.com/mens-health/testosterone-and-prostate-cancer-bye-androgen-hypothesis-welcome-saturation-model/
Hormones such as DHT, estradiol, IGF-1 and others play a part in the etiology of prostate cancer.
It's far from a clear picture at this time. I did post some studies through this thread. Also see:
http://www.brinkzone.com/mens-health/testosterone-and-prostate-cancer-bye-androgen-hypothesis-welcome-saturation-model/
Hormones such as DHT, estradiol, IGF-1 and others play a part in the etiology of prostate cancer.
If, at some point, I had to come off of Test what can replace it or kick the nads back into production again?
I saw an add in an airline magazine about some "men's health" clinic somewhere that used "bio-identical" drugs. I took that to mean not Test per se but something like it?
If, at some point, I had to come off of Test what can replace it or kick the nads back into production again?
I saw an add in an airline magazine about some "men's health" clinic somewhere that used "bio-identical" drugs. I took that to mean not Test per se but something like it?
Getting the HPTA back up and running (The nads are the the T in HPTA) is most effective with a combination of HCG and Clomid, and some will use additional meds to get the axis up and running. See article linked in post #574 for additional info. It covers more the use of those meds to maintain fertility during TRT, but the info applies to restarting a suppressed HPTA, albeit doses and schedule will differ.
"bio identical" is a marketing term of no use in male TRT, although it may have some basis of truth in female HRT. See:
http://www.brinkzone.com/anti-aging-and-hrt/what-are-bioidentical-hormones-dont-get-fooled-by-marketing-claims/
TBI related article: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/09/11/former-army-sergeant-raising-funds-for-hormone-replacement-therapy-to-treat/
TBI related article: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/09/11/former-army-sergeant-raising-funds-for-hormone-replacement-therapy-to-treat/
I have posted on Dr. Mark Gordon and his approach to TBI a while back. Good to see its getting some traction in the mainstream press.
The_crawfish
10-08-15, 14:17
Thanks, Will. I consider myself more up to speed than most but not necessarily a guru. (This stuff used to really interest me...not as much anymore)
Here's a question for you. New doc has me on"
250mg test cyp/wk
.5g arimidex 2x/wk
400iu hCG 1x/wk
I've never been on such a low dose of hCG nor have I ever been on a 1x/wk injection schedule. I'm skeptical to say the least. She has promised to get me studies that claim that this is now a "best practice".
Thoughts?
[Under doctor's orders I've been on hCG up to 9,000iu/wk (3k 3/wk) then 6,000iu/wk also split in 3, then lastly before this doc 250iu 2x/wk but back to back doses]
Any impact on hct or bp with that high of a dose??
1.25 to 2ML (better to give actual mg/ml here) is a big jump. Why not 1.5?
Met with the Doc again today. My T was 1,000 ng/dl she thought that too high. She wanted 1.5 ML a Week. I talked to her and asked for 2 ML Every 10 Days. Now that I am thinking about it, 1ML every 5 days will probably be better.
If all the math adds up here and we are on the same page; if you're taking 400mg per week of T and getting levels in the 500s, something is very wrong. That's almost physiologically impossible. Where the issue is, I can't say, could be as simple as testing methodology issues, to the product itself not containing the claimed dose, to something more complex such as a high conversion to estradiol, very high SGBG levels, etc. Prior chemo is a factor for sure in causes of hypogondaism, but I don't know how/if it would impact your current issue.
Doc should order a battery of tests (covered in this thread some place), change testing lab, change brand of T. Half the dose you're taking will get most people's T levels to the high
"normal" range.
400 MG weekly got me to 1,000 ng/dl. I've seen normal ranges all over the place. Last search was 270-1070 ng/dl. I don't feel any adverse effects at my current level. I am going to print this thread and re read everything.
Flankenstein
10-14-15, 11:05
Any impact on hct or bp with that high of a dose??
Yes, both are high. Doc wants me to donate blood occasionally and get on BP meds through primary care doc. I suspect if my diet was better and I did cardio BP would be a non issue.
daddyusmaximus
10-14-15, 11:13
The VA has been pretty good keeping an eye on my Low-T. (Had a pituitary tumor) I give myself a shot every two weeks. No luck with the commercial treatments as to my understanding they only encourage the pituitary to send out the signal to make more. My pituitary is FUBAR and don't work, so I have to do the testosterone injections. (and other pills, turns out the pituitary glad regulates a lot of shit)
Met with the Doc again today. My T was 1,000 ng/dl she thought that too high. She wanted 1.5 ML a Week. I talked to her and asked for 2 ML Every 10 Days. Now that I am thinking about it, 1ML every 5 days will probably be better.
400 MG weekly got me to 1,000 ng/dl. I've seen normal ranges all over the place. Last search was 270-1070 ng/dl. I don't feel any adverse effects at my current level. I am going to print this thread and re read everything.
I would have expected 400mg per week to get you above 1000ng/dl, but as long as other tests come back OK (E2, hct, etc) OK, then I don't know why some docs have an issued with high/normal T levels. "Happy" levels are clearly in the upper side of "normal" and data suggests the most benefits to boot.
Flankenstein
10-14-15, 11:28
I would have expected 400mg per week to get you above 1000ng/dl, but as long as other tests come back OK (E2, hct, etc) OK, then I don't know why some docs have an issued with high/normal T levels. "Happy" levels are clearly in the upper side of "normal" and data suggests the most benefits to boot.
M7 latest labs just came back at 1433 total and 43.66 free. This was 4.5/5 days after an my weekly injection. Doc didn't blink, she said she's fine with it.
Yes, both are high. Doc wants me to donate blood occasionally and get on BP meds through primary care doc. I suspect if my diet was better and I did cardio BP would be a non issue.
BP was 120/80 today. I am on BP and cholesterol meds and I'm Very Over Weight! Food is my drug. I'm working on it. I lost 155 #'s about 2 years ago. Gained 80 back. Just started working on it again a few weeks ago. I'm very happy with my current T level. I have an appointment in 5 weeks to see my doc and re check blood work.
The VA has been pretty good keeping an eye on my Low-T. (Had a pituitary tumor) I give myself a shot every two weeks. No luck with the commercial treatments as to my understanding they only encourage the pituitary to send out the signal to make more. My pituitary is FUBAR and don't work, so I have to do the testosterone injections. (and other pills, turns out the pituitary glad regulates a lot of shit)
I'm glad it's working for you too.
I would have expected 400mg per week to get you above 1000ng/dl, but as long as other tests come back OK (E2, hct, etc) OK, then I don't know why some docs have an issued with high/normal T levels. "Happy" levels are clearly in the upper side of "normal" and data suggests the most benefits to boot.
I suspect my T was always on the high side prior to my Chemotherapy. That was a bright line for me. I had zero libido following the chemotherapy. The T has been wonderful in that respect. I'm shooting for 40 pounds lost by the time I see her in 5 weeks!
Will could my obesity effect the T's absorption? I feel comfortable my Doc will listen to me if I'm not happy at a lower level. She didn't bat an eye when I told her I was using a 28G 5/8" needle to inject the T Sub Q instead of the harpoon IM! She wrote me a script for new syringes and needles so I can get them from my pharmacy and not online like last time. Hopefully it's cheaper. It will be more convenient this way. I bought a case of 100 last time. It takes up quite a bit of space.
The_crawfish
10-15-15, 19:06
400mg/wk on trt??? Holy hell, that's just shy of a cycle dose!!
What's the range on your free test labs?? 43 seems low, with that high of a total number. Doc test shbg?
If you don't mind me asking, how high was your hct??
The_crawfish
10-15-15, 19:11
Will could my obesity effect the T's absorption? I feel comfortable my Doc will listen to me if I'm not happy at a lower level. She didn't bat an eye when I told her I was using a 28G 5/8" needle to inject the T Sub Q instead of the harpoon IM! She wrote me a script for new syringes and needles so I can get them from my pharmacy and not online like last time. Hopefully it's cheaper. It will be more convenient this way. I bought a case of 100 last time. It takes up quite a bit of space.
Not will...but your weight can absolutely contribute to the test aromatizing. Are you taking any AI currently?
What's your current protocol??
400mg/wk on trt??? Holy hell, that's just shy of a cycle dose!!
What's the range on your free test labs?? 43 seems low, with that high of a total number. Doc test shbg?
If you don't mind me asking, how high was your hct??
Is HCT part of the CBC? I asked her for a CBC too. I'm interested because the my HCL (Hairy Cell Leukemia) was in remission for 6 years. 2004-2010. I'm coming up on that 6 year mark again now.
I don't think she checked SHGB. Just logged in to view my health records online and all I see is T of 1,000 ng/dl. She did draw blood at yesterday's appointment. To check T again and she wanted total cholesterol. Not sure but I think she was checking my liver too.
Not will...but your weight can absolutely contribute to the test aromatizing. Are you taking any AI currently?
What's your current protocol??
What's an AI? Anti Estrogen? I was injecting 2cc of Testosterone weekly. Doc wanted to do 1.5 cc weekly. I asked for 2cc every ten days but think 1cc every five days would be even better. My medicine comes in 1cc vials and doing 1.5cc would be a PITA.
Flankenstein
10-15-15, 22:05
AI= aromatase inhibitor. Arimidex or Aromasin would be the most popular for TRT doses.
The_crawfish
10-15-15, 22:12
Is HCT part of the CBC? I asked her for a CBC too. I'm interested because the my HCL (Hairy Cell Leukemia) was in remission for 6 years. 2004-2010. I'm coming up on that 6 year mark again now.
I don't think she checked SHGB. Just looked online and all I see is T of 1,000 ng/dl. She did draw blood at yesterday's appointment. To check T again and she wanted total cholesterol. Not sure but I think she was checking my liver too.
What's an AI? Anti Estrogen? I was injecting 2cc of Testosterone weekly. Doc wanted to do 1.5 cc weekly. I asked for 2cc every ten days but think 1cc every five days would be even better. My medicine comes in 1cc vials and doing 1.5cc would be a PITA.
HCT is hematocrit, it's the percentage of red blood cells to blood, basically the thickness of your blood. You know all those Ambo-chasing lawyers on tv that wanna sue if you or a loved one has suffered a stroke or heart attack due to trt?? HCT is one of the main culprits of said strokes and heart attacks. Not trying to scare you, nut it NEEDS to be tested and kept in check!
Free test is the important number, as that's the test that is available for your body to use. Total test is a pretty useless number, other than using it in a comparison to your free. High shbg will result in a lower free test number.
AI (aromatase inhibitor) is basically an "anti-estrogen"...it blocks aromatase which converts testosterone (or other androgens) into estrogen. Have you had e2 levels checked??
How much confidence do you have in your doc?? I'm not trying to get all up in your business, but IMO what he's doing is not healthy at all!
Thanks crawfish. I will call her today and ask about these tests. I appreciate it.
HCT is hematocrit, it's the percentage of red blood cells to blood, basically the thickness of your blood. You know all those Ambo-chasing lawyers on tv that wanna sue if you or a loved one has suffered a stroke or heart attack due to trt?? HCT is one of the main culprits of said strokes and heart attacks. Not trying to scare you, nut it NEEDS to be tested and kept in check!
Free test is the important number, as that's the test that is available for your body to use. Total test is a pretty useless number, other than using it in a comparison to your free. High shbg will result in a lower free test number.
AI (aromatase inhibitor) is basically an "anti-estrogen"...it blocks aromatase which converts testosterone (or other androgens) into estrogen. Have you had e2 levels checked??
How much confidence do you have in your doc?? I'm not trying to get all up in your business, but IMO what he's doing is not healthy at all!
Why would you say that? 1000ng/dl is inherently not unhealthy. I agree additional tests should be done, and it sounds like his doc would be open to that. If his numbers come back GTG, what's the issue?
1.25 to 2ML (better to give actual mg/ml here) is a big jump. Why not 1.5?
@ 200mg/ml...?
Comes in 100mg/ml or 200mg/ml in the US. If the latter, that would be 400mg per week, which well above TRT range for vast majority of men and into low end of bbing doses. Likely the former is my guess.
If all the math adds up here and we are on the same page; if you're taking 400mg per week of T and getting levels in the 500s, something is very wrong. That's almost physiologically impossible. Where the issue is, I can't say, could be as simple as testing methodology issues, to the product itself not containing the claimed dose, to something more complex such as a high conversion to estradiol, very high SGBG levels, etc. Prior chemo is a factor for sure in causes of hypogondaism, but I don't know how/if it would impact your current issue.
Doc should order a battery of tests (covered in this thread some place), change testing lab, change brand of T. Half the dose you're taking will get most people's T levels to the high
"normal" range.
Why would you say that? 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy. I agree additional tests should be done, and it sounds like his doc would be open to that. If his numbers come back GTG, what's the issue?
Will just trying to make sure I am tracking. Is "not" a typo in "not inherently" if not I'm confused. I am on the phone with the doctors office now. They did have HGB on the blood panel. The phlebotomists has signed off but the doc has not reviewed it yet I have asked for a nurse to call me back.
Will just trying to make sure I am tracking. Is "not" a typo in "not inherently" if not I'm confused. I am on the phone with the doctors office now. They did have HGB on the blood panel. The phlebotomists has signed off but the doc has not reviewed it yet I have asked for a nurse to call me back.
