Dr. Rouzier interview on "Estrogen in Men"

[ronadams9]

I've searched the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) databases which has reports on millions of medical and biological studies and I have not found any reports of any studies reporting anything even remotely similar the ones Dr. Rouzier cites. I have found reports of numerous studies which show health problems with estradiol levels either too low or too high. These studies pretty much indicate that the ideal range of estradiol is about what we have previously seen, 20 to 35.

Life Extension seems to me to be an organization with no "axe to grind". They are very vehement in warning against the health problems that low estradiol in men can cause and have been for many years. This report from Life Extension Magazine cites some large studies including one published in The Journal of The American Medical Association that seem to me to make sense and set out the health problems potentially caused by estradiol levels in men both too high and too low.

Estrogen Balance and Aging Men - page 1 | Life Extension

By the way, Life Extension reports increased cardiovascular disease in men with LOW testosterone and recommends low testosterone in men be treated with TRT. The organisation seems to me to look to report the truth in an unbiased manner.

I see numerous seemingly unflawed studies are available with report an increased risk of stroke and had far higher incidences of coronary artery disease correlated with high estradiol in men, and by high they are referring to levels equal to a tiny fraction of the levels that Dr. Rouzier is recommending saying that such levels will greatly increase health. Anything and everything I can find indicates that Dr Rouzier is 100% wrong - dangerously wrong. I cannot understand how the doctor can be unaware of these studies or how he can just dismiss them.

I do think it is possible that estradiol levels a little higher than previously thought might be ideal. I agree with Gman86 that it could be a good idea to try and keep my E2 levels at the top of the normal range, or slightly higher, as long as no negative subjective symptoms are experienced. It seems clear to me that trying to get your E2 levels to 80 or 90 or 200 or 300 as Dr Rouzier speaks of is insanity.

 

[dd340]

I've searched the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) databases which has reports on millions of medical and biological studies and I have not found any reports of any studies reporting anything even remotely similar the ones Dr. Rouzier cites. I have found reports of numerous studies which show health problems with estradiol levels either too low or too high. These studies pretty much indicate that the ideal range of estradiol is about what we have previously seen, 20 to 35.

Life Extension seems to me to be an organization with no "axe to grind". They are very vehement in warning against the health problems that low estradiol in men can cause and have been for many years. This report from Life Extension Magazine cites some large studies including one published in The Journal of The American Medical Association that seem to me to make sense and set out the health problems potentially caused by estradiol levels in men both too high and too low.

Estrogen Balance and Aging Men - page 1 | Life Extension

By the way, Life Extension reports increased cardiovascular disease in men with LOW testosterone and recommends low testosterone in men be treated with TRT. The organisation seems to me to look to report the truth in an unbiased manner.

I see numerous seemingly unflawed studies are available with report an increased risk of stroke and had far higher incidences of coronary artery disease correlated with high estradiol in men, and by high they are referring to levels equal to a tiny fraction of the levels that Dr. Rouzier is recommending saying that such levels will greatly increase health. Anything and everything I can find indicates that Dr Rouzier is 100% wrong - dangerously wrong. I cannot understand how the doctor can be unaware of these studies or how he can just dismiss them.

I do think it is possible that estradiol levels a little higher than previously thought might be ideal. I agree with Gman86 that it could be a good idea to try and keep my E2 levels at the top of the normal range, or slightly higher, as long as no negative subjective symptoms are experienced. It seems clear to me that trying to get your E2 levels to 80 or 90 or 200 or 300 as Dr Rouzier speaks of is insanity.

In the video with Dr Rouzier he sites many examples of studies that show a relationship with high estradiol and health problems. Then he goes on to explain why the high estrogen is not the cause of their health problems. The point he makes very clearly is that the men with high estrogen have underlying metabolic conditions that make the aromatise at a higher rate than the normal population and it is in fact the metabolic condition that causes the harm and not the estrogen. You really should go back and watch the presentation as it is pretty clear and I think he includes the studies that he sites so you can look them up if you want to review in more detail.

