Does a person with higher natural testosterone...

**sigrabbit** · 07-08-2003, 01:09 PM

production require higher dosages to see gains? I ask this based on the following premise: If a person normally has high test, 900ng/nl for example, and they use exogenous test, won't they need to use an amount greater than what they produce to offset shutdown? Or does exogenous test become free test easier?

***BIG TEXAN*** · 07-08-2003, 01:14 PM

Interesting, I'll bump for anyone who might be able to answer this.

**Lift Chief** · 07-08-2003, 01:19 PM

Well regardless of where someones natural test is it is still within certain boundaries... and even at the highest level it is still not high enough to impact the amount of exogeneous test you'd take. The natural test level isnt high enough to impact it.

**sigrabbit** · 07-08-2003, 01:21 PM

Maybe my confusion is comparing ng to mg?

**Lift Chief** · 07-08-2003, 02:32 PM

Ohhh ok- im not sure of the exact amount of test an average male produces but i believe it is between 5-10mg per day. I'm almost positive it isnt much more than 10mg per day- so that would mean at most 70mg per week of natural test.

**sigrabbit** · 07-08-2003, 02:57 PM

I believe the testicles produce between 4-12mg, but I don't think that is the only source of testosterone in the body. I thought I read that progesterone can become testosterone, etc. I think you are right though, comparing nanograms/deciliter to milligrams caused my premise to fall apart. Is nano equal to one billion? If so, you can see that exogenous testosterone doses are huge compared to naturally occurring test.

Could someone help us out with the numbers so we are comparing apples to apples?

**redrumkev** · 07-08-2003, 03:47 PM

but even with your 12mg max and say 12mg comes from else where, we are only talking 168mg/wk. Now when you introduce test to your blood stream your testicles slow down and/or stop the natural production of test, thus your 168mg is drastically reduced or even elimated totally. But I believe the numbers are more in the range or 4-10mg/ed. So 500mg ran 10-12 weeks in someone with low test and someone with high test should give almost the same readings after 4-5 weeks.

**mmaximus25** · 07-08-2003, 04:15 PM

My question is... if you were at the high end of the natural test spectrum would that have anything to do with your high affinity to synthetic test.
I have great lean results from 200-400mg of test a week and at doses of 1g or higher I only noticed sides and water.
I'm 27 now and have no Idea of my T levels but @ 17 I had a range of 830 -960 ng/dl... little good that did me cause I wasn't weight training... the only thing it did was cause concern with my dad because of all the fighting I was doing... He thought I was taking narcotics turned out I was just a real aggressive prick...
I didn’t think that range was high though.
Does anyone now what the highest levels are for teens verses a few years down the road... I know there is a major drop somewhere getting close to 30.
I also believe no natural test level can compare to even a low dose of synthetic test... say 200mg

I would think you would have to be under 300ng/dl to need a 150mg -200mg boost to bring you back to a normal test level...

***Billy_Bathgate*** · 07-08-2003, 04:34 PM

You cant compare a concentration to an amount ie 900ng/nl vs xxxmg/wk. It doesnt work that way.

**sigrabbit** · 07-08-2003, 04:36 PM

I have test levels of 799 ng/dl at the age of thirty, but the lab report did not say if the normal range of 300-900 was for any specific age group. How ng compares to mg is what I want to know.

***Billy_Bathgate*** · 07-08-2003, 04:59 PM

nano = E-9
milli = E-3

Factor of E-6 for n >> m

**longhornDr** · 07-08-2003, 06:07 PM

Some relevant graphs...

The first one is test levels during puberty and the second is test levels in normal adults..taken from the Cecil Textbook of Medicine.

As to the orginal question, someone that has naturally high levels of test will indeed need higher doses than someone with low test levels, but with the dosages that are popular now it is really a non issue as in almost every case you will have more androgens than you need to achieve maximum effect.

**sigrabbit** · 07-08-2003, 07:19 PM

Thanks for the graphs longhornDr.

**MR.BICEPS** · 07-08-2003, 10:31 PM

Heres one thing too consider! Your bodies own natural production of testostrone has its highs and lows. Meaning it fluctuates. It doesnt stay on the upper end of the scale all the time. Injections on the other hand keeps your testosterone levels high all the time. They dont decrease like your own bodies natural production.

My endocrinologist gave me this info.

**mmaximus25** · 07-08-2003, 11:47 PM

I'm confused... If you have a somewhat high natural production of testosterone and even the smallest dose of synthetic test is like doubling your own natural test. (for argument sake... unknown ratio)
Let say there’s a ratio of the amount of synthetic to natural test. I mean your natural test before you start a cycle to what ever the amount is in mg of synthetic. It seems to me that the person with a naturally high T level when on would not need to take such a high dose during their cycle. Then if they fully recover afterward be able to keep a low to moderate dose with their next cycle.
Of coarse if the person has not fully recovered and is about to start another cycle will need to increase the dosage of synthetic test to acheive the same result.

Then if the person is a year long cycler with bridging all of this doesn’t matter because your shut down all year but have low dose periods when you can chemically jump start your natural production.

