I’m on 160mg test a week (split in two), and 1mg week (.25x4) anastrozole. I’ve recently lost thirteen pounds and will head for 20 (I will weigh 180 then). I know that test is converted to estrogen in bodyfat, so I’m wondering if I’ll likely have to change my anastrozole vdose. I know only blood tests will tell but my tests are a month away and just wanted to know what you guys have heard, experienced, etc… thanks!
Funny you should mention that. The past two days I’ve noticed softer erections. Just the last 2 days so I don’t know if it’s a trend. But that most likely wouldn’t be a result of higher T would it? Is it correct to say that fat loss would likely require a proportional reduction in arimidex? Thanks.
Yes. Personally id just drop the AI. No sense in managing E2 at that dose. Plus anastrozole has a ton of sides. I was in a similar situation and dropped a bunch of fat and crashed my E2 using .125 x 2 a week.
My understanding is that 10 is the low end of the range. I’ve been on this regime for 2 months and feel fine. When my e2 was 84, knowledgeable people on this board said I had to take care of this immediately. Btw how much weight did you lose to tank your e2? I’m watching that first video now. Thanks again.
Please point me to where this was advised so I may read the thread, thanks.
I lost around 20-30 lbs of fat. Im still around 22% fat but came down from higher and it changed things. ALL that being said newly shed light on the importance of E2 will keep me from ever using an AI again.
You’re welcome on the videos. They’re eye opening.
Every single post where people posted estradiol above 55-60 were given recommendations to begin an AI. KSMan is easily the most knowledgeable trt guy on this board and he recommended action immediately when my E2 was 77:
I don’t know if your basing your ideas on that Dr. Rouzier, but as a scientist I found his arguments severely lacking, and for every fallacy he pointed out in various research studies, he committed 2 of his own. Understand that I’m a born contrarian, and whenever someone claims that some medical idea is a myth, I’m listening. I think the cholesterol hypothesis is a ridiculous myth, 75% of patients are taking statins unnecessarily, and ice inhibits wound healing. So I was ready to believe him.
70% of that podcast was dedicated to claiming false cause in high estradiol studies while offering no alternative hypothesis (except for insulin/obesity in a few cases, while constantly claiming how there are “hundreds of studies that show high estradiol is healthy for men.”. Even if there is a false cause, it doesn’t mean the converse is true(argumentum ad ignorantium). I don’t have the time right now to catalog the countless times I shook my head at this guy.
Also where did he get the data that says normal estradiol levels for young men are between 75-90? He didn’t mention units so he is either citing data I can’t find anywhere and would be challenged by every study on the planet or is using different units.
Look, I’m not saying the guy is wrong necessarily, but I am saying is that if his analytical ability is as weak as is ability to formulate an argument, then he is just not worth listening to.
Not trying to start any arguments here, and as I do have a ton of respect for KSMan with respect to his knowledge and experience, this is a very hard statement to read and let go without being addressed.
I think that you’ll find a whole bunch of very knowledgeable guys on this forum. I also believe that if you would take the time to read most of the threads that have been posted in the last year, that KSMan’s idea of a “magical” E2 number has been quite thoroughly debunked. E2 levels have way less to do with an actual number, as they do with the overall ratio of E2 to Free T. You are one of the MANY people I have read on here of late that just can’t seem to understand that there is no “one stop” protocol, and there is no magic number across the board. You have to figure out what YOU respond to, how aggressively you respond to it, and get that dialed in, and then let your numbers be whatever they are at that point.
@NH_Watts has proven to be a wealth of knowledge on here as well as quite a few others. I would listen to what he is trying to tell you if I were in your shoes.
He has been absent from the board for about a year. Don’t think he liked the new direction and people pushing back on his dogma so he left. New data has shown a lot of what he was preaching as incorrect.
As far as Dr. Rouzier perhaps you have issue with his approach, which is fine and respectable, but it goes against everything the medical profession has ever taught on E2. He is merely poking holes in a dogmatic understanding based on old school body building principles. At the very least take the chink in the armor and investigate for yourself. We also have a resident endocrinologist (physiologik) who was the first to shine the light on the this new thinking (here) and challenge the status quo. He has treated thousands of patients and does not prescribe AIs. He is also a bodybuilder and treats bodybuilders as well. I recommend you check out his thread “For All You AI Preachers” which he started in August. There is a wealth of information in there. I am merely carrying the torch that he has passed to this forum and presenting supporting information.