 

[Blackhawk]

I've searched the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) databases which has reports on millions of medical and biological studies and I have not found any reports of any studies reporting anything even remotely similar the ones Dr. Rouzier cites. I have found reports of numerous studies which show health problems with estradiol levels either too low or too high. These studies pretty much indicate that the ideal range of estradiol is about what we have previously seen, 20 to 35.

Life Extension seems to me to be an organization with no "axe to grind". They are very vehement in warning against the health problems that low estradiol in men can cause and have been for many years. This report from Life Extension Magazine cites some large studies including one published in The Journal of The American Medical Association that seem to me to make sense and set out the health problems potentially caused by estradiol levels in men both too high and too low.

Estrogen Balance and Aging Men - page 1 | Life Extension

By the way, Life Extension reports increased cardiovascular disease in men with LOW testosterone and recommends low testosterone in men be treated with TRT. The organisation seems to me to look to report the truth in an unbiased manner.

I see numerous seemingly unflawed studies are available with report an increased risk of stroke and had far higher incidences of coronary artery disease correlated with high estradiol in men, and by high they are referring to levels equal to a tiny fraction of the levels that Dr. Rouzier is recommending saying that such levels will greatly increase health. Anything and everything I can find indicates that Dr Rouzier is 100% wrong - dangerously wrong. I cannot understand how the doctor can be unaware of these studies or how he can just dismiss them.

I do think it is possible that estradiol levels a little higher than previously thought might be ideal. I agree with Gman86 that it could be a good idea to try and keep my E2 levels at the top of the normal range, or slightly higher, as long as no negative subjective symptoms are experienced. It seems clear to me that trying to get your E2 levels to 80 or 90 or 200 or 300 as Dr Rouzier speaks of is insanity.

Thanks for your summary.

It would be really helpful for you to post links to all these studies... Please.

 

[DragonBits]

In the video with Dr Rouzier he sites many examples of studies that show a relationship with high estradiol and health problems. Then he goes on to explain why the high estrogen is not the cause of their health problems. The point he makes very clearly is that the men with high estrogen have underlying metabolic conditions that make the aromatise at a higher rate than the normal population and it is in fact the metabolic condition that causes the harm and not the estrogen. You really should go back and watch the presentation as it is pretty clear and I think he includes the studies that he sites so you can look them up if you want to review in more detail.

IMO a lot of men that start TRT have metabolic conditions that was caused by or at least facilitated by low testosterone. So if you start those guys out with TRT and high estrogen, is that a fair study of high estrogen?

When your testosterone is low it's very difficult to work out, eat right and get lean.

I wonder how many men have low T and DON'T have a metabolic condition?

BTW, if I have a metabolic condition, I go on TRT, get lean, at what point does one say I no longer have a metabolic condition?

Because if I start TRT with a metabolic condition, then it goes away because of changes, I feel that depending on how you want to slant the study, you can count those men at having a metabolic condition even though it went away.
Like once diagnosed, forever in that camp.

That is why I like to read the study, and if I really want to know, I want to see their raw data. Not see someone's opinion of what they think a study means.

 

[Vince]

Welcome to the Estromale forum!




Counterpoint here: SHBG 52, do best with E2 sensitive 25-30.

Last time I did labs was in June, I'm planning on doing lab again January 14th of this year.
Estradiol, Sensitive 29.5 range 8.0 - 35.0
SHBG 48.8 range 19.3 - 76.4
I've been on trt for just over four years and I've never felt anything from estrogen levels.

 

[Blackhawk]

Last time I did labs was in June, I'm planning on doing lab again January 14th of this year.
Estradiol, Sensitive 29.5 range 8.0 - 35.0
SHBG 48.8 range 19.3 - 76.4
I've been on trt for just over four years and I've never felt anything from estrogen levels.

LOL, the drawbacks of quoting where previous contextual quotes disappear... The context of my post is gone without your quoted statements regarding some guys pursuing E2=to SHBG, and the related issue of guys with low SHBG.

And now, in quoting your post all relevant context is GONE!

