20 and test level at 361

[MuscleInk]

I agree with you. But I went to a urologist about six months ago and he basically told me I was crazy for wanting him to test for free test and lh

My guess is he's more concerned about his liability. If you're lower end of normal it's still normal and most people won't notice a big difference. In fitness and body building I understand the desire for hire testosterone. For normal daily living though, many docs would say normal is normal so live with it.

I would do as Kel advises. Get other opinions. There are those that will treat.

[powerlifterty16]

My guess is he's more concerned about his liability. If you're lower end of normal it's still normal and most people won't notice a big difference. In fitness and body building I understand the desire for hire testosterone. For normal daily living though, many docs would say normal is normal so live with it.

I would do as Kel advises. Get other opinions. There are those that will treat.

i'm surprised to hear you say this viewpoint. I would think you would be more progressive. How can you say that there would be no subjective difference between a low normal level and a normal one? The normal scale is taken by averaging the t levels of adult males aged 18-100 and coming up witha range. The range is 348-1197 give or take the lab. The range also includes men with thyroid issues, pituitary issues, diabetits, aksa all unhealthy men.
It makes sense that the men at the bottom of the chart with 348 levels are OLD men with health conditions. How can someone feel similar at that level vs the level of the healthy 20 yr old with 850? That's a 3x diff nearly.

[MuscleInk]

i'm surprised to hear you say this viewpoint. I would think you would be more progressive. How can you say that there would be no subjective difference between a low normal level and a normal one? The normal scale is taken by averaging the t levels of adult males aged 18-100 and coming up witha range. The range is 348-1197 give or take the lab. The range also includes men with thyroid issues, pituitary issues, diabetits, aksa all unhealthy men.
It makes sense that the men at the bottom of the chart with 348 levels are OLD men with health conditions. How can someone feel similar at that level vs the level of the healthy 20 yr old with 850? That's a 3x diff nearly.

I agree with YOU. I didn't say I believe there is no subjective difference. I was simply providing the current rationale behind some MDs' view of TRT and its necessity. The highest my endogenous T reaches is 162 and that was before I ever used gear. Now, after a few cycles, the highest it typically goes is 52!!!!! I know exactly how low T feels and believe you me, it is extremely unpleasant when its well below normal ranges.

From the perspective of many (not all, thankfully) MDs, the risks of TRT (elevated hemoglobin, RBCs, LDL, TC, TG, decreased HDL, hair loss, acne, and psychological changes in some cases) far outweigh the benefits for men still within normal ranges - even when at the lower end of normal.

Many men seeking TRT for low T are looking for improvements in quality of life. Most men on THIS board are the exception. They want higher free T levels so they can feel better and see some physical improvements and in many (not every) case, use TRT to maintain levels between cycles. Many men seeking TRT do not fit in that category. Moreover, I know very few MDs personally (I would of course be the exception) that would endorse or condone TRT as a "bridge" to maintain normal levels between anabolic cycles.

I understand what you are saying. I'm not in disagreement, nor did I state that view, but remember, to a physician, a normal range is a normal range even if low and men on this board would not be representative of most men using TRT IMO.

[powerlifterty16]

I agree with YOU. I didn't say I believe there is no subjective difference. I was simply providing the current rationale behind some MDs' view of TRT and its necessity. The highest my endogenous T reaches is 162 and that was before I ever used gear. Now, after a few cycles, the highest it typically goes is 52!!!!! I know exactly how low T feels and believe you me, it is extremely unpleasant when its well below normal ranges.

From the perspective of many (not all, thankfully) MDs, the risks of TRT (elevated hemoglobin, RBCs, LDL, TC, TG, decreased HDL, hair loss, acne, and psychological changes in some cases) far outweigh the benefits for men still within normal ranges - even when at the lower end of normal.

Many men seeking TRT for low T are looking for improvements in quality of life. Most men on THIS board are the exception. They want higher free T levels so they can feel better and see some physical improvements and in many (not every) case, use TRT to maintain levels between cycles. Many men seeking TRT do not fit in that category. Moreover, I know very few MDs personally (I would of course be the exception) that would endorse or condone TRT as a "bridge" to maintain normal levels between anabolic cycles.

