Re: Low testosterone

[Guest guest]

> I'm getting

> an appointment before May, but in the meantime, is there anything " I "

> can do..or take, for this?

Possibly but I would suggest that you don't.

At best whatever product you take may influence or be perceived as

influencing your diagnostic labs. So you'll have to discontinue the

product and wait some amount of time before repeating the labs.

Worse still, your doc may believe that the product is the cause of

your problem rather than a failed or inadequate treatment. So he or

she might perceive the only appropriate step is to discontinue the

product.

Much better to bring a clean slate to the doc for diagnosis.

Move up your appointment as much as you can. Avail yourself of the

reading available in the Links section. Till then, Chill Pills as needed.

Brad

[Guest guest]

I agree with Brad, however, can you see another PCP or Urologist?

Not sure what type of plan you have, but if you can swap Dr.'s you

may be able to find someone a bit quicker.

> > I'm getting

> > an appointment before May, but in the meantime, is there

anything " I "

> > can do..or take, for this?

>

> Possibly but I would suggest that you don't.

>

> At best whatever product you take may influence or be perceived as

> influencing your diagnostic labs. So you'll have to discontinue the

> product and wait some amount of time before repeating the labs.

>

> Worse still, your doc may believe that the product is the cause of

> your problem rather than a failed or inadequate treatment. So he or

> she might perceive the only appropriate step is to discontinue the

> product.

>

> Much better to bring a clean slate to the doc for diagnosis.

>

> Move up your appointment as much as you can. Avail yourself of the

> reading available in the Links section. Till then, Chill Pills as

needed.

>

> Brad

[Guest guest]

Hi,

Different advice here.

Skip the urologist as his skill and ability is not hormone therapy.

Most Uro's take their training from pharmaceutical reps and have not

had formal training nor do they have years of experience to tell them

the info they are getting is either very conservative, slanted for

more sales or wrong.

It is tough to find an endocrinologist that has treated men for

andropause but this is the search you need to be invovled with. You

can find your way the hard way by enduring treatment that doesn't meet

your needs and eventually become smart enough on the subject to see

the doctor you need is somewhere else.

Read a few books on the subject of hormone therapy. One good one is by

Dr. Euguene Shippen, " The Testosterone Syndrome " , $14.95 @ and

Noble. Browse the book even if you don't buy so you can tell when you

are being treated badly.

ernestnolan

> My testosterone level, on my test result's (Feb.9Th), is 205 NG/DL

> My PC didn't want to to deal with it. He said when I go to

> my 'Urologist' in MAY!...he will do something about it. I'm getting

> an appointment before May, but in the meantime, is there anything " I "

> can do..or take, for this?

> All suggestions are welcome, and will be appreciated.

> --Dale W.

[Guest guest]

Gotto second the skip the urologist vote. Saw one on consult from my PCP.

Waste of time.

>From: " ernestnolan " <emiles@...>

>Reply-

>

>Subject: Re: Low Testosterone

>Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:38:33 -0000

>

>Hi,

>

>Different advice here.

>

>Skip the urologist as his skill and ability is not hormone therapy.

>Most Uro's take their training from pharmaceutical reps and have not

>had formal training nor do they have years of experience to tell them

>the info they are getting is either very conservative, slanted for

>more sales or wrong.

>

>It is tough to find an endocrinologist that has treated men for

>andropause but this is the search you need to be invovled with. You

>can find your way the hard way by enduring treatment that doesn't meet

>your needs and eventually become smart enough on the subject to see

>the doctor you need is somewhere else.

>

>Read a few books on the subject of hormone therapy. One good one is by

>Dr. Euguene Shippen, " The Testosterone Syndrome " , $14.95 @ and

>Noble. Browse the book even if you don't buy so you can tell when you

>are being treated badly.

>

>ernestnolan

>

>

> > My testosterone level, on my test result's (Feb.9Th), is 205 NG/DL

> > My PC didn't want to to deal with it. He said when I go to

> > my 'Urologist' in MAY!...he will do something about it. I'm getting

> > an appointment before May, but in the meantime, is there anything " I "

> > can do..or take, for this?