My point is that 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy per se. Additional tests warranted for sure, but 1000ng/dl not inherently unhealthy.
Ok so I know the woman who drew my blood. Sent her a text and asked for my HGB level and the range it should be in. This was the response: HGB of 5.2 = avg of 93 glu everyday Perfect!
The_crawfish
10-16-15, 10:38
My point is that 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy per se. Additional tests warranted for sure, but 1000ng/dl not inherently unhealthy.
I think we're trying to say the same thing, you just probably put it better than me. I agree that 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy and neither is 400mg/wk. What I'm saying IS unhealthy is the likely sides that come with that high of a dose.
Vet, HCT is not the same thing as HGB. See if you can get them to give you a copy of your labs and let us know what all they tested.
My point is that 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy per se. Additional tests warranted for sure, but 1000ng/dl not inherently unhealthy.
Thank you Will. I thought that is what you were saying.
I think we're trying to say the same thing, you just probably put it better than me. I agree that 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy and neither is 400mg/wk. What I'm saying IS unhealthy is the likely sides that come with that high of a dose.
Vet, HCT is not the same thing as HGB. See if you can get them to give you a copy of your labs and let us know what all they tested.
I wouldn't say likely, but an increased risk of side effects yes.
Thank you Will. I thought that is what you were saying.
All good, but I do agree with crawfish in that potential for side effects at that level is higher and close monitoring and additional tests (per comments in prior responses) warranted.
Flankenstein
10-16-15, 11:51
400mg/wk on trt??? Holy hell, that's just shy of a cycle dose!!
What's the range on your free test labs?? 43 seems low, with that high of a total number. Doc test shbg?
If you don't mind me asking, how high was your hct??
Was this addressed to me? I'm on 250mg/wk and free test is 43.66. I'm 30, not in crazy shape like I used to be when dieting and training were a priority but still in relatively good shape (muscular- 215, 5'10, 18% bf) with a poor diet.
You think that free test is low?
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f291/cutt29/10.2-Lab.png
The_crawfish
10-16-15, 15:12
Was this addressed to me? I'm on 250mg/wk and free test is 43.66. I'm 30, not in crazy shape like I used to be when dieting and training were a priority but still in relatively good shape (muscular- 215, 5'10, 18% bf) with a poor diet.
You think that free test is low?
No, sorry I was getting yours and vet's numbers confused...
I'll give my opinion on your numbers (but you may not want it). I think you should dial back your dosage. I'm of the opinion with trt, less is more. What I mean by that, is that you want to take the least amount that keeps you feeling good. Reason being is in your blood work...trt is for life, and I personally don't want to have to constantly worry about negative sides, such as your HCT, for the rest of my life. 56.9 is pretty dang high. Don't know when those labs are from, or if you've donated since then, but if I were u, I'd hit up a blood bank asap, and donate double rbc.
Flankenstein
10-16-15, 15:32
No, sorry I was getting yours and vet's numbers confused...
I'll give my opinion on your numbers (but you may not want it). I think you should dial back your dosage. I'm of the opinion with trt, less is more. What I mean by that, is that you want to take the least amount that keeps you feeling good. Reason being is in your blood work...trt is for life, and I personally don't want to have to constantly worry about negative sides, such as your HCT, for the rest of my life. 56.9 is pretty dang high. Don't know when those labs are from, or if you've donated since then, but if I were u, I'd hit up a blood bank asap, and donate double rbc.
Those are very recent labs and the first labs that total test or HCT were that high. I haven't donated any blood yet.
Not really soliciting opinions at the moment either but thanks.
Flankenstein
10-16-15, 15:34
Actually, the only opinions I have solicited about in this thread are regarding my hCG dose. If you'd like to comment on that (400iu/wk) that is welcome.
The_crawfish
10-16-15, 20:38
250iu's 2x/wk is what I do. I load it in the syringe with my test. 500/wk is a pretty common dose.
Flankenstein
10-16-15, 21:54
250iu's 2x/wk is what I do. I load it in the syringe with my test. 500/wk is a pretty common dose.
Yea, I used to do higher doses 3x/wk then 250iu 2x/wk and now 400iu 1x/wk. I'm not familiar with 1x/wk dosing being common at all.
Flankenstein
10-16-15, 23:28
Also...why are you taking your hCG at the same time as your test? That's contrary to any practice I have ever head. Especially at 1/wk dosing. Most docs would recommend taking that dose your trough.
I wouldn't mix water and oil either.
The_crawfish
10-17-15, 05:33
I think u misunderstood me...I meant 500 total per week. I dose every 3.5 days and don't really have a trough.
The_crawfish
10-17-15, 05:35
And by the way...oil and water don't mix!
I think we're trying to say the same thing, you just probably put it better than me. I agree that 1000ng/dl is not inherently unhealthy and neither is 400mg/wk. What I'm saying IS unhealthy is the likely sides that come with that high of a dose.
Vet, HCT is not the same thing as HGB. See if you can get them to give you a copy of your labs and let us know what all they tested.
I will do that.
Also...why are you taking your hCG at the same time as your test? That's contrary to any practice I have ever head. Especially at 1/wk dosing. Most docs would recommend taking that dose your trough.
I wouldn't mix water and oil either.
Mixing HCG and T in the same shot is not an issue. It's a common practice and does not effect the end results.
Flankenstein
10-17-15, 13:18
Mixing HCG and T in the same shot is not an issue. It's a common practice and does effect the end results.
I would never do it. Especially with dose timing. Doesn't make any sense to me.
Flankenstein
10-17-15, 13:19
And by the way...oil and water don't mix!
Lol...yes, I'm aware. You are still "mixing" them in the same syringe.
I would never do it. Especially with dose timing. Doesn't make any sense to me.
I'm just letting people here know it's not uncommon nor an issue. If it does not fit your schedule, then don't do it.
Flankenstein
10-17-15, 16:50
I'm just letting people here know it's not uncommon nor an issue. If it does not fit your schedule, then don't do it.
I see. Well if he is dosing his test every 3 days then it makes more sense.
I would personally never break up such a small shot but to each their own.
Crawfish- What T dose are you on? Where are you injecting and what gauge needle? Any other info you're willing to share is welcome too (your age, body comp, why you're on trt, how long you've been on etc...) I understand if you don't want to share.
I see. Well if he is dosing his test every 3 days then it makes more sense.
I would personally never break up such a small shot but to each their own.
Crawfish- What T dose are you on? Where are you injecting and what gauge needle? Any other info you're willing to share is welcome too (your age, body comp, why you're on trt, how long you've been on etc...) I understand if you don't want to share.
One can use 28-30g insulin needles (see prior pages) so breaking it up, and or weekly, is no pain and very minimal potential for scar tissue or other issues. But, many mix their HCG and T in the same syringe regardless of schedules without any negative effects on either.
Thread bump of interest. My friend Dr. Crisler has written a TRT/HRT guide. I wrote a review for the Life Extension. Here's the review. He's not a "hard" science guy but he does have as much, or more, actual clinical experience with TRT than any doc I'm aware of:
Testosterone Replacement Therapy—A Recipe For Success
Until recent years, testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) was on the fringes of traditional medicine.
This is unfortunate because millions of men suffer from testosterone deficiency (low T), along with other hormones that grow out of balance with normal aging.
Some adverse outward effects associated with low testosterone are depression, low libido, abdominal weight gain, lack of energy, and “brain fog.” These common effects of testosterone deficit went untreated for decades. And that’s only the tip of the proverbial iceberg.
Testosterone deficiency imposes a substantial public health burden. Numerous studies show that low T is a predisposing factor for various chronic illnesses such diabetes, cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, and sarcopenia (muscle loss). All of these conditions—as well as others not covered here—can be improved greatly with proper hormonal management, especially in conjunction with changes in other risk factors.
A recent study determined that over a 20-year period, testosterone deficiency is projected to be involved in the development of approximately 1.1 million new cases of diabetes, 1.3 million new cases of cardiovascular disease, and over 600,000 osteoporosis-related fractures, with a cost of $190 to 525 billion in inflation-adjusted US health care expenditures.*
Some in the medical community overall have recently embraced the fact that low T is a serious problem and risk factor for men, and the ubiquitous “low T” commercials show that the pharmaceutical industry has finally realized a large consumer market exists. However, there’s still resistance within the mainstream medical community in terms of the best ways to treat low T, and those who have embraced the use of testosterone tend to be well behind the learning curve on the optimal approach.
The problem is there’s only a handful of medical professionals who have extensive clinical proficiency with testosterone/estrogen balancing therapy in men. Pioneers such as Dr. John Crisler are among the few practitioners with decades of hands-on clinical experience in this emerging field. Even those practitioners now willing to treat low T only understand the very basics of the topic. For example, the majority of medical practitioners currently willing to treat low T will simply have a man tested for total testosterone (TT) then make a decision to treat based solely on the results of that one lab test. That’s poor medicine and poor hormonal management. Many doctors don’t even require blood testing before prescribing testosterone to men complaining of andropausal symptoms. This failure to perform requisite blood testing is a recipe for disaster.
Cont:
http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2015/6/testosterone-replacement-therapy/page-01
On Amazon HERE (http://www.amazon.com/Testosterone-Replacement-Therapy-Recipe-Success/dp/0983773947/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1445119776&sr=8-1&keywords=crisler)
Thanks to this thread I'm using a 28G 5/8" needle for my injections and I warm the T under warm water in the faucet to increase the viscosity.
Flankenstein
10-17-15, 18:02
Thanks to this thread I'm using a 28G 5/8" needle for my injections and I warm the T under warm water in the faucet to increase the viscosity.
You were using a harpoon initially, right?
I'm good w/ 25g 1". Even when I used to inject multiple times a week. With bigger doses the 1cc syringe just doesn't cut it.
Saw someone mention high HCT as being a culprit in the lawsuits against Test manufacturers. My last blood work (in addition to the slowly creeping PSA) showed a HCT being high, 59 IIRC. Now, I did do cardio the morning I had the blood drawn so I may have been a little dehydrated.
You were using a harpoon initially, right?
I'm good w/ 25g 1". Even when I used to inject multiple times a week. With bigger doses the 1cc syringe just doesn't cut it.
I misspoke. I'm using a 25G 5/8" needle on a 3cc syringe. I use an 18G needle to draw the T and switch to the 25G to inject it.
The_crawfish
10-19-15, 11:26
I see. Well if he is dosing his test every 3 days then it makes more sense.
I would personally never break up such a small shot but to each their own.
Crawfish- What T dose are you on? Where are you injecting and what gauge needle? Any other info you're willing to share is welcome too (your age, body comp, why you're on trt, how long you've been on etc...) I understand if you don't want to share.
I don't mind sharing...
I started about 2 years ago, with a doc that didn't know wtf he was doing (neither did I), so no underlying issues were found. My total test was ~180, I was desperate, and put all my faith in my doc to take care of me.
I've finally gotten a doc (she's actually a nurse practitioner) who knows what's going on in the world of HRT, and in the last 4 or 5 months have gotten dialed in to where we're both happy.
My current protocol is 70mg T-cyp + 250iu's HCG (sub-Q) and .25mg anastrozole on Mon. morn and Thurs. night.
My test numbers come in the upper 1/4th of the ranges.
After recovering from shoulder surgery at the end of 2012, I weighed in around 290lbs (6ft), and probably around 35% BF (I was a lard-ass). I got in the gym, started eating right, and dropped 25lbs pretty fast. That's where I hit a wall, went to my doc, and discovered the low-t.
I'm currently 235lbs, pretty muscular, and somewhere around 20%BF.
The_crawfish
10-19-15, 11:26
Saw someone mention high HCT as being a culprit in the lawsuits against Test manufacturers. My last blood work (in addition to the slowly creeping PSA) showed a HCT being high, 59 IIRC. Now, I did do cardio the morning I had the blood drawn so I may have been a little dehydrated.
What did your doc say about it??
I've scheduled blood work for next week. I asked the RN who called about the "ranges" listed on my labs. The testosterone range is something like 182-878. I've seen other ranges in the mid 300's to 1050/1100. I like thos numbers better. How can I approach my doc with info to suggest a change?
Check out other lab ranges, and go where highest " low norm" range
Wonder if eating soy and watching lifetime would help
I've scheduled blood work for next week. I asked the RN who called about the "ranges" listed on my labs. The testosterone range is something like 182-878. I've seen other ranges in the mid 300's to 1050/1100. I like thos numbers better. How can I approach my doc with info to suggest a change?
Different labs have different ranges. You'd have to suggest they use a lab that uses the higher ranges so you're in the magical "normal" ranges they seek. If you're on the high end of the lab they're using now (800+) and other labs check out, and they don't have an issue with you're being in that upper range, than drive on. Did you change docs or did your docs change labs?
W
Different labs have different ranges. You'd have to suggest they use a lab that uses the higher ranges so you're in the magical "normal" ranges they seek. If you're on the high end of the lab they're using now (800+) and other labs check out, and they don't have an issue with you're being in that upper range, than drive on. Did you change docs or did your docs change labs?
