“Sweet spot E2” vs test levels

[madman]

@madman

Just curious what your E2 is at. I know you said you feel good, and don’t use an ai. So just wondering. Thanks.

You asked me a few weeks back and I posted the link for the thread regarding peoples protocols.

My estradiol sensitive in near the top end of the reference range.

 

[Gman86]

You asked me a few weeks back and I posted the link for the thread regarding peoples protocols.

My estradiol sensitive in near the top end of the reference range.

Appreciate it. Sorry, I have extreme brain fog. My short term memory is very poor atm. Thanks for the response though.

 

[Gman86]

@madman
Don’t mean to be rude or anything, but aren’t you being hypocritical just a little bit. You’re saying there’s no real benefit, in regards to TRT, to have supraphysiological total testosterone numbers, and to keep free testosterone 2-3% of your total, but you keep your free T double the top of the range. Why are you against other guys having a free T similar to yours, but yet you keep yours that high? Why would you be different than every other guy on TRT? Again, no disrespect. Just an honest question. Just curious what your personal reasons are for keeping your free T so high. Hopefully you don’t take this the wrong way. It’s just an honest question. I apologize in advance if it was out of line to ask you this. Thanks.

 

[user_joe]

Point being stressed is extremely high levels of T are not needed to experience relief/improvement of low T symptoms period.

Healthy FT levels is what matters and the free unbound bioactive fraction of T of a male is 2-3% of TT.

Many can achieve a healthy FT with TT levels near or just above the top end of the physiological range and as was stated in cases of very high SHBG or possible AR resistance which would be if anything in older men or former steroid abusers than yes one would need to run a TT a lot higher (1500-1800 ng/dl).

Of course higher T levels up to a point is healthier compared to lower T levels but this higher T level is not to far off from what a normal healthy fit young male could naturally produce and yes we are talking about the top 2.5% of men which have TT levels in the 1000-1200 ng/dL range.

I will say that when looking at the main areas of low T symptoms sure higher T levels may enhance ones mood to a certain degree but running high T levels as in this greater than 1800+ range is not going to result in more energy, better mood, better libido, better erectile function and overall well being.

Even with healthy T levels many other factors can negatively effect ones energy levels and mood (thyroid/adrenal function, lack sleep, poor diet, excess stress (physical/mental), lack exercise and so on.....excess T is not going to cure this.

Even with healthy T levels as you know many other factors can negatively effect ones libido/erectile function (poor vascular/endothelial health, thyroid/adrenal dysfunction, lack of sleep, excess stress (physical/mental) and so on.....excess T is not going to cure this.

Again symptom relief is what truly matters but labs are still critical and we need to keep physiological levels in context here as reference ranges are guidance and sure we do not need to adhere to being in range but it is highly doubtful men need to be running around with 2000 ng/dL T levels in order to benefit from trt.

No healthy young males produces those kind of levels endogenously and to top it off there is a natural 24 hr circadian rhythm where testosterone levels peak in the am and decline (trough) in the late afternoon/early evening and we are not talking about peak levels 2000+ only to be followed by absurdly high trough levels.

At best most healthy young men have a TT of 600-800 ng/dL at peak only to be followed by a 25-40% reduction at trough and they function extremely well.

All hormones need to be kept in balance as testosterone is only one piece of the overall picture.

Sure you can use the analogy that well since my hpga is suppressed and I am now on trt.....might as well make the best of it and run the highest T levels because I feel best as you say.....but again one can say oh I feel best on 200 mg/week than all of a sudden I feel better on 250+ mg/week (which is not a replacement dose).

Call it what you may but 250+ mg/week is a low steroid dose.

Where is the line drawn between replacement doses when you know a good majority of men can achieve a healthy FT using trt doses in the 100-150 mg range.

Anytime we increase T----->e2 will follow and you very well know how many need to start tinkering with an aromatase inhibitor in order to run higher T levels without experiencing sides.

Any time we increase T as in 200 mg/week and higher it can negatively effect lipids.....mainly lowering HDL.

Anytime we increase T----->hemoglobin/hematocrit are increased and you very well know how common that is leading many to jump on the too frequent blood donation bandwagon
only to be followed by the all to common.....oops I crashed my ferritin/iron.

Sure hemo/hemato can be managed if done sensibly and even than most can let levels get a little higher than the reference range without issues but regardless if it leads to no immediate negative effects.....thicker blood is thicker blood and the heart has to work harder.

Big problem here is many are started on high doses of T 200 mg/week from the get go only to be followed by a negative experience in many cases or for the ones that tend to feel well never get a chance to realize that they could very well feel just as good on lower doses.

You see it all the time on the forums.....people thinking that more T is always better.

If you truly feel better running levels in the 1600-1800 ng/dL range so be it but do not come off as if these levels are needed to truly experience improvements in low T symptoms.

