My Testosterone Levels

[Beefkake31]

Disclaimer: My intentions aren't to brag about my test levels, nor am I superior to any other member, in fact I'm not even that big.

Ok guys, I'm really curious, I got my testosterone levels checked and I got a copy from the lab for myself. The total testosterone came out to 916 NG/DL and on the paper the range says 241-827 NG/DL for males. So basically it's saying that I have abnormal testosterone levels obviously towards the good side. Now my question is this; If my test levels are that high would it be similar to lets say someone with a total testosterone of lets say in the 200's doing a regular test E cycle? Can I hypothetically be on a test E cycle for an average person with low to mid testosterone? And also, if lets say you do 500 mg of test E a week how much will that raise your total testosterone in the form of NG/DL concentration? And it doesn't have to be exact numbers just around. And even lets say hypothetically if I did a regular one compound like testosterone cycle would it give me above average gains than the average guy or less gains because my test levels are already high? Again please read the disclaimer, I almost didn't want to post this thinking I was going to get flame type responses, I am just genuinely curious about these questions and have been thinking about it for a few days.

EDIT: new information 3 years later, post #20

[Kale]

Why would you get flamed ? Superhuman has a 10" dick but we dont flame him !! Jealous maybe !!!

Now this is all very subjective and individualized. For example of I am on HRT at 100mg a week of Test and my levels are around 1000 NG/DL on that dose, there are other guys on HRT who are doing 250mg Test a week and there levels are like 600 ng/dl.

So it is almost impossible to answer your questions with any level of certainty. If I do a cycle at 750mg a week of Test and Deca thrown in my levels were around 4300 ng/dl, would that be the same for you who knows. Obviously if you put enough juice into the mix you can get your Test levels a lot higher, At 916 ng/dl I would say you still had some potential there to increase muscle mass naturally. Obviously it depends a lot on your Diet and workout intensity

[Beefkake31]

Why would you get flamed ? Superhuman has a 10" dick but we dont flame him !! Jealous maybe !!!

Now this is all very subjective and individualized. For example of I am HRT at 100mg a week of Test and my levels are around 1000 NG/DL on that dose, there are other guys on HRT who are doing 250mg Test a week and there levels are like 600 ng/dl.

So it is almost impossible to answer your questions with any level of certainty.

But wouldn't it matter what their starting testosterone total was for lets say the guy doing 250 mg a week to have their levels go to 600 ng/dl.

Basically trying to figure out how much 500 mg of test E will make your testosterone total go up in terms of ng/dl concentration, is there any way to convert it or figure it out like an estimate not necessarily exact. I know theres different kinds like free form testosterone, etc. Thats why it's hard to equate all of this.

[Kale]

Well if you think about it logically when you introduce Exogenous Test your Natural production of Testosterone ceases. So on that basis you would assume that everybody that uses Test would be on a level playing field. Its not like you are at 600ng/dl and then you add in exogenous Test and the number introduced then adds to the 600. My assumption may be wrong and I am happy to hear a better explanation. Anthony Roberts is probably the man that would know the answer to this for sure.

[Beefkake31]

Well if you think about it logically when you introduce Exogenous Test your Natural production of Testosterone ceases. So on that basis you would assume that everybody that uses Test would be on a level playing field. Its not like you are at 600ng/dl and then you add in exogenous Test and the number introduced then adds to the 600. My assumption may be wrong and I am happy to hear a better explanation. Anthony Roberts is probably the man that would know the answer to this for sure.

Ya I forgot to think about it from that angle that everyone is on a level playing field since our natural production is shut down. Thanks for the input Kale, Hopefully Anthony will see this and explain the conversion because I would still be curious to know how much the ng/dl testosterone total would be around at 500 mg of test E every week and I know that 500 mg of test E a week doesn't mean 500 ng/dl total so that's why it's a difficult equation basically. I would actually be surprised now that I think about it for someone to know the answer to this, pretty confusing.

[skipp]

What was your free test level, that's the one that matters.

[Beefkake31]

What was your free test level, that's the one that matters.

I have no idea it didn't say, maybe it is on the full copy but not sure I only have a part of it that was copied and given to me. So you're saying total testosterone has nothing to do with muscle building? And also does that mean that you can't convert 500 mg of test E into total testoterone comparisons? Does it only work with free form?

[Property of Steroid.com]

Well if you think about it logically when you introduce Exogenous Test your Natural production of Testosterone ceases. So on that basis you would assume that everybody that uses Test would be on a level playing field. Its not like you are at 600ng/dl and then you add in exogenous Test and the number introduced then adds to the 600. My assumption may be wrong and I am happy to hear a better explanation. Anthony Roberts is probably the man that would know the answer to this for sure.

