T Nation

Medical Reluctance to High T

I’ve often wondered, with all the evidence that higher testosterone levels correlate w/ less heart disease, BP, diabetes, etc., wouldn’t increasing the body’s natural testosterone to the high-normal levels be a priority in the medical world? I mean, there’s so much medication out there to lower your cholesterol, BP, blood sugar, etc., that you’d figure someone would take an interest in improving testosterone levels, right?

Yet, doctors don’t seem to have an answer to this; as long as you are above 300 ng/dL, you can’t do anything about it. Why is there such reluctance on the part of the medical field? Is it because of the possible risk of prostate cancer, that they want to avoid it?

Probably because testosterone is a steroid, and steroids are bad for you, remember?

[quote]Otep wrote:
Probably because testosterone is a steroid, and steroids are bad for you, remember?[/quote]

Otep is right. Injecting testosterone into your body will make you less of a man, because as everyone knows Testosterone is a female hormone.

I’m going to lobby for mandatory Estrogen injections for every male. 6x a week seems like enough. And it will be cheap enough to source, just filter it from Livefromthe781’s urine. Better make sure he drinks some apple juice first, don’t want it to taste nasty.

Then we can go shoot some Panda’s and drink beer.

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Otep wrote:
Probably because testosterone is a steroid, and steroids are bad for you, remember?

Otep is right. Injecting testosterone into your body will make you less of a man, because as everyone knows Testosterone is a female hormone.

I’m going to lobby for mandatory Estrogen injections for every male. 6x a week seems like enough. And it will be cheap enough to source, just filter it from Livefromthe781’s urine. Better make sure he drinks some apple juice first, don’t want it to taste nasty.

Then we can go shoot some Panda’s and drink beer.[/quote]

I take it you’ve already started on the “drink beer” part?

[quote]NateOrade wrote:
I take it you’ve already started on the “drink beer” part?[/quote]

No, the shooting Panda’s part. Call me a monster if you want, but last time we were in China you said it was fun.

[quote]Makavali wrote:
NateOrade wrote:
I take it you’ve already started on the “drink beer” part?

No, the shooting Panda’s part. Call me a monster if you want, but last time we were in China you said it was fun.[/quote]

Monster?

Hardly.

The pandas must be destroyed.

Oh and the reason you won’t see many test scripts anytime soon is with all the athletes getting in trouble and congress going after them - there’s no way a doctor is going to risk his butt.

Too bad because anti-aging is making great strides forward but this steroid hysteria BS is putting a dent in it.

Yep, it’s gotta be the prostate cancer risk. Sad to say, but it’ll take a while before things are definitively figured out. The way the system is now, a few big malpractice cases can end a career, which is both good and bad.

Plus, just because you’re on the low end of T for the population doesn’t mean you’re not exactly where you should be. Where you “should be” depends if you are asking yourself, your friends and loved ones, or your healthcare provider.

[quote]Otep wrote:
Probably because testosterone is a steroid, and steroids are bad for you, remember?[/quote]

so is fat and cholesterol

/antiquated outdated medical dogma

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]AlteredState wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
Otep wrote:
Probably because testosterone is a steroid, and steroids are bad for you, remember?

so is fat and cholesterol

/antiquated outdated medical dogma

I suspect he was being facetious :wink:

Actually, the chief reason steroids may be bad for some individuals in the long term (IMO) is because they alter your lipid profile, making you more susceptible to atherosclerosis. However there are ways to counter this of course.[/quote]

Even worse but I think, and I could be wrong here, that he isn’t referring to exogenous testosterne. From what I was reading, he is making the claim that better health could be derived from lowering one’s natural levels.

This is just baffling to me. It seems to be on par with reasoning that people should starve themselves/restrict food intake because studies have shown that rats live longer with less calories.

EDIT:Wow, I need sleep. I just re-read the OP post and it is saying the opposite of what I saw. Now I’m just thankful I managed not to kill myself on the drive home. Anyway, my mistake. A large one.

We’ve finally done it. The human race knows TOO MUCH.