Worse than this, I’ll link literature later but during prep TT can plummet down to 200ng/dl (ish). Physiologically speaking you need more testosterone than this to even acutely maintain muscle mass. Are you really going to tell me there isn’t a significant difference between say… 200ng/dl and 650ng/dl?
Testosterone, even in replacement dosages gives one a distinct advantage when cutting down to be very lean, otherwise relatively speaking the difference is rather minor provided it’s actually replacement and not “I’m on HRT bro, TT of 1300 year round and FT 2x the upper end of the ref range”.
Do you think there should be a therapeutic exemption for TRT in natural body building? I am convinced it isn’t a fair playing field. IMO, almost all men would look better on stage with TRT vs when they were natty.
There are two orgs that make exception, ANBF (what I did a show in specifically because I’ve been on TRT since 2001) and OCB. I wanted to do WNBF but couldn’t.
I’ve seen men besides myself on TRT competing. They don’t look peculiar.
I’ve yet to encounter one person who can prove that TRT with values in the normal range can give someone an edge over a natty with values in the normal range.
Would you say most men in those orgs are on TRT? I guess if I was natty, I would want my competition to be natty as possible. I realize there are cheaters even in something where cheating is so easy to not do (just go untested).
I am not saying all on TRT look phenomenal, just better than they would look.
Do you believe that having higher testosterone is an advantage for building and maintaining muscle, and an advantage in keeping fat lower?
If your answer is yes, then the two men who test the same for testosterone are on different playing fields. It comes down to the pharmacokinetics between endogenous and exogenous testosterone and how the blood work is timed.
Example:
Say a natty guy has 900 ng/dL, and the TRT guy is also at 900 ng/dL. The natty guy pulls his blood in the morning at likely his peak concentration of test. During the day his levels fall to perhaps 600 ng/dL at the lowest. Let’s say his average level is 750 ng/dL. Now the TRT guy who pins once a week tests his blood at the trough at 900. However this is his low point. If he were to take the test 1 day after the injection, he would likely be around 1800 ng/dL. If we average his peak and his trough, we get a level of 1350 ng/dL. Does that equate to an advantage? IMO it does, because I think having a higher testosterone level is an advantage in BBing.
Who has these numbers on 100 mg T per week? I don’t even think we can call that TRT.
An MD prescribing a dose that maintains those numbers isn’t providing TRT. My doc certainly wouldn’t tolerate those readings. I am only one person but most recently I tested in the mid 800’s a day after taking 100 mg for the week. Maybe I had fallen to 400 by Saturday. I don’t know. When I took modest dose HCG to have kids along with TRT my numbers were a tad higher on average.
Do I think more T helps with muscular gain? Yes, but only if more means significantly more to get someone to supraphysiological levels. Insignificant differences in the normal range (eg, 500 vs 800 ) don’t do jack, I believe, and it would be ridiculous for us to be designed that way, as if we can even discern differences in our own functioning because of such fluctuations.
I’ve read that study. Yes, 250 is hypogonadal but given the relatively short time frame I still don’t think there is a discernible advantage when strict TRT is used. I say strict because there are people who think up to 250 to 300 mg per week is TRT.
Many docs prescribe 1X a week shots, and instruct the patient to test bloods right before their next shot (at the trough). I think testing at trough is almost standard. If you did one shot every two weeks, and tested at trough, you could have an even higher average level. Less frequent pinning (if testing at the trough) will allow the highest average level while remaining in range on the scale.
I would say most men on TRT would have an AVERAGE test level outside of the normal ranges. Many go for having their test level at the top at the lowest point, which would almost necessitate having an average level outside the range.
These feds could mandate a testing protocol. I would say if one did 3 blood tests in a week, and all are in the normal ranges, that it is close enough to fair for me. I am not sure, but I don’t think this is what is happening.
I believe this is prevalent amongst the gym crowd (eg, the TRT forum here) who treat TRT as a muscle building scheme. Which is likely why it’s banned in many orgs.