I have not changed docs. I saw the ranges here in this thread and online while looking things up. It's a pretty big difference. I will ask her about the differences and try to bring some info with me to support being in the 1000 range. I felt great there! I can tell I'm lower now and not really happy about it.
Check out other lab ranges, and go where highest " low norm" range
Wonder if eating soy and watching lifetime would help
Soy's ok. Lifetime is not! The new GF doesn't eat red meat. I am enjoying fresh fish and have replaced red meat with fish for most of my cooking.
Just spoke to the tech who draws blood at my doctors office. The doctor in the practice sets the Reference Range. This is a fairly large practice, for VT with half a dozen MD's and at least that many PA's. The office I go to set the range at 175-781. The local hospital ten miles away sets the range at 241-827. I will talk to my doc when I see her in a few weeks. I'd like to know how they came up with these numbers and plan to nicely but firmly challenge them.
Just spoke to the tech who draws blood at my doctors office. The doctor in the practice sets the Reference Range. This is a fairly large practice, for VT with half a dozen MD's and at least that many PA's. The office I go to set the range at 175-781. The local hospital ten miles away sets the range at 241-827. I will talk to my doc when I see her in a few weeks. I'd like to know how they came up with these numbers and plan to nicely but firmly challenge them.
I call BS. They don't just decide out of the thin air to set a reference range. I think the tech was passing the buck or simply didn't know the answer. The docs are pulling their ranges from some place, either the lab they use or some reference book, source, etc. For example, they may look to the International Society of Endocrinology for recommended ranges or other authoritative org. They don't internally set the ranges, but do decide on what their range will be based on some source they consult. Ask both places which lab they send their samples off to and see if they match.
I call BS. They don't just decide out of the thin air to set a reference range. I think the tech was passing the buck or simply didn't know the answer. The docs are pulling their ranges from some place, either the lab they use or some reference book, source, etc. For example, they may look to the They don't internally set the ranges, but do decide on what their range will be based on some source they consult. Ask both places which lab they send their samples off to and see if they match.
Will do.
Just had the blood draw for the suggested labs. My doctors office does the Total Testosterone testing in house. The Total & Free Tests are done at another location.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpstgaomiiy.jpeg (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpstgaomiiy.jpeg.html)
The_crawfish
11-06-15, 09:00
Your picture is not working.
Your picture is not working.
I edited it. Is it showing now? It's just five vials of blood.
The_crawfish
11-06-15, 10:53
lol, yeah I can see it now. I thought it was gonna be lab results!
lol, yeah I can see it now. I thought it was gonna be lab results!
I was laughing at the amount of samples drawn.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/Mobile%20Uploads/10-07%20T_zpssr6hrmjj.jpg (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/Mobile%20Uploads/10-07%20T_zpssr6hrmjj.jpg.html)
My dose was 2cc weekly and changed to 1cc every 5 days. My T dropped from 1000 to 502 in a month.
http://i859.photobucket.com/albums/ab160/usmcvet0331/Free%20T_zpsdvu2ac7j.png (http://s859.photobucket.com/user/usmcvet0331/media/Free%20T_zpsdvu2ac7j.png.html)
Looks like my E is high and with the change in my T does it's cut in half and I feel the difference. It sucks! I am sure you guys will chime in with good advice. I found this article which helped me understand what's going on.
http://tnation.t-nation.com/free_online_forum/sports_training_performance_bodybuilding_trt/estradiol_why_you_should_care
Looks like my E is high and with the change in my T does it's cut in half and I feel the difference. It sucks!
My understanding is that you want your E2 (estradiol) levels in the 21 - 23 range. Are you taking any type of AI (aromatase inhibitor)?
I've also read that the estradiol "sensitive assay" gives a much better reading than the regular version, when it comes to males.
My understanding is that you want your E2 (estradiol) levels in the 21 - 23 range. Are you taking any type of AI (aromatase inhibitor)?
I've also read that the estradiol "sensitive assay" gives a much better reading than the regular version, when it comes to males.
Thanks Irish. No I'm not taking any AI. I did not even know what it was until I googled E2 this morning. I take the T injections and medicine for High Blood Pressure and High Cholesterol, Fish Oil a Multi Vitamin and an Aspirin every day. I have a message in to my doc asking about my E2 level.
Thanks Irish. No I'm not taking any AI. I did not even know what it was until I googled E2 this morning. I take the T injections and medicine for High Blood Pressure and High Cholesterol, Fish Oil a Multi Vitamin and an Aspirin every day.
Arimidex, used to treat breast cancer, is the most common AI I know of. I would suggest starting with a small amount and titrating up, so you don't crash your E2 levels, which will make you feel like crap. 1/2 the pill or even 1/4 to start out. If your doc isn't amiable to this suggestion, and you want to stick with the same one, there are places you can order it from without a prescription.
You may also want to look into HCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) which will preserve testicular size and function.
Arimidex, used to treat breast cancer, is the most common AI I know of. I would suggest starting with a small amount and titrating up, so you don't crash your E2 levels, which will make you feel like crap. 1/2 the pill or even 1/4 to start out. If your doc isn't amiable to this suggestion, and you want to stick with the same one, there are places you can order it from without a prescription.
You may also want to look into HCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) which will preserve testicular size and function.
Good information. Is HCG used to counter the AI or the T?
Good information. Is HCG used to counter the AI or the T?
HCG is used to counter the testosterone, sort of. When you introduce an outside source of testosterone your body recognizes this and eventually shuts down it's own production. Due to this, your testicles will atrophy, and more than likely you'll end up with little bitty baby balls which don't produce T or swimmers. The HCG prevents this from happening. I know a bit of the technical side but I prefer to use layman analogies most of the time. If you want I can post some good online references.
The AI is used to stop the aromatization of testosterone into estrogen. "E" follows "T". Basically, the higher your levels of testosterone get, the higher your levels of estrogen will get, unless you prevent it with an AI. This can lead to gynecomastia, bitch tits, and other undesirables like loss of libido. Initially starting on an Arimidex I would say to start at .25mg EOD (every other day) and go from there. Dropping your E2 levels below 20'ish is no bueno.
I hope this is helpful... I've done a lot of research and reading on it and this is my understanding of the subject.
Good information. Is HCG used to counter the AI or the T?
When in doubt, or in need of intel dump, search BrinkZone:
Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT) and Fertility – how to get the best of both worlds – part 1 (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/testosterone-replacement-therapy-trt-and-fertility-how-to-get-the-best-of-both-worlds-part-1/)
TRT and Fertility – how to get the best of both worlds – part 2
(http://www.brinkzone.com/mens-health/trt-and-fertility-how-to-get-the-best-of-both-worlds-part-2/)
The_crawfish
11-13-15, 11:04
I agree with Irish, you need to get on an AI. No telling how high your e2 was when you were on 2cc/wk. With an AI controlling your converting t to e, your t numbers should get a little better. Be very careful with a-dex though, there's not much room for error with it and a crashed e2 can be as bad or worse than high e2. Talk with your doc about it. My opinion would be to start around .25mg twice a week.
Curious...when was your blood draw in relation to your shot?? And you're on a once a week protocol correct??
When in doubt, or in need of intel dump, search BrinkZone:
Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT) and Fertility – how to get the best of both worlds – part 1 (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/testosterone-replacement-therapy-trt-and-fertility-how-to-get-the-best-of-both-worlds-part-1/)
TRT and Fertility – how to get the best of both worlds – part 2
(http://www.brinkzone.com/mens-health/trt-and-fertility-how-to-get-the-best-of-both-worlds-part-2/)
Awesome, thanks Will. I'm producing no swimmers, had that test a few months ago. I'm also about ten years into T replacement therapy, I wish someone said something about HCG 10 years ago. Could the swimmers come back with HCG?
I agree with Irish, you need to get on an AI. No telling how high your e2 was when you were on 2cc/wk. With an AI controlling your converting t to e, your t numbers should get a little better. Be very careful with a-dex though, there's not much room for error with it and a crashed e2 can be as bad or worse than high e2. Talk with your doc about it. My opinion would be to start around .25mg twice a week.
Curious...when was your blood draw in relation to your shot?? And you're on a once a week protocol correct??
The doctor wanted me to do 1.25cc weekly, I asked her if I could do 1cc every 5 days to keep things steadier. She agreed. I was due for my T shot the morning of the blood draw. I took it later that day.
Awesome, thanks Will. I'm producing no swimmers, had that test a few months ago. I'm also about ten years into T replacement therapy, I wish someone said something about HCG 10 years ago. Could the swimmers come back with HCG?
Very few docs know of using HCG with TRT and those using it even now are in the extreme minority. I don't believe you'd get full return of fertility with HCG alone after 10 years of TRT, but you will see an improvement for sure. A full reboot of your system (HPTA) is possible, buy there' a very specific protocol to follow for that. I can give you the contact of the doc who developed it via PM for a consult. He's probably the most knowledgeable doc alive on that topic. A book to check out from a doc with extensive clinical experience (even if I don't agree with all his recs) is Dr. Crisler, and I was asked to review his book HERE (http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2015/6/testosterone-replacement-therapy/page-01) if interested.
Thanks again guys. Will I would be interested in speaking to the Doc. I printed your articles to read tonight.
I just ordered the book too.
Thanks again guys. Will I would be interested in speaking to the Doc. I printed your articles to read tonight.
I just ordered the book too.
Sounds like you'll be busy for a while with a major TRT/HRT intel dump then.
Sounds like you'll be busy for a while with a major TRT/HRT intel dump then.
Absolutely! =)
The book is in back order. I just called to check. I met with my doc today and it was disappointing. She said my E was due to my weight nothing to do with the T. I am sure that's part of it. I told her I immediately noticed a difference with the reduction in My weekly dose. She said T doesn't really effect sexual function because the penius is is a vascular organ. I didn't even get into it with her. She also said at 500 my T is just where it should be. I need a new doctor. Will is the doc who wrote the book the one I should call for a consultation? http://www.allthingsmale.com/consultations.html
I found a local doc online that I'm going to reach out to. http://www.greenmountainhealth.com/naturopathic-doctor-appointment
Sounds promising and he. Takes my insurance! I'm reading the effects if low T again and I'm further frustrated. My BP and weight are up a bit too in the month since my T was cut in half. I'm sure they're directly related.
The_crawfish
11-18-15, 20:18
Your doc is partly right (probably). Your e is probably elevated due to the weight, but it wouldn't be elevated if it weren't converting from test.
I've had good luck finding docs by looking for one that is a4m certified. Go to http://www.a4m.com/directory.html type in your zip and see what pops up.
Your doc is partly right (probably). Your e is probably elevated due to the weight, but it wouldn't be elevated if it weren't converting from test.
I've had good luck finding docs by looking for one that is a4m certified. Go to http://www.a4m.com/directory.html type in your zip and see what pops up.
Thanks Man. My weight is a definitely part of the big picture. BUT I was a STUD at 1,000. Things worked as they should when I wanted them to. Now it's Ok but I don't want Ok. I want the benefits and don't want to use Cialis, Viagra or Levitra to get things working. Especially since my T cost $15 for a three month script!
The_crawfish
11-19-15, 08:06
Thanks Man. My weight is a definitely part of the big picture. BUT I was a STUD at 1,000. Things worked as they should when I wanted them to. Now it's Ok but I don't want Ok. I want the benefits and don't want to use Cialis, Viagra or Levitra to get things working. Especially since my T cost $15 for a three month script!
I gotcha now, from what I know/hear t doesn't necessarily affect the salute, but the drive, but high e2 can lead to ed. It's all a balancing act to get things working right with minimal/no side effects. Have u looked into the benefits of daily cialis (5mg)?? Aside from bringing the soldier to attention, it's a great drug!!
The book is in back order. I just called to check. I met with my doc today and it was disappointing. She said my E was due to my weight nothing to do with the T.
She's partially correct. Your ability to convert T -> E2 is related to bodyfat and you will see a drop in E by reducing BF. T levels are also related, and high T levels (which you had) with high bodyfat levels = high E2. It's not uncommon to see obese men with low T and high E.
I am sure that's part of it. I told her I immediately noticed a difference with the reduction in My weekly dose. She said T doesn't really effect sexual function because the penius is is a vascular organ. I didn't even get into it with her. She also said at 500 my T is just where it should be. I need a new doctor. Will is the doc who wrote the book the one I should call for a consultation? http://www.allthingsmale.com/consultations.html
It's not the same guy, but if he he does consults then start with him. He's got more clinical experience treating men than any 20 docs combined. You can tell him I sent you. He's also ret Mil. Was a Ranger I recall and a no BS individual.
I found a local doc online that I'm going to reach out to. http://www.greenmountainhealth.com/naturopathic-doctor-appointment
Sounds promising and he. Takes my insurance! I'm reading the effects if low T again and I'm further frustrated. My BP and weight are up a bit too in the month since my T was cut in half. I'm sure they're directly related.
Start with Dr Crisler consult, see where that gets you. Don't add too many cooks to the kitchen.
The_crawfish
11-19-15, 09:31
...........
