Where do Barry Bonds’ T levels fit in that?
Pure speculation, but is it possible those levels are circumstantially low because the athletes were off cycle for the blood tests and therefore suppressed and showing T levels lower than their natural levels?
If we’re talking about pro athletes, I would assume a huge percentage have to be on gear.
That said, I’ve come to the conclusion for a while now that genetics has a lot more of an impact on atheltic performance than Testosterone levels
4 Likes
I would agree with group 1 data. Those powerlifters kept a dirty little secret from the authors of the paper 
Track and field looks pretty darn good. Maybe they are on some AI/SERM therapy.
1 Like
Yep! Even pure strength. Coan would be stronger than me natty even if I was going full boar on drugs for years.
2 Likes
His TT levels (measured by accurate LC/MS-MS assay) may have been suppressed while exogenous AAS/prohormone stack. Good question. But as I said, the measured range on the Elite olympic athletes tell you what you need to know about ref range.
Interesting, especially the highlighted part. Honestly I don’t know enough about testing in that context to have an informed opinion on how easy it would be to elude detection, but I could totally believe that some elite athletes have relatively average Test levels paired with ridiculous genetics.
I would have a hard time believing however that as a group, elite athlete have average or lower than population average Test levels.
One thing though I’d like to see is Free T instead of or additionally to Total T. One factor could also be that athletes have lower SHBG and therefore higher Free T levels. For example I had Total T at 1000ng/dL and Free T at 6ng/dL pre-TRT because my SHBG was sky high
The reference range tells us Jack Shit about elite athletes. Barry Bonds never failed a drug test. Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test.
Thank you for taking the time to discuss. It is difficult in this medium on something as tedious as this.
Regarding how you restated the claim. I am not claiming they are taking too much testosterone. What I am claiming is this:
I think that the current lab ranges for total t and free t can and should be applied to men on exogenous testosterone in terms of risk/benefit and standard of care, as far as to show that if someone on exogenous testosterone tests higher than the top of the range at trough, then that person is exceeding physiological reference range for humans on a consistent basis. They should understand that and the relative risk before continuing this type of treatment.
In fact, I’ll go a step further and state that
even if their trough isn’t above top of range (let’s say it is 600 or 800 ng/dl trough), they still may be subjecting themselves to an androgen profile that is outside their individual reference range. Because we don’t have the genetic tools available yet to determine this individual range, the population reference range is the only guide posts we have plus some CAG repeat studies. However, 1200 ng/dl is a reasonable top end estimate of natural male peak TT level. In no way does 1200 ng/dl represent an accurate top end estimate of natural functional male mean level or trough level that should be applied to 95% cross section of patients in the process of optimization.
Also the individual reference range that maximizes QOL/longevity appears to be a function of age based on what we know at the moment. 1000 ng/dl may be appropriate for 25 year old version of you, maybe not for the 55 YO version of you. These are subtle points that one should consider so you don’t wreck yourself in the process of trying to optimize.
Graph below shows TT level for symptom resolution may be individual on the lower end of range and the patient needs to understand the unknowns potentially lurking near the high end of the range (300-1200 ng/dl).
Of course everyone is free to seek the treatment they want and I support them. Thanks for taking the time to work through this with me.
2 Likes
Data above would concur. They don’t seem to be any different than average population with respect to descriptive statistics for TT (and other hormones from what I can tell).
1 Like
Average is really surprising. I would believe slightly above average, leaving most of the discrepency in athletic performance to other aspects of genetics, but just average?
With all the ways Testosterone correlates with making effort more rewarding, higher Dopamine levels, etc…outside of all the physical apsects. Half the population can barely get out of bed in the morning, forget about pursuing any endeavor consistently. I don’t know…average is hard to believe
Full disclosure I haven’t done means comparison for elite groups here vs decade by decade TT population estimates. Let’s run the t-tests for fun:
See the plots:
All in the paper.
My answer is very simple.
TRT is the replacement of natural testosterone levels. These levels are found somewhere between 300 and 1200 ng/dl. Likely your levels were around 600-800 ng/dl when you where 25 years old. So if you want to do real TRT then you’d shoot for these levels. Maybe peak at 900 and trough at 500 as an example. This will not cause harm in the long run.
Everything that goes above 800 as trough value or above 1200 ng/dl peak is not TRT anymore. It’s TOT or a very light perma blast, or for some, a cruise dose. This behavior may in the long run cause harm.
I’m not saying you can’t/shouldn’t do it. I’m saying that’s what it is and people have to be honest with themselves and others about what it is they are doing or advocating for (on the internet, I’m not saying you must tell people IRL what you are doing).
Reference ranges are clearly applicable to hypogonadal and eugonadal men. There’s no question about it. If you need 250 mg per week for symptom resolution, maybe the problem is not the test (if you are outside reference ranges).
4 Likes
If we did, I missed it. What choo talkin bout Willis?
Lol. If it were really that simple, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
I think it would fit nicely above the fireplace at grandpas house, it will also prevent him from falling prey to the TOT crowd
1 Like
My answer was simple to understand, wasn’t it?
In my estimation, you are doing TOT, and I’m fine with that.
You responded to my post with a like. I am curious your reaction and feedback on my clarification.