On 160mg/week split into 3 doses. Late 30’s and very low bodyfat. I’m on 2.5 months of TRT and my nipples are a little puffy. I’ve read several studies showing how harmful AI’s are. I have also read that DIM can significantly help my situation. Has anyone else dealt with this? My wife says I’m crazy but they are definitely puffier and I understand why, I’m just hoping for a solution.
If you understand why, why are you hoping for a solution? You can lower dose to lower e2, you can try injecting SubQ, or you can take the lowest dose of AI that relieves symptoms. Pretty straightforward I think.
This is most likely fluid retention and not necessarily gyno. To get gyno you actually require a certain gene.
Testosterone, prolactin, estrogen, and DHT all play a role in gyno.
A lot of guys experience this on TRT when first starting out. Some are sensitive to TRT and need a fraction of a typical dosage (120-150 mg). There is member on another forum who took 12 years to figure out his optimal protocol, which is 52 mg once weekly.
Yeah, most certainly not gyno. Takes longer than a couple of months. Mild swelling is common when first starting. Even so, like suggested, go Sub-Q (less aromatization) and consider dropping the dosage. You likely won’t notice any difference physically or mentally if you drop down closer to 100 mg. a week.
I am curious about this. You think long term going from 160 mg/wk to 100 mg/wk won’t result in a less impressive physique?
I do understand to get significant muscle building effects quickly, one must usually use much higher dosages than either of the doses. What I am wondering though is over a year, does it not make a difference?
Hard to say, but I don’t think it would matter much, especially if you convert to sub-q injections. Less aromatization equals more T so, for instance, 80 mg of sub-q T might equal 100 mg of IM testosterone.
I’ll say I am skeptical of claim that sub-q results in higher levels of T and less aromatization to any significant degree. I remember when a study came out that supported that claim, but IMO the study’s methodology was flawed (comparing apples and oranges). I think a lot of people drew conclusions that were in error from that study.
Maybe I am remembering wrong. Please correct me if so. The study compared once a week IM, to twice a week sub-Q. On the same dose twice a week injections will result in higher trough T levels, as well, it is likely that E2 will be lower with more injection frequency. I have a trouble crediting the sub-Q injection for these benefits compared to the injection frequency. It could be all the injection frequency doing the work, it could be a bit of both, it could be the sub-Q, but I just don’t think we can sort that out from the study. Perhaps there is research I haven’t seen, and I am jumping to the conclusion you are thinking of the same study as I am?
I believe that difference is justified by subQ being less painful. That is fine, but I wouldn’t attribute the results to the subQ. I would say it is because of injection frequency, and subQ may make upping the injection frequency easier / less painful.
I think you could make the argument that 80 mg IM twice a week will on average result in trough levels similar to 100 mg IM once a week. @tareload does this add up?
FWIW, I would rank my injection spots from least painful to most painful as IM Lats, SubQ in belly fat, IM delts, then IM quads. The IM quads was by far the worst. IM delt and SubQ in belly fat were close. IM lats has been by far the best spot for me. I have not once gotten pip there in about a year of EOD IM shots.
I would like to have a break-away conversation about SubQ vs IM (I know there’s already a couple threads on this) but would appreciate your involvement, along with @TC_Luoma and @tareload (hopefully many more too).