What is Optimal Estradiol Range for Libido/Erection

[ncsugrad]

It says he’s been banned when he tries to log in, so yeah, he’s banned. Hopefully I don’t get in trouble here just for conveying that fact.

 

[Appassionato]

It says he’s been banned when he tries to log in, so yeah, he’s banned. Hopefully I don’t get in trouble here just for conveying that fact.

Nah, I don't think you will.
I wouldn't have banned him to be honest, but that's just me.
The guy has some serious comprehension limits though.

 

[ncsugrad]

Nah, I don't think you will.
I wouldn't have banned him to be honest, but that's just me.
The guy has some serious comprehension limits though.

I know what he was trying to say but he wasn’t doing a great job of it. English not being his native language probably doesn’t help. I certainly couldn’t convey much in Bulgarian so I try to be nice about it.

 

[Appassionato]

I know what he was trying to say but he wasn’t doing a great job of it. English not being his native language probably doesn’t help. I certainly couldn’t convey much in Bulgarian so I try to be nice about it.

English is not my native language and I'm far from being fluent. Neither I'm a doctor.
But he seriously embarrassed himself with many things he said. He doesn't even know the basics of endocrinology.

Also, he went on a crusade against AIs, which usage long term I don't agree on as well, and then he kept secret the fact that he's on cabergoline to control his prolactin, which is another problematic drug.
He omitted he couldn't do otherwise, because with that E2 his prolactin would have gone sky high.

Yet he claimed he's feeling "awesome" and he knows guys that does. While his sleep worsened on TRT and he's relying on magical supplements that will fix his problems.

 

[camygod]

the guy was on t nation for ages offering others advice whilst never actully being on trt himself he has only just started trt and seemed obbsesive he is probably mentally ill
I feel sorry for him to.be honest but clearly would take what he says with a huge pinch of salt
or he is one very bored troll

 

[equel]

Its very weird dude. But why did he get banned? He is just stupid, not evil.

 

[Charliebizz]

Well stupid or evil aside. We don’t need misinformation being spread all over the forum. It’s one thing to have an educated debate another to have comprehension issues and coming to a forum and misrepresenting the other group you came from. It’s bad for both party’s.

 

[ncsugrad]

Well stupid or evil aside. We don’t need misinformation being spread all over the forum. It’s one thing to have an educated debate another to have comprehension issues and coming to a forum and misrepresenting the other group you came from. It’s bad for both party’s.

Then why leave his name saying member instead of banned?

 

[Appassionato]

These 2 studies are a must read for whoever keeps saying that the normal level of total T was 4000000 ng/dL 2000 years go.

(PDF) Serum androgen levels and their relation to performance in track and field: Mass spectrometry results from 2127 observations in male and female elite athletes

Why do endocrine profiles in elite athletes differ between sports?

Yet TRT clinic are doing big money nowadays letting people believe that there's no range limit for testosterone

 

[antelopers]

These 2 studies are a must read for whoever keeps saying that the normal level of total T was 4000000 ng/dL 2000 years go.

(PDF) Serum androgen levels and their relation to performance in track and field: Mass spectrometry results from 2127 observations in male and female elite athletes

Why do endocrine profiles in elite athletes differ between sports?

Yet TRT clinic are doing big money nowadays letting people believe that there's no range limit for testosterone

What do these studies have to do with t levels from 2000 years ago?

 

[Appassionato]

What do these studies have to do with t levels from 2000 years ago?

Ehm, I was sarcastic

 

[antelopers]

Ehm, I was sarcastic

Woosh. Sorry lol.

 

[madman]

These 2 studies are a must read for whoever keeps saying that the normal level of total T was 4000000 ng/dL 2000 years go.

(PDF) Serum androgen levels and their relation to performance in track and field: Mass spectrometry results from 2127 observations in male and female elite athletes

Why do endocrine profiles in elite athletes differ between sports?

Yet TRT clinic are doing big money nowadays letting people believe that there's no range limit for testosterone

People can keep going on speculating.....let alone claiming such!

The first testosterone assay was not developed until the late 1960's.

As I stated in a previous thread in my reply to a post from davidrn:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

davidrn said:
"The normal range of testosterone is reported as 350- 1200ng/dl. Studies in the 1940's showed the average testosterone level to be at 700 ng/dl, 300 ng/dl higher than for men today. In the past, a drop in testosterone levels to 250 ng/dl was rarely reported before men were 80 years of age. Yet today, it is not an uncommon value for middle aged men! "
I also have seen mention (assume this is estimated) that slim tradesmen as recent as a hundred years ago had levels up to the 2000 range. In my town, Italian stone workers built loose stone walls with little equipment in the 1870's, looking at pictures of these men, you realize how strong and wiry they were. What they weren't, was built like contemporary bodybuilders.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My reply to davidrn:

There were no accurate testing methods decades ago.....let alone testing methods in the 1940's

