Harvard Study: More Test is Better, Healthier

Pharma TRT
101

[quote]tokon wrote:
MuscleTrainee, AnabolicExtreme forum:

"Also, IMO, I am dead set against HRT, unless there are demonstrable health problems caused by low test. I have no care about superficial esthetic problems like bodyfat, muscle mass, or limp dick. Middle age is middle age! Get used to it, coz there’s lots more worse shit coming down the pike for you!

With HRT, you are basically asking to destroy your own natural test production, the HTPA, permanently. Then, some years from now, when the health problems from the use of exogenous test appear, such as enlarged prostate(and eventually prostate cancer) or liver damage occurs, they will pull you off the exogenous test, and you will have no natty HTPA left to restore any flow of test.

So, while you had some good years, from the HRT, where you pretended like you were a younger guy, now you are facing life, for the rest of your days, with the test levels of a woman. You think things were bad before? Try life being a male on female levels of test.

There are no peer reviewed studies that show HRT does a damn thing to increase or improve your lifespan. In fact, the American Urological Association still does not approve the use of HRT for anything but proven clinical health problems.

Feel depressed, go see a therapist. Have trouble getting a hardon, get some cialis. Have bodyfat, try some cardio and clean up the bad carbs in your diet.

There is no magic cure to middle age. And testosterone is the fuel of prostate cancer. The longer you live, and the longer you maintain your test levels, the more surely you will end up with prostate cancer. Mother nature is not making a mistake when she tapers down your natty test levels, as you age. You may not like what you see in the mirror or in the bedroom, but I guarantee that you won’t like the results of prostate cancer.

There have been studies which postulate that estrogen exposure sensitizes the prostate tissue and predisposes it to cancer. But there isn’t the slightest doubt in my mind that estrogen is not the fuel of prostate cancer; it is testosterone.

Look at it from this angle:

In cases where the prostate cancer is not found very early, it is fairly standard practice to shrink the prostate prior to radiation therapy. This is usually done via injection of leuprolide, which stops testosterone production. Eliminating testosterone stops prostate cancer cell reproduction. Now, if it was estrogen which was the culprit, it would be the standard practice to apply an anti-estrogen. But they do not. Why? Because estrogen does not fuel prostate cancer reproduction.

Now, look at it from another angle:

In cases where the prostate cancer has become late stage, and it no longer responds to anti-androgen therapy, it is known that high dosages of estrogen will kill such advanced prostate cancers. So, here we see estrogen KILLING prostate cancer, not fuelling it.

So, I say again, the problem is not estrogen in older men; it is testosterone."
[/quote]

This guy is a fucking idiot. He talks about peer reviewed studies showing no long term benefits of testosterone (which I’m alomst 100% positive actually exists) then bases his whole argument on “testosterone cause prostate cancer” LOL…I am positive there are no studies showing this link. In fact, the opposite is true–there have been studies demonstrating that the two ARE NOT related. What a moron.

102

[quote]bugs wrote:
It is not clear that higher testosterone levels from supplemental testosterone leads to better health in males. It is more likely that males who are genetically predisposed to higher levels of testosterone (aka: Alpha Males) have physiological advantages (protection from disease) over males with lower levels of testosterone.

It is clear (both in primate and in human studies) that males lower on the totem pole have higher levels of stress and higher levels of disease (specifically heart disease).

[/quote]
Excellent observation bug’s. It should be understood that it’s Bio-available endogenios although the addiction of testosterone to a hypogonadal man probably will produce the same result’s (hopefully)Because the Alpha Male get’s old as well as the bata,delta etc.It’s very difficult to get any endocrinologist to treat us,if we are athletes,especially people that want to maintain a muscular psysique? The negative toward’s aas was after the Ben Johnson incident.Prior to that most General practictioner’s rx anabolic steroid’s in a safe and liberal manner.The change was poltical,not because steroid’s are harmful to your health.In general aas are a positive suppliment for all men. thank’s johnny

103

The prostate is a male sex organ and without T, it simply shrinks. That does not mean that T is the cause of BPH/enlargement. You end up with a smaller diseased organ. Once you get to cancer, the tumor can be testosterone sensitive, but again that does not mean that T was the cause.

There was a study that found that the levels of T for a man with typical age related low testosterone was enough to feed a testosterone positive prostate tumor and that TRT would not change the outcome. The conclusion was that the only benefit of lower T in this situation was castrate levels. So the only way to get T levels low enough to make a difference is to be castrated.

Young men have high T and DHT levels and there is no sign of BPH. As men age, they can become estrogen dominant and they often have metabolic disorder aka syndrome-X or prediabetes.

This group is known to be plagued with BPH and high risk of prostate cancer. What is going on? T levels drop, DHEA levels drop, fat gain, increased fat, increased aromatase, increased SHBG, decreased FT and the result is an adverse ratio E2:fT. We know that this is also responsible for the process of endothelial dysfunction aka heart disease.

Also note that as men age and T levels drop and estrogen dominance increases, sexual activity falls off and often stops. The lack of ejaculation leaves seminal fluid that gets stale and rancid. This causes inflammation and inflammatory factors then cause or contribute to prostate enlargement and perhaps damage to DNA or gene expression that is the road to cancer.

104

Article from the Endo-Society.

www.endo-society.org/guidelines/final/upload/FINAL-Androgens-in-Men-Standalone.pdf

105

[quote]txrunner22 wrote:
Great article from the Endo-Society.

http://www.endo-society.org/guidelines/final/upload/FINAL-Androgens-in-Men-Standalone.pdf[/quote]

It is disappointing as it ignores the need for E2 management. There is a weak reference to LH/FSH replacement needs, but basically ignores the issue and neglects the role of hCG.

106

Figures!! It’s all political. Last week my doctor said I have beginning stages of heart disease and he said my low t had nothing to do with it! TT 126! So instead of TRT he gave me cholesterol meds. That’s Kaiser Permanente for ya.

107

The original link is broken. I believe this is the original posted article.