Yes, I suggest a starting dose of 120-150mg at the OP's choice because nobody can tell him exactly what his best dosage will be. From what Ive seen most guys feel best without side effects at this interval of dosages. Also Im confident the chance for someone to get dangerous side effects at this dose are very miniscure and he will be making regular blood work especially anyway. If a health harm can happen from 120mg testosterone it will take at least months. You start to seem to me like an endocrinologist fear mongering TRT will cause heart attack. Dont forget we have a six months study at 600mg.
You are starting to sound like a broken record!
Again there is no fear-mongering going on here and if anything you are out to lunch on some of the advice you are dishing out on here.
Again nowhere did I ever state that running a TT 1500-2000ng/dL or FT 30-80 ng/dL is dangerous/harmful let alone would cause any long-term health issue.
Knumbskull!
From what Ive seen and the people I have contact with nobody feels most optimal at 100mg, I even cannot think of someone on 120 and I talk about tens of persons on TRT I know personally and tens of persons whose stories Ive followed on fb groups and forums to learn something from them.
He would be starting on 100 mg T/week split (50mg every 3.5 days) for 6 weeks until blood work is done to see where said protocol will have trough TT, FT, estradiol, SHBG, and other blood markers let alone how he reacts to a T only protocol.
Is anyone stating that he needs to stay at that dose let alone it is dangerous if he injects more.....give your head a f**kn shake!
Unfortunately, many of these other forums you lurk on are full of men that were jacked upon T from the get-go let alone blast/cruisers.....LOL.
Dont forget we have a six months study at 600mg.
Going to break this down for you.....get back to you on this as I already picked that apart in another thread!
I dont care about the most accurate essays and will tell you why. First I dont have access to them in my country. Second free testosterone specially is a relative value that is a giving reference. And free testosterone is a function of total testosterone, SHBG and albumin. So when I say 25-40ng/dl free testosterone I mean the old version of the calculator, because if I use another measurement method this numbers 25-40 will change. The people Ive observed to have felt best in that range use the old version of the calculator or the old measurement methods, so the reference is for these methods. I work with numbers and large samples of data every day so allow me to understand well how data and numbers should be analyzed....
My doc says the old calculator is accurate enough for the needs of guiding a TRT therapy and at the end the measurement methods of the 3 variables are relatively unified in most countries in the world.
Unfortunately, this is what many fail to understand including you!
*Measuring FT is technically challenging and shows high variability.
Much more when it comes to SHBG: T binding.
My reply from a previous thread:
This is where I stand when it comes to testing FT!
I would not rely on the piss poor direct immunoassay let alone outdated calculated methods especially in cases of altered SHBG
Although the newer cFTZ algorithm (TruT) should give fairly consistent results I would prefer to rely on direct testing using the most accurate assays such as the gold standard Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration especially in cases of altered SHBG.
The EAM (cFTZ) appears to be an accurate and testable model for calculating free testosterone levels, but this model needs further validation in large populations.
This will be a part of the ongoing phase II.
As I am patiently waiting on the completion of Phase II for the TruT (cFTZ) Algorithm let alone standardization and harmonized reference ranges for Free testosterone which is in the works as we speak.
The new dynamic model leads to the reconsideration of several dogmas related to testosterone's binding to SHBG and has important physiologic and clinical implications.
*First, the fraction of circulating testosterone that is free is substantially greater (2.9±0.4%) than has been generally assumed (% cFTV 1.5±0.4%).
*Second, percent FT is not significantly related to total testosterone over a wide range of total testosterone concentrations. However, the percent FT declines as SHBG concentrations increase, although it does not decline as precipitously as predicted by Vermeulen's model. Due to the allostery between the two binding sites, SHBG is able to regulate FT levels in a much larger dynamic range.
Key points:
EAM (cFTZ) SHBG: T binding
*Intra-dimer complex allostery suggests that SHBG can regulate FT fraction over a wide range of total testosterone concentrations without getting saturated.
*Indeed, it was found that percent FT calculated using the new model changed very modestly over a wide range of total testosterone concentrations.
*Due to the allostery between the two binding sites, SHBG is able to regulate FT levels in a much larger dynamic range.
Unfortunately, this is too much for you to digest!
You are this same guy.....no?
post #2/7
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.excelmale.com/forum/threads/short-vs-long-esters.23282/[/URL]
4 months ago.
Coming from the guy running a trough TT 1500 ng/dL, SHBG 30 nmol/L which would easily have your trough FT through the roof.....most likely 50+ ng/dL!
Never gave your protocols a fighting chance let alone clueless about how exogenous T works.
Clueless as to where his FT levels truly sat as he never had it tested using the most accurate assays.