> > All suggestions are welcome, and will be appreciated.

> > --Dale W.

>

[Guest guest]

Dale it was my Urologist the after 5 yrs of being sick found that I

had low T. I have been to a lot of Endro's and found them not to be

of any help. It is hard to find a good Dr. so here is what I would

do if I was you. I would call my loco drug stores and ask for the

name and number of the Dr.'s that prescribe AndroGel, Testim and so

on. These are the meds that we use. Call one and ask how many men

they treat. We have a links section full of info about this and you

should read and learn as much as you can. The more you know the

better off you will be when it comes to talking to your Dr.

Here is a link you need to read and print to take to your Dr. Your

levels are very low.

http://www.aace.com/clin/guidelines/hypogonadism.pdf

And this link is for you to read it is more for the laymen.

http://www.lef.org/protocols/prtcl-130.shtml#too

Phil

> My testosterone level, on my test result's (Feb.9Th), is 205 NG/DL

> My PC didn't want to to deal with it. He said when I go to

> my 'Urologist' in MAY!...he will do something about it. I'm

getting

> an appointment before May, but in the meantime, is there

anything " I "

> can do..or take, for this?

> All suggestions are welcome, and will be appreciated.

> --Dale W.

[Guest guest]

---

Thanks, ernestnolal,

I will check the links, but I still have to go to my

urologist....some tests'. The

low T. is the least of my trouble. I'll try to be a little more

educated when I do go to him. I sure do feel bad, I need to get to

the bottom of it.

-Dale W.

In , " ernestnolan " <emiles@s...> wrote:

> Hi,

>

> Different advice here.

>

> Skip the urologist as his skill and ability is not hormone therapy.

> Most Uro's take their training from pharmaceutical reps and have not

> had formal training nor do they have years of experience to tell

them

> the info they are getting is either very conservative, slanted for

> more sales or wrong.

>

> It is tough to find an endocrinologist that has treated men for

> andropause but this is the search you need to be invovled with. You

> can find your way the hard way by enduring treatment that doesn't

meet

> your needs and eventually become smart enough on the subject to see

> the doctor you need is somewhere else.

>

> Read a few books on the subject of hormone therapy. One good one is

by

> Dr. Euguene Shippen, " The Testosterone Syndrome " , $14.95 @

and

> Noble. Browse the book even if you don't buy so you can tell when

you

> are being treated badly.

>

> ernestnolan

>

>

> > My testosterone level, on my test result's (Feb.9Th), is 205 NG/DL

> > My PC didn't want to to deal with it. He said when I go to

> > my 'Urologist' in MAY!...he will do something about it. I'm

getting

> > an appointment before May, but in the meantime, is there

anything " I "

> > can do..or take, for this?

> > All suggestions are welcome, and will be appreciated.

> > --Dale W.

[Guest guest]

Doctors. The trick is to find one who can provide good, effective

clinical treatment.

Some doctors don't understand ranges (test vs. therapeutic) or

have misconceptions, attitudes or opinions that prevent good,

effective clinical treatment. Don't support them with your

business, because they won't help you in return.

Theres a big difference between drug use and abuse, for

testosterone and for most other meds.

Bruce

> > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

around

> here

> > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

report says

> so based on

> > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

214

> was only a

> > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim that

> 391 is low.

> > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as

a

> Testosterone

> > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

> controlled

> > substance.

> >

> > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

with

> 391. 391

> > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

> drugs like

> > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> sterile, E2

> > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

[Guest guest]

Bruce,

Life Extension Foundation http://www.lef.org/ used to advocate that most men

have T levels of a teen ager...that was when I first started viewing their

site in 1999...I just visited the site and didn't see anything to that

effect. But if I didn't have my PCP who is very T friendly, I think that I

would investigate their list of innovative doctors.

BTW, I've put this list in our files section.

I know it seems bizarre, and it wasn't my idea, but a member here suggested

last year to find a doctor that has a large HIV/AIDS clientele as many of

these clients may be hypogonadal.

It's interesting, my PCP has largest HIV/AIDS clientele in Houston and he

also has a very large straight clientele....he's just a good/compassionate,

attitude free doctor.

