ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Testosterone Basics & Questions
6 Weeks Results: High FT, E2, & Hema. What Next?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JRos895" data-source="post: 230542" data-attributes="member: 43163"><p>Is the posted E2 level actually a good one? If it was the non-sensitive test, your E2 might be closer to 75/80 (sensitive is usually 1.5x to 2.0x non sensitive) or potentially higher and people would say that’s high if they saw numbers like that.</p><p></p><p>I feel like people are saying your E2 looks good because it’s not high above 50, but I think that standard is generally reserved for the non-sensitive test. People often apply the non-sensitive standard for treating high E2 (>50) for sensitive tests and I feel like it’s comparing two different units. The sensitive assay clearly states that the upper range is 30, so why do people just ignore that?</p><p></p><p>In fact, I believe the famous study that demonstrated that E2 levels between 20-30 was best for reduced cardiac mortality used the ELCIA test, not the sensitive test. An E2 level of 20-30 on a non sensitive test would likely appear as a 15-20 on a sensitive test, yet people who are too pro-E2 would say that 15-20 is far too low, even though it’s on the sensitive test.</p><p></p><p>Just a thought.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JRos895, post: 230542, member: 43163"] Is the posted E2 level actually a good one? If it was the non-sensitive test, your E2 might be closer to 75/80 (sensitive is usually 1.5x to 2.0x non sensitive) or potentially higher and people would say that’s high if they saw numbers like that. I feel like people are saying your E2 looks good because it’s not high above 50, but I think that standard is generally reserved for the non-sensitive test. People often apply the non-sensitive standard for treating high E2 (>50) for sensitive tests and I feel like it’s comparing two different units. The sensitive assay clearly states that the upper range is 30, so why do people just ignore that? In fact, I believe the famous study that demonstrated that E2 levels between 20-30 was best for reduced cardiac mortality used the ELCIA test, not the sensitive test. An E2 level of 20-30 on a non sensitive test would likely appear as a 15-20 on a sensitive test, yet people who are too pro-E2 would say that 15-20 is far too low, even though it’s on the sensitive test. Just a thought. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Testosterone Basics & Questions
6 Weeks Results: High FT, E2, & Hema. What Next?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top