I’ll explain this the way I’ve done in various other places. It seems to work.
The whole testosterone dosing debate can be tiresome, but take it out of this context and put it a different way and see if it makes sense.
750mg/w- guaranteed shutdown of natural production
500mg/w- guaranteed shutdown of natural production
350mg/w- guaranteed shutdown of natural production
250mg/w- guaranteed shutdown of natural production
150mg/w- guaranteed shutdown of natural production
So now we know the risk. In this case you can use the nominal value of -1 to represent said risk. Let’s assume a 12 week cycle wherein you’ll be training and dieting perfectly. Irrespective of drugs, you know you’re going to hit it hard for 12 weeks. That’s what we’ll call the risk-free return. The risk-free return has nominal value of 0.25. (In the investment world the risk-free return is basically cash/cash equivalents; its the baseline against which you measure all investment returns) So you know if you use no drugs you’ll get some positive return, but it will be low. Now the game is to determine what the return will be on any given dose of any anabolic. Since the risk is constant ( at -1) then the return must dictate the dose. At 150mg/w your risk is -1, your return is x + -1. In this case X is likely to be fairly low. At 750mg/w your return is also x + -1, but X is likely to be a lot larger. However in this case there’s an additional variable. Ongoing maintenance costs in the form of side effects are an additional risk that is unaccounted for in the original formulation. We know risk is -1, but that’s the baseline. What happens when you combine that -1 (total shutdown) with other potential risks (elevated BP, high e2, lethargy, acne, etc)? Well the answer is “I don’t know”. So now you’ve got to decide how many additional risks you can reasonably account for at any given dose level.
The reason 500mg is the gold standard is because it’s been used so many times by so many people we can reasonably assess what the normal distribution of side effects is going to be. Yes yes YMMV and all that, but on average we know what you’re likely to experience at that dose as far as sides and gains in muscle. 500mg is also a good dose because it usually requires some AI, but almost never dose it require a lot (again, YMMV and there are extreme outliers). But 350mg? Shit. Some guys need AI at that dose, some don’t. Some need AI, use a low dose, end up nuking their e2 anyway, and blow their whole cycle. That in-between test dose is trickier than it seems for a lot of guys, hence the whole “use a trt dose OR 500mg” as a sort of mantra. It’s not necessarily wrong to use 350. In fact, if you can control your e2 and any sides that may come from it then that’s probably a great dose. Even 300mg has reports of solid gains. And when I say reports I mean real, actual clinical results. Not just bros, but studies done on the dose-dependent results of testosterone. 300 was more attractive than 600 from a cost/benefit analysis (cost/benefit is different from risk/reward, FYI).
The point is this: you’re taking on a known risk at any dose. Up to a certain point the additional risks can be understood. Past that point you’re in new territory. So when taking these risks weigh them against what you would get if you used nothing at all, and then weigh them again versus a different dose. If you do the math (or in this case it’s less math and more intuition) you’ll arrive at the right dose for you.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.