There’s another thread on here about the OP using 36mg TOTAL per week and feeling his best.
It’s all so subjective. Truly not a one size fits all science.
I understand where he’s coming from. I really think that there are aspects of this that are not completely understood though. I went in to the doc because I had symptoms of low-T. His first prescription put me at TT 515 ng/dL and FT 7.9 ng/dL. That’s a very normal, typical blood concentration for an average, healthy man. It did not, however, eliminate all of my symptoms. I asked the doc if he would go up on my dose. He did and I now come in at TT 818 ng/dL and FT 18.5 ng/dL. That still in the normal range but pretty high in that range. All symptoms are resolved. But…how does it compare to what my T levels were when I was young? No way to know because I never had it tested then. I had severe acne when I was a teenager. TRT has resulted in an occasional pimple but that’s about it. Is there a correlation? Again, I don’t know. In terms of how I feel, I feel about the same as I did at 30 (I’m 57 now). But, again a “but”, I don’t feel the way I did in my teens through mid-20s in terms of libido for sure and to an extent in sexual performance. Would higher T allow me to feel that way? Who knows? But at that point I’d be really high. Would that still be TRT? Would it be worth the increased risk? What if it worked? How would my wife feel about that? So far I’ve decided not to push it that far.
Do what makes you feel best and keep you healthy and within your comfort level. The article draws a line that doesn’t really exist. Some people can get to TT of 2,000 on 180mg a week and for another person 200mg a week puts them at a TT of 900. So who is doing the “mild cycle” here? And if that person @ 180mg a week also starts doing HCG?
2 Likes
And besides, who the heck cares? I know that my TT 818 ng/dL & FT 18.5 ng/dL is well above what the average man has, even an average, healthy younger man. So what? Call it TRT, call it a low grade steroid cycle, whatever. If I knew that I could reliably get pharma grade steroids without the potential legal hassles I’d do it in a heartbeat. Based on everything that I’ve read and learned in the past year since I’ve been on TRT, I’m convinced that it can be done safely and effectively if properly managed. As with anything (food, alcohol, even aspirin or acetaminophen, or hell, drinking too much water (hyponatremia)) abuse can be dangerous or even deadly. Properly used and managed you could be fitter and healthier than the average man (not to mention better looking and still tapping dat…well, you know) well into old age.
The article also makes a mistake in that calling high dose TRT a cycle is by definition wrong. If I take a gram a week until I die, I am not cycling. Cycling implies that I am going on and off, TRT is only on.
Silly to make an error like that right in the title.
2 Likes
I’d argue this is marginally higher than what the average, healthy young man produces… Within 1-2 standards deviation of normality. If one feels good, I’d probably call this optimisation
If you’re in the US you most certainly can, certain clinics will prescribe Nandrolone, oxandrolone etc
I used Alpha Male for 2 years and liked the results. That being said I just start Test E at 150 per week and it is much better. But I am 51.
Well, we’d need somebody who paid more attention in statistics class than I did to determine the standard deviation but according this study: Harmonized Reference Ranges for Circulating Testosterone Levels in Men of Four Cohort Studies in the United States and Europe, the 50th percentile for healthy, non-obese young men is 531 ng/dL. 818 ng/dL is well above the 90th percentile and closing in on the 95th percentile so that seems high to me. And on top of that, as is standard practice, that natural 531 ng/dL value was obtained at peak in the morning while my 818 ng/dL was at trough just before I applied my next dose of T. If we compared apples to apples and measured me at peak, say 3-4 hours after I applied the T, I might have been at 1200 ng/dL or so.
As for AAS, it comes down to money. My entire program is covered by my insurance and costs me less than $200 a year in co-pays for doctor visits, labs, and T all inclusive. All of those doctors that I’ve heard about who offer nandrolone and oxandrolone and such are with private HRT clinics that don’t take insurance.
Now if I could go to one and say, “Hey doc, here’s my blood work, I’d like some var” then that would be awesome. But from what I’ve heard they won’t do that. They want to manage your entire program which runs around $1500 a year. It’s not worth the cost for me.
I paid some attention in statistics class. ~95% of all samples will fall within +/- 2 standard deviations. Now that is two sided, so you would have the bottom 2.5% left at the lower end, and the 2.5% left at the higher end that are outside of +/- two standard deviations.
By your chart, you would be within 2 standard deviations if you were somewhere in between the 2.5 percentile, and the 97.5 percentile or ~265 ng/dL and ~920 ng/dL, which you are.
2 Likes
Well you see, it pays to pay attention in class 
Thanks for that. That still seems like a big difference though.
Being close to the upper 2 standard deviation limit puts you far above where most men are. I do statistics some for work (mechanical engineer), so I am not sure I would remember that if I didn’t use it.
2 Likes
On a somewhat different note, my 818 ng/dL is obtained with the middle dose, 75mg/day, of Androgel applied in a single location (left or right shoulder alternating). Lots of people don’t like gels but I’ve been using it for more than a year and it works great and no, my wife has not developed a beard and mustache. Base on this study that I recently ran across: Pharmacokinetics of Transdermal Testosterone Gel in Hypogonadal Men: Application of Gel at One Site Versus Four Sites: A General Clinical Research Center Study* I have started applying the gel in four locations - both shoulders and both sides of the upper abdomen. It’s slightly more hassle to do it that way but no big deal. I’m curious to see if my numbers go up. I can’t say that I’ve noticed any difference since doing it that way.
Define “cycle”.
By its very definition, a cycle cannot be trt. Once on trt, it’s not supposed to be cycled. And, for reference, there may be an outlying case, where someone needs 500mg per week, to get optimal levels that eliminate symptoms.
So, in those instances, we’d not call that trt?
1 Like
I think what he really meant to say was that it’s a “cruise” without a “blast” but not really in the therapeutic range. Obviously it isn’t a true “cycle”. The problem I suspect is that we are going by averages and we don’t know what any particular individual’s T levels were when they were young because no one ever has that tested when they are young and healthy. I have suggested that to my 32 year old son but I don’t know that he will take that advice. Kids, sheesh! LOL We also don’t fully understand the mechanism by which TRT works so it might be perfectly reasonable to need a higher level of exogenous T to address symptoms when compared to natural T levels.
2 Likes
My symptoms are being too small doctor.
5 Likes
Within two standard deviations of normality. Generally abnormal means 2SD+ off the norm. In class we were taught 2SD encompassed 97.5% of variabes percentile (perhaps it was 95%… I think it was 97.5, depends who you ask. I’ll check my old notes tommorow)
I’ve linked some data (of which has been disputed) indicating a generational drop in T is occuring from generation to generation irrespective of health status/method of testosterone assay used. I’m of the belief that generationally there has been a generalised decline in male hormonal output, fertility.
Tren
It is closer to 95%. The confusion usually comes from the 95% being two sided. So 97.5 percentile would be the upper limit for 2 SD. 2.5 percentile would be the lower limit. 97.5-2.5=95%.
2 Likes
Then there’s this,
" A study on a large sample of American men found that the average testosterone level has been dropping by as much as 1 percent per year. Testosterone levels lower naturally with age, but this study found that a 65-year-old man in 1987 had about 17 percent more testosterone than a 65- year-old man in 2004. This wasn’t just limited to Americans either; a Danish study found similar results. Anecdotally, sex counselor Ian Kerner told CNN that he’s noticed “an increasing number of young guys are complaining of sexual concerns, such as diminished libido and erectile problems, more commonly seen in older men.”
https://bigthink.com/sex-relationships/men-have-less-testosterone-today?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1
Don’t know if anyone wants to factor that in or not. There are likely a multitude of reasons but I’d prefer to not necessarily be compared to today’s average male .
I am thinking there are multiple reasons that testosterone would be dropping if it is. Mainly how BF% has shifted up. I remember going to grade school in the early 90s. Everyone in my class was fit. Look at grade school kids now, and that is not the case.
I am about to get a blood test, and I am betting I’ll be somewhere around 1200-1500 ng/dL at the trough (pin MWF). I don’t think it is dangerous to be at those levels. Why should I care if I am advantaged over another man?
The range for labcorp testosterone used to stop ~1100 ng/dL (based off of older population statistics). I don’t care that the new guidelines only go to ~900 ng/dL. I care about what can be done safely.
2 Likes
Yes, as I stated “There are likely a multitude of reasons” and yes one of them is obesity but there are likely many more such as environmental and nutritional that are hard for even healthy people to avoid.