Shallow Testosterone IM versus SubQ Injections - Lab Results

[MarkM]

Getting back to the original post, did you notice any effect on your libido when you switched to subq considering the significant drop in TT/FT?

Ya know Willyt, that's a good question. I really didn't notice a drop. I've always seemed to have good libido even when my testosterone was testing very low prior to getting on TRT. My issue back then was being tired and having very low energy.

 

[solothesensei]

MarkM, thanks for your valuable insights. You did a huge service to all of us by posting those results. Here's my personal analysis on your subq experiment:

• TT falling was to be expected. Subq depots are absorbed more slowly into the bloodstream after all. What's interesting was it fell by over 20%.
• FT fell without a corresponding rise in SHBG. This is puzzling if the labs are at least directionally accurate. I can only imagine 2 possibilities - either albumin changed drastically, or the FT measurement using LC-MS was inaccurate like Cataceous has attested to.
• E2 and DHT staying the same was surprising as well. Especially since both have to come from a much smaller pool of FT. I have no explanation for this other than an increase in aromatase and 5AR for some reason.

Really thought-provoking results especially on the 2nd and 3rd bullet points.

 

[MarkM]

MarkM, thanks for your valuable insights. You did a huge service to all of us by posting those results. Here's my personal analysis on your subq experiment:

• TT falling was to be expected. Subq depots are absorbed more slowly into the bloodstream after all. What's interesting was it fell by over 20%.
• FT fell without a corresponding rise in SHBG. This is puzzling if the labs are at least directionally accurate. I can only imagine 2 possibilities - either albumin changed drastically, or the FT measurement using LC-MS was inaccurate like Cataceous has attested to.
• E2 and DHT staying the same was surprising as well. Especially since both have to come from a much smaller pool of FT. I have no explanation for this other than an increase in aromatase and 5AR for some reason.

Really thought-provoking results especially on the 2nd and 3rd bullet points.

solothesensi, thank you for your input. I am trying to make complete sense of it myself. My albumin was basically the same. One one lab it was 4.0 and another it was 4.1.

 

[madman]

MarkM, thanks for your valuable insights. You did a huge service to all of us by posting those results. Here's my personal analysis on your subq experiment:

• TT falling was to be expected. Subq depots are absorbed more slowly into the bloodstream after all. What's interesting was it fell by over 20%.
• FT fell without a corresponding rise in SHBG. This is puzzling if the labs are at least directionally accurate. I can only imagine 2 possibilities - either albumin changed drastically, or the FT measurement using LC-MS was inaccurate like Cataceous has attested to.
• E2 and DHT staying the same was surprising as well. Especially since both have to come from a much smaller pool of FT. I have no explanation for this other than an increase in aromatase and 5AR for some reason.

Really thought-provoking results especially on the 2nd and 3rd bullet points.

The free testosterone was measured using an inaccurate assay and needs to be tested using the most accurate assays Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration to know where it truly sits.

If anything I would even put more weight behind the cFTZ let alone cFTV over the piss poor direct immunoassay.

As I previously stated in my reply (post #3) we can nitpick here on the TT as there should not be a significant difference between the standard and LC-MS/MS unless we get into the lower-end ranges.

Free T is a different story as the piss poor direct immunoassay is inaccurate and should not be used.....period!

Highly doubtful his FT was cut in almost half.

Unfortunately too many are clueless when it comes to testing FT.

 

[madman]

MarkM, thanks for your valuable insights. You did a huge service to all of us by posting those results. Here's my personal analysis on your subq experiment:

• TT falling was to be expected. Subq depots are absorbed more slowly into the bloodstream after all. What's interesting was it fell by over 20%.
• FT fell without a corresponding rise in SHBG. This is puzzling if the labs are at least directionally accurate. I can only imagine 2 possibilities - either albumin changed drastically, or the FT measurement using LC-MS was inaccurate like Cataceous has attested to.
• E2 and DHT staying the same was surprising as well. Especially since both have to come from a much smaller pool of FT. I have no explanation for this other than an increase in aromatase and 5AR for some reason.

