The Masculine Mystique of T(nybooks.com)
nybooks.com
The Masculine Mystique of T
https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/06/28/the-masculine-mystique-of-t/
67 comments
> Intriguing why someone would try to analyze a biological compound through a cultural / political / sociological lens without at least giving some reference to actual scientific research.
I don't think it's all that strange, given the situation. Testosterone appears to be a cultural and even economic phenomenon irrespective of its actual effects. There's a whole franchise chain of doctor's offices branded as "Low T Centers", which I don't think I've seen for any other biological compound. It's not a big stretch to say that people interested in that kind of thing are predominantly more interested in an experience than they are in a molecule. It's not entirely unlike "pot culture" or "drinking culture", etc..
I don't think it's all that strange, given the situation. Testosterone appears to be a cultural and even economic phenomenon irrespective of its actual effects. There's a whole franchise chain of doctor's offices branded as "Low T Centers", which I don't think I've seen for any other biological compound. It's not a big stretch to say that people interested in that kind of thing are predominantly more interested in an experience than they are in a molecule. It's not entirely unlike "pot culture" or "drinking culture", etc..
That to some degree is driven by how taboo TRT (fuelled by steroid craze of the `80s) was. In effect there were seriously hundreds of men forced to live for example on Clomid because testosterone was a no-no (compared to TRT Clomid is like using propofol because you can't sleep)
Clomid works for some but not all.
http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html
http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html
http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html
http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html
The main point of Clomid are quite usual psychological side-effects, including such fun stuff as suicidal thoughts.
Where have you seen that in the literature?
Here's the best compilation of data (not mine, but by a man I incredibly respect for his insights in neuropsychopharmacology)
https://www.quora.com/Can-clomiphene-citrate-trigger-depress...
Honestly, I have to dig through. The thing is those things are often underreported. I worked with a TRT clinic for a while, people on Clomid for fertility reasons were miserable (as in "kill me now") so that's my bias.
The TRT clinic I went to was a clear scam. When he realized my T was too high he tried to sell me on growth hormone peptides for $300 a month and B12 injections. Lots of pseudoscience. Also, he was a chiropractor. Not surprising since chiropractors aren't real doctors.
Yeah, a lot of TRT clinics are scam, especially if they employ chiropractors or naturopaths - DO STAY AWAY. Fact that those professions are allowed to give medical advice in some countries/states is actually an emerging problem because the school giving out certificates to these people have a much lower quality of education which can be fatal. People with "degrees" from schools such as Bastyr are know to advocate against vaccination and other sane science while peddling "natural" solutions.
My understanding was that they are mainly interested in body-building.
Whenever testosterone comes up, I always think of the study showing testosterone levels change in sports fans according to whether their preferred team wins or loses[1].
The interest for me is not so much in the question of testosterone and dominance, but more to do with how mere perception of events whose meaning is entirely culturally determined can mediate hormone levels in this way.
Winning at football is very different from winning at a fight, that is - you need to understand football's rules to understand who's won, whereas the winner of a fight is immediately clear.
Thinking about it, though, I guess ritualised proxies for fighting to establish dominance (like antler fights, etc.) might be thought to occupy an intermediate position.
1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365
The interest for me is not so much in the question of testosterone and dominance, but more to do with how mere perception of events whose meaning is entirely culturally determined can mediate hormone levels in this way.
Winning at football is very different from winning at a fight, that is - you need to understand football's rules to understand who's won, whereas the winner of a fight is immediately clear.
Thinking about it, though, I guess ritualised proxies for fighting to establish dominance (like antler fights, etc.) might be thought to occupy an intermediate position.
1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365
Winning at football is exactly like winning a fight.
The member of the winning tribe will feel more confident that they will be able to win the next fight/feel more dominant, which correlates well with testosterone levels in my mind.
The member of the winning tribe will feel more confident that they will be able to win the next fight/feel more dominant, which correlates well with testosterone levels in my mind.
Sometimes the winner also riots and wrecks their city. Actually a lot of the time.
This is possibly related to testosterone levels/heightened confidence as well.
I don't see many riots, though. At least in my kind of football (soccer).
I don't see many riots, though. At least in my kind of football (soccer).
I was reminded of that by the recent news in France after they won the world cup https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-...
Understanding you've won at football is quite different to understanding you've won a fight.
Compare two cats fighting and knowing who's won to two cats playing football and knowing who's won :)
Compare two cats fighting and knowing who's won to two cats playing football and knowing who's won :)
What a strange meandering article. The author seems almost to be seeking confusion.
Since she quotes Cordelia Fine approvingly, here's an amusing review from a slightly different perspective:
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/old-t-rex/
Since she quotes Cordelia Fine approvingly, here's an amusing review from a slightly different perspective:
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/old-t-rex/
Fun read. Just one point of disagreement:
> Fine mention a kind of cichlid fish where dominance influences gonadal events – causation (in part) goes from behavior to hormones, instead of hormones to behavior. Interesting. But is there evidence of a similar pattern in humans? No.
Yes.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17582237
> Fine mention a kind of cichlid fish where dominance influences gonadal events – causation (in part) goes from behavior to hormones, instead of hormones to behavior. Interesting. But is there evidence of a similar pattern in humans? No.
Yes.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17582237
I guess his point is that fish do things which are way-out crazy by ape standards... like Nemo's family group in which the biggest one literally becomes female:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphiprioninae#Reproduction
. Getting a bit horny after the footy isn't quite the same category.
that was an interesting article
Cochran is a genius, but not for everyone. There are certain facts that are taboo to acknowledge, possibly for good reasons. Cochran does not abide taboos. If you keep reading his stuff, it is very likely to shock and offend you.
Well said.
The trouble with social taboos (even ones that exist for good reasons) is that it can be hard to understand who's being polite, and who's just stupid. Many people are stupid about many things, after all, even when there are no reasons to pretend.
Thus it seems valuable that there are places outside of such conventions. The internet has been very good for this -- things once known only by academic specialists are now open to anyone interested. Sometimes you return to polite society able to better decode what people really know.
The trouble with social taboos (even ones that exist for good reasons) is that it can be hard to understand who's being polite, and who's just stupid. Many people are stupid about many things, after all, even when there are no reasons to pretend.
Thus it seems valuable that there are places outside of such conventions. The internet has been very good for this -- things once known only by academic specialists are now open to anyone interested. Sometimes you return to polite society able to better decode what people really know.
Substitute "genius" with "scientific racist" and "facts" with "unsubstantiated claims about race and sex," and you've got the rest right.
Not everybody is interested in racist/anti-semetic canards[1][2] and claims about gay viruses[3].
[1]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/the-son-also-rises...
[2]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/live-not-by-lies/
[3]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/
Not everybody is interested in racist/anti-semetic canards[1][2] and claims about gay viruses[3].
[1]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/the-son-also-rises...
[2]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/live-not-by-lies/
[3]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/
Yes, I find those are extremely shocking and offensive.
And, more importantly, just plain incorrect.
We praise people for speaking truth to power, not for twisting the truth to fit a reactionary worldview.
We praise people for speaking truth to power, not for twisting the truth to fit a reactionary worldview.
We should praise people for speaking truth. Power has nothing to do with it. Cognitive genomics will confirm or disconfirm all the really shocking and offensive stuff very shortly. I have my priors and you have yours. We will see how it pans out.
In general we should do our best not to be offended by descriptive claims and hypotheses, as reality is not constrained by ideology, though we may pretend it is.
In general we should do our best not to be offended by descriptive claims and hypotheses, as reality is not constrained by ideology, though we may pretend it is.
5+6 = 11. Where's my praise? 9-5=4. I deserve more praise.
The cashier told me my bill was $4.33, just like it said on the display. I praised him for speaking truth.
Sarcasm aside, woodruffw's emphasis was on "truth", with the clear statement that Cochrane is not expressing truths but is making "unsubstantiated claims about race and sex" which are "just plain incorrect".
You earlier write that these are "facts that are taboo to acknowledge". If they are "facts", then why do we have to wait to "confirm or disconfirm all the really shocking and offensive stuff"? Shouldn't we have the facts already?
If we have to wait for confirmation then that's an hypothesis.
The cashier told me my bill was $4.33, just like it said on the display. I praised him for speaking truth.
Sarcasm aside, woodruffw's emphasis was on "truth", with the clear statement that Cochrane is not expressing truths but is making "unsubstantiated claims about race and sex" which are "just plain incorrect".
You earlier write that these are "facts that are taboo to acknowledge". If they are "facts", then why do we have to wait to "confirm or disconfirm all the really shocking and offensive stuff"? Shouldn't we have the facts already?
If we have to wait for confirmation then that's an hypothesis.
You have an infallible source for this correctness? Offensive to some, sure, not NYT material... that's OK.
We have a lot to learn about viruses. And viral-like ways in which life uses genetic material, that don't quite fit into how we're used to thinking. Probably he's wrong about this idea, but generating lots of such hypotheses & finding ways to test them seems like a great idea.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17540094
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16139798
We have a lot to learn about viruses. And viral-like ways in which life uses genetic material, that don't quite fit into how we're used to thinking. Probably he's wrong about this idea, but generating lots of such hypotheses & finding ways to test them seems like a great idea.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17540094
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16139798
Science isn't about infallibility, it's about overwhelming bodies of evidence supporting a conclusion inductively.
There is overwhelming evidence, anthropological and biological, that homosexuality is (at least!) as old as genetically modern humans. There is no evidence of any sort of exceptional origin for homosexuality in humans, especially in light of homosexual behavior in other species. The very idea of a dual (or multiple) emergence of homosexuality across species violates one of the central dogmas of genetics: that the parsimonious explanation is always preferable.
Spitting out a bunch of low quality hypotheses and then building the rest of your career on them (as Cochran did with his claims about Ashkenazi intelligence) is not how good science is done.
There is overwhelming evidence, anthropological and biological, that homosexuality is (at least!) as old as genetically modern humans. There is no evidence of any sort of exceptional origin for homosexuality in humans, especially in light of homosexual behavior in other species. The very idea of a dual (or multiple) emergence of homosexuality across species violates one of the central dogmas of genetics: that the parsimonious explanation is always preferable.
Spitting out a bunch of low quality hypotheses and then building the rest of your career on them (as Cochran did with his claims about Ashkenazi intelligence) is not how good science is done.
I think you may be responding to a stronger, clearly wrong, hypothesis... in which some virus landed on Haight-Ashbury in 1965? And this is kind-of what I'm arguing against -- ruling out a whole line of thought because you take offence at some version.
Every STD has a massive incentive to alter sexual behaviour. Some do: Syphilis makes you horny. And we probably haven't found all of them: if AIDS was no worse for you than Toxoplasmosis, would we have tracked it down? So maybe a whole lot of sexual behaviour is influenced by viruses, maybe in lots of animals. Where would you look to test this? At behaviours which don't seem obviously motivated by standard Darwinian concerns.
Certainly this is a tentative idea, nobody should get too attached to it. Probably there are people saying this more politely than Cochran. Some of us like the blunt style, it wastes less time.
Every STD has a massive incentive to alter sexual behaviour. Some do: Syphilis makes you horny. And we probably haven't found all of them: if AIDS was no worse for you than Toxoplasmosis, would we have tracked it down? So maybe a whole lot of sexual behaviour is influenced by viruses, maybe in lots of animals. Where would you look to test this? At behaviours which don't seem obviously motivated by standard Darwinian concerns.
Certainly this is a tentative idea, nobody should get too attached to it. Probably there are people saying this more politely than Cochran. Some of us like the blunt style, it wastes less time.
Do you consider them to be true? Because I don't.
If not, which "facts that are taboo to acknowledge" are you referring to?
If not, which "facts that are taboo to acknowledge" are you referring to?
That’s a looooot or claims without anything like citations and support in that blog. It all sounds alright until you realize it’s a house of cards shown to you at a very particular angle under the best possible light. I was sort of curious if it was a one-off from someone who didn’t know how to source their claims, but reading some more on that site it seems to be more like very genteel propaganda. The theme seems to be a retread of old ideas on sex, race, and genetics arrived at by cherry picking results which agree with the premise. Well written prose, but devoid of intellectual rigour.
It’s a blog post. Basically everything there is not controversial in the relevant fields.
The difference in spatial rotation is extremely well replicated:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19086027_Emergence_...
The difference in grip strength:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17186303/
It just is the case that professional women’s sports teams lose to male high school teams regularly:https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.yahoo.com/amphtml/sports/blo...
I don’t think lack of citations is your true objection.
The difference in spatial rotation is extremely well replicated:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19086027_Emergence_...
The difference in grip strength:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17186303/
It just is the case that professional women’s sports teams lose to male high school teams regularly:https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.yahoo.com/amphtml/sports/blo...
I don’t think lack of citations is your true objection.
I wasn’t concerned about no-brainers like grip-strength, which really in no way bears on the central claims made.
Then provide some examples.
[deleted]
I agree citations would be nice, but not having them doesn't make it false, just means you need to do the research yourself.
For example, a quick google corroborates the boys under 15 team beating the women pro soccer team [1]. Or men dying twice as much in car accidents[2].
1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3609949/Ma...
2. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit...
For example, a quick google corroborates the boys under 15 team beating the women pro soccer team [1]. Or men dying twice as much in car accidents[2].
1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3609949/Ma...
2. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit...
The article hints that the effects of testosterone may be placebo, but at least physical muscle-wise, I’ve always found this study fascinating. Summary of the study - guys who took excessive amounts of testosterone who sat on the couch build 3x the muscle of men who worked out naturally with weights consistently.
https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/steroids-vs-natural/
https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/steroids-vs-natural/
In regard to this study I'd like to point one thing. Therapeutic dose of testosterone enanthate (that can be prescribed legally) is nowhere near 600mg a week. Highest I heard of is 200mg. That will put average man above normal levels. 600mg is insanely high (3-4 times maximum test level) but the risk goes linear with the dose. At that level they have to be monitored pretty in-depth (BP, hematocrit, electrolytes, kidney function, lipid profile and probably psychiatric evaluation every 6-8 months. I know a lof of BB who ended up on SSRIs or in funny towns)
[deleted]
strange article, not fully accurate either.
> no one individual gets to choose precisely what changes it produces. As one friend who had started T said to me, “Let me know if you find a way to get the big muscles and keep the head hair!
Actually, we know. DHT causes the male pattern baldness. The conversion from T to DHT by 5 alpha reductase can be blocked by drugs.
We don't have good topicals or selective drugs yet, so people complain about the side effects of current drugs like finasteride. But it's not like we are talking of a huge scientific unknown, or if it is impossible to do that is described.
> no one individual gets to choose precisely what changes it produces. As one friend who had started T said to me, “Let me know if you find a way to get the big muscles and keep the head hair!
Actually, we know. DHT causes the male pattern baldness. The conversion from T to DHT by 5 alpha reductase can be blocked by drugs.
We don't have good topicals or selective drugs yet, so people complain about the side effects of current drugs like finasteride. But it's not like we are talking of a huge scientific unknown, or if it is impossible to do that is described.
DHT plus the male pattern baldness genes. Not everyone who takes T would even be affected at all hair wise, propecia or not.
Not to be critical, but I find this article to be uncompelling.
I began working out when I was 13. After college post 2010 I experimented with Testosterone, from 200mg a week to 600mg a week. It’s a whole underground culture.
My own experiences were exactly like the stereotype— increased libido, increased muscle mass, increase strength, increase mood swings. The sex drive is palpable. It’s ferocoiously potent, increasing sexual stamina, confidence, euphoric feelings of dominance.
I have coached many pupils in the realm of Testosterone injection. Every single one has experienced the same side effects.
I want to stress something. The endocrine system is vastly complex. Every hormone influences a cascade of other hormones. For this reason, maintaining health (strenuous exercise and a sound diet) is essential for ensuring those side effects are predictable.
For example, when testosterone levels are high, the body naturally wants to convert excess testosterone to other hormones— namely estrogen.
High estrogen can cause all sorts of side effects, including bloat, fat gain, mood swings, acne, and gynomastia. (Think what happens when a woman gets her monthly period... her body is flush with estrogen, and all the accompanying side effects).
To remedy this, you take estrogen blockers. Or AI’s (aromatase inhibitors, which is the enzyme catalyst responsible for converting T into E).
However, some estrogen is good. It is what causes a lot of that well-being and euphoria. Block all estrogen and energy levels plummet.
This is just one. There is DHT, or di-hydro-testosterone, which is 10x more androgenic than testosterone. There is cortisol. There is insulin. There are effects on HGH levels.
The list of cascading influences on the endocrine system is complex.
What else effects hormones? Exercise- circulation and digestion.
Diet. What food you consume effects your sugar levels, which effect your hormones. Your fat and cholesterol consumption affects your hormones. (Cholesterol is the base fat molecule that the body uses to manufacture all other fat based hormones. Without it, hormone levels are depressed, and the endocrine system functions sub optimally).
I say all this because it’s complex.
Human organisms are complex.
If you don’t understand or appreciate the complexity, you’ll ascribe cause where it’s undue.
There is no magic bullet.
We are a complex organism.
I will say, however, that testosterone is powerful.
I am no longer on it today, and I look back and think about how powerfully it affected me psychologically, physically, and emotionally. It definitely can change your life, and you can get addicted to that change. It’s empowering.
I began working out when I was 13. After college post 2010 I experimented with Testosterone, from 200mg a week to 600mg a week. It’s a whole underground culture.
My own experiences were exactly like the stereotype— increased libido, increased muscle mass, increase strength, increase mood swings. The sex drive is palpable. It’s ferocoiously potent, increasing sexual stamina, confidence, euphoric feelings of dominance.
I have coached many pupils in the realm of Testosterone injection. Every single one has experienced the same side effects.
I want to stress something. The endocrine system is vastly complex. Every hormone influences a cascade of other hormones. For this reason, maintaining health (strenuous exercise and a sound diet) is essential for ensuring those side effects are predictable.
For example, when testosterone levels are high, the body naturally wants to convert excess testosterone to other hormones— namely estrogen.
High estrogen can cause all sorts of side effects, including bloat, fat gain, mood swings, acne, and gynomastia. (Think what happens when a woman gets her monthly period... her body is flush with estrogen, and all the accompanying side effects).
To remedy this, you take estrogen blockers. Or AI’s (aromatase inhibitors, which is the enzyme catalyst responsible for converting T into E).
However, some estrogen is good. It is what causes a lot of that well-being and euphoria. Block all estrogen and energy levels plummet.
This is just one. There is DHT, or di-hydro-testosterone, which is 10x more androgenic than testosterone. There is cortisol. There is insulin. There are effects on HGH levels.
The list of cascading influences on the endocrine system is complex.
What else effects hormones? Exercise- circulation and digestion.
Diet. What food you consume effects your sugar levels, which effect your hormones. Your fat and cholesterol consumption affects your hormones. (Cholesterol is the base fat molecule that the body uses to manufacture all other fat based hormones. Without it, hormone levels are depressed, and the endocrine system functions sub optimally).
I say all this because it’s complex.
Human organisms are complex.
If you don’t understand or appreciate the complexity, you’ll ascribe cause where it’s undue.
There is no magic bullet.
We are a complex organism.
I will say, however, that testosterone is powerful.
I am no longer on it today, and I look back and think about how powerfully it affected me psychologically, physically, and emotionally. It definitely can change your life, and you can get addicted to that change. It’s empowering.
This. I have done many a cycle in my life, and of things far stronger than test.
I hate that I only feel like the person I want to be on cycle.
