So I just had an interesting thought about E2 levels in men. So the gold standard in regards to where we want our hormones, is to get them to the levels that they were when we were in our prime, correct? So probably around 18-22, I would assume for most men, hormone wise at least. Take total and free testosterone, for example. Ideally, most men seem to do well when their total and free T level is that of the average 18-22 year old healthy male. Obviously free T is more important. Also, the top end of the free T range is probably based off of males in society today, so it's probably a little low. So I would imagine that striving to have free T levels 30% higher than the top end of the current ranges should be just fine as well.
Anyways, so if this is the current thoughts on where we should be trying to get our T levels, why is E2 any different. Obviously, the most important thing is symptom relief, not where our levels our so much on T or E2, but for argument's sake, let's just focus on the numbers. Are we complicating things too much when it comes to E2? I'm not sure, hence why I'm starting this thread. But it makes a lot of sense to me to treat E2 the same way we would treat testosterone. Just focus on bringing guy's levels to around where the average 18-22 year old male's E2 would be. What do you guy's all think about this?
Anyways, so if this is the current thoughts on where we should be trying to get our T levels, why is E2 any different. Obviously, the most important thing is symptom relief, not where our levels our so much on T or E2, but for argument's sake, let's just focus on the numbers. Are we complicating things too much when it comes to E2? I'm not sure, hence why I'm starting this thread. But it makes a lot of sense to me to treat E2 the same way we would treat testosterone. Just focus on bringing guy's levels to around where the average 18-22 year old male's E2 would be. What do you guy's all think about this?