I could be wrong I'm just looking back at my usage.
The only problem is I haven't had my T levels checked since I was a kid. And then I've ben doing low dose high dose so there no way I'm going to know what my T levels are at naturally.

**sharky** · 07-09-2003, 12:38 AM

im not sure on the ng/mg but by this time i would bet your t levels have dropped by about 1/2. as for the levels of different people the injected t levels would shut down anybodys production. everyone should have about the same effect. peoples bodies are different but im talking about the actual levels.

**mmaximus25** · 07-09-2003, 12:50 AM

I had to edit my post... so I'm bumping for any night owls

**mmaximus25** · 07-09-2003, 07:14 AM

I think I'm trying to find an answer in the wrong place and just got confused. I was trying to link the affinity of an individuals target cells to androgens to their natural production of Testosterone .
It's purly genetics I guess someone with low or high natural levels may or may not have a high affinity to test and test derivitives once in a cycle. I was trying to figure out why I have such a great result from a low dose of enanthate but need large doses of say deca but again low doses of d-bol and winny. sorry for the off the topic post...

Originally Posted by mmaximus25

I'm confused... If you have a somewhat high natural production of testosterone and even the smallest dose of synthetic test is like doubling your own natural test. (for argument sake... unknown ratio)
Let say there’s a ratio of the amount of synthetic to natural test. I mean your natural test before you start a cycle to what ever the amount is in mg of synthetic. It seems to me that the person with a naturally high T level when on would not need to take such a high dose during their cycle. Then if they fully recover afterward be able to keep a low to moderate dose with their next cycle.
Of coarse if the person has not fully recovered and is about to start another cycle will need to increase the dosage of synthetic test to acheive the same result.

Then if the person is a year long cycler with bridging all of this doesn’t matter because your shut down all year but have low dose periods when you can chemically jump start your natural production.

I could be wrong I'm just looking back at my usage.
The only problem is I haven't had my T levels checked since I was a kid. And then I've ben doing low dose high dose so there no way I'm going to know what my T levels are at naturally.

**sigrabbit** · 07-09-2003, 07:15 AM

I guess that my thoughts were along the lines of a person with naturally high test having more muscle mass prior to the use of synthetic. So, if that person becomes shut down during a cycle, more test would be needed for him as compared to someone with naturally lower test, in order to see gains. However, BillyB helped me with a calculation and I had .00016mg of test in my blood when I was tested, based upon 800ng/dl, and assuming the math is correct. As you can see, my worries that 75mg tren /prop would not be enough were wayyyy off base. Even assuming yours testes produce between 4-12mg/day, a person on a cycle like mine is getting significantly more testosterone than normal, so even if I shut down, I am still getting enough to make gains.

**Lift Chief** · 07-09-2003, 07:35 AM

Certainly bro- regardless of what your natural test production is taking prop at 75mg per day is going to give you a much, much higher level of testosterone .

You will need a slightly higher dose as you get bigger obviously.

i.e. 5'10" 180 pound guy will need less test than a 5'10" 240 pound guy to grow.

**Rickson** · 07-09-2003, 07:43 AM

I don't think Just because you produce more testosterone naturally that you would have a higher binding affinity to the AR necessarily. In terms of needing less or more test I think it is still an individual thing. People react in different ways to synthetic test but the amount you produce naturally is so much less then what is used synthetically that I don't think that makes much of an impact.

**mmaximus25** · 07-09-2003, 08:03 AM

It depends on your genetics, right. Even the low-end person could have some unbelievable affinity to a test or test derivative, right.
So I can through my natural production of T out the proverbial window when it comes to my dosages and particular affinities to synthesized androgens.
Thx for touching a little on my kinda off topic guys...

**sigrabbit** · 07-09-2003, 08:49 AM

I think that I recently read an article that said only 3-7% of the natural test produced is available for use in muscle building. I believe the remainder is attached to sperm and protein serum. Is this why we need superphysiological doses to increase mass beyond what the average person can achieve?

**PunkRawk** · 09-22-2003, 12:57 AM

u realize nanograms are like way way less then milligrams right.....900 nanongrams is like 90 mg's....the average person uses in the 500 plus area of test....minimum

**Warrior** · 09-22-2003, 02:59 AM

To get results (for our purposes) from the exogenous use of androgens - you must exceed what would be considered replacement. Clinically 75-100mg of testosterone per week is considered replacement. Around 250-300mg per week has been used as a possible male contraceptive. When you go above 300mg a host of other benefits from increased testosterone levels come into play...

So bottomline - as long as you go above what would be considered "replacement doses," since you shut your self down no matter who you are - you will see the most benefits.

BTW - folks with higher natural levels are at a higher risk for prostate cancer. An athlete in this category should be sure to be checked more frequently for any androgen related prostate enlargement. But in the end, every one of us should be checked regularly... but those with naturally high testosterone levels are in the higher risk bracket.

It's my conclusion that those that are already advanced athletes, with a solid base of LBM to begin with, will see the best gains at doses that are not too far off from replacement. And early studies of Dianabol , Winstrol and testosterone have proved that. But after while you have to start bridging and increasing your androgen levels to keep gaining... gains associated with pro bodybuilders.