Really thought-provoking results especially on the 2nd and 3rd bullet points.

This is the problem here.

You are going to have newbies let alone people who still use/rely upon inaccurate assays thinking that injecting strictly Sub-q caused his FT to drop drastically.

Misleading, to say the least!

 

[tareload]

MarkM, thanks for your valuable insights. You did a huge service to all of us by posting those results. Here's my personal analysis on your subq experiment:

• TT falling was to be expected. Subq depots are absorbed more slowly into the bloodstream after all. What's interesting was it fell by over 20%.
• FT fell without a corresponding rise in SHBG. This is puzzling if the labs are at least directionally accurate. I can only imagine 2 possibilities - either albumin changed drastically, or the FT measurement using LC-MS was inaccurate like Cataceous has attested to.
• E2 and DHT staying the same was surprising as well. Especially since both have to come from a much smaller pool of FT. I have no explanation for this other than an increase in aromatase and 5AR for some reason.

Really thought-provoking results especially on the 2nd and 3rd bullet points.

Respectfully,

no, no, and no on these 3 bullet points.

Just as an example, box plot or table your own Trough TT readings from last 5 blood tests on the same protocol. Mean +/- SD?

What does this tell you?

While the OPs data is appreciated and respected, there's much more work you'd have to do to chase down the TT story and of course the fT story going on here.

Look at bullet point 1....making a transient argument for a SS result. OP is injecting every day. Nice setup by the way, @MarkM

 

[tareload]

Respectfully,

no, no, and no on these 3 bullet points.

Just as an example, box plot or table your own Trough TT readings from last 5 blood tests on the same protocol. Mean +/- SD?

What does this tell you?

While the OPs data is appreciated and respected, there's much more work you'd have to do to chase down the TT story and of course the fT story going on here.

Look at bullet point 1....making a transient argument for a SS result. OP is injecting every day.

Post in thread 'Subcutaneous Injections' Subcutaneous Injections

From the paper linked:

Results: Fourteen transgender males (mean age, 30 ± 10 years) participated in the study. The mean hemoglobin values at the first and final visits were 160 ± 9 and 153 ± 9 g/L, respectively (p > 0.05); the mean ALT values were 18 ± 6 and 21 ± 10 IU/L (p > 0.05). Total testosterone exposure was comparable with subcutaneous versus i.m. injection (mean AUC, 1.7 ± 0.6 nmol·days/L/mg versus 1.9 ± 0.6 nmol·days/L/mg; p > 0.05). Information collected via weekly questionnaires indicated that the subcutaneous route was more tolerable, with lower self-reported scores for preinjection anxiety, pain during injection, and postinjection pain.

Conclusion: The subcutaneous route for the injection of testosterone was well tolerated and appeared to be as effective as i.m. injection in delivering equivalent TST levels, although there was wide intrapatient and interpatient variability

 

[tareload]

This is the problem here.

You are going to have newbies let alone people who still use/rely upon inaccurate assays thinking that injecting strictly Sub-q caused his FT to drop drastically.

Misleading, to say the least!

I get what you are saying but it really is a great case study from which to educate people and provides a really nice working example to discuss. The issue of course as you lay out is that the ignorant or unqualified (i don't use these terms pejoratively here) will make conclusions that are not warranted then others will take those appealingly simple conclusions as fact.

 

[madman]

I get what you are saying but it really is a great case study from which to educate people and provides a really nice working example to discuss. The issue of course as you lay out is that the ignorant or unqualified (i don't use these terms pejoratively here) will make conclusions that are not warranted then others will take those appealingly simple conclusions as fact.

Downright embarrassing to compare FT results using the piss poor direct immunoassay let alone when injecting strictly IM vs Sub-q!

 

[madman]

I get what you are saying but it really is a great case study from which to educate people and provides a really nice working example to discuss. The issue of course as you lay out is that the ignorant or unqualified (i don't use these terms pejoratively here) will make conclusions that are not warranted then others will take those appealingly simple conclusions as fact.

