I've used it plenty of times. I notice a generally consistent slight, transient boost in libido about 3 days after beginning that levels off after about a week. However, I attribute it mostly to placebo effect. Nonetheless, it's an effect I enjoy, so I don't really care if it comes from placebo or not. It's just not something I think is worth the money to continue taking.
In any case, it's kind of poor logic anyway to say that someone who hasn't tried it can't have a valid opinion. I've never tried heroin. Does that mean it's wrong for me to believe it's a nasty drug unless I actually try it first?
Lots of bloods do not verify it. For all we know there could be 99 people with bloods that do not support the hypothesis for every result that supports it. Additionally, there are many other factors that can influence TT results enough to prove to be significant confounds. This has also been an issue with the scientific approach to test-boosters. Inattention to confounding factors (as well as inability to control for them) and failure to account for possible confounds in statistical analysis, small sample sizes, lack of replication, and researchers with possible agendas has left me with a very cynical outlook towards this aspect of science.