Total T testing is 100% accurate, take one blood sample, split it into two, you get plus or minus 70 ng/dL, sometimes more depending on the method used for testing.
Doctors know this, patient comes in for two separate tests, one’s 295 ng/dL and the other one is 365 ng/dL, now he doesn’t qualify for treatment because his insurance doesn’t cover TRT 300>!
IMO, don’t mess with your hormones until you give 6 meals a day a good three months trial. You could have been “starving” your muscles, thus making lean muscle gain slow.
I think you got this mixed up, body (testicles) produce Total T, if your level of Total T is 800 ng/dL, that is what is produced (or in case of steroid users, total depends on how much and when you injected). Then SHBG binds it and what is left is FT for body to use (2% or so).
Total T is the SHBG bound T, Albumin bound T, Free T+ Albumin bound T and Free T 1-2%. 98% of Testosterone is protein bound.
Now when SHBG increases with age, the Free T declines, by 50% between ages 40-80, Total T remains consistent through the decades.
If that’s the case, what you say makes no sense.
For the Total T to remain virtually unchanged for decades, and for the Free T to decline 50% (!), your production within the testes has to go down, otherwise your Free T would never decline in the first place.
Head over to ExcelMale for a detailed explanation, as we have a thread dedicated to the subject.
Do you have the paper for that please? First biy I can get but second surprises me a little.
Here you go.
Low testosterone is not determine by total testosterone, flip it around the other way, high testosterone is not determined by total testosterone.
Objectives: We tested the hypothesis that serum total testosterone and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) levels predict cardiovascular (CV) events in community-dwelling elderly men.
Background: Low serum testosterone is associated with increased adiposity, an adverse metabolic risk profile, and atherosclerosis. However, few prospective studies have demonstrated a protective link between endogenous testosterone and CV events. Polymorphisms in the SHBG gene are associated with risk of type 2 diabetes, but few studies have addressed SHBG as a predictor of CV events.
Methods: We used gas chromatography/mass spectrometry to analyze baseline levels of testosterone in the prospective population-based MrOS (Osteoporotic Fractures in Men) Sweden study (2,416 men, age 69 to 81 years). SHBG was measured by immunoradiometric assay. CV clinical outcomes were obtained from central Swedish registers.
Results: During a median 5-year follow-up, 485 CV events occurred. Both total testosterone and SHBG levels were inversely associated with the risk of CV events (trend over quartiles: p = 0.009 and p = 0.012, respectively). Men in the highest quartile of testosterone (≥550 ng/dl) had a lower risk of CV events compared with men in the 3 lower quartiles (<250/<350/<550 ng/dL) (hazard ratio: 0.70, 95% confidence interval: 0.56 to 0.88). This association remained after adjustment for traditional CV risk factors and was not materially changed in analyses excluding men with known CV disease at baseline (hazard ratio: 0.71, 95% confidence interval: 0.53 to 0.95). In models that included both testosterone and SHBG, testosterone but not SHBG predicted CV risk.
Conclusions: High serum testosterone predicted a reduced 5-year risk of CV events in elderly men.
Thanks @systemlord
sorry I can see where it states higher levels are better than lower
Prevalence of high-risk, high-volume disease was significantly higher for
patients with cFT in the lowest quartile, when compared to those in the
highest quartile.
And your highlighted part where it says
But not where it says those 3 lower quartile are the same risk? So if you are in the lowest quarter your risk is the same as in the 3rd lowest (Second highest group?)
I’m not good with maths at all but if that was so I’d have thought they’d all be included in the same group? (maybe after allowing for age differences etc?)
I know some will say this is easy but I honestly don’t “do” maths so if theres an easy explanation to this please share!
I can’t find the original study paper, but I clearly remember it did not matter if total testosterone was <550, risk was the same as the other lower quartile.
I will continue searching for it. It’s posted on EM and here.
But you said that your levels are like this, and that falls below 75% percentile, no? So you are at those cardio/prostate risks that you mentioned, with TRT.
My natural level at 38yo is around and above that in last tests. Not sure about average, but FT was above 13.4 ng/dL.
You’re comparing my midpoint level to your peak level. The 550> in the study was early morning before 10am, levels naturally decline throughout the day.