OR eon

Re: Low Testosterone

Doctors. The trick is to find one who can provide good, effective

clinical treatment.

Some doctors don't understand ranges (test vs. therapeutic) or

have misconceptions, attitudes or opinions that prevent good,

effective clinical treatment. Don't support them with your

business, because they won't help you in return.

Theres a big difference between drug use and abuse, for

testosterone and for most other meds.

Bruce

> > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

around

> here

> > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

report says

> so based on

> > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

214

> was only a

> > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim that

> 391 is low.

> > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as

a

> Testosterone

> > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

> controlled

> > substance.

> >

> > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

with

> 391. 391

> > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

> drugs like

> > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> sterile, E2

> > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

[Guest guest]

> I know it seems bizarre, and it wasn't my idea, but a member here

suggested

> last year to find a doctor that has a large HIV/AIDS clientele as

many of

> these clients may be hypogonadal.

I have actually read, that it is good to find a doctor who caters

towards the gay clientelle. The reasoning is because gay men are

more into the whole hormone and testosterone thing or something

along those lines. Might only work for the bigger cities.

Supposedly, the doctors that treat gay men more are more open to

hormone issues and replacement etc.

Armyguy

> > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> around

> > here

> > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> report says

> > so based on

> > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> 214

> > was only a

> > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

that

> > 391 is low.

> > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as

> a

> > Testosterone

> > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

> > controlled

> > > substance.

> > >

> > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

> with

> > 391. 391

> > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

> > drugs like

> > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> > sterile, E2

> > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:32:58 -0700, you wrote:

>I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor around here

>defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab report says so based on

>my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214 was only a

>little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim that 391 is low.

>The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as a Testosterone

>abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a controlled

>substance.

People need to understand the lab ranges are set statistically by

taking two stad. deviation from the mean. Thus they get 95% of test

results in the range. But this usually ignores age and other factors.

the low end on the T scale thus is likely dominated with 70 and 80

year old guys. And low ones at that. SO when they tell you you're 240

is normal, it's really in the lower .25 for 70 year old men. It's

ridiculous that Dr.s don't know more about what these numbers mean. Or

more importantly the effect they have.

Here's a table I found on T levels by age.

Mean T level for 75-84 year old men is 471!

For 85 to 100 its 376!

So Dr. don't dare tell me a 240 is " normal " .

>Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy with 391. 391

>is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with drugs like

>Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough - sterile, E2

>problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

Look to the study on Arimidex boosting T levels. It looks like with a

400 level a person could possibly bump to 600 or so and with lower E2

might actually have a good T/E ratio. (Assuming of course E was at

all high to begin with.)

[Guest guest]

Armyguy,

When my PSA was elevated late 2000/early 2001 and Uro was scheduling me for

biopsy...thru his PA he asked me to go off TRT...in a moment of weakness I

said yes. I saw PCP and he said that I didn't have to as he was unconvinced

that testosterone exacerbated PCa. I've had two P biopsies, 12 cores

collected each time...all negative for PCa.

OR eon

Re: Low Testosterone

> I know it seems bizarre, and it wasn't my idea, but a member here

suggested

> last year to find a doctor that has a large HIV/AIDS clientele as

many of

> these clients may be hypogonadal.

I have actually read, that it is good to find a doctor who caters

towards the gay clientelle. The reasoning is because gay men are

more into the whole hormone and testosterone thing or something

along those lines. Might only work for the bigger cities.

Supposedly, the doctors that treat gay men more are more open to

hormone issues and replacement etc.

Armyguy

> > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> around

> > here

> > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> report says

> > so based on

> > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> 214

> > was only a

> > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

that

> > 391 is low.

> > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as

> a

> > Testosterone

> > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

> > controlled

> > > substance.

> > >

> > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

> with

> > 391. 391

> > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

> > drugs like

> > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> > sterile, E2

> > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 13 May 2004 09:22:25 -0700, you wrote:

>On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:32:58 -0700, you wrote:

>

>>I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor around here

>>defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab report says so based on

>>my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214 was only a

>>little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim that 391 is low.

