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
Blood Test Discussion
My TRT Odyssey: Lab Results and More
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="madman" data-source="post: 276256" data-attributes="member: 13851"><p><strong><em>If you've noticed a shift in my attitude towards SC injections, this is why. I increased my dose by 25%, my <u>free T and DHT stayed almost exactly the same, and my E2 doubled</u>. WTF?</em></strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Would put money on it that the ED results are way off!</p><p></p><p>Your FT was tested using Quests ED assay.</p><p></p><p>Keep in mind this is not a <u>standardized Equilibrium Dialysis assay</u>.</p><p></p><p>Not all ED devices/assays are the same let alone there are numerous issues when it comes to comparing ED vs ED, ED vs UF let alone ED/UF vs cFT between the different labs.</p><p></p><p>Accurate and standardized free testosterone ED assays will become the norm once we have a harmonized reference range for free testosterone.</p><p></p><p>We need accurate and standardized free testosterone assays with harmonized reference ranges!</p><p></p><p>This shitshow will be coming to an end soon enough!</p><p></p><p>Take home points:</p><p></p><p><em><strong>*Assays that are <u>standardized are designed to provide accurate results, traceable to “true” value-assigned certified reference materials and gold-standard reference methods</u>. <u>Results obtained using standardized methods can be compared across assays, institutions, populations, and past and future test results, thereby improving diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of patients</u></strong></em></p><p></p><p>No way your FT barely budged!</p><p></p><p>You drove your trough TT from 893---> a whopping 1101 ng/dL which is an increase of 208 ng/dL and your SHBG is normal as it was driven down from 44--->35 nmol/L (far from high) and more importantly your FT would be closer to where the cFTV sits which would be in the mid-high 20s!</p><p></p><p>Remember as of now cFTV tends to overestimate slightly when compared to a gold standard <u>standardized ED assay</u>.</p><p></p><p>This should kill any doubts about your most recent (2/15/24) Quest ED assay vs cFTV results!</p><p></p><p>These are your trough FT levels (EOD injections).</p><p></p><p>Your peak (12-24 hrs post-injection) TT, FT, and estradiol will be higher.</p><p></p><p>Anyone hitting a whopping trough TT of 1100 ng/dL with normal SHBG is going to have a very high trough FT.</p><p></p><p>This is a given.</p><p></p><p>This is the main reason why your hematocrit increased and this is only 8 weeks in.</p><p></p><p>Again where your levels sit 8 weeks in is not where they will end up as it can take anywhere from 6-9 months and in some cases up to a year to reach peak levels.</p><p></p><p>Driving up your FT increased your estradiol and there is a good chance you may have added some body fat.</p><p></p><p>17% is still a fair amount.</p><p></p><p>10-12% is where it's at if you want to look decent.</p><p></p><p>Even then you put on a whopping 22 lbs and there is no way in hell this is quality gains, definitely a fair amount of water weight (extra/intracellular), and some adipose.</p><p></p><p>The acne is from driving up your FT which would be high now and this is at the trough.</p><p></p><p>Switching over to IM is not going to save you if you truly believe your FT has not budged let alone your e2 is high due to injecting strictly sub-q!</p><p></p><p>If you truly feel good running a very high FT then do what you feel is best for you.</p><p></p><p>Again need to give it 12 weeks to claim whether it was truly a success or failure.</p><p></p><p>The first 6 weeks mean nothing when looking at the bigger picture.</p><p></p><p>As I have been preaching on the forum for years it takes time for the body to adapt to the new set point.</p><p></p><p>This is where many fail!</p><p></p><p>If you were struggling with sides then you would easily have room to bring down your trough FT.</p><p></p><p>As I stated previously it is expected that you are going to drive up your FT jumping from 140--->175 mg T/week.</p><p></p><p>35 mg T/week is a big jump.</p><p></p><p>As stated in my previous post (#4) far too eager here.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/threads/testosterone-assays.27661/[/URL]</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/threads/cdc-standardized-total-t-and-estradiol-tests-and-soon-to-be-free-testosterone.17329/[/URL]</p><p></p><p><strong>Key Points:</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong><em>* Limitations of using free testosterone by equilibrium dialysis and calculated free testosterone concentrations in practice are the <u>lack of assay standardization, an accuracy-based quality control program, and a harmonized reference range</u>. Until these <u>limitations are addressed</u>, free testosterone by equilibrium dialysis and calculated free testosterone should use <u>reference ranges established by individual laboratories or their specific assay method</u></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em>*Currently, the CDC is developing a<u> harmonized method for free T based on calculated free T using REVISED FORMULAE.