NO....you got it exactly right.

[Swifto]

Did you get your estrogen tested too?

[Beefkake31]

NO....you got it exactly right.

Which part was right Anthony? I know the natural production shuts down and everyone starts the same but my question was can you explain the conversion because I would still be curious to know how much the ng/dl testosterone total would be around at 500 mg of test E every week and I know that 500 mg of test E a week doesn't mean 500 ng/dl total so that's why it's a difficult equation basically.

[BrokenBricks]

To answer your question you cant do math to know what your test level will be following administration of test. But this study im going to post should give you a rough idea. In it they gave different doses of test E to men over 20 weeks and measured their serum test. However they also administered a GnRH agonist for the purpose of supressing the patienrs natural test. This was required becuase precicely speaking your own production is *not* shut down on a cycle, at least not every cycle. It just depends on the amount you do.


Do tren an whether you start with 200ng/dl of natural test or 1000, you will be in the same boat, becuase that anabolic is so efficient at stimulating the negative feedback loop that regulates your own test production. But if a guys natural test levels are 1000ng/dl what should be clear is that his feedback loop is in equilibrium at that high level of test and will not respond to extra test in the same way as a man with 200ng/dl of natural test. If both men take a low dose of test, say 400mg/week, that amount is so far beyond what the 200ng mans feedback loop is comfortable with that he will shut down what he does make. The 400mg/week is not so far beyond the 1000ng/dl mans natural equilibrium and his body wont respond the same way. Will his natural test drop? No doubt, but if it falls by 50% he is still making more that the other guys natural. Take a different anabolic that is a potent feedback loop stimulator, or take enough test itself and anyone will be shut down. But to be precice, being shut down is a gradual process that is dependant on amount and type of exogenous androgen and not an either or type phenomenon.

Something that might help is to think about cycles where you did a mild test cycle vs the time you did a big cycle or one with tren in it. Were your balls equaly small during each? Mine arent. They maintain more of their volume on low dose cycles.

Anyway, I talk to much. Here is what you want to see.

Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men.
"Testosterone increases muscle mass and strength and regulates other physiological processes, but we do not know whether testosterone effects are dose dependent and whether dose requirements for maintaining various androgen-dependent processes are similar. To determine the effects of graded doses of testosterone on body composition, muscle size, strength, power, sexual and cognitive functions, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), plasma lipids, hemoglobin, and insulin -like growth factor I (IGF-I) levels, 61 eugonadal men, 18-35 yr, were randomized to one of five groups to receive monthly injections of a long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist, to suppress endogenous testosterone secretion, and weekly injections of 25, 50, 125, 300, or 600 mg of testosterone enanthate for 20 wk. Energy and protein intakes were standardized. The administration of the GnRH agonist plus graded doses of testosterone resulted in mean nadir testosterone concentrations of 253, 306, 542, 1,345, and 2,370 ng/dl at the 25-, 50-, 125-, 300-, and 600-mg doses, respectively. Fat-free mass increased dose dependently in men receiving 125, 300, or 600 mg of testosterone weekly (change +3.4, 5.2, and 7.9 kg, respectively). The changes in fat-free mass were highly dependent on testosterone dose (P = 0.0001) and correlated with log testosterone concentrations (r = 0.73, P = 0.0001). Changes in leg press strength, leg power, thigh and quadriceps muscle volumes, hemoglobin, and IGF-I were positively correlated with testosterone concentrations, whereas changes in fat mass and plasma high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol were negatively correlated. Sexual function, visual-spatial cognition and mood, and PSA levels did not change significantly at any dose. We conclude that changes in circulating testosterone concentrations, induced by GnRH agonist and testosterone administration, are associated with testosterone dose- and concentration-dependent changes in fat-free mass, muscle size, strength and power, fat mass, hemoglobin, HDL cholesterol, and IGF-I levels, in conformity with a single linear dose-response relationship. However, different androgen-dependent processes have different testosterone dose-response relationships."

Keeping in mind that those numbers were in the presence of a chemical given specifically to shut the person down completely. So the low doses would give higher total test concentration in your body in you or I becuase we are not shutting down our natural production, wheras the higher doses results are more in line with what our total would be becuase the will more effectively reduce our natural test, mimicing the conditions of this experiment.

[skipp]

I have no idea it didn't say, maybe it is on the full copy but not sure I only have a part of it that was copied and given to me. So you're saying total testosterone has nothing to do with muscle building? And also does that mean that you can't convert 500 mg of test E into total testoterone comparisons? Does it only work with free form?

Yup free test is what helps build muscle. If it's bound it's useless.

