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
Subcutaneous Administration of Testosterone
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="JSayaMD" data-source="post: 1831" data-attributes="member: 282"><p>I get the idea of "mass action" over the top of all of the SHBG, but still have difficulty reconciling this with larger, less frequent injections based solely on SHBG levels. The pharmacodynamics of the injection (regardless of method... IM vs SubQ) should not be dramatically altered for that <strong>same injection technique</strong> based solely on the frequency of the injections. This is hard to grasp conceptually, but my pharmacology mentor hammered this in my head at UNC. Since pharmacodynamics (peak timing, nadir timing, half-life, etc) would NOT be altered by changing frequency of injection alone, would it not make more sense...to "mass action" over the SHBG for those with high SHBG levels... to simply do slightly higher dosing with each injection but keep the more frequent injection pattern as you stated to preserve the "sawtooth" physiology (which would basically be sacrificed, necessarily due to the pharmacodynamics of the ester, with the once weekly injections)?</p><p></p><p>Granted, there is no right answer, just boils down to smart people who understand the physiology involved coming up with their best approach based on the processes involved...</p><p></p><p>Dr Saya</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JSayaMD, post: 1831, member: 282"] I get the idea of "mass action" over the top of all of the SHBG, but still have difficulty reconciling this with larger, less frequent injections based solely on SHBG levels. The pharmacodynamics of the injection (regardless of method... IM vs SubQ) should not be dramatically altered for that [B]same injection technique[/B] based solely on the frequency of the injections. This is hard to grasp conceptually, but my pharmacology mentor hammered this in my head at UNC. Since pharmacodynamics (peak timing, nadir timing, half-life, etc) would NOT be altered by changing frequency of injection alone, would it not make more sense...to "mass action" over the SHBG for those with high SHBG levels... to simply do slightly higher dosing with each injection but keep the more frequent injection pattern as you stated to preserve the "sawtooth" physiology (which would basically be sacrificed, necessarily due to the pharmacodynamics of the ester, with the once weekly injections)? Granted, there is no right answer, just boils down to smart people who understand the physiology involved coming up with their best approach based on the processes involved... Dr Saya [/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
Subcutaneous Administration of Testosterone
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