I understand what you are saying. I'm not in disagreement, nor did I state that view, but remember, to a physician, a normal range is a normal range even if low and men on this board would not be representative of most men using TRT IMO.

in your opinion, do you think there are cholesterol or hair loss risks when going from a low level of 200-400 up to a level of 700-1000?

[MuscleInk]

in your opinion, do you think there are cholesterol or hair loss risks when going from a low level of 200-400 up to a level of 700-1000?

That's difficult to say. Each patient is different and every case needs to managed individually. I will say however, that if a man comes to me for TRT with a low normal or below normal free T and his bf% is greater that 20 and/or has a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, hypercholesterolemia, or other factors, I'm certainly not going to allow his testosterone to go much beyond an upper range of 500-550 initially and my treatment plan would involve dose adjustments to keep him around that level. Now, if he brings his bf% down and I'm comfortable with his blood work, then I would consider a marginal increase.

Age is another variable that has to be weighted in on the treatment plan. Most 50+ year old men don't need a circulating testosterone level equivalent to a 19 year, although I'm sure many would like to. Again, the patient's overall health and well being have to be weighed against the risks. If treating him to a range of 450-500 was a substantial improvement and all other health factors (including QOL assessments) remained normal or were improved beyond baseline T levels, I would find it very difficult to argue he needs more than the dose that is keeping his levels at midrange.

[kelkel]

That's difficult to say. Each patient is different and every case needs to managed individually. I will say however, that if a man comes to me for TRT with a low normal or below normal free T and his bf% is greater that 20 and/or has a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, hypercholesterolemia, or other factors, I'm certainly not going to allow his testosterone to go much beyond an upper range of 500-550 initially and my treatment plan would involve dose adjustments to keep him around that level. Now, if he brings his bf% down and I'm comfortable with his blood work, then I would consider a marginal increase.

Age is another variable that has to be weighted in on the treatment plan. Most 50+ year old men don't need a circulating testosterone level equivalent to a 19 year, although I'm sure many would like to. Again, the patient's overall health and well being have to be weighed against the risks. If treating him to a range of 450-500 was a substantial improvement and all other health factors (including QOL assessments) remained normal or were improved beyond baseline T levels, I would find it very difficult to argue he needs more than the dose that is keeping his levels at midrange.

Yes I do.

[MuscleInk]

Yes I do.

You were the exception I was referring to. I think you know that. Lol

I don't keep my T levels at 500, but I accept responsibility of potential health risks for my own health. I can't put other men at my age or above at unnecessary risk. I'd have no license to practice! Lol

[powerlifterty16]

That's difficult to say. Each patient is different and every case needs to managed individually. I will say however, that if a man comes to me for TRT with a low normal or below normal free T and his bf% is greater that 20 and/or has a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, hypercholesterolemia, or other factors, I'm certainly not going to allow his testosterone to go much beyond an upper range of 500-550 initially and my treatment plan would involve dose adjustments to keep him around that level. Now, if he brings his bf% down and I'm comfortable with his blood work, then I would consider a marginal increase.

Age is another variable that has to be weighted in on the treatment plan. Most 50+ year old men don't need a circulating testosterone level equivalent to a 19 year, although I'm sure many would like to. Again, the patient's overall health and well being have to be weighed against the risks. If treating him to a range of 450-500 was a substantial improvement and all other health factors (including QOL assessments) remained normal or were improved beyond baseline T levels, I would find it very difficult to argue he needs more than the dose that is keeping his levels at midrange.

followup question- do you think those sides would occur on hcg mono or clomid mono? im running just hcg now..maybe im imagining it but i think i have less hair in the front...but i do have curly hair so maybe that's why...been really curly lately in front.

[MuscleInk]

followup question- do you think those sides would occur on hcg mono or clomid mono? im running just hcg now..maybe im imagining it but i think i have less hair in the front...but i do have curly hair so maybe that's why...been really curly lately in front.

Could be related to estrogen levels. Alopecia (hair loss) or thinning is atypical for HCG and clomid.