Maintaining an average supraphysiological level isn’t TRT, as said before.
What is and isn’t TRT is debatable. If one doesn’t understand the differences, they could look at levels and say all is fair, but if the TRT guy is on infrequent shots, and is testing at trough, then it isn’t fair.
IMO to be fair the orgs that allow it should have a scientifically backed testing protocol to ensure fair play. Going by what most Dr.s are doing and taking that level isn’t fair.
FWIW, I believe what you are doing is fair (testing around peak and still being in range). IMO, they need to test at peak, but then one can say they are at peak, but really be at trough, so I think lots of blood work needs to be done so that it can’t be gamed.
At the same time though most of these comps don’t have much at stake, and don’t have the funds to do that type of testing. It sucks people try to cheat. It especially sucks when they have an option to not cheat and still compete (what I do with powerlifting). I know the guys really using are at a huge advantage, but I am not going to compete natty while on TRT (I do small blasts too). So I am kinda in a spot where my use isn’t enough for me to be super competitive, but I am also not going to compete against nattys. So I just do it for fun and to get better.
Gentlemen, please remember forum etiquette. If you would like to discuss impacts of TRT on late stage prep for a bodybuilding contest, please create a thread in the right forum.
This thread is about petite women dealing with huge wangs. This is very important and we must stay focused and on topic
The latter part of this is speculative. I pointed out up thread that body size and member size have almost no correlation. Ron Jeremy is only 5’6" after all.
I wanted to be honest. So I wrote to a WNBF staff member. He said no. That was it.
I’m never competing again, so whether I have some edge or not isn’t important to me.
I am repeating here, but I go to a great doc. He was once a Hospital urology chairman. Whenever someone from here in the tri-State area has messaged me to refer him, I have said, “I’ll only going to give you his name if you don’t hassle the man about gym talk and muscle. He’s there to provide medicine for a condition.”
For 0.001% of the general populace it probably is. I remember watching one of Dr Thomas O Connors “anabolic doc” videos and he was talking about a guy who needs nearly 700mg/wk to attain a testosterone concentration in the realm of mid/high normal. Then you have rare disorders like partial androgen insensitivity syndrome wherein the response to physiologic dosages of testosterone is sub-par. On the other hand, supra dosages for them is equatible to us taking 100mg/wk.
There is a group of people using dosages of which are akin to a “mild cycle” year round. I’ve never taken T at 300mg/wk (though I’ve tried 250) and whilst dose response differs from person to person I can attest that 250mg/wk is NOT TRT (for me). It blows 100mg/wk so far out of the fucking water, to justify running that much testosterone year round on the basis of “I feel optimised” is a meme… If you want to run that dose year round, be honest and say “I like the feeling of being quasi on cycle the whole time and I’m going to accept the elevation in cardiovascular risk as this dose is not healthy from a long term perspective”
Exactly, and in the realm of highly competitive athletics many will do whatever they can to gain a leg up on their opponents. If you have a TUE for TRT/HRT carbon isotope testing is no longer relevant. Thus any testing will probably consist of a testosterone/epitestosterone ratio. I’ve seen data indicative you can use up to 3mg/kg test/wk and not get popped when this testing protocol is used. 3mg/kg/wk is enough to elicit a discernable increase in athletic prowess.
One could simply state “just test the individuals T concentration”. I’d state “TNE/test suspension can be out in a matter of hours. These tests aren’t difficult to flight”. Regardless of perceived morality, PEDs have been around in sports for quite some time and probably won’t dissapear anytime soon.
I’d think there’s reasonable argument for tested/non-tested athletic divisions within sport (as is the case with bodybuilding). It isn’t foolproof, but it’s better than pretending doping doesn’t universally exist within the highest levels of virtually all competitive sports.
Remember that if you want to do it, just go untested. I have done some comps where nearly everyone is taking much more than me. It is still fun. I am thinking a push / pull PLing meet is in the future, and after that I may give strongman a try as it looks like a lot of fun.