Serum Testosterone Assays—Accuracy Matters (2004)
The routine clinical use of T assays began approximately 30 yr ago with the development of RIAs for T that could be performed on relatively small quantities of blood after organic extraction and chromatographic separation (1). Subsequently, there have been remarkable advancements in immunoassays for T as well as other hormones. Compared with original RIAs, T assays of today are more sensitive and specific, require smaller quantities of serum, do not involve extraction or chromatography, and are performed more rapidly and with less cost. In most large clinical chemistry and many reference laboratories, T assays are performed routinely on automated platforms using nonradioactive meth



http://eknygos.lsmuni.lt/springer/516/63-72.pdf
The first RIA method, developed in 1959 by Yallow and Berson (1,2), was for insulin. Ten years later, Abraham (3) reported the development of the first steroid RIA, which was for estradiol (E2). The immediate impact of the RIA method allowed measurement of an immensely wide range of compounds of clinical and biological importance and opened new horizons in endocrinology.








davidrn stated....."I also have seen mention (assume this is estimated) that slim tradesmen as recent as a hundred years ago had levels up to the 2000 range"

-that would be based off he said/she said!

 

[madman]

Steroid assays history


In addition to protein hormones, the determination of steroids constitutes the basis of modern endocrinology. The use of mass spectrometry for steroids measurement started with analysis of these hormones in urine by GC-MS, that was described for the first time by Horning and Sweeley in 1960 [2]. Immunoassays have been a significant development in the 1960s. The first steroid measurement by radioimmunoassay (RIA) dates back to 1969 with the determination of estradiol (E2). Then, RIA has been quickly adapted to other steroids such as testosterone and progesterone. The sensitivity, accuracy and reproducibility of RIA made that it was the reference method whether for research or clinical practice. In the late 1970s, others immunoassays were developed based on enzymometry, fluorimetry or chemiluminescence. Like RIA, these methods can require pretreatment with a chemical extraction or chromatography, depending on antibody specificity. But, automation made them much faster and simple to use, which contributed to their generalization use in daily practice of clinical laboratories. In recent years, mass spectrometry has experienced major technological advance and has become the method of choice for steroids measurement [3].

 

[tropicaldaze1950]

Uff, the same arguments and the same discussion every time.
So, let me understand, you created a post few days ago, saying that you couldn't sleep at night and you were feeling dead.
Then suddenly you took out magnesium, which is a proven remedy for mild insomnia relief, and you started sleeping well.
Don't you think your statement sounds a bit unreal?

The so called science behind Rouzier's statements is weak to say the least. He compares women to men, which is apples to oranges. And don't start parroting Jay Campbell's "same biological system" thing, because otherwise you should nuke your T levels and soar your progesterone and prolactin levels to get the so called benefit of women estrogenic profiles.

Funny thing is that you all end up trying to prove your arguments with "I know X amount of guys who feel awesome on that number of E2 or T".
Same claims by bodybuilders running supraphysiological levels of hormones for several years, right before ending up with strokes.

And be aware that I'm against the use of AIs as well. Reducing the dose usually sort out things for many people.
The less drugs you can be on, the better it is.

The big question is still unanswered though. Are you aware those levels of E2, along with high levels of free T and thyroid hormones that Rouzier wants you to run, haven't been observed in any young healthy man?

Use the search button and find a thread in which Dr Saya and Keith Nicols were discussing the topic. It seems you're just eating all the trash Jay Campbell and his inner circle of doctors are feeding you.

Regarding magnesium and sleep, it doesn't work for me. Trashes it. And I've read other people saying the same, even when taking it in the morning, rather than at night. For some of us, it's more excitatory and stimulating. I've tried various forms and all of them worsen my sleep. As always, just like with E2 levels, YMMV.

 

[tropicaldaze1950]

People can keep going on speculating.....let alone claiming such!

The first testosterone assay was not developed until the late 1960's.

As I stated in a previous thread in my reply to a post from davidrn:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View attachment 9230

davidrn said:
"The normal range of testosterone is reported as 350- 1200ng/dl. Studies in the 1940's showed the average testosterone level to be at 700 ng/dl, 300 ng/dl higher than for men today. In the past, a drop in testosterone levels to 250 ng/dl was rarely reported before men were 80 years of age. Yet today, it is not an uncommon value for middle aged men! "
I also have seen mention (assume this is estimated) that slim tradesmen as recent as a hundred years ago had levels up to the 2000 range. In my town, Italian stone workers built loose stone walls with little equipment in the 1870's, looking at pictures of these men, you realize how strong and wiry they were. What they weren't, was built like contemporary bodybuilders.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My reply to davidrn:

There were no accurate testing methods decades ago.....let alone testing methods in the 1940's

Serum Testosterone Assays—Accuracy Matters (2004)
The routine clinical use of T assays began approximately 30 yr ago with the development of RIAs for T that could be performed on relatively small quantities of blood after organic extraction and chromatographic separation (1). Subsequently, there have been remarkable advancements in immunoassays for T as well as other hormones. Compared with original RIAs, T assays of today are more sensitive and specific, require smaller quantities of serum, do not involve extraction or chromatography, and are performed more rapidly and with less cost. In most large clinical chemistry and many reference laboratories, T assays are performed routinely on automated platforms using nonradioactive meth



http://eknygos.lsmuni.lt/springer/516/63-72.pdf
The first RIA method, developed in 1959 by Yallow and Berson (1,2), was for insulin. Ten years later, Abraham (3) reported the development of the first steroid RIA, which was for estradiol (E2). The immediate impact of the RIA method allowed measurement of an immensely wide range of compounds of clinical and biological importance and opened new horizons in endocrinology.








davidrn stated....."I also have seen mention (assume this is estimated) that slim tradesmen as recent as a hundred years ago had levels up to the 2000 range"

-that would be based off he said/she said!

