It is, I see that all the time.
2 Likes
No. That’s ridiculous. Why would you assume that I think a patient can automatically diagnose his own condition?
I don’t really disagree with that.
As long as the symptoms aren’t caused by something else, then yes, I’d agree.
Again, why would you assume I believe this? Especially after I already said that I wouldn’t know if 175mg per week was too little or too much?
That’s why I just don’t understand why doctors treat a t level, instead of the patient’s symptoms. What other condition do we seek medical treatment for, that the doctor DOESN’T treat the symptoms or condition that causes the symptoms?
Kinda makes me a little envious of a guy who gets symptom relief on less than 100mg per week.
1 Like
This post is a perfect example of why.
I think some guys in here have decided for the rest of the world that 200mg is the trt ceiling because they can function on 75mg/wk(Im generalizing) Its like anything physical, thresholds are not black and white. It could be cocaine, alcohol, vaccines, and hormones. Studies have given the scientific and medical communities certain guidelines. But we all know that a man could easily be below legal blood alcohol levels to operate a vehicle, yet he may be severely impaired, while another can be past it, and be fully functional. The point being is that TT is not the only factor to keep in mind. Lipids, blood pressure, RBC count, HCT and side effects that range from mood swings to ED will have to be monitored. So if 350mg/wk turns the wheels of life. I dont see anything wrong. Just be sure to test quarterly for the following two years, and adjust if needed.
2 Likes
How so?
What? If u only have 900ng/dl on your trt dosage, then its fine.
1 Like
Because it leads to individuals receiving ‘TRT’ at doses of 350 mg/week, that’s how so. The ‘symptoms’ you guys put so much stock in are poorly defined, and are closely associated with an array of common conditions. Consider: Which is a more likely cause of ‘decreased libido and brain fog’: A hormonal milieu that requires 350 mg of test cyp a week to reach homeostasis, or depression? Because one of these entities is extremely common, while the other is so rare as to be almost theoretic in nature. But you guys, with your Dunning-Kruger confidence in full bloom, are oblivious to this. And it results in the spouting of nonsense such as ‘350 mg of cyp/week is an okay TRT dose.’ Newsflash: It’s not. And in addition to whatever negative effects accrue to OP from this irresponsibly high test dosing, the odds are he has a potentially serious medical condition that will go unaddressed because of the uninformed crap you guys spew. And that’s a damn shame.
2 Likes
Why would that be your response when I just posted this:
“ As long as the symptoms aren’t caused by something else, then yes, I’d agree.”
Did you read my response? I just made the point that I thought was pretty clear about making sure the symptoms aren’t caused by something else, and you go off like I never said it.
Because from an outside of this subforum perspective- this reads as a weak disclaimer without any follow up on much more likely possibility.
2 Likes
I dont think that’s how it works. Just because one guy needs 350mg/wk it doesn’t raise the need for everyone else to take 350mg/wk. Don’t sweat another man’s protocol. If you need 70mg/wk, do you expect that to be what all men need? I say no.
1 Like
Excellent post! If MD’s went by how patients are feeling in all situations, medicine would turn into a joke! I’ll ask again, what ethical doctor prescribes 350 mg per week?
1 Like
So what’s your cutoff mg of test per week, that must not be exceeded by an ethical doctor?
Doses that provide supraphysiological T values.
2 Likes
I just want to highlight this. Don’t go by dose. Go by labs. What is a dangerous dose for one guy isn’t for another (or at least it isn’t as unsafe). It is the levels in the blood that dictate risk, not the amount injected IMO.
This is what I was thinking too. Should be spit up if not.
To the OP, your numbers on 300 mg/wk wouldn’t raise my eyebrows. Perhaps if shot once a week, and taken at trough, then we know you have some really high levels early in the week, which could be more risk long term.
I think where you get on 300 mg/wk is about where I get to on 200 mg/wk.
Not everyone is the same. We shouldn’t be saying something is TRT or a cycle based on dose, but blood work. I’d say if you’re close to the top of the range, I’d call it replacement. If you’re approaching double, then I say it is getting into permablast territory.
I can agree with you in this case, but his labs on 300 mg/wk actually are not far out of range. He is 2.3% over range on TT. More so on FT, but these aren’t cycle labs. I’d say the lower the frequency of injection, the lower the lab results should be (we should be using area under the curve to assess risk IMO).
It’s just foolish to use dose instead of blood values when trying to quantify risk. 350 mg/wk isn’t the same for every person. One guy may be close to in range, and another may be 3-4X the range.
You said 350 is too much. What’s the cutoff in mg per week. I’m trying to make a point, so please be specific.
So, if an outlier has labs of say 900 total t, and 25 free t, and most of his symptoms are alleviated, but not all, and he’s tried everything from 50mg per week all the way up to his current 250mg per week. Since his bloodwork puts him at the top of the range, he’s now cutoff, and can’t get full symptom relief, because of some bloodwork numbers?
FTR, I am okay with being over range. I am just not sure it should be called TRT at that point. TRT indicates replacement. It is likely that the person could never have produced those levels, so it is more of an enhancement than replacement. Just semantics. I do my own testosterone enhancement therapy, and am usually a bit over range on TT and FT on EoD injections. I am okay with that, as I think we should be allowed to make decisions in regards to our own bodies.
1 Like
Now he will say: “Well the range has been reduced every year! 50 years ago men had 2000ng/dl!!”