>>The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as a Testosterone

>>abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a controlled

>>substance.

>

>People need to understand the lab ranges are set statistically by

>taking two stad. deviation from the mean. Thus they get 95% of test

>results in the range. But this usually ignores age and other factors.

>the low end on the T scale thus is likely dominated with 70 and 80

>year old guys. And low ones at that. SO when they tell you you're 240

>is normal, it's really in the lower .25 for 70 year old men. It's

>ridiculous that Dr.s don't know more about what these numbers mean. Or

>more importantly the effect they have.

>

>Here's a table I found on T levels by age.

>

>Mean T level for 75-84 year old men is 471!

>

>For 85 to 100 its 376!

>

>So Dr. don't dare tell me a 240 is " normal " .

Oops. I meant to include this link of ages and mean levels:

http://www.alt-support-impotence.org/hormone_charts.htm

>

>>Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy with 391. 391

>>is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with drugs like

>>Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough - sterile, E2

>>problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

>Look to the study on Arimidex boosting T levels. It looks like with a

>400 level a person could possibly bump to 600 or so and with lower E2

>might actually have a good T/E ratio. (Assuming of course E was at

>all high to begin with.)

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor around

>here defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

>report says so based on my experience.

Alot of doctors might say that but alot of doctors might be wrong.

I doubt very much that your lab report says that 240 is normal. More

likely, it says that 240ng/dl is the lower limit of their reference range.

A reference range is just that: a reference range for the lab's test.

" Normal " is a medical opinion about a particular result.

A discussion of reference ranges is available:

http://www.labtestsonline.org/understanding/features/ref_ranges.html

>In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214 was only a little

>low and nothing to worry about.

Were you convinced? Perhaps you can ask your lab how they established

their reference ranges. Most apparently are based on a 95% confidence

interval for the relevant population (adult males, in this case). If

this is true for your lab and the lower limit is 240 and the

distribution is approximately normal, then we can say that

approximately 97 1/2% (95% within the confidence interval plus 2 1/2%

in the upper tail) of adult males would be expected to have a higher

level of testosterone than 240 and 2 1/2% would be expected to have a

lower level.

>Here, posters claim that 391 is low. The doctors in my neck of the

>woods would label a 391er as a Testosterone abuser.

Doctors in your neck of the woods are underinformed.

The average daily t concentration of 5G (the STARTING dose) Androgel

users was 566 according to the prescribing info.

If 391 is " abuse " , we are in good company.

>That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a controlled

>substance.

The real problem is that the moral climate around testosterone use has

reached such a level of hysteria that hypogonadal men have trouble

getting appropriate care.

>Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy with

>391. 391 is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation

>with drugs like Clomid and HCG.

Having a level of 391 tells us almost nothing about the suitability of

Clomid or HCG. A man with secondary hypogonadism and a t level of 250

might respond beautifully to HCG. My level was slightly over 400. I

have primary hypogonadism. I don't respond to Clomid. Since I don't

respond to increases in my own LH it is unlikely that I will be able

to use HCG as an effective therapy.

>The side effects of TRT are pretty rough - sterile, E2 problems,

>normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

The " side effects " of untreated hypogonadism are worse in my opinion.

Spermatogenesis may be reduced but won't necessarily be zero. I am not

interested in fertility so this isn't a problem for me. Those

concerned about fertilily have sperm banking or hmg treatments as options.

E2 isn't necessarily a problem. I have no trouble with E2. To the

extent it can be a problem I see no evidence that using hcg or clomid

makes the situation any better for a given t level.

Endogenous t production is lessened. As a primary hypogonadal patient

not interested in fertility, I am not overly concerned. I suppose I

could co-administer hcg or clomid but this adds to the cost and

complexity of my treatment and would complicate my t dosing. Apart

from maintaining testicular volume I am unclear on the benefits of

this for me.

While testicular atrophy is unwelcome, I view this as a cosmetic

concern and I try to maintain a sense of proportion about it.

