Pretty much.
He may not even have added that statement at the end. I think the articles get edited to include things like this?
For regular T-nation readers, we know that many good articles have supplement plugs. If I had never been on T-nation though, and was educating myself on TRT, and then read that article, I would dismiss the whole thing once I got to the end as a sales pitch.
Now I see why you’re defending the article.
The editors don’t put words in authors’ mouths, no.
As I’ve explained any time this comes up, 15-20% of articles contains product links. That’s the opposite of “many”. The overwhelming majority contain zero links whatsoever. An article on Testosterone Nation talking about testosterone replacement should be expected to mention a testosterone booster as a potential alternative.
That’s absurd and short-sighted. Those three sentences don’t invalidate the information presented throughout the entire article.
Um, okay.
Shouldn’t we expect honesty, instead of selling snake oil products?
There’s zero “snake oil” being sold. The article is Thibs’ honest opinion.
For anyone that hasn’t tried Alpha Brain you really should. It’s incredible (the fast acting packets). It’s the one supplement that I think is worth every fucking penny and I had no idea this site had anything to do with them.
Aren’t test boosters by and large ineffective at increasing testosterone levels? If they work it is a small impact? Maybe I am off base in my beliefs?
That may be true, but I generally distrust information from someone trying to sell me something (especially on the internet). I don’t think I am the only one who thinks this way. I understand T-nation is trying to make a profit, there isn’t anything wrong with that.
1 Like
Depends largely on their ingredients. There are plenty of crap formulas out there, unfortunately, but Biotest has lead the supplement field with plenty of legit products.
I’ve been on Alpha Male for about six straight months and was due to get bloodwork in a few weeks, to get some concrete numbers on top of the benefits I’ve noticed subjectively, but my checkup’s been put on hold for obvious reasons.
Yeah, uh, me neither, because I don’t think they do. Brain Candy is Biotest’s main nootropic, not Alpha Brain.
Oh I misread Alpha Male as Alpha Brain.
Some people need 200mg to feel descent on TRT and 250mg to feel great. If they go below 200mg, they feel crappy; and go too high, they feel crappy. Knowing this would 200mg still be an enhanced dose or replacement as it is the minimum some people need for symptom-relief? 250mg in this context would be “enhanced”. In a podcast, I’ve heard one doctor with a patient that needed 300mg for symptom-relief, and this was an old guy who didn’t work out, just needed that high of a dose for symptom-relief.
200mg is different results person to person.
I only need 2 clicks a day creamfor my T levels to hit
high normal
One of my buddies takes 2 clicks twice a day cream (4 clicks) to hit mid normal.
I guess my system responds better to lower doses. So honestly my lower dose would have a greater affect in the gym vs his higher dose. I get better TRT mileage than him 
Yep, this is the thesis to my comment. 200mg definitively can be enhanced for many; too much, or just enough - depends on context. In general I would agree with @Gossamer that most seem to only need 150mg for symptom-relief. 500mg I think we can agree is a legit steroid cycle.
Wasn’t you’re TT initially like 200ng/dl? If so may I ask … Why not get on TRT. If you’re symptomatic (you haven’t stated whether you are/aren’t) you’ll feel magnitudes better on just 100mg/wk (trust me, the difference between 200ng/dl and say 600ng/dl is astounding).
It’s rather cheap too, even on a private script.
3ml of test E (250mg/ml) can get me 7.5 weeks worth if I use 100mg/wk. My prescribed dose is closer to 150mg/wk, but that’s me, others can get by with 80-100mg/wk… Sometimes people need 200-250mg/wk, I’d say a good rule of thumb is that the majority fall between 100-200mg/wk
One needs to take into account ester weight too. According to John crisler (and a few studies I’ve looked at) the avg man appears to produce between 5-15mg test/day… But I’m no expert
Injected test is prone to alteration via site/tissue selective bioavailability (IM/sq, though generally bioavailability is very high), then elimination/metabolic processes come into play, go the point wherein said person A may not be getting as much test/responding as well to X dose compared to person B.
It’s the same with most pharmaceuticals. Take codiene for instance, a shitty cyp2d6 metabolizer may not percieved any analgesic effect at all… Someone like me, an extensively ultrarapid cyp2d6 will take 10-20mg and it’ll be like a normal person taking 100mg.
Thomas O Connor had a patient (on one of his vids who he talked about) who requires about 700mg/wk just to hit mid normal on the ref ranges
As to the old man… I’d be very wary … AR sensitivity can play a huge role here. Those with PAIS understandably need more stimulation, thus outright supraphysiologic concentrations of testosterone may be what is required for normality. However say he “feels good” only with a TT of 2500, ft 4x top of the ref range (if this is where 300mg gets him) without PAIS or a similar disorder… It’s not the testosterone causing the issues in my unprofessional opinion
Instead you’d be masking symptoms by using a very high dose of T, a dose of which could have long term implications. As a sedentary elderly male I’d be seriously worried about the elevation in risk for DVT.
1 Like
It is rare to be over 2000 T, maybe there’s androgen resistance or endocrine disruptors in play, but do we have any studies that indicate harm? If not, I’d keep someone on the dose that lets them feel best while simultaneously looking for possible disrupters.
Here’s one study that gave men 600mg of testosterone over 20 weeks, and observed no significant harm. They concluded:
No significant linear associations were observed between testosterone dose and MCP-1, sICAM-1, or hs-CRP (all p-trend >0.20). In apparently healthy men, over a wide dose range, testosterone did not adversely affect atherogenic biomarkers. Long-term studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to determine whether testosterone supplementation affects atherosclerosis progression and cardiovascular risk.
I can link a different study in which indicates test at higher dosages decreases HDL cholesterol in a dose dependent fashion. The decrease isn’t all that great (10-30%)… Actually I can link about three of these studies.
Biggest issue at play is the notion of oxidative stress, other mechanisms at play of which induce a deleterious effect on the heart, other organs at play. I can’t go into detail but I will eventually (currently on lunch break). Systemic, transient damage being induced over time many times isn’t visible on blood work
Other issues like polycythemia may come into play with high dosages over prolonged periods of time.
Overall the effect test has on lipids is generally very mild… But that’s a very small piece of what makes up to be a very big puzzle when it comes to long term impact
2 Likes
That quote was from the article, it’s not my quote.
Needless to say, I disagree with him on that.