A perfect example here from post #40

Willyt.....Getting back to the original post, did you notice any effect on your libido when you switched to subq considering the significant drop in TT/FT?

Long-time member 2.5 years in and still clueless!

 

[MarkM]

@Nelson Vergel @Vince @Cataceous

I've been a member of this forum for over three years and have participated in the forum off and on over this time frame. During that time I have watched madman belittle, berate, slam dunk, slap in the face, and be completely rude to your forum members. These forum members are not just members, they are your customers.

Just because a moderator doesn't agree with a post doesn't give him the right to treat other members in the manner he does on a regular basis. You've all seen it and I can't see how you could say you don't.

In the post above he refers to a member, "Long-time member 2.5 years in and still clueless!" Most of us have lives to live and even though we may participate in the forum we do not consider ourselves experts. The member above asks a simple question only to be made fun of. Does it matter that he was been with the forum over 2.5 years or that I have been on the forum over 3 years? No, we are not experts and don't claim to be. We have other lives to live and come to this forum to gain knowledge and share, not be attacked. In this same post he told a member, "Told you from the get-go.....I see right thru u BRUH!".

Is that how you want your forum to be represented? Without question madman is an extremely knowledgeable person and to some extent he is valuable to your forum. But on the other hand he does you an extreme disservice. In my case, I started this thread with a study I performed between injecting shallow IM and SubQ. I was clear in how I performed the study. I posted the results and he did not agree with my study. He has every right to voice his opinion. I can respect that. However, he does not have the right to continually bash me in post after post. I turned the cheek once but just once.

I have run businesses with annual revenues of over $500 million and I would never have someone represent a company I ran who treated customers in this manner regardless of their skill level. Most people are afraid to say anything in fear of being banned but I am not afraid to stand up to this nonsense. I would actually delete my account if there was a "Delete" account button but since there is not I have formally requested my account to be deleted. Contrary to what madman states, I am not running and tucking tail or folding because he called me out. I choose from my own will not take his abuse.

Please delete my account. My time is better served where one's participation is appreciated.

 

[Willyt]

A perfect example here from post #40

Willyt.....Getting back to the original post, did you notice any effect on your libido when you switched to subq considering the significant drop in TT/FT?

Long-time member 2.5 years in and still clueless!

I asked the question BRUH because I have seen countless guys on this forum and elsewhere who experienced improved libido once their testosterone dropped back within normal physiological levels. Dare I say, learning from others' experiences (the horrors!!!).

I never get personal on forums, but I've noticed that over the past 6 months you have become very petty, argumentative and close-minded - a classic know it all. Not a good look. People are going to stop listening to your advice, which is a shame because you bring a vast array knowledge to the forum and I for one have learned a tremendous amount from your posts (at least from the constructive ones, which are far less frequent these days).

 

[Gman86]

@Nelson Vergel @Vince @Cataceous

I've been a member of this forum for over three years and have participated in the forum off and on over this time frame. During that time I have watched madman belittle, berate, slam dunk, slap in the face, and be completely rude to your forum members. These forum members are not just members, they are your customers.

Just because a moderator doesn't agree with a post doesn't give him the right to treat other members in the manner he does on a regular basis. You've all seen it and I can't see how you could say you don't.

In the post above he refers to a member, "Long-time member 2.5 years in and still clueless!" Most of us have lives to live and even though we may participate in the forum we do not consider ourselves experts. The member above asks a simple question only to be made fun of. Does it matter that he was been with the forum over 2.5 years or that I have been on the forum over 3 years? No, we are not experts and don't claim to be. We have other lives to live and come to this forum to gain knowledge and share, not be attacked. In this same post he told a member, "Told you from the get-go.....I see right thru u BRUH!".

Is that how you want your forum to be represented? Without question madman is an extremely knowledgeable person and to some extent he is valuable to your forum. But on the other hand he does you an extreme disservice. In my case, I started this thread with a study I performed between injecting shallow IM and SubQ. I was clear in how I performed the study. I posted the results and he did not agree with my study. He has every right to voice his opinion. I can respect that. However, he does not have the right to continually bash me in post after post. I turned the cheek once but just once.

I have run businesses with annual revenues of over $500 million and I would never have someone represent a company I ran who treated customers in this manner regardless of their skill level. Most people are afraid to say anything in fear of being banned but I am not afraid to stand up to this nonsense. I would actually delete my account if there was a "Delete" account button but since there is not I have formally requested my account to be deleted. Contrary to what madman states, I am not running and tucking tail or folding because he called me out. I choose from my own will not take his abuse.

Please delete my account. My time is better served where one's participation is appreciated.

I really wish u would reconsider and continue to participate in the forum, but at the same time I understand and respect ur want to not be a part of a forum that allows members to treat other members how madman does. It’s very sad to me that he’s allowed to treat other members the way he does without any repercussions. It’s also very frustrating to see him drive out quality members that bring a lot of value to this forum/ community. Out of all the actual members of this forum, a small percentage actually contribute, which is fine. There’s nothing wrong with people coming here just to learn. But it’s hard to not assume that the percentage of members that contribute would be much much higher if they weren’t so fearful of being attacked, embarrassed, and harassed for anything they post. I’m sure there’s many members that would like to contribute, but are too hesitant because of how madman might respond to them.

I personally do think that madman brings value to this forum. He is very smart, and although I don’t personally read any of the studies or other things he posts, I’m sure they do bring a lot of value to other members. So I’m not saying to just ban him, but I do believe that there needs to be consequences for any member talking to and treating other members the way he does. A warning first sounds fair, then if they continue doing it a suspension would be fair, imo. And then when they come back from suspension, and continue doing what they’ve been told not to do, then yes, banning their account is warranted, imo.

 

[madman]

I asked the question BRUH because I have seen countless guys on this forum and elsewhere who experienced improved libido once their testosterone dropped back within normal physiological levels. Dare I say, learning from others' experiences (the horrors!!!).

I never get personal on forums, but I've noticed that over the past 6 months you have become very petty, argumentative and close-minded - a classic know it all. Not a good look. People are going to stop listening to your advice, which is a shame because you bring a vast array knowledge to the forum and I for one have learned a tremendous amount from your posts (at least from the constructive ones, which are far less frequent these days).

The point that was being stressed is that you stated his FT levels dropped drastically yet it was tested using the piss poor direct immunoassay which is known to be inaccurate.

You never once question the assay used.....Getting back to the original post, did you notice any effect on your libido when you switched to subq considering the significant drop in TT/FT?

Notice the part I highlighted in your original reply.

Everyone is so quick to jump the gun.

You and many long-time members have been on here long enough to know let alone had been given sensible advice numerous times even when it comes to testing FT.




*MIP1950.....over 5 years in

I can only add my praise for your meticulous comparison analysis. Some, or many of us, wouldn't have the time or inclination to be so methodical. I also read the article on Testosterone Nation about the study at one of the medical centers in the University of California system. It never stated where, specifically, since I wanted to read the study, so you conducted your own study. Good job!


*Gman86.....well over 4 years in

This post is honestly amazing. Thank u so much for doing such a detailed experiment. It’s extremely impressive how well u kept all the variables the same. If only people conducting studies had ur brain. I would put much more weight into them. But anyways, obv ur results are exactly that, ur results, and they may vary person to person running this exact experiment. But at the same time, ur results are extremely important, and can really help the HRT community, especially if more guys ran this exact same experiment, and we found similar trends in others. Thanks again for doing this and making this post for everyone to see, I personally really appreciate it.


*S1W.....4.5 years in

never once questioned the assay used


*You.....2.5 years in

Great stuff. Appreciate you having the discipline to eliminate the variables, especially the supplements. Count me surprised by the subq TT number based on 24mg daily!

Getting back to the original post, did you notice any effect on your libido when you switched to subq considering the significant drop in TT/FT?


solothesensei.....rookie, long time trt user (who knows)

His post speaks for itself




Everyone jumped in headfirst and no one questioned the assay used!

Hard to believe especially when it has been beaten to death on the forum over the years.

 

[tareload]

He is very smart, and although I don’t personally read any of the studies or other things he posts, I’m sure they do bring a lot of value to other members.

This really is part of the problem. If you have no theoretical understanding or constuitive framework for how all this stuff works, then you are left to wander from forum to forum trading anecdotes and making erroneous conclusions that then get force multiplied over and over and over....

 

[madman]

Just to be clear here.

I had no intentions of gunning for the position of being a MOD as we are more than lucky to have Nelson, Vince, and Jason let alone there are others on the forum who I felt would be more suited for the position.

I never asked to be put in this place.

To be honest I was content with just being a member.

I have no issues with stepping down and if Nelson wants to ban me from the forum then he will do what is best.

No hard feelings on my end.

 

[tareload]

Just to be clear here.

I had no intentions of gunning for the position of being a MOD as we are more than lucky to have Nelson, Vince, and Jason let alone there are others on the forum who I felt would be more suited for the position.

I never asked to be put in this place.

To be honest I was content with just being a member.

I have no issues with stepping down and if Nelson wants to ban me from the forum then he will do what is best.

No hard feelings on my end.

Could madman refine his "sales and marketing" approach? Sure .

Would banning someone who gets their facts straight and tries to push the level of understanding in this field (for members here) be epicly in the wrong direction? Yes.

Too bad many of us get stuck debating the drama instead of reading the papers and putting in the work. Madman's "like ratio" is embarrassingly low. A lot of amazing stuff there and being able to have a resource you can depend on to get technical parts correct is priceless in a land of fog and confusing anecdotes.

 

[tareload]

Please delete my account. My time is better served where one's participation is appreciated

Over the top. We already told you it was appreciated.

I guess there is a delete button. Someone seems to have found it.

 

[Willyt]

The point that was being stressed is that you stated his FT levels dropped drastically yet it was tested using the piss poor direct immunoassay which is known to be inaccurate.

You never once question the assay used.....Getting back to the original post, did you notice any effect on your libido when you switched to subq considering the significant drop in TT/FT?

Notice the part I highlighted in your original reply.

Everyone is so quick to jump the gun.

You and many long-time members have been on here long enough to know let alone had been given sensible advice numerous times even when it comes to testing FT.

If his TT drops by 26% and his albumin, E2 and SHBG barely budge, isn't it likely that his FT also took a significant hit?

 

[madman]

If his TT drops by 26% and his albumin, E2 and SHBG barely budge, isn't it likely that his FT also took a significant hit?

Highly doubtful his FT dropped drastically.

As stated previously I would even put more weight behind the cFTZ let alone cFTV over the piss poor direct immunoassay.

Even when using the calculated method his FT would not be cut in half.


Look over post #2

A note on the testosterone testing. In June the labs did not use the LC/MS/MS for the Total Testosterone and did not use the Ultra Filtration on the Free T. Therefore, I did not use those assays on this round of testing so the testing would be apples to apples.

When it comes to comparing blood levels you should have used the most accurate assays TT (LC-MS/MS) and FT (Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration) to see where your levels truly sat.

We can nitpick here on the TT as there should not be a significant difference between the standard and LC-MS/MS unless we get into the lower-end ranges.

Free T is a different story as the piss poor direct immunoassay is inaccurate and should not be used.....period!

Your trough TT(IM) 1055--->778 ng/dL (SUB-Q).....TT dropped 277 ng/dL which is a fair amount but far from drastic.

Not going to even compare the FT results as it means nothing seeing as you used the piss poor direct immunoassay.


Total T and Free T dropped significantly on SubQ. Total T dropped 26.8% while Free T fell 47.2%. While the SubQ testosterone numbers are not terrible, they are much lower that the testosterone on shallow IM

Your TT dropped 277 ng/dL and your SHBG barely budged.....highly doubtful your FT was cut almost in half.