The book is in back order. I just called to check. I met with my doc today and it was disappointing. She said my E was due to my weight nothing to do with the T. I am sure that's part of it. I told her I immediately noticed a difference with the reduction in My weekly dose. She said T doesn't really effect sexual function because the penius is is a vascular organ. I didn't even get into it with her. She also said at 500 my T is just where it should be. I need a new doctor. Will is the doc who wrote the book the one I should call for a consultation? http://www.allthingsmale.com/consultations.html
Crisler also works for Defy Medical in FL: http://defymedical.com/about-us/our-team and their prices are far more reasonable than what he has listed. Also, Dr. Saya at Defy, gets really good reviews of his services related to TRT, etc. Just another option.
I gotcha now, from what I know/hear t doesn't necessarily affect the salute, but the drive, but high e2 can lead to ed. It's all a balancing act to get things working right with minimal/no side effects. Have u looked into the benefits of daily cialis (5mg)?? Aside from bringing the soldier to attention, it's a great drug!!
Cialis for dailiy use ROCKS! No arguments here it's just too dam expensive and with a $15 co pay for T monthly I'd rather go that route. The Cialis was affordable for a while but then went to close to $300 a month, that does not work for my budget.
She's partially correct. Your ability to convert T -> E2 is related to bodyfat and you will see a drop in E by reducing BF. T levels are also related, and high T levels (which you had) with high bodyfat levels = high E2. It's not uncommon to see obese men with low T and high E.
It's not the same guy, but if he he does consults then start with him. He's got more clinical experience treating men than any 20 docs combined. You can tell him I sent you. He's also ret Mil. Was a Ranger I recall and a no BS individual.
Start with Dr Crisler consult, see where that gets you. Don't add too many cooks to the kitchen.
Good advice. I will reach out today. She was just dismissive and I did not even see the point of showing her the info I brought with me. I printed out things from this thread.
Crisler also works for Defy Medical in FL: http://defymedical.com/about-us/our-team and their prices are far more reasonable than what he has listed. Also, Dr. Saya at Defy, gets really good reviews of his services related to TRT, etc. Just another option.
Thanks Irish. The prices took me out of that game right away. I will check out the other link.
Cialis for dailiy use ROCKS! No arguments here it's just too dam expensive and with a $15 co pay for T monthly I'd rather go that route. The Cialis was affordable for a while but then went to close to $300 a month, that does not work for my budget.
Liquid Cialis: https://www.rui-products.com/cia-30ml-30mg-ml.html It's legit, Google it, it works, and it's cheap.
The_crawfish
11-19-15, 15:18
Liquid Cialis: https://www.rui-products.com/cia-30ml-30mg-ml.html It's legit, Google it, it works, and it's cheap.
Ditto....
I just sent in my paperwork for http://defymedical.com/about-us/our-team to start the process. I told the man I spoke with on the phone about this thread and suggested he look at it. When I told him my screen name he said Semper Fi and told me if I included a copy of my DD214 I would receive a 10% discount. I think he said the discount applied to all fees. That's a nice bonus.
Got my labs back last night and had my physical and my PA is faxing the results to Defy Medical in Tampa
http://www.defymedical.com
I am looking forward to my phone consultation.
Can't remember if this had been posted before but I think it's very interesting. Especially when people say a TT of 500 isn't bad for a 35 year old and the average TT level for a 65 year old was over 500 not long ago. Testosterone Levels in Men Decline Over Past Two Decades, Study Shows (https://www.endocrine.org/news-room/press-release-archives/2006/testosterone_lvls_in_men_decline).
Testosterone levels in American men have been declining steadily over the past two decades, a new study in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism concludes...
“Male serum testosterone levels appear to vary by generation, even after age is taken into account,” said Thomas G. Travison, Ph.D., of the New England Research Institutes (NERI) in Watertown, Mass., and lead author of the study. “In 1988, men who were 50 years old had higher serum testosterone concentrations than did comparable 50-year-old men in 1996. This suggests that some factor other than age may be contributing to the observed declines in testosterone over time.”...
For men 65-69 years of age in this study, average total testosterone levels fell from 503 ng/dL (nanograms/deciliter) in 1988 to 423 ng/dL in 2003.
Can't remember if this had been posted before but I think it's very interesting. Especially when people say a TT of 500 isn't bad for a 35 year old and the average TT level for a 65 year old was over 500 not long ago. Testosterone Levels in Men Decline Over Past Two Decades, Study Shows (https://www.endocrine.org/news-room/press-release-archives/2006/testosterone_lvls_in_men_decline).
I've made reference to it a few times over the treads history. Exactly why T levels have been on a steady decline is unclear and likely multi factorial, but if you recall your grandfather being more manly than what we see today, he was.
So, everyone under 500 should be jabbing the test! If they want to feel as good as their grandfather. ;)
My PA did the referral paperwork for me but was skeptical. I understand that. I offered to lend her my book. I'm printing this info too. I knew 502 sucked! I have my phone consult on the 30th.
More ammo (http://press.endocrine.org/doi/abs/10.1210/jc.2006-1375) for you Devil Dog.
Abstract
Context: Age-specific estimates of mean testosterone (T) concentrations appear to vary by year of observation and by birth cohort, and estimates of longitudinal declines in T typically outstrip cross-sectional decreases. These observations motivate a hypothesis of a population-level decrease in T over calendar time, independent of chronological aging.
Objective: The goal of this study was to establish the magnitude of population-level changes in serum T concentrations and the degree to which they are explained by secular changes in relative weight and other factors.
Design: We describe a prospective cohort study of health and endocrine functioning in randomly selected men of age 45–79 yr. We provide three data collection waves: baseline (T1: 1987–1999) and two follow-ups (T2: 1995–1997, T3: 2002–2004).
Setting: This was an observational study of randomly selected men residing in greater Boston, Massachusetts.
Participants: Data obtained from 1374, 906, and 489 men at T1, T2, and T3, respectively, totaling 2769 observations taken on 1532 men.
Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measures were serum total T and calculated bioavailable T.
Results: We observe a substantial age-independent decline in T that does not appear to be attributable to observed changes in explanatory factors, including health and lifestyle characteristics such as smoking and obesity. The estimated population-level declines are greater in magnitude than the cross-sectional declines in T typically associated with age.
Conclusions: These results indicate that recent years have seen a substantial, and as yet unrecognized, age-independent population-level decrease in T in American men, potentially attributable to birth cohort differences or to health or environmental effects not captured in observed data.
This is pretty darn cool: http://www.nebido.com/tools/index.php/en/default/index/effects-tool
Note: There are 2 tabs. Click on each color to see timeline.
yossarian42
12-20-15, 01:55
Interesting. Maybe all the soy and other shit in our food
Normal with age progression. Thats why muscles atrophy with age. Its most certainly exacerbated by lifestyle, physical activity, diet etc. Then yes the soy and other additives in our foods as well as medication we start taking. The literature like posted above always makes me face palm. Those studies are as clear as mud. We will continue to paint with a broad stroke "big Pharm" I guess. It is something that needs lots more test and publishing. I guess my point is be careful. I would hold off on replacement as long as possible if able. Last Physician I worked for was an Endo and he took alot into consideration aside from the standard blood work. Maybe thats why he's not very rich hah. Dunno but anyway... You only get one heart. When that sucker takes a lick its not like loosing a little liver.
Normal with age progression. Thats why muscles atrophy with age. Its most certainly exacerbated by lifestyle, physical activity, diet etc. Then yes the soy and other additives in our foods as well as medication we start taking. The literature like posted above always makes me face palm. Those studies are as clear as mud. We will continue to paint with a broad stroke "big Pharm" I guess. It is something that needs lots more test and publishing. I guess my point is be careful. I would hold off on replacement as long as possible if able. Last Physician I worked for was an Endo and he took alot into consideration aside from the standard blood work. Maybe thats why he's not very rich hah. Dunno but anyway... You only get one heart. When that sucker takes a lick its not like loosing a little liver.
I cover the major known factors and treatments for sarcopenia HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/articles/sarcopenia-the-undiagnosed-epidemic/), which is a bit more complex and nuanced than many realize.
I'm unclear what's meant by that statement, but the vast majority of the data, which is fairly extensive, shows the opposite (low T associated with higher rates of CVD) and TRT an overall benefit. I have posted many studies in this thread and it's covered HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/comment-on-study-increased-risk-of-heart-attack-following-testosterone-therapy/).
My understanding is that a total testosterone level below 550 is bad for the cardiovascular system.
More ammo (http://press.endocrine.org/doi/abs/10.1210/jc.2006-1375) for you Devil Dog.
Abstract
Context: Age-specific estimates of mean testosterone (T) concentrations appear to vary by year of observation and by birth cohort, and estimates of longitudinal declines in T typically outstrip cross-sectional decreases. These observations motivate a hypothesis of a population-level decrease in T over calendar time, independent of chronological aging.
Objective: The goal of this study was to establish the magnitude of population-level changes in serum T concentrations and the degree to which they are explained by secular changes in relative weight and other factors.
Design: We describe a prospective cohort study of health and endocrine functioning in randomly selected men of age 45–79 yr. We provide three data collection waves: baseline (T1: 1987–1999) and two follow-ups (T2: 1995–1997, T3: 2002–2004).
Setting: This was an observational study of randomly selected men residing in greater Boston, Massachusetts.
Participants: Data obtained from 1374, 906, and 489 men at T1, T2, and T3, respectively, totaling 2769 observations taken on 1532 men.
Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measures were serum total T and calculated bioavailable T.
Results: We observe a substantial age-independent decline in T that does not appear to be attributable to observed changes in explanatory factors, including health and lifestyle characteristics such as smoking and obesity. The estimated population-level declines are greater in magnitude than the cross-sectional declines in T typically associated with age.
Conclusions: These results indicate that recent years have seen a substantial, and as yet unrecognized, age-independent population-level decrease in T in American men, potentially attributable to birth cohort differences or to health or environmental effects not captured in observed data.
I cover the major known factors and treatments for sarcopenia HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/articles/sarcopenia-the-undiagnosed-epidemic/), which is a bit more complex and nuanced than many realize.
I'm unclear what's meant by that statement, but the vast majority of the data, which is fairly extensive, shows the opposite (low T associated with higher rates of CVD) and TRT an overall benefit. I have posted many studies in this thread and it's covered HERE (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/comment-on-study-increased-risk-of-heart-attack-following-testosterone-therapy/).
My understanding is that a total testosterone level below 550 is bad for the cardiovascular system.
Thanks again Guys. I really appreciate the great information shared here in this epic thread. It's made a huge difference in my life.
Thanks again Guys. I really appreciate the great information shared here in this epic thread. It's made a huge difference in my life.
We aims to please sir. My long term goal is to start, or join forces with, a clinic and focus on TRT/HRT in vets. I feel they are an overlooked population with additional challenges not appreciated by the general med community. It's been very slow going to accomplish that, so I try to assist via places like M4C. I have moved to FL form MA, a place much more friendly to TRT/HRT and a greater interest in the topic, so maybe I can get some traction again.
We aims to please sir. My long term goal is to start, or join forces with, a clinic and focus on TRT/HRT in vets. I feel they are an overlooked population with additional challenges not appreciated by the general med community. It's been very slow going to accomplish that, so I try to assist via places like M4C. I have moved to FL form MA, a place much more friendly to TRT/HRT and a greater interest in the topic, so maybe I can get some traction again.
That's great Will.
I grew up in MA. I escaped in the early 1990's =) I still have my FID tucked away and brought it up the other day while talking about gun control. When I received my FID it it was good for "life" not the case for some time now. VT is much friendlier as a gun owner. Article 16 of the Vermont constitution ROCKS!
http://www.usconstitution.net/vtconstexp.html
Article 16th. Right to bear arms; standing armies; military power subordinate to civil
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State - and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.
That's great Will.
I grew up in MA. I escaped in the early 1990's =) I still have my FID tucked away and brought it up the other day while talking about gun control. When I received my FID it it was good for "life" not the case for some time now. VT is much friendlier as a gun owner. Article 16 of the Vermont constitution ROCKS!
http://www.usconstitution.net/vtconstexp.html
Article 16th. Right to bear arms; standing armies; military power subordinate to civil
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State - and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.
VT (best), NH and ME, all far better than MA when it comes to guns to be sure. If not for the weather, VT or NH would have been on the short list, snow and cold suck donkey nads. FL gun laws are quite good. Not as good as say VT or Alaska, but far better than People Republic of MA. It also has far more people in line with my interests and biz, and puts me a short flight to my place in Panama.
Yeah the weather in this area is not the greatest and the ability to make a good living is not great here either. You chose well Grasshopper! :cool: Not to mention the beautiful women at the beach!
yossarian42
12-21-15, 22:10
I'm gonna be 33 in a few months. You guys think I should get my shit checked? I'm curious now. Plus a little extra t wouldn't be bad for some gains in the gym.
I went in at 42 and my free T was 27. Started pellets and immediately lost 10lbs. Mood and sex drive improved. My doc says higher T leads to cardiac issues and checks for those every year.
I went in at 42 and my free T was 27. Started pellets and immediately lost 10lbs. Mood and sex drive improved. My doc says higher T leads to cardiac issues and checks for those every year.
There is good information in this thread that says just the opposite of what your doc, and mine think of cardiac issues. I think some on this page or the last. I know it is a long thread but it is worth a read for you. .