Brad

[Guest guest]

> > I know it seems bizarre, and it wasn't my idea, but a member here

> suggested

> > last year to find a doctor that has a large HIV/AIDS clientele as

> many of

> > these clients may be hypogonadal.

>

> I have actually read, that it is good to find a doctor who caters

> towards the gay clientelle. The reasoning is because gay men are

> more into the whole hormone and testosterone thing or something

> along those lines. Might only work for the bigger cities.

> Supposedly, the doctors that treat gay men more are more open to

> hormone issues and replacement etc.

>

> Armyguy

>

I don't particularly think that gay men are more into hormones or

testosterone. Choosing someone with an HIV/AIDS practice sounds good

but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

My PCP is gay, has mostly gay patients, and has a large HIV practice.

When I say him the first time after my endocrinologist started me on

treatment, I got the usual crapola: 200ng/dl is normal, you are going

to have cardiovascular disease, and your prostate is going to explode...

Brad

[Guest guest]

OR eon,

Great link & file info., thanks for the reminder. " When all else

fails, read the instructions. "

I just added Dr Schwartz & Dr. Shippen's info. to the database

records, hope that's okay. I'm told Dr. Shippen may be accepting

new patients in June.

Bruce

> > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> around

> > here

> > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> report says

> > so based on

> > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> 214

> > was only a

> > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

that

> > 391 is low.

> > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er

as

> a

> > Testosterone

> > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is

a

> > controlled

> > > substance.

> > >

> > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

> with

> > 391. 391

> > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation

with

> > drugs like

> > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> > sterile, E2

> > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi,

I've also found interesting & relevant hormone info. at

transgender/transsexual sites. Wonder if they have a list of

doctors.

Bruce

> > > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> > around

> > > here

> > > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> > report says

> > > so based on

> > > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> > 214

> > > was only a

> > > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

> that

> > > 391 is low.

> > > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er

as

> > a

> > > Testosterone

> > > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and

is a

> > > controlled

> > > > substance.

> > > >

> > > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a

guy

> > with

> > > 391. 391

> > > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation

with

> > > drugs like

> > > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty

rough -

> > > sterile, E2

> > > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking

balls.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Bruce,

good post, I agree with all that you said.

Armyguy

> >I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor around

> >here defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> >report says so based on my experience.

>

> Alot of doctors might say that but alot of doctors might be wrong.

> I doubt very much that your lab report says that 240 is normal.

More

> likely, it says that 240ng/dl is the lower limit of their

reference range.

> A reference range is just that: a reference range for the lab's

test.

> " Normal " is a medical opinion about a particular result.

>

> A discussion of reference ranges is available:

>

http://www.labtestsonline.org/understanding/features/ref_ranges.html

>

> >In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214 was only a little

> >low and nothing to worry about.

>

> Were you convinced? Perhaps you can ask your lab how they

established

> their reference ranges. Most apparently are based on a 95%

confidence

> interval for the relevant population (adult males, in this case).

If

> this is true for your lab and the lower limit is 240 and the

> distribution is approximately normal, then we can say that

> approximately 97 1/2% (95% within the confidence interval plus 2

1/2%

> in the upper tail) of adult males would be expected to have a

higher

> level of testosterone than 240 and 2 1/2% would be expected to

have a

> lower level.

>

> >Here, posters claim that 391 is low. The doctors in my neck of the

> >woods would label a 391er as a Testosterone abuser.

>

> Doctors in your neck of the woods are underinformed.

>

> The average daily t concentration of 5G (the STARTING dose)

Androgel

> users was 566 according to the prescribing info.

>

> If 391 is " abuse " , we are in good company.

>

> >That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a controlled

> >substance.

>

> The real problem is that the moral climate around testosterone use

has

> reached such a level of hysteria that hypogonadal men have trouble

> getting appropriate care.

>

> >Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy with

> >391. 391 is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation

> >with drugs like Clomid and HCG.

>

> Having a level of 391 tells us almost nothing about the

suitability of

> Clomid or HCG. A man with secondary hypogonadism and a t level of

250

> might respond beautifully to HCG. My level was slightly over

400. I

> have primary hypogonadism. I don't respond to Clomid. Since I

don't

> respond to increases in my own LH it is unlikely that I will be

able

> to use HCG as an effective therapy.