[Beefkake31]

To answer your question you cant do math to know what your test level will be following administration of test. But this study im going to post should give you a rough idea. In it they gave different doses of test E to men over 20 weeks and measured their serum test. However they also administered a GnRH agonist for the purpose of supressing the patienrs natural test. This was required becuase precicely speaking your own production is *not* shut down on a cycle, at least not every cycle. It just depends on the amount you do.


Do tren an whether you start with 200ng/dl of natural test or 1000, you will be in the same boat, becuase that anabolic is so efficient at stimulating the negative feedback loop that regulates your own test production. But if a guys natural test levels are 1000ng/dl what should be clear is that his feedback loop is in equilibrium at that high level of test and will not respond to extra test in the same way as a man with 200ng/dl of natural test. If both men take a low dose of test, say 400mg/week, that amount is so far beyond what the 200ng mans feedback loop is comfortable with that he will shut down what he does make. The 400mg/week is not so far beyond the 1000ng/dl mans natural equilibrium and his body wont respond the same way. Will his natural test drop? No doubt, but if it falls by 50% he is still making more that the other guys natural. Take a different anabolic that is a potent feedback loop stimulator, or take enough test itself and anyone will be shut down. But to be precice, being shut down is a gradual process that is dependant on amount and type of exogenous androgen and not an either or type phenomenon.

Something that might help is to think about cycles where you did a mild test cycle vs the time you did a big cycle or one with tren in it. Were your balls equaly small during each? Mine arent. They maintain more of their volume on low dose cycles.

Anyway, I talk to much. Here is what you want to see.

Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men.
"Testosterone increases muscle mass and strength and regulates other physiological processes, but we do not know whether testosterone effects are dose dependent and whether dose requirements for maintaining various androgen-dependent processes are similar. To determine the effects of graded doses of testosterone on body composition, muscle size, strength, power, sexual and cognitive functions, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), plasma lipids, hemoglobin, and insulin -like growth factor I (IGF-I) levels, 61 eugonadal men, 18-35 yr, were randomized to one of five groups to receive monthly injections of a long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist, to suppress endogenous testosterone secretion, and weekly injections of 25, 50, 125, 300, or 600 mg of testosterone enanthate for 20 wk. Energy and protein intakes were standardized. The administration of the GnRH agonist plus graded doses of testosterone resulted in mean nadir testosterone concentrations of 253, 306, 542, 1,345, and 2,370 ng/dl at the 25-, 50-, 125-, 300-, and 600-mg doses, respectively. Fat-free mass increased dose dependently in men receiving 125, 300, or 600 mg of testosterone weekly (change +3.4, 5.2, and 7.9 kg, respectively). The changes in fat-free mass were highly dependent on testosterone dose (P = 0.0001) and correlated with log testosterone concentrations (r = 0.73, P = 0.0001). Changes in leg press strength, leg power, thigh and quadriceps muscle volumes, hemoglobin, and IGF-I were positively correlated with testosterone concentrations, whereas changes in fat mass and plasma high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol were negatively correlated. Sexual function, visual-spatial cognition and mood, and PSA levels did not change significantly at any dose. We conclude that changes in circulating testosterone concentrations, induced by GnRH agonist and testosterone administration, are associated with testosterone dose- and concentration-dependent changes in fat-free mass, muscle size, strength and power, fat mass, hemoglobin, HDL cholesterol, and IGF-I levels, in conformity with a single linear dose-response relationship. However, different androgen-dependent processes have different testosterone dose-response relationships."

Keeping in mind that those numbers were in the presence of a chemical given specifically to shut the person down completely. So the low doses would give higher total test concentration in your body in you or I becuase we are not shutting down our natural production, wheras the higher doses results are more in line with what our total would be becuase the will more effectively reduce our natural test, mimicing the conditions of this experiment.

Thanks a lot Bricks this was something along the lines that I was looking for I was wondering when someone would attempt to answer my question but your post helped a lot thank you.

[Property of Steroid.com]

Thanks a lot Bricks this was something along the lines that I was looking for I was wondering when someone would attempt to answer my question but your post helped a lot thank you.

I believe that same answer to your question can be found (with charts) in my testosterone enanthate profile.

[Tapout]

Broken Bricks---wow impressive
a question for you or Anthony Roberts

as in a few posts latley my test is at 239 and my free test is at 5.66 with a norm supposed to be 5-21 so my doc is going to put me on Testim gel 50mg per dose
the question
How well does transdermal applications work?
example-- if you were to take the Testim at 50mg per dose daily-- is it the same as taking 10 5mg dbol orally per day or 50mg prop injection daily.
Or does some not tranfer thru skin

[BrokenBricks]

If I understand correctly (and I may not), the testoserone gel Testim is 10% bioavalible, compared to 100% bioavalibility of a testosterone IM injection.