I went in at 42 and my free T was 27. Started pellets and immediately lost 10lbs. Mood and sex drive improved. My doc says higher T leads to cardiac issues and checks for those every year.
Here's the abstract from a urology article dispelling the cardiac issues. I can link to numerous more if you'd like additional information for yourself and to present to your doctor.
http://www.goldjournal.net/article/S0090-4295(15)01106-1/abstract
Testosterone therapy (TTh) has become highly controversial. Yet there are important health consequences of testosterone deficiency, and meaningful benefits with treatment. There is level 1 evidence that TTh improves sexual function and desire, body composition, and bone density. Concerns regarding cardiovascular risk were based on two deeply flawed retrospective studies, and are contradicted by dozens of studies showing CV benefits of TTh or higher endogenous testosterone, including placebo-controlled studies in men with known heart disease (angina, heart failure). Prostate cancer should no longer be considered a risk of TTh. Testosterone is neither scourge nor panacea- it is just good medicine.
yugo308guy
12-28-15, 17:43
Well, I have just taken the plunge. Thanks to all for the input in this thread. I went in today to a local Low T Center and found out that my T number is 113!! Free T was 2.2!! Needless to say, I am stunned. Looks like my insurance will cover the bulk of the treatments, with co-pay and deductible, I have to pay $47 per shot. The Dr is recommending a shot every week, to get the most even dispersment of the testosterone. I can opt for every 10 days or every 2 weeks at my choice, but the levels would spike a bit more if I chose that. He said most guys who opt for the longer time between shots will usually see a spike in the first week, then they will notice a tapering off the second week, but at $47 per shot, I may opt for that at a later date. Btw, I am 51 if anyone is interested.
I will attempt to keep everyone updated as to my progress with this.
Well, I have just taken the plunge. Thanks to all for the input in this thread. I went in today to a local Low T Center and found out that my T number is 113!! Free T was 2.2!! Needless to say, I am stunned. Looks like my insurance will cover the bulk of the treatments, with co-pay and deductible, I have to pay $47 per shot. The Dr is recommending a shot every week, to get the most even dispersment of the testosterone. I can opt for every 10 days or every 2 weeks at my choice, but the levels would spike a bit more if I chose that. He said most guys who opt for the longer time between shots will usually see a spike in the first week, then they will notice a tapering off the second week, but at $47 per shot, I may opt for that at a later date. Btw, I am 51 if anyone is interested.
I will attempt to keep everyone updated as to my progress with this.
A 10CC bottle of 100mg/ML of T without insurance runs around $100 give or take. So, someone is trying to take you for a ride some place or that fee includes additional services and or meds. With co pay, as you said insurance will cover it, should be far less than $47 per shot. See also:
How Is Testosterone Deficiency “low T” Diagnosed? – Things you need to know before going to your doctor (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/how-is-testosterone-deficiency-low-t-diagnosed-things-you-need-to-know-before-going-to-your-doctor/)
yugo308guy
12-28-15, 19:22
A 10CC bottle of 100mg/ML of T without insurance runs around $100 give or take. So, someone is trying to take you for a ride some place or that fee includes additional services and or meds. With co pay, as you said insurance will cover it, should be far less than $47 per shot. See also:
How Is Testosterone Deficiency “low T” Diagnosed? – Things you need to know before going to your doctor (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/how-is-testosterone-deficiency-low-t-diagnosed-things-you-need-to-know-before-going-to-your-doctor/)
Thanks for the info! I have both a co pay as well as a deductible in that, also all the blood work and monitoring is included in that. I asked him what the cost would be without insurance and he said roughly $375-$400/month. I made a call to another clinic and he did not accept insurance and told me that the cost would be roughly $895 for a 10 week cycle.
What are your thoughts on the frequency and dosages of the shots? Is he correct that a larger dose spaced out over 2 weeks would be subject to a spike then taper?
Thanks for the info! I have both a co pay as well as a deductible in that, also all the blood work and monitoring is included in that. I asked him what the cost would be without insurance and he said roughly $375-$400/month. I made a call to another clinic and he did not accept insurance and told me that the cost would be roughly $895 for a 10 week cycle.
What are your thoughts on the frequency and dosages of the shots? Is he correct that a larger dose spaced out over 2 weeks would be subject to a spike then taper?
You'll find extensive discussions on dosing through the thread BTW. Weekly dosing using typical esters found in the US (cypionate or enanthate) gives steady levels and better overall effects than every two weeks for sure. If your GP (for example) gives you a script for T, and you give yourself the shots, and insurance covers it, costs should we well below what you're getting quoted by often questionable TRT/HRT clinics.
Few could afford the crazy costs you're getting quoted.
The Dr is recommending a shot every week, to get the most even dispersment of the testosterone. I can opt for every 10 days or every 2 weeks at my choice, but the levels would spike a bit more if I chose that. He said most guys who opt for the longer time between shots will usually see a spike in the first week, then they will notice a tapering off the second week, but at $47 per shot, I may opt for that at a later date.
With your testosterone levels you shouldn't have an issue getting a legit script from your doc, or get a referral to a specialist, and you will save a ton of money versus going through an anti-aging type clinic. Most things I've read indicate a 3 1/2 day shot interval being a much better protocol than once a week as well.
Disclaimer: I am not on HRT/TRT currently. The whole thing really interests me, I've read a lot about it, and am simply passing on what I've learned through many hours of study.
yugo308guy
12-28-15, 20:06
You'll find extensive discussions on dosing through the thread BTW. Weekly dosing using typical esters found in the US (cypionate or enanthate) gives steady levels and better overall effects than every two weeks for sure. If your GP (for example) gives you a script for T, and you give yourself the shots, and insurance covers it, costs should we well below what you're getting quoted by often questionable TRT/HRT clinics.
Few could afford the crazy costs you're getting quoted.
Thanks again. I don't currently have a regular doctor. I need one. What I think I am going to do moving forward is, continue the course of treatment with the Low T Center, temporarily. I have no problem investing $200-$400 over the next 2 months to see how this affects my life, and in the meantime, start my search for a regular GP. I know that usually takes a little time. Any advice on screening GPs by the ones who might be more receptive to THT? Also, if I am currently using testosterone, how will that affect a new GP's assessment of my levels?
Well, I have just taken the plunge. Thanks to all for the input in this thread. I went in today to a local Low T Center and found out that my T number is 113!! Free T was 2.2!! Needless to say, I am stunned. Looks like my insurance will cover the bulk of the treatments, with co-pay and deductible, I have to pay $47 per shot. The Dr is recommending a shot every week, to get the most even dispersment of the testosterone. I can opt for every 10 days or every 2 weeks at my choice, but the levels would spike a bit more if I chose that. He said most guys who opt for the longer time between shots will usually see a spike in the first week, then they will notice a tapering off the second week, but at $47 per shot, I may opt for that at a later date. Btw, I am 51 if anyone is interested.
I will attempt to keep everyone updated as to my progress with this.
A 10CC bottle of 100mg/ML of T without insurance runs around $100 give or take. So, someone is trying to take you for a ride some place or that fee includes additional services and or meds. With co pay, as you said insurance will cover it, should be far less than $47 per shot. See also:
How Is Testosterone Deficiency “low T” Diagnosed? – Things you need to know before going to your doctor (http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/how-is-testosterone-deficiency-low-t-diagnosed-things-you-need-to-know-before-going-to-your-doctor/)
With your testosterone levels you shouldn't have an issue getting a legit script from your doc, or get a referral to a specialist, and you will save a ton of money versus going through an anti-aging type clinic. Most things I've read indicate a 3 1/2 day shot interval being a much better protocol than once a week as well.
Disclaimer: I am not on HRT/TRT currently. The whole thing really interests me, I've read a lot about it, and am simply passing on what I've learned through many hours of study.
A three month prescription of testosterone cost me $25. I buy my syringes and other the supplies online. But it's still less than $47 for three months. I was going to the doc every two weeks for injections. It prob cost about $47 because a tech was giving me the shot and there is a fee to be seen. Every two weeks sucks! I've been doing every five days but my new doc just said to Change to Tuesday morning and Thursday evening for s steadier level.
I had my phone consultation yesterday with Dr. Sayah at Defy Medical.
I took four pages of notes and I'm still a bit overwhelmed. Looks like I will be adding HCG and Lipo C injections. He said to include a DHEA supplement and changed my T dose to .4ml/80mg twice weekly. He suggested Tue morning and Thursday evening for the steadiest levels. Monday and Wednesday work better for me.
I think the T will continue being covered by my insurance but don't think HCG will be covered. The .4ml confused me. I was taking 200mg/1ml injections every five days so would this mean draw to .4 on the syringe? This is a reduction isn't it? I have an email and call in to the office to clarify.
He also told me to add 1/2 an anti E tablet twice weekly.
He also told me to add 1/2 an anti E tablet twice weekly.
If you can 1/4 those pills with a splitter I'd start with that. Obviously I'm not your doc but I've read more of more than a few people who've crashed their estrogen levels and felt like utter shit due to it. Different folks respond to AI's differently. Are you exhibiting any symptoms? Tingling or itchy, puffy nipples? What was your E2 level?
Not sure if I'd posted this before but I'll throw it out there...
I decided to give Clomid a run to see the results and they were very positive. Since the last bloods I stopped taking the Clomid and just got blood pulled yesterday due to regressing back to the same type symptoms. My doc is super receptive to the idea of TRT after my experiment and the positive results I had.
I started at 12.5mg per day for a week and then bumped it up to 25mg per day thereafter. During the run my wife had mentioned I'd been much more patient, relaxed and had a much better demeanor. I also noticed my strength shot up quite a bit from the norm, recovery was quicker, I felt more focused and dialed in on an everyday basis.
My mood was really super stable as compared to before. My temper used to go from 1 to 10 in a nano second, and now I stop at each number and it's far more under control, ex. 1, 2, 3, 4... rather than just going from A to Z.
BEGINNING:
3/3/2015
TT 523 (348 - 1197)
LH 6.0 (1.7 - 8.6 mIU/mL)
FSH 1.8 (1.5 - 12.4 mIU/mL)
Estradiol 22.7 (7.6 - 42.6 pg/mL)
DAY 50 - 5/3/2015:
Testosterone 851 (348 - 1197)
Estradiol 19.9 (7.6 - 42.6)
LH 7.8 (1.7 - 8.6)
FSH 2.5 (1.5 - 12.4)
Tests done yesterday:
CBC
CMP
DHEA
Estradiol
FSH
Lipid panel
LH
Prolactin
SHBG
T4, free
Testosterone Free
Testosterone Total
TSH
Vitamin D
I'll post results when I get them.
Wall Street's secret weapon. (cnbc.com/id/48149955)
Traders on Wall Street are always looking to get an edge and pull ahead, especially in this catch-a-falling knife market. The latest secret weapon isn’t some complex trade or computer algorithm, it’s something more primal — testosterone...
Wall Street's secret weapon. (cnbc.com/id/48149955)
Makes sense. Would help them keep an edge.
Is blood test timing important? (http://www.harvardprostateknowledge.org/a-harvard-expert-shares-his-thoughts-on-testosterone-replacement-therapy)
Do time of day, diet, or other factors affect testosterone levels?
For years, the recommendation has been to get a testosterone value early in the morning because levels start to drop after 10 or 11 a.m. But the data behind that recommendation were drawn from healthy young men. Two recent studies showed little change in blood testosterone levels in men 40 and older over the course of the day. One reported no change in average testosterone until after 2 p.m. Between 2 and 6 p.m., it went down by 13%, a modest amount, and probably not enough to influence diagnosis. Most guidelines still say it’s important to do the test in the morning, but for men 40 and above, it probably doesn’t matter much, as long as they get their blood drawn before 5 or 6 p.m.
There are some very interesting findings about diet. For example, it appears that individuals who have a diet low in protein have lower testosterone levels than men who consume more protein. But diet hasn’t been studied thoroughly enough to make any clear recommendations...
Dr. Rand McClain - Taking TRT with normal Testosterone levels if having symptoms of low T
https://youtu.be/PIFTcBBIhbY?list=PL0RC5Mg69FHaUJ-b6D0RCps09TDo0qNZ0
If you can 1/4 those pills with a splitter I'd start with that. Obviously I'm not your doc but I've read more of more than a few people who've crashed their estrogen levels and felt like utter shit due to it. Different folks respond to AI's differently. Are you exhibiting any symptoms? Tingling or itchy, puffy nipples? What was your E2 level?
Not. Is but when I was at 1000 they were sensitive.
Looking at the TT alone doesn't take into account other variables that are indicative of needing testosterone replacement. My free T level has only been measured once and came in at 76.2 pg/mL (46 - 224). After the next round of blood test results I should have a better understanding of my levels. You may find the following (http://www.menshealthboston.com/pdf/2014_Who-Is-a-Candidate-for-Testosterone-Therapy%20-a-Synthesis-of-International-Expert-Opinions.pdf) interesting:
Mohit Khera, MD "I diagnose TD based on two criteria: low serum total or free T and signs or symptoms of TD. However, I must stress that in my practice, symptoms are the key driver for TTh rather than any specific value for blood test results...
I offer T therapy to symptomatic men with calculated free T less than 6.5 ng/dL (65 pg/mL or 232 pmol/L)."
