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
Testosterone gel/cream vs injectables?
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="Nelson Vergel" data-source="post: 1605" data-attributes="member: 3"><p>Dave</p><p></p><p>I think it's great to have a physician who is not threatened by information that patients bring. I must admit that it must be hell having people bring information from the Internet and that most doctors react negatively to that. My doctor calls it Internet medicine <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>But if what you bring is well referenced and logical, most open minded doctors are receptive to information that may help treat you better. I have a lot of experience on the subject since I advocated for the use of anabolic steroids and testosterone to try to save my life and that of many people who were wasting away. In the early 90's we had no data on the subject but over 100 physicians opened their arms to the concept. Of course, the risk-benefit ratio that we had in those days made it possible for them to try something that had no published data.</p><p></p><p>The use of HCG, anastrozole, sermorelin/peptides, and some compounded formulations is currently been adopted by some medical practices while others reject it. Medical practices that are cash based are obviously more willing to use products of this nature in an off label manner since they do not have to deal with rejection from insurance companies.</p><p></p><p>Only good study data will make TRT+HCG or + anastrozole be something with insurance reimbursement potential. However, these products are all generics that lack pharmaceutical funding for studies. So only studies funded by the US government via the National Institute of Health provide any hope to generate data on generics such as HCG and anastrozole.</p><p></p><p>What some physicians do not understand is that they can consider prescribing certain options that may not be covered by insurance but which are available cheaply from the compounding industry. That , in my opinion, is an area of advocacy on which we can all concentrate. Of course, if we lose the compounding industry as pharma and some congressmen want, we can lose this option.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Nelson</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nelson Vergel, post: 1605, member: 3"] Dave I think it's great to have a physician who is not threatened by information that patients bring. I must admit that it must be hell having people bring information from the Internet and that most doctors react negatively to that. My doctor calls it Internet medicine :) But if what you bring is well referenced and logical, most open minded doctors are receptive to information that may help treat you better. I have a lot of experience on the subject since I advocated for the use of anabolic steroids and testosterone to try to save my life and that of many people who were wasting away. In the early 90's we had no data on the subject but over 100 physicians opened their arms to the concept. Of course, the risk-benefit ratio that we had in those days made it possible for them to try something that had no published data. The use of HCG, anastrozole, sermorelin/peptides, and some compounded formulations is currently been adopted by some medical practices while others reject it. Medical practices that are cash based are obviously more willing to use products of this nature in an off label manner since they do not have to deal with rejection from insurance companies. Only good study data will make TRT+HCG or + anastrozole be something with insurance reimbursement potential. However, these products are all generics that lack pharmaceutical funding for studies. So only studies funded by the US government via the National Institute of Health provide any hope to generate data on generics such as HCG and anastrozole. What some physicians do not understand is that they can consider prescribing certain options that may not be covered by insurance but which are available cheaply from the compounding industry. That , in my opinion, is an area of advocacy on which we can all concentrate. Of course, if we lose the compounding industry as pharma and some congressmen want, we can lose this option. Nelson [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Testosterone Basics & Questions
Testosterone gel/cream vs injectables?
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