Low testosterone and low sex drive article

[Rida5d]

Rida,
Are you aware that this article was published fourteen years ago? I think, if he even attempted to publish it today, he probably wouldn't be able to find work the next day.

Actually no. I didn't know the date this article was published but I came across it only today.. That's why I just shared it..
IMO.. We evolved a lot during 14 years, but I don't see the date of publishing as a reason to ignore a study. Unless there is an update that you or anyone else know, it might be interesting to read, at least.

[2Sox]

Actually no. I didn't know the date this article was published but I came across it only today.. That's why I just shared it..
IMO.. We evolved a lot during 14 years, but I don't see the date of publishing as a reason to ignore a study. Unless there is an update that you or anyone else know, it might be interesting to read, at least.

I agree completely. ALL knowledge is useful and ought always to be read with a critical mind.
Part of being a good critic is to see where something could be better and saying so.

So...I just said so.

Think about some of the pioneers of TRT. A few months ago, I had a conversation with E.Barry Gordon, MD the author of Testosterone Deficiency: The Hidden Disease.(who happens to be my TRT doctor and whose protocol is TOTALLY outdated! How I manage that is another story.) and during our discussion he admitted to me that his book was out of date shortly after he wrote it! (By the way, his book is inspirational. You should read it.) I'd bet Shippen and Morgentaler would say something similar about their books - which are seven and six years old respectively. Ask Nelson Vergel if he'd like to do a revision to his book - and it's only three years old. I can guess what he'd say. Do these books still have value? Of course they do. But they should be read in the context that new scientific information is becoming available daily.

What particularly disturbs me about this article (and this is also what makes it so useful because the harm it does is SO transparent) is how it so cavalierly dismisses the very real concerns of tens of thousands of men with hypogonadism. That attitude - prevalent then and for too long afterwards - had me begin TRT fifteen to eighteen years later than I should have. I'm very angry at the medical establishment for not taking this "disease" seriously much sooner. I'm more than certain that's the same story dozens of other men on this forum could tell as well.