Several articles are showing that many athletes have an FT that is debatably low.
Such in this one:
As an amateur marathoner (just about the 3hour for full-marathon), it seems that my endogenous FT (around 0.33 nmol/L) is acceptable.
It's well known that long-distance runners are having kinda low T/low FT.
But what amazes me the most is to see sprinters (0.39 nmol/L) which are usually kinda literally beasts of muscles having T which is pretty low compared to the normal population... but they still have outstanding explosiveness, quick power, recovery, and important muscle mass.
Is there a piece of the puzzle am I missing?
This post is a bit out-of-subject, but I'd be very interested in knowing the advice of the ExcelMale community members (who are actually always impressing me by the quality of their posts/responses)
Such in this one:
Why do endocrine profiles in elite athletes differ between sports? - PubMed
It is unclear whether the differences in hormone profiles between sports is a reason why they become elite athletes in that sport or is a consequence of the arduous processes involved. For components of body composition we know that most have a major genetic component and this may well be true...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
As an amateur marathoner (just about the 3hour for full-marathon), it seems that my endogenous FT (around 0.33 nmol/L) is acceptable.
It's well known that long-distance runners are having kinda low T/low FT.
But what amazes me the most is to see sprinters (0.39 nmol/L) which are usually kinda literally beasts of muscles having T which is pretty low compared to the normal population... but they still have outstanding explosiveness, quick power, recovery, and important muscle mass.
Is there a piece of the puzzle am I missing?
This post is a bit out-of-subject, but I'd be very interested in knowing the advice of the ExcelMale community members (who are actually always impressing me by the quality of their posts/responses)