>

> >The side effects of TRT are pretty rough - sterile, E2 problems,

> >normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

> The " side effects " of untreated hypogonadism are worse in my

opinion.

>

> Spermatogenesis may be reduced but won't necessarily be zero. I am

not

> interested in fertility so this isn't a problem for me. Those

> concerned about fertilily have sperm banking or hmg treatments as

options.

>

> E2 isn't necessarily a problem. I have no trouble with E2. To the

> extent it can be a problem I see no evidence that using hcg or

clomid

> makes the situation any better for a given t level.

>

> Endogenous t production is lessened. As a primary hypogonadal

patient

> not interested in fertility, I am not overly concerned. I suppose

I

> could co-administer hcg or clomid but this adds to the cost and

> complexity of my treatment and would complicate my t dosing. Apart

> from maintaining testicular volume I am unclear on the benefits of

> this for me.

>

> While testicular atrophy is unwelcome, I view this as a cosmetic

> concern and I try to maintain a sense of proportion about it.

>

> Brad

[Guest guest]

Oops, sorry Brad, I meant Brad, Good post! I agree with it!

Armyguy

> > >I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

around

> > >here defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> > >report says so based on my experience.

> >

> > Alot of doctors might say that but alot of doctors might be

wrong.

> > I doubt very much that your lab report says that 240 is normal.

> More

> > likely, it says that 240ng/dl is the lower limit of their

> reference range.

> > A reference range is just that: a reference range for the lab's

> test.

> > " Normal " is a medical opinion about a particular result.

> >

> > A discussion of reference ranges is available:

> >

>

http://www.labtestsonline.org/understanding/features/ref_ranges.html

> >

> > >In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214 was only a

little

> > >low and nothing to worry about.

> >

> > Were you convinced? Perhaps you can ask your lab how they

> established

> > their reference ranges. Most apparently are based on a 95%

> confidence

> > interval for the relevant population (adult males, in this

case).

> If

> > this is true for your lab and the lower limit is 240 and the

> > distribution is approximately normal, then we can say that

> > approximately 97 1/2% (95% within the confidence interval plus 2

> 1/2%

> > in the upper tail) of adult males would be expected to have a

> higher

> > level of testosterone than 240 and 2 1/2% would be expected to

> have a

> > lower level.

> >

> > >Here, posters claim that 391 is low. The doctors in my neck of

the

> > >woods would label a 391er as a Testosterone abuser.

> >

> > Doctors in your neck of the woods are underinformed.

> >

> > The average daily t concentration of 5G (the STARTING dose)

> Androgel

> > users was 566 according to the prescribing info.

> >

> > If 391 is " abuse " , we are in good company.

> >

> > >That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a controlled

> > >substance.

> >

> > The real problem is that the moral climate around testosterone

use

> has

> > reached such a level of hysteria that hypogonadal men have

trouble

> > getting appropriate care.

> >

> > >Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

with

> > >391. 391 is not that low and is a good candidate for

manipulation

> > >with drugs like Clomid and HCG.

> >

> > Having a level of 391 tells us almost nothing about the

> suitability of

> > Clomid or HCG. A man with secondary hypogonadism and a t level

of

> 250

> > might respond beautifully to HCG. My level was slightly over

> 400. I

> > have primary hypogonadism. I don't respond to Clomid. Since I

> don't

> > respond to increases in my own LH it is unlikely that I will be

> able

> > to use HCG as an effective therapy.

> >

> > >The side effects of TRT are pretty rough - sterile, E2

problems,

> > >normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

> >

> > The " side effects " of untreated hypogonadism are worse in my

> opinion.

> >

> > Spermatogenesis may be reduced but won't necessarily be zero. I

am

> not

> > interested in fertility so this isn't a problem for me. Those

> > concerned about fertilily have sperm banking or hmg treatments

as

> options.

> >

> > E2 isn't necessarily a problem. I have no trouble with E2. To

the

> > extent it can be a problem I see no evidence that using hcg or

> clomid

> > makes the situation any better for a given t level.