 

[Vince]

LOL, the drawbacks of quoting where previous contextual quotes disappear... The context of my post is gone without your quoted statements regarding some guys pursuing E2=to SHBG, and the related issue of guys with low SHBG.

And now, in quoting your post all relevant context is GONE!

Wonder how that happened, it might have been caused by me. I always use my phone and sometimes I hit the wrong area.

 

[Blackhawk]

No worries Vince, this E2 and AI discussion is pretty well beaten to death lately!

 

[user_joe]

In the video with Dr Rouzier he sites many examples of studies that show a relationship with high estradiol and health problems. Then he goes on to explain why the high estrogen is not the cause of their health problems. The point he makes very clearly is that the men with high estrogen have underlying metabolic conditions that make the aromatise at a higher rate than the normal population and it is in fact the metabolic condition that causes the harm and not the estrogen. You really should go back and watch the presentation as it is pretty clear and I think he includes the studies that he sites so you can look them up if you want to review in more detail.

You took the words out of my mouth. If anyone can show me a study that exists with a reasonable trt protocol, where men claim to be dialed in, let’s see it. Does not exist.

Therefore all of these doctors are operating on theory. They string together supporting evidence. All of us are being treated based on theories and not hard evidence. That’s why these threads can go on forever. There no meat to either side’s argument. All these posts saying “I feel” “ there must be” “ I think” “ vut in nature” are bullshit. Sorry.

You should have become comfortable with that risk when you decided to be in trt for life.

 

[rafapark]

Last time I did labs was in June, I'm planning on doing lab again January 14th of this year.
Estradiol, Sensitive 29.5 range 8.0 - 35.0
SHBG 48.8 range 19.3 - 76.4
I've been on trt for just over four years and I've never felt anything from estrogen levels.

Vince: Maybe you posted this elsewhere. but how often do you inject T? I inject twice a week and might want to increase my frequency to better manage my estrogen. I have a similar SHBG as yours.

 

[Vince]

Vince: Maybe you posted this elsewhere. but how often do you inject T? I inject twice a week and might want to increase my frequency to better manage my estrogen. I have a similar SHBG as yours.

My protocol is 16 mg of testosterone cypionate daily, 500 iu of HCG twice a week, 25 mg of DHEA, 10mg of pregnenolone and no AI.

Testosterone serum 1117 ng/dL range 264 - 916
Free T 30.3 pg/mL range 6.6 - 18.1
DHEA - Sulfate 347.3 range 48.9 - 344.2
Estradiol, Sensitive 29.5 range 8.0 - 35.0
SHBG 48.8 range 19.3 - 76.4
HCT 47.9 range 37.5 - 51.0

 

[rafapark]

My protocol is 16 mg of testosterone cypionate daily, 500 iu of HCG twice a week, 25 mg of DHEA, 10mg of pregnenolone and no AI.

Testosterone serum 1117 ng/dL range 264 - 916
Free T 30.3 pg/mL range 6.6 - 18.1
DHEA - Sulfate 347.3 range 48.9 - 344.2
Estradiol, Sensitive 29.5 range 8.0 - 35.0
SHBG 48.8 range 19.3 - 76.4
HCT 47.9 range 37.5 - 51.0

Thanks for the response. I assume you are injecting subcu daily? I am injecting twice a week and want to move to 3 times a week, I assume I'd need to reduce the total dosage?

 

[Nelson Vergel]

I am amazed at how many of you seem to be shocked by this info when I have been saying the same thing for years.

I noted all studies here and I am also attaching some papers. Please do yourself a favor and read instead of just believing people's "opinions".

Role of Estradiol in Men and Its Management


Estradiol | Discounted Labs

 

[Vince]

Thanks for the response. I assume you are injecting subcu daily? I am injecting twice a week and want to move to 3 times a week, I assume I'd need to reduce the total dosage?

No I inject shallow IM. I use an easy touch 29g 1/2" syringe. Never had any issues with scar tissue. I'm really happy that Nelson turn me on to these Easy Touch syringes.