# Alpha Male Results - Blood Work

I thought this info might be useful to anyone considering using Alpha Male. I know I was skeptical when I first tried it, and some threads on here with blood test results were really what made me take the plunge. Being in my 30’s, I’ll take any test increases I can get.

Anyway, here are the results from blood work I took last year at the exact same time of the year, almost to the day. I was using NO supplements at the time.

Total test: 525 ng/dl
Free test: 1.08 ng/dl

Now, the new blood work after using Alpha Male starting about 3 weeks beforehand. Diet, routine, etc, were all EXACTLY the same. New #s:

Total test: 669 ng/dl
Free test: 113.3 PG/ML

I can’t figure out how to convert PG/DL to ng/dl, but in any event the total test has seen a pretty nice bump. This jives exactly with my anecdotal evidence when I ran Alpha Male for nearly 3 straight months in the spring/summer last year. After a month “on” I could literally feel the difference in the gym, so I expect had I been on for longer than 3 weeks ahead of this blood work, my test might have been even higher.

Hopefully this info helps someone make an informed decision. I am by no means a Biotest shill, but the product works as advertised.

pico = 10^-12
Nano = 10^-9
mila = 10^-3
deci = 10^-1

So 113.3 pg/ml should = 11.33 ng/dl assuming all the prefixes are lowercase (not the way you wrote them)

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
pico = 10^-12
Nano = 10^-9
mila = 10^-3
deci = 10^-1

So 113.3 pg/ml should = 11.33 ng/dl assuming all the prefixes are lowercase (not the way you wrote them)[/quote]

No I don’t think that’s right. Something about pg to ng is a factor of 1000 and ml to dl is only 100, so they both have to be divided by 10, then converted, then multiplied back up. 11.33 ng/dl would make no sense on the lab’s normal range scale. FYI, I only capitalized to highlight the difference in measurement units.

[quote]doubleh wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
pico = 10^-12
Nano = 10^-9
mila = 10^-3
deci = 10^-1

So 113.3 pg/ml should = 11.33 ng/dl assuming all the prefixes are lowercase (not the way you wrote them)

No I don’t think that’s right. Something about pg to ng is a factor of 1000 and ml to dl is only 100, so they both have to be divided by 10, then converted, then multiplied back up. 11.33 ng/dl would make no sense on the lab’s normal range scale. FYI, I only capitalized to highlight the difference in measurement units.[/quote]

Ppffffft. Wow I suck at math; I didn’t even try to follow that.

Anyway, if you two gents come to a consensus on the conversion i’m not the only one who’d be interested =)

I’m getting my blood work done next week and will have my test checked for the first time ever.

PS is there anything I should ask for specifically when it comes to test? Because as I know, there is total and “free”; isn’t there also a bioavailable, or is that another term for “free”?

Basically I don’t want to get this done and realize I didn’t ask for something specific, and then have to wait another year. Thanks

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
pico = 10^-12
Nano = 10^-9
mila = 10^-3
deci = 10^-1

So 113.3 pg/ml should = 11.33 ng/dl assuming all the prefixes are lowercase (not the way you wrote them)[/quote]

This is definitely right. I think the problem is that there are different testing methods for free test, with one reporting drastically lower numbers than the other. The reference range for the OP’s latest test might be 46-224 pg/mL or thereabouts.

1 pg = .001 ng

=> 113.3 pg = .1133 ng

1 dL = 100 ml

=> .1133 ng/mL = 11.33 ng/dL, as DoubleDuce said.

While there is only one correct meaning for free testosterone, or free anything in the blood, Wfifer is correct that given labs use different methods for determing what they call free testosterone, and some report values that are really not of free testosterone only but of free and weakly bound even if they do not say so. The second sort of lab reports much higher values than is actually correct.

So unfortunately, two non-comparable testing protocols were used before and after, so free test values cannot be meaningfully compared.

Hmmm, OK, that’s not what I found when I googled it and the same question came up in some math forums. Guess they were wrong. I didn’t bother, nor did I have the time, to try and figure it out, but it seemed a lot more complicated. The problem is no one knows what the hell a picogram is (except, apparently, most of T-Nation). Thanks guys, although it sucks the 2 labs can’t compare.

How much did it cost to get these tests done?

[quote]doubleh wrote:
Hmmm, OK, that’s not what I found when I googled it and the same question came up in some math forums. Guess they were wrong. I didn’t bother, nor did I have the time, to try and figure it out, but it seemed a lot more complicated. The problem is no one knows what the hell a picogram is (except, apparently, most of T-Nation). Thanks guys, although it sucks the 2 labs can’t compare.[/quote]

I don’t have any really idea about the measurements, I just know math, so I’d take my conversion with a grain of salt. But pico is just 10^-12 so 1 picogram would be 1*10^-12 grams.

I would trust Bill personally, he is like the fact checker guy from PTI.