> >

> > Endogenous t production is lessened. As a primary hypogonadal

> patient

> > not interested in fertility, I am not overly concerned. I

suppose

> I

> > could co-administer hcg or clomid but this adds to the cost and

> > complexity of my treatment and would complicate my t dosing.

Apart

> > from maintaining testicular volume I am unclear on the benefits

of

> > this for me.

> >

> > While testicular atrophy is unwelcome, I view this as a cosmetic

> > concern and I try to maintain a sense of proportion about it.

> >

> > Brad

[Guest guest]

Hey retro...could you tell me where you found a table of T levels by

age? Just curious what was the level for someone my

age...26...thanks. And yes i do feel really crappy most of the time i

dont know if its due to low T or just my ED problems or both....this

is one vicious cycle.

>

> >I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor around

here

> >defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab report says

so based on

> >my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214

was only a

> >little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim that

391 is low.

> >The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as a

Testosterone

> >abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

controlled

> >substance.

>

> People need to understand the lab ranges are set statistically by

> taking two stad. deviation from the mean. Thus they get 95% of test

> results in the range. But this usually ignores age and other

factors.

> the low end on the T scale thus is likely dominated with 70 and 80

> year old guys. And low ones at that. SO when they tell you you're

240

> is normal, it's really in the lower .25 for 70 year old men. It's

> ridiculous that Dr.s don't know more about what these numbers mean.

Or

> more importantly the effect they have.

>

> Here's a table I found on T levels by age.

>

> Mean T level for 75-84 year old men is 471!

>

> For 85 to 100 its 376!

>

> So Dr. don't dare tell me a 240 is " normal " .

>

> >Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy with

391. 391

> >is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

drugs like

> >Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

sterile, E2

> >problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

> Look to the study on Arimidex boosting T levels. It looks like with

a

> 400 level a person could possibly bump to 600 or so and with lower

E2

> might actually have a good T/E ratio. (Assuming of course E was at

> all high to begin with.)

[Guest guest]

Bruce,

Oh definitely...the files/links belong to all of us and we can all

contribute. Generally, I think files/links sections are overlooked in many

...

OR eon

Re: Low Testosterone

OR eon,

Great link & file info., thanks for the reminder. " When all else

fails, read the instructions. "

I just added Dr Schwartz & Dr. Shippen's info. to the database

records, hope that's okay. I'm told Dr. Shippen may be accepting

new patients in June.

Bruce

> > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> around

> > here

> > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> report says

> > so based on

> > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> 214

> > was only a

> > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

that

> > 391 is low.

> > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er

as

> a

> > Testosterone

> > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is

a

> > controlled

> > > substance.

> > >

> > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

> with

> > 391. 391

> > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation

with

> > drugs like

> > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> > sterile, E2

> > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Good point! But I would like to remind everyone to PLEASE be

responsible when posting files or links. We only want legitimate,

medically sound links - there's a lot of quackery out there, and one

member recently posted a link to sites to buy illegal drugs. That one

slipped by me, but fortunately Brad caught it. The goal here is

quality!

:-)

K4

> > > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> > around

> > > here

> > > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> > report says

> > > so based on

> > > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> > 214

> > > was only a

> > > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

> that

> > > 391 is low.

> > > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er

> as

> > a

> > > Testosterone

> > > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is

> a

> > > controlled

> > > > substance.

> > > >

> > > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

> > with

> > > 391. 391

> > > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation

> with

> > > drugs like

> > > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> > > sterile, E2

> > > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 13 May 2004 21:56:51 -0000, you wrote:

>Hey retro...could you tell me where you found a table of T levels by

>age? Just curious what was the level for someone my

>age...26...thanks. And yes i do feel really crappy most of the time i

>dont know if its due to low T or just my ED problems or both....this

>is one vicious cycle.

http://www.alt-support-impotence.org/hormone_charts.htm

Age

Number of

Subjects Total

Testosterone Standard

Deviation Free

Testosterone Standard

Deviation SHBG Standard

Deviation

25-34 45 617 170 12.3 2.8 1024 254

35-44 22 668 212 10.3 1.2 1157 228

45-54 23 606 213 9.1 2.2 1287 237

55-64 43 562 195 8.3 2.1 1313 254

65-74 47 524 197 6.9 2.3 1405 410

75-84 48 471 169 6 2.3 1471 655

85-100 21 376 134 5.4 2.3 1901 658

[Guest guest]

Look in the " Links " section of the forum (in the yellow bar to the

left). You'll find this chart and many other helpful resources.

