T Nation

A couple of questions


#1

I just had my free t tested and the results came back as 52.0 pmol/L. normal range they tell me is 30.0 to 87.0 pmol/L. I'm not exactly sure what these units of measure are other than the last part of "per liter". Any one know what the conversion facter is?
I'd also like to know more about the creatine cycling mentioned in an earlier post on this forum.... anyone know more about the specifications ?


#2

Conversion factor to what? Why do you want to
convert it to anything? The only thing that
matters is how it fits on the scale normal
to that laboratory's method of measurement
and you have that scale. You are in the middle.

pmol is picomoles, or trillionths of a mole.

Multiply by the molecular weight of testosterone (288? don't recall offhand)
and you have picograms per liter. Divide
by 1000 and you have nanograms per liter,
divide by another 10 and you have nanograms per deciliter. Though
there is no need to make that conversion,
and ng/dL of free testosterone is not of
course going to be anywhere near as large
a figure as ng/dL of total testosterone.

BTW, the free figure is the important one.
The total figure, if one already has the
free, is of value only in allowing an
estimation of whether SHBG is low, normal,
or high, which is not of great importance
anyway although high SHBG has an adverse
effect on the prostate.


#3

Bill,
Can you shed some light on your statement that high SHBG increases PC risk. Data from Nutr Cancer 1998;31(2):127-31 suggests that elevation of SHBG may decrease PC risk. Thanks.


#4

Thanks Bill
I knew it was pico something...never heard of moles before. I deal with conversions daily in metrology and I was just curious on the units of measure.
Mid scale is cool with me as I had stopped taking ZMA, Flax and Tribex to see how I scored with nothing at all.
I was tested for prostrate tumour markers at the same time. Let's just say that I prefered giving blood to an ugly technician than I did when a hot doctor snapped on her rubber glove.


#5

CR, sounds like the issue of SHBG and the
prostate could use more checking into... I
had read only one source which had found
that high SHBG levels were more correlated
with development of benign prostatic
hyperplasia than were testosterone levels.
I don't recall the journal right now.

Perhaps the difference here, the apparently
contradictory reports, is that the journal
you cite is a cancer journal. BPH is not
cancer. It could well be that prostate
cancer is affected differently by SHBG than
BPH is.