Well you continue to claim some things that cannot be proven. You’ve ordained yourself the person who gets to decide what is healthiest. We don’t have proof of these things. My statements stand on their own here. I’ll agree to disagree here.

 

[madman]

@madman
Don’t mean to be rude or anything, but aren’t you being hypocritical just a little bit. You’re saying there’s no real benefit, in regards to TRT, to have supraphysiological total testosterone numbers, and to keep free testosterone 2-3% of your total, but you keep your free T double the top of the range. Why are you against other guys having a free T similar to yours, but yet you keep yours that high? Why would you be different than every other guy on TRT? Again, no disrespect. Just an honest question. Just curious what your personal reasons are for keeping your free T so high. Hopefully you don’t take this the wrong way. It’s just an honest question. I apologize in advance if it was out of line to ask you this. Thanks.

I am talking about 2000+ ng/dL testosterone levels as I already stated in cases of men with very high SHBG or possible AR resistance (older men, former steroid users) than they most likely need to run a 1500-2000 TT in order to achieve a healthy FT.

My TT is 1200 ng/dL and SHBG is 30 nmol/L and my calculated FT is 2.67% or 32.1 ng/dL.

Most need FT above 2%.....some do well just above 2%.....others need to be closer to 3%.

 

[madman]

Well you continue to claim some things that cannot be proven. You’ve ordained yourself the person who gets to decide what is healthiest. We don’t have proof of these things. My statements stand on their own here. I’ll agree to disagree here.

I am not saying it is the healthiest.....to each his own and run the levels you feel is best for you but again do understand that no healthy male endogenously produces 2000+ T levels.

Unless one has very high SHBG or possible AR resistance than sure running a TT 1500-2000 may be needed to achieve healthy FT levels.

For the average man on trt absent of the above issues.....highly doubtful running TT levels in the 2000+ range are anymore beneficial regarding ones overall health.

 

[Gman86]

I am talking about 2000+ ng/dL testosterone levels as I already stated in cases of men with very high SHBG or possible AR resistance (older men, former steroid users) than they most likely need to run a 1500-2000 TT in order to achieve a healthy FT.

My TT is 1200 ng/dL and SHBG is 30 nmol/L and my calculated FT is 2.67% or 32.1 ng/dL.

Most need FT above 2%.....some do well just above 2%.....others need to be closer to 3%.

Oh I completely apologize. In a previous reply on this thread, you mentioned that your free T was double the top of the range. I incorrectly assumed that this would of put your free T closer to 50, not 32. That’s my bad. I use quest, and their free T range is completely different. So I’m not used to the standard range that Labcorp uses. Disregard what I said before. I get what you’re saying.

 

[madman]

Oh I completely apologize. In a previous reply on this thread, you mentioned that your free T was double the top of the range. I incorrectly assumed that this would of put your free T closer to 50, not 32. That’s my bad. I use quest, and their free T range is completely different. So I’m not used to the standard range that Labcorp uses. Disregard what I said before. I get what you’re saying.

I should have been more specific and stated calculated FT.

 

[Gman86]

The only reason I defend some guys having a higher than normally seen total T, is because my SHBG binds like crazy, even though it’s only 44. My last labs had my total T at 1670, and free T right at the top of the range. This was all taken at trough, while on EOD injections.

People look at my total T and think it’s probably pretty damn high. But then there’s guys with a total T of 1000, and free T about double the top of the range, or close to it, and guys think nothing of it. But in reality, the guy with free T about double the top of the range is the one running supraphysiological numbers, way more than me. Their free T, and anabolic effects from it, are much closer to what’s seen in a light steroid cycle, than my numbers, but people look at my total and think I’m closer to a steroid cycle than they are. So I just personally don’t like the stigma, that’s all.

 

[Gman86]

I should have been more specific and stated calculated FT.

No worries, just a misunderstanding. It happens. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[jhperez81]

I am talking about 2000+ ng/dL testosterone levels as I already stated in cases of men with very high SHBG or possible AR resistance (older men, former steroid users) than they most likely need to run a 1500-2000 TT in order to achieve a healthy FT.

My TT is 1200 ng/dL and SHBG is 30 nmol/L and my calculated FT is 2.67% or 32.1 ng/dL.

Most need FT above 2%.....some do well just above 2%.....others need to be closer to 3%.

What if you have to run 2000+ in order to get FT% to be closer to 3%?

 

[madman]

What if you have to run 2000+ in order to get FT% to be closer to 3%?

In cases of really high SHBG even if one needed to run a high TT in order to achieve said FT one would never even need to run such a level to achieve a healthy let alone high FT.

Not everyone needs to have a FT of 3% and even then when SHBG is really high some doctors will prescribe danazol to help lower it.

Dr. Rand has mentioned in a previous thread that in some patients with very high SHBG he prescribes low-dose c-17 alpha alkylated orals such as stanozolol (winstrol) or oxandrolone (Anavar) with trt.