Regards,

K4

> >

> > >I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

around

> here

> > >defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab report says

> so based on

> > >my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that 214

> was only a

> > >little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim that

> 391 is low.

> > >The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as a

> Testosterone

> > >abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

> controlled

> > >substance.

> >

> > People need to understand the lab ranges are set statistically by

> > taking two stad. deviation from the mean. Thus they get 95% of

test

> > results in the range. But this usually ignores age and other

> factors.

> > the low end on the T scale thus is likely dominated with 70 and 80

> > year old guys. And low ones at that. SO when they tell you

you're

> 240

> > is normal, it's really in the lower .25 for 70 year old men. It's

> > ridiculous that Dr.s don't know more about what these numbers

mean.

> Or

> > more importantly the effect they have.

> >

> > Here's a table I found on T levels by age.

> >

> > Mean T level for 75-84 year old men is 471!

> >

> > For 85 to 100 its 376!

> >

> > So Dr. don't dare tell me a 240 is " normal " .

> >

> > >Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

with

> 391. 391

> > >is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

> drugs like

> > >Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> sterile, E2

> > >problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

> >

> > Look to the study on Arimidex boosting T levels. It looks like

with

> a

> > 400 level a person could possibly bump to 600 or so and with

lower

> E2

> > might actually have a good T/E ratio. (Assuming of course E was

at

> > all high to begin with.)

[Guest guest]

And for future reference...that link is in our links section under:

" Testosterone Levels by Age Groups "

OR eon

GayMan

Re: Low Testosterone

On Thu, 13 May 2004 21:56:51 -0000, you wrote:

>Hey retro...could you tell me where you found a table of T levels by

>age? Just curious what was the level for someone my

>age...26...thanks. And yes i do feel really crappy most of the time i

>dont know if its due to low T or just my ED problems or both....this

>is one vicious cycle.

http://www.alt-support-impotence.org/hormone_charts.htm

Age

Number of

Subjects Total

Testosterone Standard

Deviation Free

Testosterone Standard

Deviation SHBG Standard

Deviation

25-34 45 617 170 12.3 2.8 1024 254

35-44 22 668 212 10.3 1.2 1157 228

45-54 23 606 213 9.1 2.2 1287 237

55-64 43 562 195 8.3 2.1 1313 254

65-74 47 524 197 6.9 2.3 1405 410

75-84 48 471 169 6 2.3 1471 655

85-100 21 376 134 5.4 2.3 1901 658

[Guest guest]

I believe it was Oreon who originally said that hypogonadism is one

of the complications of HIV/AIDS. And the reason it might be good to

find a Dr. who has a lot of HIV/AIDS patients is that they would

presumeably be much more experienced with Hormone Replacement Therapy.

Dean

> > > > I noticed posts about " low " T levels. More than one doctor

> > around

> > > here

> > > > defines anything above 240 as normal because the lab

> > report says

> > > so based on

> > > > my experience. In fact, my doctor tried to convince me that

> > 214

> > > was only a

> > > > little low and nothing to worry about. Here, posters claim

> that

> > > 391 is low.

> > > > The doctors in my neck of the woods would label a 391er as

> > a

> > > Testosterone

> > > > abuser. That is the real problem - T can be abused and is a

> > > controlled

> > > > substance.

> > > >

> > > > Conversely, I am not sure if TRT is the best option for a guy

> > with

> > > 391. 391

> > > > is not that low and is a good candidate for manipulation with

> > > drugs like

> > > > Clomid and HCG. The side effects of TRT are pretty rough -

> > > sterile, E2

> > > > problems, normal T production shutdown, shrinking balls.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >