How you figure? I argued in both those cases based on clear articulable facts. I have no authority to appeal to as I am an internet nobody (been consistent on that since I got here).
And check out the Pharma description if you want to see how the latter case you quoted above ended.
Not sure how you miss understood me dudeā¦
From your post aboveā¦
Then followed up with ā¦
Misunderstand?
Sometimes easy to on a forum. Not quite following but I will leave it be.
You got banned due to appeal to authority on this forum. (You werenāt the authority)
Comparing the situation with the same light as debating and conversing with KSman or DannyB but imagining if they were mods.
Oh ok. Gotcha. I think the official terminology was persistently arguing with staff. And I should not have pushed it but I really care about harm reduction although it looks retarded (what I did) to many.
Thanks for clarifying. I have been very outspoken and appreciative to Tim for making this right.
Iām asking seriously. I donāt think there even is such a thing as optimization. There is normal and abnormal. There is no effect on function at 500 to 1000, though some will say, ā800 to 1000 is where the magic happens. Like, what is this magic? I test 700 to 1000 on any day of the week for years on 100 mg per week. I should be a bionic man, butā¦ Iām not. Thatās why Iāve jokingly used the terms TRT versus ācyborg/bionic-man TRTā, which is really just ādoing roidsā.
And no, Iām not one who entertains extremes, like, ābro, are ya saying 300 is normal cuz thatās what some docs and normal references ranges say?!ā I know you donāt do that, but many do.
Can I just say (again I am not trying to make more work for TNation folks) that we need way more reaction emojis here than just the like/love option.
I have been very outspoken on all this but another part that does not get enough consideration is that just because 300 to 1200 ng/dl (if I am generous) is the TT reference range (ignore FT for the moment so everyone does not fall asleep from boredom) does not mean that running an 800 or 1000 ng/dl mean TT level is physiologic for a given individual using exogenous Test. Their physiology may support / āneedā 400 or 500 ng/dl mean.
All of this becomes so detailed that most tune out as IronYuppie warned me about one time.
One manās experience on 1000 ng/dl TT or say 20 ng/dl FT is not/may not be the same as another man WRT either benefits or sides.
Hence we must tread carefully especially as we depart further from high end of ref range.
It should be added that there is way more to physique/strength genetics than high testosterone.
I canāt tell you how beneficial it would be to go from 500 to 1000. I think it would be slightly beneficial to physique. We are only talking TT here and I prefer to gauge the FT metric. Lets assume for conversation they are linear to an imaginary TRT patient.
My TRT protocol has always had my TT in top range at trough (900s ng/dl) and FT about 2/3 range at trough (17-20ish pg/ml). These are Lab Corp draws. Before starting TRT my TT was <400ng/dl and my FT was only 4.4pg/ml, with a FT bottom range at the time of roughly 8pg/ml for my age. So going from FT of 4.4 to 20 (pg/ml) I saw a drastic change in my body. When I started TRT, I had already worked out for 5 days a week for 18 years. I weighed 170 lbs and looked soft despite this. I was STRONG but didnāt look it. I also looked 18 in my 30s. Post TRT I gained 20 lbs of mostly lean tissue. I didnāt change a thing about my work out or nutrition. I was dialed in pretty well before. So thats my experience. That was on 140mg TCyp per week. If I, say, dialed it back to more mid range, maybe I would have had similar results. Maybe not. But I started what I consider optimized from the get go.
@RT_Nomad @tearload I fully agree with both your statements.
I agree. I do think there are certain protocols that donāt work for certain people (that are likely a minority).
A popular thing to say in the TRT clinic world is ādialed inā. At least in my experience, lots of different doses, injection frequencies will work for me, and I feel the same from what I can tell.
Agree.
I think this is a fairly common misconception though. I think there is a disproportionate amount of gym rats on TRT. So these are mostly guys that lifted for a long time before TRT. The fact that they lifted for so long means there is often a selection bias (people tend to drop out of things they suck at). Then they get the TRT and usually that helps with a bit of body fat removal, and perhaps a few lbs of muscle. Over time, many of these guys look great. But they had most of that muscle before TRT (or at least I did, and most others I know on TRT also did). For me, dropping the body fat has made me look much more jacked, but had I made that my focus (losing fat), I believe I could have done it before TRT. Sure, maybe I can hold a few lbs more muscle at the lower body fat, but I think it is a smaller improvement than most outsiders think.
I donāt understand what dialed in can even be. How can a doctor even work with such a premise.
I swear, I think Iād fire patients that were driving me up a wall with a litany of complaints, unrealistic desires and expectations, and lack of understanding of what is medicine!
Ability to stick to a diet is 80% of aesthetics
Even genetics affect the degree of diet required. Iāve seen some that eat about whatever they wanted and looked 4 weeks out from a show.
For me dialled in comes down to e2 levels.
Test between 125mg and 175mg not that much different. Slightly edgier/forceful in manner and start gaining water weight at 150+
Below 100mg and Iām where I was pre-trt.
But e2- bloody hell, low and Iām a wreck- sleepy, feel dead to the world etc. High and Iām argumentative, overly emotional and canāt stop eating and have insomnia.
Somewhere mid range and I feel good.
Whatās your T value at these doses?
Testosterone affects the way the kidneys re-absorb sodium, this could be your water weight problem.
The higher estrogen value may be completely innocent.
I donāt run that high E2 ever. My blood pressure seems to be a problem past 120ish mg more or less, so there is something to that.
At 125mg Iām at upper end of normal range at trough (seem to remember it was 29 with upper range being top at 30), then more like 40 at 175mg (at trough)
Lets not turn this thread into another e2 debate.
Just ends up going round in circles.
If you re-read my post the e2 sides are listed seperate to T. And raised water weight is when Iām on higher levels of T.