For the experienced guys (those that know what X Test dose does to their FT levels), why do we recommend a dose, and not say “take what gets you to a FT of 100 or whatever”.
I occasionally see guys get shamed for taking a larger dose, but their FT / TT may be lower than the guy on half the dose. Is the dose what dictates side effects, gains, and long term risk, or is it the FT level (which is dependent on dose, but the level is too individual for dose to make much sense as a recommendation)?
I guess I understand that dose is used, because it is a lot simpler. Additionally, 80% of the threads here are for the first or second cycle, so going off of dose makes more sense.
I see the TRT community starting to ignore dose, and go with FT. I think it makes sense. I think for the pharma guys who know their bodies, I think it makes sense.
What do you guys think?
I also think that basing every on dose, sets up the guys who have a poor dose to FT relation for disappointment. They think to themselves that I didn’t make very good gains on 500 mg Test, but perhaps the people they are comparing themselves to would have 2-3X the FT levels on 500 mg Test. If those guys just targeted the same FT as the guys that get a good FT response from Test, I think they would on average get similar results. Wouldn’t the risk be almost the same even though the dose would be a lot higher?
I am sure I forgot someone!
Additionally, one more question, if one knows their dose response to Test, does it follow that the dose response (of free hormone) of another compound would fall roughly in line with that. Meaning if they get an average blood levels, that they should expect about average free hormones from X of Compound dose?