———
You are welcome on there too.
Beats going to Youtube where they have no idea what your level will be vs dose. Decent harm minimization tool.
I think @azza23 may have liked to know this beforehand.
I would like to see mine on the graph for my recent blast.
Was on 875 mg (250 mg EOD), pulled labs between the shots (pinned Wed morning, pulled blood on Thursday morning).
TT = 4687 ng/dL
FT = 1585 pg/mL
Was Quest labs if that matters.
I also have blood work from 200 mg/wk (lowered that to 175 mg/wk now). The dosing strategy was a bit weird though. 62.5 mg Mon, 62.5 mg Wed, 75 mg Fri. I pulled the bloods on Friday morning (and injections were in the morning).
TT = 1223 ng/dL
FT = 274.3 pg/mL
SHBG = 35
Quest this time as well. This was the method.
3 Likes
We are going to have to get a bigger graph 
Quest fT assay? SHBG?
LCMS on the TT?
#omgyouregonnadie!!!
I’ll edit my post. I also included my blood work from 200 mg/wk. I didn’t pull SHBG on the blast blood work, but my SHBG seems to be fairly stable in previous bloods (between 34-36). Wasn’t using orals at the time, only Test for that portion of the blast.
2 Likes
Please confirm /deny TT test was lcms.
What assay or calculation for fT?
1 Like
I posted an image. I am not sure. It says Free (Dialysis), and Total, MS
I believe in the details of the test it says this.
So I think LCMSMS? Whatever that means?
1 Like
Great. Equilbrium dialysis for fT and lc/ms-ms for TT. If everyone was this thorough 
I will start a new data set with TNation members and expand the domain. For folks that are sincere feel free to add your results.
Rules
- Minimum of 4-5 weeks with the protocol
- State protocol (weekly amount of test ester and frequency)
- LC/MS-MS results only for TT levels above 1500 ng/dl
- Please state assay/lab used
- SHBG and fT will be considered and I may make a fT plot at some point (please state the type of fT assay or calculated).
And this is “TRT” thread. So please disclose any other AAS used concurrently (especially 17AA) which may skew TT response via SHBG in the gutter.
2 Likes
I meet all of those criteria for both sets of labs aside from not having SHBG on the blast labs.
Been thinking it is about time to get labs on the 50 mg EOD protocol.
1 Like
Many members of this forum have been preaching “No AI to start with” long before Danny got here including myself. I’m surprised you are crediting Danny with this but he was the squeakiest wheel for awhile.
1 Like
I seem to remember the most prominent members were the biggest AI pushers.
One day I jumped in on a conversation and basically told Danny that I needed an AI because of high E2 symptoms. He patiently explained to me that I was probably sensitive to hormone fluctuations, and it wasn’t high E2 causing the symptoms. After a few discussions, he had convinced me to try the same way he stopped taking an AI, and I’ve never felt better, even with my “high E2”.
Basically, nobody else took the time to convince me like Danny did.
1 Like
It was definitely prominent in the KSman era when I first joined. It seemed by 2020 it was well known that AI was not needed to “start” a protocol. It has its place but most don’t need one with the proper dose. It took me over a year to figure that out for myself and I was going against the grain at the time. Here’s one from 2018… no AI recommendation
I’m not doubting that you and others were trying to get people to try TRT without an AI. But my problem was that I was convinced that I needed an AI. I pretty much ignored any posts saying otherwise. It wasn’t until Danny used pretty basic logic, which convinced me to give it a shot without an AI, that I actually opened up and listened to someone who I disagreed with.
1 Like
That is awesome. Now if he could use basic logic with TRT. I have received more data from another provider and have some follow up him. I will post that info and weave into treatment above.
But hey we are getting somewhere. Danny and I agree the long term impact of fT 80-150 ng/dl is unknown. It is a start and by logical extension the long term effects of running above human physiology are also unknown and most likely a nonlinear function of deviation from physiologic range.
Hence, he should also caution the ignorant looking for relief about the risk of 30 to 50 ng/dl and not just above 80 ng/dl. Yields a false sense of security.
He did. That’s exactly what he did. That’s why I stopped poisoning myself with anastrozole.
TRT as in the use of exogenous T to replace endogenous hypo levels back to levels found in eugonadal male.
That would be reasonable standard of care consistent with four pillars of medical ethics. Normalizing that many are running 30 to 50 ng/dl for symptom relief is not. Informed consent seems in order and looking out for the most vulnerable.
My main problem with Danny is too much passiveness over E2. Ratios sound good in theory but I don’t believe they exist. I myself now am trying new things and ok let’s drop the AI, but then I do absolutely believe I have to reduce dose. He was just too nonchalant about going higher and higher and “letting it work itself out, higher e2 comes with higher T”. At some point it doesn’t matter some level of E2 is a cut off for certain people.
This is the result when run your T levels higher than that found in 99.999% of young, eugondal males and remove any AI use.