My grandfather was wiry and my father(also wiry) told me my grandfather could carry a roll of linoleum on his shoulder. I'm also wiry, but strong, even at 70.

 

[tropicaldaze1950]

I wonder what that persons hdl, blood pressure, hematocrit, hemoglobin etc are like at 2000ng. I’m sorry but I call total BS on someone needing 2000ng to feel normal. If this ever was the case then that patient obviously has something else going on. From what I’ve seen being on trt over a decade and hundreds of hours of reading is, if someone’s problems aren’t resolved with t levels 500-1200ng then your problem isn’t testosterone related. There are some good doctors hosted on there occasionally but some of those guys are completely reckless with men’s health. You can get by with anything for a while but running levels 2-4 times the normal range I believe will catch up to some of these guys.

e

Danny Bossa says, outright, that he's a biochemical outlier, since he and his doctor find that he needs 250 mg, weekly, to sexually, physically and mentally function. He also acknowledges there are men, outliers too, who do well on 35 to 50 mg, weekly. 'Outliers' is the operative word. Most men do well on 100 mg weekly, divided doses.

I believe it's the same with E2. There are men who function and feel better with a high number, even if it's 100 or above, just as there are men who do better with something below 20 pg. We can get lost in the debate of this versus that, ad nauseum. I'm not an absolutist or, in the case of TRT, letting the numbers from a lab, rule. I had an email exchange, two years ago, about estradiol with an endocrinologist who is an endocrine researcher at the University of Washington. I asked what's the 'optimal' number for men. She replied, in essence, 'We don't know. That's the point of the research.'

All I know, or believe, is that if you're a man who is doing well with high total & free T and high E2, that's it! It' s not to be debated, anymore than a man who is doing well, in all parameters, with low total, free and E2. My urologist told me a story of a married 42 y.o. patient with Type 1 diabetes who lost erectile function. After running labs he prescribed t shots and the man ended up with a TT of 1400, along with good free T. No erections. Tried topical. No change. Went back to shots and kept increasing the dose. At some point the man's erections returned. Labs showed he had a TT of 1800 in the trough, so he likely had a TT over 2000. It's not, nor should it be, strictly about the numbers. That's what everyone is always debating on every men's forum. Let's just be glad and celebrate when a man finds a protocol that works and gives him back his life. It gives us hope that we, too, will find a protocol that works. That's all I want and that's why I'm still trying.

 

[equel]

e

Danny Bossa says, outright, that he's a biochemical outlier, since he and his doctor find that he needs 250 mg, weekly, to sexually, physically and mentally function. He also acknowledges there are men, outliers too, who do well on 35 to 50 mg, weekly. 'Outliers' is the operative word. Most men do well on 100 mg weekly, divided doses.

I believe it's the same with E2. There are men who function and feel better with a high number, even if it's 100 or above, just as there are men who do better with something below 20 pg. We can get lost in the debate of this versus that, ad nauseum. I'm not an absolutist or, in the case of TRT, letting the numbers from a lab, rule. I had an email exchange, two years ago, about estradiol with an endocrinologist who is an endocrine researcher at the University of Washington. I asked what's the 'optimal' number for men. She replied, in essence, 'We don't know. That's the point of the research.'

All I know, or believe, is that if you're a man who is doing well with high total & free T and high E2, that's it! It' s not to be debated, anymore than a man who is doing well, in all parameters, with low total, free and E2. My urologist told me a story of a married 42 y.o. patient with Type 1 diabetes who lost erectile function. After running labs he prescribed t shots and the man ended up with a TT of 1400, along with good free T. No erections. Tried topical. No change. Went back to shots and kept increasing the dose. At some point the man's erections returned. Labs showed he had a TT of 1800 in the trough, so he likely had a TT over 2000. It's not, nor should it be, strictly about the numbers. That's what everyone is always debating on every men's forum. Let's just be glad and celebrate when a man finds a protocol that works and gives him back his life. It gives us hope that we, too, will find a protocol that works. That's all I want and that's why I'm still trying.

Lolwut? Danny Bossa is known as the biggest joke in the TRT community.

 

[JA Battle]

Simply put, if you require a t or E number outside of the range (especially way outside) that you had when you were feeling your best there are likely other things off with your metabolism that are not being examined. Hormones work in synergy with one another.

 

[camygod]

Simply put, if you require a t or E number outside of the range (especially way outside) that you had when you were feeling your best there are likely other things off with your metabolism that are not being examined. Hormones work in synergy with one another.

this
im sure if your needing trt in supra does to feel "optimal" its to mask issues you havent resolved and like putting a plaster on them running a cycle to hide the problems but in the long term it wont help the underlining issues as there is so much more than tesosterone at work to feel good and be healthy