My Total T peaks at 988 ng/dL, 2 hours after my morning dose. My Free T at peak is 28 ng/dL, declining through the day, just like natural men.
So as long as your early morning levels is at the top 25 percentile, you’re at reduced risk of cardiovascular problems.
You’re midrange, which is not in the top 25 percentile.
Now take into account men with short gene CAG repeats, who have very sensitive receptors, they don’t have the same risks as a man with average or above average gene CAG repeats.
This makes high testosterone highly variable person to person.
Your highest or peak Free T level, before 10 am, is 13.4 ng/dL, declining throughout the day. I wonder about your trough Free T level…
I’m getting 28 ng/dL at 10 am.
Also, Dr. Abraham Morgentaler, the foremost expert on testosterone, has stated testosterone’s effects on T receptors lasts several hours after levels have declined.
So that peak 28 ng/dL is driving effects at the receptor level long after levels have declined to 12.9 ng/dL.
I see, do you microdose every morning then, that seems the best and closest to natural production, right?
How much does it decline in the evening, what is lowest FT for you during the day, naturally that is about 30% since peak in the morning, as far as I can see in research.
Jaetnzo, a new oral testosterone is dosed twice daily, so two separate peaks at 988. My trough level is 264 ng/dL. By then the effects of the 28 ng/dL peak is still in play, which is why I feel no different at 264 ng/dL 12 hours later.
There was one day when I accidently double dosed, got 1052 ng/dL at 5 hours. I was significantly stronger in the gym that day!
My hematocrit level is 51%, so doctors are scared shitless increasing my dosage.
Do you know many, or any, other guys using this product? I do not, obviously. I wonder how those fluctuations would sit with the “smooth, steady, stable, hormones in a state of flux/chaos” crowd?
I know it is currently working well for you.
I do not. That could mean if men are on it, they’re doing very well on it they have no need to visit these forums.
If I went on Jatenzo at the beginning, I would never know these forums existed.
The dialing in process is fast and painless and very little time spent with hormones in flux, reducing side effects. Seven days to a steady state, effects happen more quickly = less problems.
I know all of that. What I meant was do you personally know anyone using Jatenzo.
I’ve always thought guys doing well on testosterone are not on forums. I would expect the same for Jatenzo.
I know a lot of men on testosterone who are not my patients, but none of them use Jatenzo. Probably not used much. I have two GP friends who have not even heard of it.
Thanks anyway.
This is interesting, I saw your thread about it now. but Total T looks very peaky, isn’t that a problem. It drops twice daily to very low end, with natural production this never happens (naturally only 100-200 point drop is by the evening), it is much more stable throughout the day, which is important for mood, energy, etc…
My insane response to this protocol speaks volumes, my muscle are exploding. If the low trough level was a problem, my results would be underwhelming.
My energy and stamina is out of this world! Then again, on 7 mg cypionate daily, 49 mg weekly, I had a similar response at only 425 ng/dl, but the super steady levels drops my ferritin levels fast!
It’s pure speculation, but maybe I have short gene CAG repeats and maybe that plays a part in my ADHD and Tourette’s syndrome. Tourette’s syndrome is basically your CNS on steroids, no pun intended.
Good to hear that you found what works best for you, this oral TRT is very practical and promising, especially since it seems that there are no sides (no organ damage, liver, etc). Even it may be easier to rebound and keep fertility on it.
I’ll stay natural for next years for sure. Just less frequent alcohol consumption and less body fat, it should be fine. I will do next blood test in 6 months.
Since you mentioned Tourette’s, I have it too, since I was 3; now 73. Don’t want to hijack OP’s thread but wanted to comment to @SystemLord.
As I’ve aged, my tics have become less intense unless under stress or during allergy season. Pollen & mold shifts my brain and body into hyperdrive. No matter where I lived(NJ, FL, MD, now back in FL) . Used to crank up my libido/erectile function to high intensity. I’d say uncomfortable but I always felt more alive and vital. Perhaps the only way I’d experience that with testosterone is if I was injecting 400 to 500 mg weekly. Not comfortable with doing that and wouldn’t want to alienate my urologist, whose been my doctor for over 10 years. He’d have to be onboard with that experiment.
