Accepting that you do see remarkably low total testosterone relative to dose, and the implication that your metabolic clearance rate is very high, then a further likelihood is that your hormonal swings are larger than what you're guessing.
Rather, my hope is to dissuade others from similarly jumping to extraordinary conclusions based on uncontrolled and often subjective evaluations, which also conflict with existing research. This is the sure path to a metaphorical dark ages, in which little new knowledge is gained.
Here's a tidbit for you. If you want to learn more then Google is your friend:
As all testosterone esters, testosterone propionate is rapidly hydrolysed into free testosterone in plasma.[1]
You must be a big fan of homeopathy, chief: Water has memory, so testosterone must also, right? Once again, extraordinary claim, burden of proof on you.
Ever heard that you can't prove a negative? In this case the claim is also ridiculously vague. Tell me specifically what problems you think they're causing along with some plausible mechanisms.
"Rather, my hope is to dissuade others from similarly jumping to extraordinary conclusions based on uncontrolled and often subjective evaluations, which also conflict with existing research. This is the sure path to a metaphorical dark ages, in which little new knowledge is gained."
My conclusions are based on my decade's worth of experience taking Testosterone, 7 of which have been under doctor supervision at the Baylor College of Medicine. Perhaps there are flaws in the existing research. Every time I have changed from long-ester to short, most negative symptoms (with the most bothersome being the GI pain) diminish. When I switch back to long-esters, the negative symptoms present themselves. I have tried this time and again over the last decade. And again, I have quantifiable evidence that validates there are differences in how I respond to Prop versus Cyp (even at a much higher dosage). Perhaps you should be a little more open to considering new evidence, lest you fall victim to limited knowledge acquisition remnant of the dark ages.
"Here's a tidbit for you. If you want to learn more then Google is your friend:
As all testosterone esters, testosterone propionate is rapidly hydrolysed into free testosterone in plasma.[1]"
Thanks for the resource. Just so we are clear, DrugBank is citing a study that solely assesses the pharmacokinetics of Testosterone Propionate without comparison to other esters. The assertion is, in fact, not supported by the study they are citing.
Pharmacokinetic properties of testosterone propionate in normal men. - PubMed - NCBI
"You must be a big fan of homeopathy, chief: Water has memory, so testosterone must also, right? Once again, extraordinary claim, burden of proof on you."
No sir. If you assert that the body doesn't know the difference between endogenous T and exogenous T, you must provide evidence of that claim or chalk it up to the
speculation that it is. Remember: Russell's teapot.
"Ever heard that you can't prove a negative? In this case the claim is also ridiculously vague. Tell me specifically what problems you think they're causing along with some plausible mechanisms."
Lol. Hey man, if you are going to call someone out and say that it is mere speculation that preservatives and esters don't affect drugs, then simply turning it around on me for calling you out and saying that the burden is on me furthers my speculation that you don't have evidence backing up your statement. I'm totally cool with saying that my statement is, in fact, speculation that preservatives and esters 'may' affect the way a drug works in someone's body (depending on liver enzyme function, etc.). If you are going to assert that this is incorrect then you need to provide evidence, or just own up to your statement being speculation.