This abstract is what I base the 10% value on:

A novel testosterone gel formulation normalizes androgen levels in hypogonadal men, with improvements in body composition and sexual function.

Department of Urology, Lister Hospital, Stevenage, Herts, UK.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of two doses of a new testosterone gel formulation (Testim Auxilium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Norristown, PA, USA) to a permeation-enhanced testosterone patch (Andropatch), GlaxoSmithKline, UK) for treating men with confirmed low serum testosterone levels , and associated signs and symptoms of hypogonadism. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 208 men were randomized and treated at 29 centres in Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden and the UK. The men were treated for 90 days, and the pharmacokinetics and treatment effectiveness of Testim at two doses (50 and 100 mg/day, delivering a daily dose of 5 and 10 mg testosterone, respectively) and Andropatch (2 x 2.5 mg patches, each delivering 2.5 mg testosterone and containing 12.2 mg of testosterone) were compared. Pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained, body composition measured, and mood and sexual function data recorded. RESULTS: Testim produced dose-dependent improvements in all pharmacokinetic variables compared with Andropatch. The mean increases from baseline to 90 days in testosterone were 12.41, 6.54 and 3.82 nmol/L for Testim 100 and 50 mg/day and the Andropatch, respectively. Both doses of Testim significantly improved positive and negative mood over baseline; Andropatch did not."

They claim that a 1% concentration tube of Testim which contains 50mg of testosterone will actually deliver 5mg, and a 100mg will deliver 10mg. On the other hand the other product Andropatch (which is not a gel you rub on but a literal patch) contains 12.5 mg and delivers 2.5mg, which is 20% bioavalible. Why would a patch be more efficient than a gel? Maybe the gel is diluted by sweat and absorbed into clothes whereas the test in the patch is protected from being rubed off of, absorbed into clothes, degraded by light (who knows) by the patch itself.

In anycase, to answer your question I wouldnt compare any dose of test with any dose of dbol becuase they are different substances that can differ in many ways. One might be more prone to estrogen conversion (I belive dbol is) and water retention. A certain dose of each (say: 10mg/day dbol vs 400mg/week test E) might make your bench press go up by the same amount but one might make acne hair loss and prostate enlargement more likely than the other. (one other small point is that oral steroids are partially broken down by the liver in what is called first pass metabolism before they ever make it out of the circulation of your gut and into your muscles to the tune of 70% for most liver metabolized drugs, so there is that to consider as well)

Comparing test prop to the gel is reasonable though. You are getting 5mg of pure test per day with the patch. Becuase Test prop has the ester attatched it is less mg for mg than pure test. 10mg test prop works out to be something like 8-9mg of actual test. Your patch provides 35 mg of test a week, which would be equivalent to around 40mg of prop a week give or take. Your body makes about 7mg of test per day if you have normal function if i remember correctly. Meaning your patch should about double what you already make. I would estimate your test levels will go from the 230's to the low 500's with one 50mg patch per day. I think what you want to know is how close to the effects of juicing will you come with a patch. The answer is, not close unfortunately.

[Tapout]

wow thanks Broken very informitive

I guess after my 6 week blood test I will have to add a cc of cyp per week

[Beefkake31]

Ya I agree, nice informative posts Broken. I just want to note that for everyone out there that is going to do a first cycle it would be a good idea to get your test levels checked before the cycle and then after so you know where you were beforehand and not just after the cycle where you would have no clue if the numbers were normal or not.

[Property of Steroid.com]

Ya I agree, nice informative posts Broken. I just want to note that for everyone out there that is going to do a first cycle it would be a good idea to get your test levels checked before the cycle and then after so you know where you were beforehand and not just after the cycle where you would have no clue if the numbers were normal or not.

That's what I did before I did my first cycle, at 19. This way I know forever whether I got back to my Original Levels or not.

[Beefkake31]

Well it's been 3 years since I made this thread. Fair to say I'm really depressed now. In my original post I said "The total testosterone came out to 916 NG/DL and on the paper the range says 241-827 NG/DL for males".

I got my results again yesterday. Total testosterone came out to 580 NG/DL. That's almost a 50% decrease! I was 25 when I posted the original post and now I'm 28. 3 damn years after my peak and it's dropped this much already? This is really saddening

[ferocious bubble]

Perhaps you should consider another pct? Stane is apparently really effective.

[Beefkake31]

I haven't done any cycles, so it's not related to that.

[ferocious bubble]

Oh . I know its asking alot seeing how its been three years but if you can remember when you got your bloodwork done back in 2007 because if you got the work done in the mourning when you test levels are the highest it could result with different test levels.