</u> This may bring the measurement of free T to a referable standard in clinical laboratories and common reference intervals that all clinicians can use</em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em>*Assays that are <u>standardized are designed to provide accurate results, traceable to “true” value-assigned certified reference materials and gold-standard reference methods</u>. <u>Results obtained using standardized methods can be compared across assays, institutions, populations, and past and future test results, thereby improving diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of patients</u></em></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>The Need to Harmonize Clinical Laboratory Test Results-----</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong><em>Laboratory test results are a critical component of patient care. These values help physicians diagnose disease and are critical to developing clinical guidelines that direct treatment options and are instrumental in ongoing efforts to improve and measure the quality of patient care. <u>Most tests report a numeric value for healthcare providers to interpret and the range of numbers reported for a test for a certain condition may vary depending on the method used</u></em></strong></p><p><strong><em><u></u></em></strong></p><p><strong><em><u>Different test methods, however, may report different numeric values for the same condition</u>. <u>Although these test results may be accurate within the context of its own method, this variation can create confusion for physicians and patients</u>. Clinical laboratory test results need to be <u>harmonized</u> so that healthcare providers and the public receive the <u>same numeric result regardless of the method or instrument used or the setting where it was performed</u></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em>post #11</em></strong></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/threads/direct-measurements-of-free-hormones-using-mass-spectrometry-based-methods.28144/[/URL]</p><p></p><p><strong><em>*Equilibrium dialysis (ED) followed by LC-MS/MS is considered the <u>gold standard methodology</u></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em><strong>*<u>FH concentrations measured by UF-based methods often do not agree with ED-based methods because of UF conditions</u> (temperature, time, centrifugation speed), <u>the type of the UF device</u> (MWC membrane material, material of the of the housing, seal around the membrane, etc.), and <u>inconsistencies in the filtration rate</u>. <u>Therefore, reference intervals are typically not interchangeable across methods for measurement of the same FH</u></strong></em></strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="madman, post: 276256, member: 13851"] [B][I]If you've noticed a shift in my attitude towards SC injections, this is why. I increased my dose by 25%, my [U]free T and DHT stayed almost exactly the same, and my E2 doubled[/U]. WTF?[/I][/B] Would put money on it that the ED results are way off! Your FT was tested using Quests ED assay. Keep in mind this is not a [U]standardized Equilibrium Dialysis assay[/U]. Not all ED devices/assays are the same let alone there are numerous issues when it comes to comparing ED vs ED, ED vs UF let alone ED/UF vs cFT between the different labs. Accurate and standardized free testosterone ED assays will become the norm once we have a harmonized reference range for free testosterone. We need accurate and standardized free testosterone assays with harmonized reference ranges! This shitshow will be coming to an end soon enough! Take home points: [I][B]*Assays that are [U]standardized are designed to provide accurate results, traceable to “true” value-assigned certified reference materials and gold-standard reference methods[/U]. [U]Results obtained using standardized methods can be compared across assays, institutions, populations, and past and future test results, thereby improving diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of patients[/U][/B][/I] No way your FT barely budged! You drove your trough TT from 893---> a whopping 1101 ng/dL which is an increase of 208 ng/dL and your SHBG is normal as it was driven down from 44--->35 nmol/L (far from high) and more importantly your FT would be closer to where the cFTV sits which would be in the mid-high 20s! Remember as of now cFTV tends to overestimate slightly when compared to a gold standard [U]standardized ED assay[/U]. This should kill any doubts about your most recent (2/15/24) Quest ED assay vs cFTV results! These are your trough FT levels (EOD injections). Your peak (12-24 hrs post-injection) TT, FT, and estradiol will be higher. Anyone hitting a whopping trough TT of 1100 ng/dL with normal SHBG is going to have a very high trough FT. This is a given. This is the main reason why your hematocrit increased and this is only 8 weeks in. Again where your levels sit 8 weeks in is not where they will end up as it can take anywhere from 6-9 months and in some cases up to a year to reach peak levels. Driving up your FT increased your estradiol and there is a good chance you may have added some body fat. 17% is still a fair amount. 10-12% is where it's at if you want to look decent. Even then you put on a whopping 22 lbs and there is no way in hell this is quality gains, definitely a fair amount of water weight (extra/intracellular), and some adipose. The acne is from driving up your FT which would be high now and this is at the trough. Switching over to IM is not going to save you if you truly believe your FT has not budged let alone your e2 is high due to injecting strictly sub-q! If you truly feel good running a very high FT then do what you feel is best for you. Again need to give it 12 weeks to claim whether it was truly a success or failure. The first 6 weeks mean nothing when looking at the bigger picture. As I have been preaching on the forum for years it takes time for the body to adapt to the new set point. This is where many fail! If you were struggling with sides then you would easily have room to bring down your trough FT. As I stated previously it is expected that you are going to drive up your FT jumping from 140--->175 mg T/week. 35 mg T/week is a big jump. As stated in my previous post (#4) far too eager here. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/threads/testosterone-assays.27661/[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/threads/cdc-standardized-total-t-and-estradiol-tests-and-soon-to-be-free-testosterone.17329/[/URL] [B]Key Points: [I]* Limitations of using free testosterone by equilibrium dialysis and calculated free testosterone concentrations in practice are the [U]lack of assay standardization, an accuracy-based quality control program, and a harmonized reference range[/U]. Until these [U]limitations are addressed[/U], free testosterone by equilibrium dialysis and calculated free testosterone should use [U]reference ranges established by individual laboratories or their specific assay method[/U] *Currently, the CDC is developing a[U] harmonized method for free T based on calculated free T using REVISED FORMULAE.[/U] This may bring the measurement of free T to a referable standard in clinical laboratories and common reference intervals that all clinicians can use *Assays that are [U]standardized are designed to provide accurate results, traceable to “true” value-assigned certified reference materials and gold-standard reference methods[/U]. [U]Results obtained using standardized methods can be compared across assays, institutions, populations, and past and future test results, thereby improving diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of patients[/U][/I] The Need to Harmonize Clinical Laboratory Test Results----- [I]Laboratory test results are a critical component of patient care. These values help physicians diagnose disease and are critical to developing clinical guidelines that direct treatment options and are instrumental in ongoing efforts to improve and measure the quality of patient care. [U]Most tests report a numeric value for healthcare providers to interpret and the range of numbers reported for a test for a certain condition may vary depending on the method used Different test methods, however, may report different numeric values for the same condition[/U]. [U]Although these test results may be accurate within the context of its own method, this variation can create confusion for physicians and patients[/U]. Clinical laboratory test results need to be [U]harmonized[/U] so that healthcare providers and the public receive the [U]same numeric result regardless of the method or instrument used or the setting where it was performed[/U] post #11[/I][/B] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/threads/direct-measurements-of-free-hormones-using-mass-spectrometry-based-methods.28144/[/URL] [B][I]*Equilibrium dialysis (ED) followed by LC-MS/MS is considered the [U]gold standard methodology[/U] [B]*[U]FH concentrations measured by UF-based methods often do not agree with ED-based methods because of UF conditions[/U] (temperature, time, centrifugation speed), [U]the type of the UF device[/U] (MWC membrane material, material of the of the housing, seal around the membrane, etc.), and [U]inconsistencies in the filtration rate[/U]. [U]Therefore, reference intervals are typically not interchangeable across methods for measurement of the same FH[/U][/B][/I][/B] [/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
Blood Test Discussion
My TRT Odyssey: Lab Results and More
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