Plenty of young men with Test levels on the lower end of the distribution. Probably the best time to get treated so they can build a life based on high T levels instead of going through life as cucks and then trying to salvage that disaster in the middle of an epic midlife crisis.
Need to tread lightly on this needing a high FT level!
Big difference between a natty hitting a healthy FT let alone a FT that falls in the 90-95th percentile vs one using exogenous T.
These natty men that are hitting a healthy let alone high FT (95th percentile) is a daily short-lived f**king peak to boot!
Many of the men on TTh are are running around with a high let alone absurdly high trough FT 24 hrs post-injection (dailies), 2 days (48 hrs post-injection EOD protocol), 3.5 days (84 hrs post-injection twice-weekly protocol) let alone many injecting once weekly are hitting a high-end/high trough 7 days post-injection far cry from a natty living with that daily short-lived healthy/high peak FT.
Too many are amped up on T 24/7 steady state running trough FT levels beyond/well-beyong their NATTY GENETIC SET-POINT!
FT levels were never meant to be elevated 24/7 let alone SKY F**KING HIGH!
Clueless left scratching their noggins wondering why they continue to struggle!
More T is where it's at though eh.....LMFAO!
Just to be clear up any confusion this is Fiers camps data for mFT reference ranges not the harmonized reference range being worked on by the CDC.
*Serum samples were analyzed from healthy men participating in the SIBLOS/SIBEX and EMAS studies, both population-based cohort studies
* mFT levels were measured in 867 men using ED LC-MS/MS as previously reported (1). Subsequently, 95% reference ranges were determined using the non-parametric method
Reference: 1. Fiers T, Wu F, Moghetti P, Vanderschueren D, Lapauw B, Kaufman JM. Reassessing Free-Testosterone...
*Serum samples were analyzed from healthy men participating in the SIBLOS/SIBEX and EMAS studies, both population-based cohort studies
* mFT levels were measured in 867 men using ED LC-MS/MS as previously reported (1). Subsequently, 95% reference ranges were determined using the non-parametric method
Reference: 1. Fiers T, Wu F, Moghetti P, Vanderschueren D, Lapauw B, Kaufman JM. Reassessing Free-Testosterone Calculation by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry Direct Equilibrium Dialysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(6). doi:10.1210/jc.2017-02360
We present 95% mFT age-stratified reference ranges. These reference ranges show an expected, decreasing trend of mFT with aging. Lower limits and median mFT decrease at a remarkably stable rate of, on average, 12% per decade up into the 6th decade of life. However, in the upper limit, a marked decrease of 25% occurs after 39 years, followed by smaller decreases of 6% per decade in older age categories.
Age category (years) |
Median mFT (ng/dl) |
95% mFT reference range (ng/dl) |
18-29 (n=140)
30-39 (n=252) |
12.0
9.8 |
6.7-25.3
4.9-18.5 |
40-49 (n=207) |
8.1 |
4.3.14.2 |
50-59 (n=146) |
7.1 |
3.8-12.8 |
60-69 (n=126) |
6.4 |
3.4-11.7 |
70-79 (n=125) |
5.6 |
2.7-8.7 |
Conclusion
We have determined mFT reference ranges in healthy men aged 25 to 69. These reference ranges are a first step to improving the framework for further development and integration of free testosterone measurements and calculations in clinical practice.