Michael Zitzmann, MD, PhD "Free T levels below 250 pmol/L (86 pg/mL) are highly suggestive of TD.
Abraham Morgentaler, MD "I find free T more useful than total T as a diagnostic test; however, it is critical to note that reference values provided by laboratories are not clinically based and of little value. Free T concen- trations less than 100 pg/mL or RIA concentra- tions less than 1.5 ng/dL are consistent with TD. Although I use a total T value of less than 350 ng/dL (12 nmol/L) as indicative of TD, if the free T value is low, I consider the total T concentration irrelevant."
Sorry
Not going to read all 70 pages on this tread . But I have been self injection t for over three years years and my balls
Have shrunk ..... No I will not stop I feel better My sex drive is like it in was at 20s (57 now)
I goggled this and it's normal?
I see my doc in 10 days for 6 month check up . Anything I could take Or do .
Sorry
Not going to read all 70 pages on this tread . But I have been self injection t for over three years years and my balls
Have shrunk ..... No I will not stop I feel better My sex drive is like it in was at 20s (57 now)
I goggled this and it's normal?
I see my doc in 10 days for 6 month check up . Anything I could take Or do .
Possibly HCG (Human chorionic gonadotropin).
Sorry
Not going to read all 70 pages on this tread . But I have been self injection t for over three years years and my balls
Have shrunk ..... No I will not stop I feel better My sex drive is like it in was at 20s (57 now)
I goggled this and it's normal?
I see my doc in 10 days for 6 month check up . Anything I could take Or do .
It's "normal" and the correct use of HCG can correct if it bothers you.
Looking at the TT alone doesn't take into account other variables that are indicative of needing testosterone replacement. My free T level has only been measured once and came in at 76.2 pg/mL (46 - 224). After the next round of blood test results I should have a better understanding of my levels. You may find the following (http://www.menshealthboston.com/pdf/2014_Who-Is-a-Candidate-for-Testosterone-Therapy%20-a-Synthesis-of-International-Expert-Opinions.pdf) interesting:
Mohit Khera, MD "I diagnose TD based on two criteria: low serum total or free T and signs or symptoms of TD. However, I must stress that in my practice, symptoms are the key driver for TTh rather than any specific value for blood test results...
I offer T therapy to symptomatic men with calculated free T less than 6.5 ng/dL (65 pg/mL or 232 pmol/L)."
Michael Zitzmann, MD, PhD "Free T levels below 250 pmol/L (86 pg/mL) are highly suggestive of TD.
Abraham Morgentaler, MD "I find free T more useful than total T as a diagnostic test; however, it is critical to note that reference values provided by laboratories are not clinically based and of little value. Free T concen- trations less than 100 pg/mL or RIA concentra- tions less than 1.5 ng/dL are consistent with TD. Although I use a total T value of less than 350 ng/dL (12 nmol/L) as indicative of TD, if the free T value is low, I consider the total T concentration irrelevant."
I need to look back. I don't have my info with me today. My E the as pretty high and is still high. the doc suggested the same many of you here did. The T was bound up in E.
My E was 85 on 11-6-15 and 54 on 12-12-15. I'm sure my E was even higher in October.
On 10-07-15 my T was 1,000
On 11-06-15 it dropped to 502
It was supposed to be tested on 12-12-15 but they didn't do it.
6' 3" 205 lbs. My blood tests were drawn at 16:00, due to doctor appt., so I believe there may be some lowering of levels due to that. I've read several articles from different doctors stating that men over 40, I'm 42, aren't as affected by the testosterone drop off as younger males. In essence, testing in the morning isn't as important for older guys as the young bucks.
TT 259 (175 - 781 ng/dl)
FT 49 (47 - 244 pg/mL)
SHBG 33 (13 - 90 nmol/L)
Albumin 4.5 (3.5 - 4.6 g/dL)
Estradiol 32 (0 - 52 pg/mL)
Prolactin 9.6 (Males 2.5 - 17.4 ng/mL)
LH 2.3 (Males 1.2 - 10.6 mIU/mL)
FSH 1.3 (Males 0.7 - 10.8 mIU/mL)
DHEA-SO4 134 (95 - 530 ug/dL)
T4 Free 0.92 (0.76 - 1.46 ng/dL)
TSH 1.060 (0.360 - 4.170 mIU/L)
Vit. D25 43 (31 - 100 ng/mL)
Hemoglobin 14.7 (13.5 - 18.0 g/dL)
Hematocrit 46 (41.0 - 53.0 %)
Flankenstein
01-04-16, 18:10
Your total test is 259 on TRT?
Your total test is 259 on TRT?
Not on TRT. I'm going in tomorrow morning to get blood pulled first thing in the A.M. and see if I get a repeat low number. My guess right now is secondary hypogonadism.
irishhitman
01-05-16, 08:15
Been on T a while.... If you get off for a few months. you will notice a huge crash. I am 48 yr old. It was when I turned 45 that I noticed a big difference. like one day... someone closed the valve. I hit T after a Dr visit. has worked. I think that some of us should look into all the shit they pumped into us to go "down Range" is there things in all of the shit we took, that could be causing low T early? My Dad, who would be 88 today, never suffered for it till his late 60's. Just wondering?
Been on T a while.... If you get off for a few months. you will notice a huge crash. I am 48 yr old. It was when I turned 45 that I noticed a big difference. like one day... someone closed the valve. I hit T after a Dr visit. has worked. I think that some of us should look into all the shit they pumped into us to go "down Range" is there things in all of the shit we took, that could be causing low T early? My Dad, who would be 88 today, never suffered for it till his late 60's. Just wondering?
No studies have been done as far as I know. It's my hypothesis that vets have lower T on average than their non mil counterparts. It needs to be researched however. Why that may be the case is unclear, but exposure to various chems is a possibility of course. If it was just stress and poor nutrition (as an example) crashing T levels, you'd generally expect it to rebound once that was over as it did for those returning from say WWII who, on average, had much higher T levels than men have today on average.
I suspect that the prevalence of plastics in today's lifestyles, esp those in contact with food/drink have something to do with it. Plus a change to a more sedentary lifestyle.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
I suspect that the prevalence of plastics in today's lifestyles, esp those in contact with food/drink have something to do with it. Plus a change to a more sedentary lifestyle.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
In terms of general decline in the population or the possible difference between the general male population and vets? If the former, it's likely multi factorial, a few of which you mentioned as possible culprits.
VA pulled blood yesterday at 07:00. FT, TT and Albumin are the only related tests. Still way down from the 523 I had 9 months ago.
TT 427 ng/dl (241 - 827)
FT 7.5 ng/dL (4.81 - 16.9)
Albumin 4.7 (3.4 - 4.5)
Ga Shooter
01-06-16, 16:32
I'll throw my story out there to see what you think. i'm 44 yrs old weight 230 lbs. Extremely athletic in my teen and through my twenties to include natural bodybuilding. Anyway a little over a year ago went to the 'urgent care" for a sinus infection before vacation. BP was 175/110. Long story short very high BP and Blood Sugar with type 2 diabetes. Went to GP started with meds. I'm now on 6 meds for bp and diabetes. Read this thread along with other stuff got him to check T levels since Mr. Happy stopped working right. Tested 239 he sent me to urologist (the same one who performed a vasectomey on my 10 years ago). Put me on 1cc every other week. Got my 4 month check up and level was 267. It was time for another injection when the drew the blood for the test. He told me to switch to .5cc every week but I was low end of normal due to time for injection and called it good. I don't have it in front of me but it is Cypoate(sp) I give it to myself I think from what I am reading here I should be more like 1cc every week. What do you think?
Tested 239 he sent me to urologist (the same one who performed a vasectomey on my 10 years ago). Put me on 1cc every other week. Got my 4 month check up and level was 267. It was time for another injection when the drew the blood for the test. He told me to switch to .5cc every week but I was low end of normal due to time for injection and called it good. I don't have it in front of me but it is Cypoate(sp) I give it to myself I think from what I am reading here I should be more like 1cc every week. What do you think?
Every other week dosing is prescribed by someone who has no idea what they're doing. Once a week would be much better but even more frequently would be better than that. Typical starting dosage is 100mg test cypionate from what I've read. Many people claim to get better results from injecting every 3.5 days to eliminate swing and have a more stable level.
I'll throw my story out there to see what you think. i'm 44 yrs old weight 230 lbs. Extremely athletic in my teen and through my twenties to include natural bodybuilding. Anyway a little over a year ago went to the 'urgent care" for a sinus infection before vacation. BP was 175/110. Long story short very high BP and Blood Sugar with type 2 diabetes. Went to GP started with meds. I'm now on 6 meds for bp and diabetes. Read this thread along with other stuff got him to check T levels since Mr. Happy stopped working right. Tested 239 he sent me to urologist (the same one who performed a vasectomey on my 10 years ago). Put me on 1cc every other week. Got my 4 month check up and level was 267. It was time for another injection when the drew the blood for the test. He told me to switch to .5cc every week but I was low end of normal due to time for injection and called it good. I don't have it in front of me but it is Cypoate(sp) I give it to myself I think from what I am reading here I should be more like 1cc every week. What do you think?
It sounds like you need an increase in dose and I'd recommend taking the time to read through this long thread for studies, links, etc as to what levels to shoot for, as well as other essential info. For example, just testing total T gives a very narrow window into what's going on with your hormones/T levels. For many, low end of "normal" sucks and there's no medical reason for it and data suggest high "normal" superior.
I'll throw my story out there to see what you think. i'm 44 yrs old weight 230 lbs. Extremely athletic in my teen and through my twenties to include natural bodybuilding. Anyway a little over a year ago went to the 'urgent care" for a sinus infection before vacation. BP was 175/110. Long story short very high BP and Blood Sugar with type 2 diabetes. Went to GP started with meds. I'm now on 6 meds for bp and diabetes. Read this thread along with other stuff got him to check T levels since Mr. Happy stopped working right. Tested 239 he sent me to urologist (the same one who performed a vasectomey on my 10 years ago). Put me on 1cc every other week. Got my 4 month check up and level was 267. It was time for another injection when the drew the blood for the test. He told me to switch to .5cc every week but I was low end of normal due to time for injection and called it good. I don't have it in front of me but it is Cypoate(sp) I give it to myself I think from what I am reading here I should be more like 1cc every week. What do you think?
I was doing every two weeks, switched to every week then to 1cc every five days. Spoke to a new Dr. recently and he has me on .4cc every 3.5 days. I was told .4cc every 3.5 days was better than 1cc every 5 days. Along with other meds the lower dose is supposed to be more effective. I will certainly report back in 3 months, or sooner if necessary. I am skeptical the lower dose will be effective but I'm not the expert so I'm following the doctors orders!
It sounds like you need an increase in dose and I'd recommend taking the time to read through this long thread for studies, links, etc as to what levels to shoot for, as well as other essential info. For example, just testing total T gives a very narrow window into what's going on with your hormones/T levels. For many, low end of "normal" sucks and there's no medical reason for it and data suggest high "normal" superior.
Once again Will is spot on. It's like homework but you should take the time and study this whole thread. There is a ton of great info and advice. It has been very helpful for me.
Ga Shooter
01-07-16, 08:48
I actually have read this whole thread and most of the studies which is one of the reasons I am posting now. The main problem here locally is the only source of help I can find are Urologists who are very by the book if your in the normal range your good to go and the "age management" snake oil salesmen who want you at 1200 but it only works after $2k worth of tests and you must buy their vitamins that only they sell. Any way I do have a script for the syringes and I used to give myself allergy shots so now I can monkey with it myself but need some direction. I was thinking of moving the dosage to .75 weekly or .5cc every 4 days. I don't want to overdo and I am assuming from the charts that Irish posted yesterday that there must be an accumulated effect since some of the benefits take time to maximize. I will admit getting the needle in my Delt is a little awkward can I put it in any muscle? I was thinking Tri or Quad would be easier. Also my GP will test FT and TT with no problem I know from this thread that some other tests would help too but not sure if he will test those or not. Any advice or recs is greatly appreciated. Thank you everybody for this thread and all of the info. it is really great.
I actually have read this whole thread and most of the studies which is one of the reasons I am posting now. The main problem here locally is the only source of help I can find are Urologists who are very by the book if your in the normal range your good to go and the "age management" snake oil salesmen who want you at 1200 but it only works after $2k worth of tests and you must buy their vitamins that only they sell. Any way I do have a script for the syringes and I used to give myself allergy shots so now I can monkey with it myself but need some direction. I was thinking of moving the dosage to .75 weekly or .5cc every 4 days. I don't want to overdo and I am assuming from the charts that Irish posted yesterday that there must be an accumulated effect since some of the benefits take time to maximize. I will admit getting the needle in my Delt is a little awkward can I put it in any muscle? I was thinking Tri or Quad would be easier. Also my GP will test FT and TT with no problem I know from this thread that some other tests would help too but not sure if he will test those or not. Any advice or recs is greatly appreciated. Thank you everybody for this thread and all of the info. it is really great.