Wow a lot has changed in nine months. I did my first (admittedly shallow) research back in May when I started TRT and KSMan seemed to be the first and last word on the subject. What prompted this shift in view in the community vis a vis estradiol? Are you also a believer that the E2/free test ratio is the best metric? If so, what is a good ratio range? Thanks a lot for your help, I’m going to check out that thread.
Nah I don’t see that as starting an argument at all. The feedback is appreciated. I didn’t think there was a magic number, but I did buy into the idea that there was a healthy absolute range because I never saw an alternative view. So what is considered a health e2/free test ratio range? I’m a bit wary to go only on how I feel because a ton of long term shit could be happening that doesn’t immediately express it self physically or emotionally. I’ve only been here since May so a lot has changed. What created this sea change in view and do you happen to know any good sources that substantiate it? Thanks for your help. The people may have changed here but the generosity of spirit hasn’t.
When you go on T or off AI your E2 will go up but eventually months down the road it will settle down as your body adjusts. Also, without actual symptoms it is ok and protective to have your E2 high is your T is high. I don’t have a ratio for you as everyone is different and there is so much at play in regard to all of these numbers.
So the new concept is to not worry about blood levels at all and just go by how you feel? That just seems a little nuts given the potential subclinical effects. Surely there must be some rule or rules of thumb? Has this sea change in view come about only through physioLojik and Rouzier? I read the former’s thread and his blood tests seemed to argue more for the fact that he doesn’t aromatize much test rather than that AI’s are unnecessary. Hey I’m definitely listening, I’d just love to see/hear more theory or data if you know where I can find it. Thanks man.
A lot of guys start out too high and a lot of guys have problems near 800-1000, because they are out of shape and carrying extra weight which causes issues with aromatization and therefore estrogen.
If you can, lower your dosage to about middle ranges (if SHBG isn’t too high) and lose some weight with the intention of introducing more testosterone after you have dropped weight and increased your metabolic rates, that is better than going on an endless AI roller coaster for several months.
I just completed an 18mg EOD protocol and I don’t need to waste money on labs when I feel like crap, I prefer to run labs when a protocol makes me feel good.
I’m going based on how I feel because at the end of the day, that’s all that matters.
Regarding E2, and some would argue hematocrit, yes. Too many guys jump on anastrozole when they get an itchy nipple one afternoon and end up fucking themselves up endlessly with the sides from the AI. We have been going on the good doc here for a bit but Rouzier is a recent discovery through a podcast. In all honesty I have not had the time to examine the studies he is citing in his lecture. It is on my to do list though.
Seems like the others have given you some good insight. I will add to that though this one thing…
Your “magic” ratio number will fall within somewhat of a “normal” range where test is probably high-normal and E2 is mid range or lower. There’s just so many factors that come into play man. That’s why it’s not good to go for a specific number. How much body fat you carry, what is your SHGB, how much lean mass do you have…they all play a part and that is why there has been a dynamic shift from trying to find a one size fits all approach. It’s just being proven time and again that it’s causing more people issues than it is helping them.
To answer your question about the ideal ratio though…there is no answer that I can give you but I can help you find out what yours is…
Drop everything but Test only. The rule of thumb “starter” dose is to run about 100mg per week split into two injections a week. This is kind of the middle of the road run and it seems to work well for a lot of guys. Run that protocol for 6 - 8 weeks and get blood drawn. See where you total T, Free T, SHGB, and sensitive E2 is at. If you feel good at that point, keep running that and recheck bloods in a few months and compare the 6-week to these. If you don’t, based on what your numbers are, bump the test dose and run another 6-8 weeks and draw bloods. Keep doing this u til you feel stabilized and pretty good. Whatever your numbers are, that’s where you need to be.
So the numbers definitely do matter, but the point is that what’s “normal” for you, or whatever levels your body finds itself in hemeostatsis, is going to be completely individual to you and you alone. I hope this makes sense?