I share your pain. My MD told me that 500 was good. I told her it's not. I spoke to http://www.defymedical.com/ by email and then to the doc by phone. There was a phone consultation fee of less than $200 for an hour phone call with the doc. I received my medication by FedEx yesterday. It was about $300 for 3 months of the meds I needed. If you are a veteran they ask for a copy of your DD214 and give yu a 10% discount. I will probably not buy the T from them again, I can get it locally for less. With my insurance it cost me $15 for a three month supply. I bought my needles online and skipped the script. I have been injecting Sub Q for over a year with less pain and good results. I did not see this page until recently.
http://defymedical.com/images/pdf/Subcutaneous%20Injection.pdf
I read about Sub Q here in this thread or another, I can not remember. This alone had was huge for me. I was going to the doctor every two weeks for shots. I could not do the IM in my thigh. Pisses me off but I could not do it. I did it once at the doctors office and tried for about 8 hour one day before giving up in disgust. The sub q shots have always been easy for me. I do them in the belly. I draw the T into the syringe with an 18G needle and switch to a 28G 5/8" needle. Then I put the syringe under a steady stream of hot water in the bathroom sink. After 30-60 seconds I do the injection. Warming the T up helps push it through the smaller needle. This morning I forgot to warm up the T and it worked fine, I just pushed a little slower. It is almost painless. I've never had a problem getting a shot but I could not get myself to sink the big ass needle into my body. The little needles have been a life changer for me.
Consider calling defy. You will need to have your local doctor or PA fill out a short medical form and have blood testing done before the consultation. I did the testing locally but their pricing is excellent too. I'd hit my deductible so had the blood work done locally.
I love m4c but this thread has been the one that's truly helped me the most! Today was my first HCG injection, I'm looking forward to seeing the reslts!
Good Luck.
Flankenstein
01-07-16, 15:17
Not on TRT. I'm going in tomorrow morning to get blood pulled first thing in the A.M. and see if I get a repeat low number. My guess right now is secondary hypogonadism.
Ah, gotchya.
I was told .4cc every 3.5 days was better than 1cc every 5 days. Along with other meds the lower dose is supposed to be more effective.
I've read of many people having very positive results from similar strategies. More frequent, smaller doses, produce a more steady level which lends itself to a more regulated estrogen level. Remember, big shots of testosterone typically aromatase into larger amounts of estrogen. E follows T!
Today was my first HCG injection, I'm looking forward to seeing the reslts!
HCG will raise your test levels and your estrogen levels. Just something to be aware of. Good luck!
I was thinking of moving the dosage to .75 weekly or .5cc every 4 days. I don't want to overdo and I am assuming from the charts that Irish posted yesterday that there must be an accumulated effect since some of the benefits take time to maximize. I will admit getting the needle in my Delt is a little awkward can I put it in any muscle? I was thinking Tri or Quad would be easier. Also my GP will test FT and TT with no problem I know from this thread that some other tests would help too but not sure if he will test those or not. Any advice or recs is greatly appreciated. Thank you everybody for this thread and all of the info. it is really great.
3.5 days is often recommended by those in the know, as in Monday morning & Thursday evening, as an example. Not sure if you're referring to the fancy Nebido chart, but if not, check it out: http://www.nebido.com/tools/index.php/en/default/index/effects-tool
Most often people utilize the glutes, quads or delts for shots. I think these tests would cover all the big stuff. I used these guys multiple times before I moved to NY http://www.privatemdlabs.com Here's a 15% off code: 59372H
CBC
CMP
Lipid Panel
DHEA
Estradiol (sensitive assay)
FSH
LH
Prolactin
SHBG
T4, free
Testosterone Free
Testosterone Total
TSH
ETA - get the "female hormone" panel and it has most everything you need for a good price.
I've read of many people having very positive results from similar strategies. More frequent, smaller doses, produce a more steady level which lends itself to a more regulated estrogen level. Remember, big shots of testosterone typically aromatase into larger amounts of estrogen. E follows T!
HCG will raise your test levels and your estrogen levels. Just something to be aware of. Good luck!
Thanks Irish. I'm on an anti E capsule twice a week too. I can't remember the name of it. It's also compounded with something else. I'm also taking another supplement with DHEA nightly.
In addition to the T & HCG I'm taking 1 DHEA 25/PREG 50 MG capsule each night at bedtime and 1 Anastrozole 0.5/DIM 200 MG capsule twice a week.
Man this is not starting off very well. I will stay on track through the week to see what it's like after two weeks but things are not working well so far! Today was my third set of shots, HCG/T both at .4ML/CC.
Man this is not starting off very well. I will stay on track through the week to see what it's like after two weeks but things are not working well so far! Today was my third set of shots, HCG/T both at .4ML/CC.
Defined as? There's some major adjustments taking place and that could take a while to regulate and level out, and may take additional dose/med changes and testing.
Defined as? There's some major adjustments taking place and that could take a while to regulate and level out, and may take additional dose/med changes and testing.
Can't get it up. Lower energy. Just called doc they will have someone call me tomorrow.
In addition to the T & HCG I'm taking 1 DHEA 25/PREG 50 MG capsule each night at bedtime and 1 Anastrozole 0.5/DIM 200 MG capsule twice a week.
Man this is not starting off very well. I will stay on track through the week to see what it's like after two weeks but things are not working well so far! Today was my third set of shots, HCG/T both at .4ML/CC.
Who is your doc at Defy? Is it Dr. Saya? If so he's got a solid reputation and I think you're in good hands. How many milligrams testosterone are you prescribed per week? What was your estradiol level prior to adding Anastrozole? From things I've studied it looks like you're taking quite a bit of Anastrozole per week. One option might be to lower that dosage by half and see what happens. Are you exhibiting any signs of high estrogen without it?
Also, from what I've read it's far more difficult to try to get dialed in on your testosterone level when you're throwing in HCG, an AI and apparently several other things on top of that. It's hard to troubleshoot the issue if you're starting all these things at once. Personally, I would look to start testosterone by itself. There is a good chance you don't need an AI. There is also a good chance that adding HCG to your T shot is blowing up your TT levels and you're converting T to E2, then you're taking an AI to suppress that estrogen... Up & down... Up & down... Unless I'm reading incorrectly or misunderstanding something.
This is Will's thread and I'm not trying to hijack it or step on his toes. Just throwing out some other possibilities.
Who is your doc at Defy? Is it Dr. Saya? If so he's got a solid reputation and I think you're in good hands. How many milligrams testosterone are you prescribed per week? What was your estradiol level prior to adding Anastrozole? From things I've studied it looks like you're taking quite a bit of Anastrozole per week. One option might be to lower that dosage by half and see what happens. Are you exhibiting any signs of high estrogen without it?
Also, from what I've read it's far more difficult to try to get dialed in on your testosterone level when you're throwing in HCG, an AI and apparently several other things on top of that. It's hard to troubleshoot the issue if you're starting all these things at once. Personally, I would look to start testosterone by itself. There is a good chance you don't need an AI. There is also a good chance that adding HCG to your T shot is blowing up your TT levels and you're converting T to E2, then you're taking an AI to suppress that estrogen... Up & down... Up & down... Unless I'm reading incorrectly or misunderstanding something.
This is Will's thread and I'm not trying to hijack it or step on his toes. Just throwing out some other possibilities.
Irish yes it's Dr. Sayah. I've felt like a stud for over a year because of the T. I'm feeling the opposite now. If I was at 502 I bet I'm not half that now. I'm going to see if I can get blood work Thursday morning. I'm taking .4 ml of T and .4ml of HCG Monday morning and Thursday evening. I hope to hear something helpful tomorrow. If not I'm upping my T on my own. This sucks. I will ask about the AI. It is in capsule form. Not a tablet. I don't think I could split it accurately.m my E was 85 in November and 54 in December.
I was advised to give it one more week before having blood tests.
Irish yes it's Dr. Sayah. I've felt like a stud for over a year because of the T. I'm feeling the opposite now. If I was at 502 I bet I'm not half that now. I'm going to see if I can get blood work Thursday morning. I'm taking .4 ml of T and .4ml of HCG Monday morning and Thursday evening. I hope to hear something helpful tomorrow. If not I'm upping my T on my own. This sucks. I will ask about the AI. It is in capsule form. Not a tablet. I don't think I could split it accurately.m my E was 85 in November and 54 in December.
Were you taking an AI prior to starting with Defy, and feeling good? How many mg per ml? Is it 100 or 200 mg/ml? I'm trying to figure out what dosage your taking each shot and per week. Saying .4 ml doesn't tell you how much testosterone is in that ml.
Your testosterone level may be the same, it may be higher or lower, and your estrogen may be through the roof, or more than likely, and my guess, is that you've crashed your estradiol (estrogen) with too much AI. Ideally you'd like for your estrogen level to be around 25. Some people are hyper-responders to an AI and your estrogen level may be in the hole. Are you moody, bitchy, nips hurt? Those are all indicators of high estrogen, typically.
Were you taking an AI prior to starting with Defy, and feeling good? How many mg per ml? Is it 100 or 200 mg/ml? I'm trying to figure out what dosage your taking each shot and per week. Saying .4 ml doesn't tell you how much testosterone is in that ml.
Your testosterone level may be the same, it may be higher or lower, and your estrogen may be through the roof, or more than likely, and my guess, is that you've crashed your estradiol (estrogen) with too much AI. Ideally you'd like for your estrogen level to be around 25. Some people are hyper-responders to an AI and your estrogen level may be in the hole. Are you moody, bitchy, nips hurt? Those are all indicators of high estrogen, typically.
200MG/ML is What I was prescribed and what I am prescribed now. I was taking 1ml of T every 5 days. Down from 2ml every 7 days. At 2ml my total T was 1000 and felt awesome but had tender nipples. My doc was only doing total T so I'm not sure what my E was. I'm sure it was high. It was still high a month after switching to 1ml every 5 days with a total T level of 502.
I am moody. Snapping at the kids. No tenderness.
200MG/ML is What I was prescribed and what I am prescribed now. I was taking 1ml of T every 5 days. Down from 2ml every 7 days. At 2ml my total T was 1000 and felt awesome but had tender nipples. My doc was only doing total T so I'm not sure what my E was. I'm sure it was high. It was still high a month after switching to 1ml every 5 days with a total T level of 502.
I am moody. Snapping at the kids. No tenderness.
Have you thought about reducing the dosage and taking your shots at a closer interval? I've read many claims of 3.5 days being pretty close to optimum in terms of leveling things out and getting rid of big swings in testosterone and estrogen. A lot of guys do much better on 50 mg every 3.5 days than one big shot of 100 mg once a week. The alternative may be doing 2 shots of 100 mg every 3.5 days rather than every 5 if you're not getting the response you need from 100 mg/week. Most stuff I've read indicates that 200 mg a week is on the high side of TRT. But, not everyone metabolizes things at the same rate and you may need that high of a dose.
HCG will also raise your testosterone levels. In turn there will probably be more chance of testosterone having a tendency to aromatase into excess estrogen, and then you need to add an AI. I'd get the testosterone and estrogen levels dialed in first, without the HCG, then introduce it after if you feel the need to. Bear in mind you may need to slightly lower your testosterone injections when adding HCG, due to the HCG adding more test, and that way you won't have issues with excess estrogen, needing more AI, etc...
I hope this is making sense and I'm not rambling... This would be much easier to do over a beer or two. Gotta run but let me know if I can offer any other assistance.
Have you thought about reducing the dosage and taking your shots at a closer interval? I've read many claims of 3.5 days being pretty close to optimum in terms of leveling things out and getting rid of big swings in testosterone and estrogen. A lot of guys do much better on 50 mg every 3.5 days than one big shot of 100 mg once a week. The alternative may be doing 2 shots of 100 mg every 3.5 days rather than every 5 if you're not getting the response you need from 100 mg/week. Most stuff I've read indicates that 200 mg a week is on the high side of TRT. But, not everyone metabolizes things at the same rate and you may need that high of a dose.
HCG will also raise your testosterone levels. In turn there will probably be more chance of testosterone having a tendency to aromatase into excess estrogen, and then you need to add an AI. I'd get the testosterone and estrogen levels dialed in first, without the HCG, then introduce it after if you feel the need to. Bear in mind you may need to slightly lower your testosterone injections when adding HCG, due to the HCG adding more test, and that way you won't have issues with excess estrogen, needing more AI, etc...
I hope this is making sense and I'm not rambling... This would be much easier to do over a beer or two. Gotta run but let me know if I can offer any other assistance.
A beer sounds good. I'm buying.
Dr. Sayah had me switch to every 3.5 days last Monday. I'm going to up it to .5 from .4. I'm using up my old supplies of T and they came in 1ML bottles.
A beer sounds good...
Always! I read this on a different forum and thought it sounded very applicable to your situation, he's referring to a guy who's using test cyp, HCG and an AI, it was worded better than I could've done it... Hope all's well!
Each item in your protocol has two 'dials' that can be adjusted to give you normal T and e2 levels while also minimizing/eliminating your symptoms: dose and frequency. When you take T and hcg and an AI, you have no less that SIX 'dials' to turn to get you where you want to be. Simply put, that is too big a pile to sift through. It would take a miracle to get it right.
You start off with only ONE. Get that working as best you can. Then add in the next and repeat; with a general rule of thumb that if you need an AI at all you're probably doing something wrong!
Always! I read this on a different forum and thought it sounded very applicable to your situation, he's referring to a guy who's using test cyp, HCG and an AI, it was worded better than I could've done it... Hope all's well!
Irish I did not take the AI Tursday. I took the HCG AND T and the results were great. I feel better and things are working like they should.
Irish I did not take the AI Tursday. I took the HCG AND T and the results were great. I feel better and things are working like they should.
Good news! You were possibly pushing your estrogen levels too low. PM sent.
The_crawfish
01-18-16, 15:31
I've heard that crashing your e is just as bad (or worse) than it being too high. Hope you've gotten it figured out!
Flankenstein
01-18-16, 15:48
I've heard that crashing your e is just as bad (or worse) than it being too high. Hope you've gotten it figured out!
I can attest that it is not as bad. It is not pleasant though.
I've heard that crashing your e is just as bad (or worse) than it being too high. Hope you've gotten it figured out!
People tend to feel horrible when they drive their estrogen levels too low. This study shows low levels of estrogen are associated with an increase in fat and a decrease in sexual desire and erectile function compared to higher levels.
Findings:
Higher blood levels of testosterone decreased the percentage of body fat (P = 0.001), intra abdominal fat area (P = 0.021), and subcutaneous fat area (P = 0.029), and increased sexual desire (P = 0.045) and erectile function (P = 0.032).
Low blood level of estradiol was associated with significant increases in the percentage of body fat (P<0.001), subcutaneous fat area (P<0.001), and intra abdominal fat area (P = 0.002), and relative less improvement in sexual desire (P<0.001) and erectile function (P = 0.022). These findings provide additional evidence of an independent effect of estradiol on these variables.
"Our finding that estrogens have a fundamental role in the regulation of body fat and sexual function, coupled with evidence from prior studies of the crucial role of estrogen in bone metabolism, indicates that estrogen deficiency is largely responsible for some of the key consequences of male hypogonadism and suggests that measuring estradiol might be helpful in assessing the risk of sexual dysfunction, bone loss, or fat accumulation in men with hypogonadism. For example, in men with serum testosterone levels of 200 to 400 ng per deciliter, sexual desire scores decreased by 13% if estradiol levels were 10 pg per milliliter or more and by 31% if estradiol levels were below 10 pg per milliliter. "
Reference:
Gonadal Steroids and Body Composition, Strength, and Sexual Function in Men
N Engl J Med 2013;369:1011-22.
Not good for your health:
RESULTS:
Among 501 men with chronic HF, 171 deaths (34%) occurred during the 3-year follow-up. Compared with quintile 3, men in the lowest and highest estradiol quintiles had increased mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 4.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33-7.45 and HR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.30-4.18; respectively; P < .001). These 2 quintiles had different clinical characteristics (quintile 1: increased serum total testosterone, decreased serum DHEA-S, advanced NYHA class, impaired renal function, and decreased total fat tissue mass; and quintile 5: increased serum bilirubin and liver enzymes, and decreased serum sodium; all P < .05 vs quintile 3). For increasing estradiol quintiles, 3-year survival rates adjusted for clinical variables and androgens were 44.6% (95% CI, 24.4%-63.0%), 65.8% (95% CI, 47.3%-79.2%), 82.4% (95% CI, 69.4%-90.2%), 79.0% (95% CI, 65.5%-87.6%), and 63.6% (95% CI, 46.6%-76.5%); respectively (P < .001).
Reference:
Circulating estradiol and mortality in men with systolic chronic heart failure.
JAMA 2009 May 13;301(18):1892-901.
Bad for your bones:
This study followed young and older men's testosterone and estradiol to see their impact on bone density. Estradiol below 11 pg/ml was associated with increased bone loss.
Abstract
Estrogen appears to play an important role in determining bone mineral density in men, but it remains unclear whether estrogen primarily determines peak bone mass or also affects bone loss in elderly men. Thus, we assessed longitudinal rates of change in bone mineral density in young (22–39 yr; n = 88) vs. elderly (60–90 yr; n = 130) men and related these to circulating total and bioavailable estrogen and testosterone levels. In young men bone mineral density increased significantly over 4 yr at the mid-radius and ulna and at the total hip (by 0.32–0.43%/yr), whereas it decreased in the elderly men at the forearm sites (by 0.49–0.66%/yr), but did not change at the total hip. The rate of increase in bone mineral density at the forearm sites in the young men was significantly correlated to serum total and bioavailable estradiol and estrone levels (r = 0.22–0.35), but not with total or bioavailable testosterone levels. In the elderly men the rates of bone loss at the forearm sites were most closely associated with serum bioavailable estradiol levels (r = 0.29–0.33) rather than bioavailable testosterone levels. Moreover, elderly men with bioavailable estradiol levels below the median [40 pmol/liter (11 pg/ml)] had significantly higher rates of bone loss and levels of bone resorption markers than men with bioavailable estradiol levels above 40 pmol/liter. These data thus indicate that estrogen plays a key role both in the acquisition of peak bone mass in young men and in bone loss in elderly men. Moreover, our findings suggest that age-related decreases in bioavailable estradiol levels to below 40 pmol/liter may well be the major cause of bone loss in elderly men. This subset of men is perhaps most likely to benefit from preventive therapy.
Reference:
Relationship of Serum Sex Steroid Levels to Longitudinal Changes in Bone Density in Young Versus Elderly Men.
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism August 1, 2001 vol. 86 no. 83555-3561
Some more interesting stuff...
Testosterone is Protective Against Cardiac Disease
FOR decades the main concern associated with testosterone therapy (TTh) has been the potential associated risk of prostate cancer.
However, in the last several years the paradigm has shifted and potential associated cardiovascular (CV) risks have now taken center stage.
These cardiovascular concerns were spawned by an initial study in 2010 and 3 subsequent studies in 2013 and 2014.
Despite the significant limitations associated with these 4 reports, the FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) issued a warning in 2015 about the potential increased risk of CV events with the use of all testosterone products.
This warning led to a significant increase in litigation, television advertisements by trial lawyers and increased fear among patients on TTh.
What is ironic is that there are more compelling data to support that TTh may not only be safe, but actually protective of cardiac health.
Khera M. Testosterone is Protective Against Cardiac Disease. J Urol. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022534716001245
Testosterone is Protective Against Cardiac Disease
In short, evidence to determine short and longterm cardiovascular risk or benefit with TR does not currently exist.
Published prospective trials were neither powered nor designed to examine cardiac risk end points.
Whether some subpopulations of hypogonadal men have higher CV risk (? elderly and frail) or lower CV risk (? high cardiac risk) with TR remains to be determined.
Results of a T intervention trial specifically designed to assess cardiac risk (not benefit) are expected soon.
Kohler TS. Testosterone is Protective Against Cardiac Disease. J Urol. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022534716001257
The_crawfish
01-28-16, 11:53
Good read.
IMO those at risk of cv issues and/or strokes are the ones whose doctor doses them at x amount of test/wk and never runs any follow up blood work, doesn't monitor, estrogen or h-crit levels, etc...
I would've probably fallen in this category had I not ventured out on my own and learned what I've learned. It's a shame that docs are able to prescribe this stuff without knowing a little bit about it. When I asked my first doc to check my e levels and the nurse came in to "explain" to me why that was unnecessary and a waste of money...I found another doc.
Good read.
IMO those at risk of cv issues and/or strokes are the ones whose doctor doses them at x amount of test/wk and never runs any follow up blood work, doesn't monitor, estrogen or h-crit levels, etc...
I would've probably fallen in this category had I not ventured out on my own and learned what I've learned. It's a shame that docs are able to prescribe this stuff without knowing a little bit about it. When I asked my first doc to check my e levels and the nurse came in to "explain" to me why that was unnecessary and a waste of money...I found another doc.
What most docs don't know about this topic is appalling. More mind blowing is the endocrinologists who are only slightly better, and that's supposed to be their area of expertise. For some reason, I find urologists generally the most knowledgeable, up to date, and willing to help as indicated. Obviously these are generalizations based on my experiences/feedback. Your mileage may differ.
The_crawfish
01-29-16, 10:26
What most docs don't know about this topic is appalling. More mind blowing is the endocrinologists who are only slightly better, and that's supposed to be their area of expertise. For some reason, I find urologists generally the most knowledgeable, up to date, and willing to help as indicated. Obviously these are generalizations based on my experiences/feedback. Your mileage may differ.
I agree with your assessment whole-heartedly. I've been to 3 docs and a nurse practitioner. One of them was a complete moron on the subject and shouldn't have been prescribing, one knew a little and would actually listen to my suggestions and research them (but he was over an hour away), one wanted to take me off adex when my e2 came back in the normal range (it was normal because I was on adex lol), and the nurse practitioner knows more than all of the docs put together. I will stay with HER as long as she is in practice!!
I agree with your assessment whole-heartedly. I've been to 3 docs and a nurse practitioner. One of them was a complete moron on the subject and shouldn't have been prescribing, one knew a little and would actually listen to my suggestions and research them (but he was over an hour away), one wanted to take me off adex when my e2 came back in the normal range (it was normal because I was on adex lol), and the nurse practitioner knows more than all of the docs put together. I will stay with HER as long as she is in practice!!
I tend to be very forgiving of most docs knowing they have their hands full, no one can no everything, low T is not a life threatening illness and so forth, but there almost seems a form of hormono-phobia when it comes to that topic with some.
I thought this was pretty interesting. (https://www1.essm-congress.org/guest/AbstractView?ABSID=9911) BTW 10.4 nmol is 300 ng/dl.
How To Define Hypogonadism? Results From A Population Of Men Consulting For Sexual Dysfunction
Objective - The thresholds for testosterone (T) and the symptoms required for defining late onset hypogonadism (LOH) are under debate.
The aims of the study are:
i) to verify the association between total and calculated free T (cfT) and sexual symptoms and
ii) to identify thresholds for total and calculated free T to discriminate symptomatic from asymptomatic men.
Methods - A consecutive series of 4,890 men attending the Outpatient Clinic for sexual dysfunction was retrospectively studied. Biochemical parameters were collected. The relationships between symptoms and total or calculated free T were evaluated as LOESS curves.
Results - Severe impairment in morning erections, low libido and ED were reported by 14.6%, 2.7% and 60.2%, respectively. Simultaneous presence of severe ED and impaired morning erections or low desire were reported by 12.7% and 1.9%, respectively. Severely reduced desire and morning erections were complained of by 1.0%. The simultaneous presence of the three severe sexual symptoms was reported by 0.8%.
Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analysis showed that the highest accuracy for total T and cfT in detecting subjects with two symptoms was observed for reduced morning erections and desire (area under the ROC curve [AUC]=0.670±0.04 and 0.747±0.04, for total T and cfT respectively, both p<0.0001). The addition of the third symptom, ED, further improved the accuracy (AUC=0.681±0.05 and 0.784±0.04, for total T and cfT respectively, both p<0.0001).
The assessment of the Youden index showed that the best thresholds for detecting men with androgen deficiency-related symptoms are 10.4 nmol/L for total T and ranges 225-260 pmol/L for cfT.
Conclusion - The simultaneous presence of reduced morning erections and desire is the cluster of symptoms that, along with total T<10.4 nmol/L or cfT<225 pmol/L, defines LOH in a specific, evidence-based manner.
MtnMan6114
02-07-16, 16:56
Read through the first few pages, (wow 75 pages)! Make me wonder, (but believe I know the answer) if the VA test my blood for my T level?
Yeah...like asking for tilt steering in a Yugo huh?!
Read through the first few pages, (wow 75 pages)! Make me wonder, (but believe I know the answer) if the VA test my blood for my T level?
Yeah...like asking for tilt steering in a Yugo huh?!
Certainly they will. But, you have to ask, and be specific about what you want. Otherwise, they'll simply test total testosterone and tell you you're fine.
Legit review of findings. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022534715051289)
Editorial Comment
The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology jointly undertook a review of the literature on testosterone replacement therapy. They concluded that there is no compelling evidence that testosterone therapy either increases or decreases cardiovascular risk. This is another study that seems to refute the Food and Drug Administration position.1
I had bloodwork done last night. I also received a newsupply of medicine. This time my HCG was delivered in two separate packages. 5,000 IU & 6,000 IU. The first time it was delivered in one 11,000 IU vial. Both times I needed to mix the medicine. I did a little more reading and found the HCG begins degrading after thirty days. That pissed me off. The first supply was mixed up and used for 90 days. This is again a 90 day supply and should have been given to me in three separate vials. I emailed the Doctors office and was told they understood my concern. I asked for three more months of HCG at no cost.
Flankenstein
04-01-16, 12:28
I had bloodwork done last night. I also received a newsupply of medicine. This time my HCG was delivered in two separate packages. 5,000 IU & 6,000 IU. The first time it was delivered in one 11,000 IU vial. Both times I needed to mix the medicine. I did a little more reading and found the HCG begins degrading after thirty days. That pissed me off. The first supply was mixed up and used for 90 days. This is again a 99 day supply and should have been given to me in three separate vials. I emailed the Doctors office and was told they understood my concern. I asked for three more months of HCG.
Your hCG should be just fine for 90 days after reconstitution. After that, it will lose potency, but at a relatively low percentage.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.