It speaks to the fragility and impermanence of the mind that a simple injection can make you a completely different person.
If you've never had your mind altered, you cannot understand how fragile your self-identity is.
I hate that I only feel like the person I want to be on cycle.
It speaks to the fragility and impermanence of the mind that a simple injection can make you a completely different person.
If you've never had your mind altered, you cannot understand how fragile your self-identity is.
I’m with you.
It’s been a struggle to reconcile life on it and off it.
For six years I pinned. EW or EOD or ED. I got tired of it. It was consuming, and I felt like an addict.
Testosterone is a carnal experience.
I got tired of the mood swings. I felt amazing but, unstable. Certain things were not stable. My relationships specifically.
I’m off it now, and I have to say, life is not as colorful, not as intense, not as visceral, not as exciting.
My sex drive is average.
I retained a lot of muscle mass. I still look good, and healthy. But I am a larger human being. I don’t see that changing too much. I’m not as lean. My hair has receded faster than it otherwise would have if I never took it. I have more bodyhair, specifically the back and chest and stomach, which isn’t all that sexy. I used to shave it. But I don’t even care anymore. Take me as I am.
I miss the pump. The fullness. The excitement. The leanness. The vascularity. The ability to have sex 10 times in a row. The euphoric organisms that were like pure ecstasy. I loved sex.
The endless energy.
But I also felt like it was all artificial. That I was not really this person without it. And it was self obsessive. Mostly worried about what other people thought. It was so carnal, so... superficial. Physical.
That didn’t leave me feeling too great.
I think about getting back on. I’d look better. I’d feel better. It’s like the best antidepressant, if you can handle occasional mood swings and intense reactions.
But I’m happy. I’m calmer. My life is more consistent. The highs aren’t are high, but neither are the lows. The relationship with my girlfriend has gotten more stable. The fact that I’ve had a girlfriend more than a year is a testament to being off.
I’m focusing on my intellectual pursuits once again.
Maybe when I’m approaching 40 I’ll consider TRT again.
Until then, I’m okay with the way things are, and the way I am.
It’s been a struggle to reconcile life on it and off it.
For six years I pinned. EW or EOD or ED. I got tired of it. It was consuming, and I felt like an addict.
Testosterone is a carnal experience.
I got tired of the mood swings. I felt amazing but, unstable. Certain things were not stable. My relationships specifically.
I’m off it now, and I have to say, life is not as colorful, not as intense, not as visceral, not as exciting.
My sex drive is average.
I retained a lot of muscle mass. I still look good, and healthy. But I am a larger human being. I don’t see that changing too much. I’m not as lean. My hair has receded faster than it otherwise would have if I never took it. I have more bodyhair, specifically the back and chest and stomach, which isn’t all that sexy. I used to shave it. But I don’t even care anymore. Take me as I am.
I miss the pump. The fullness. The excitement. The leanness. The vascularity. The ability to have sex 10 times in a row. The euphoric organisms that were like pure ecstasy. I loved sex.
The endless energy.
But I also felt like it was all artificial. That I was not really this person without it. And it was self obsessive. Mostly worried about what other people thought. It was so carnal, so... superficial. Physical.
That didn’t leave me feeling too great.
I think about getting back on. I’d look better. I’d feel better. It’s like the best antidepressant, if you can handle occasional mood swings and intense reactions.
But I’m happy. I’m calmer. My life is more consistent. The highs aren’t are high, but neither are the lows. The relationship with my girlfriend has gotten more stable. The fact that I’ve had a girlfriend more than a year is a testament to being off.
I’m focusing on my intellectual pursuits once again.
Maybe when I’m approaching 40 I’ll consider TRT again.
Until then, I’m okay with the way things are, and the way I am.
I just turned 40 a few days ago, and after a bad divorce decided to pull my body out of the shitter again.
Dealing with a divorce on tren+pose+t is, awful. But the results are hard to argue with. I go to the gym 6 days a week, I lift all the things I'm supposed to, and the weight comes off, and the muscles grow. I've lost a shirt size in 8 weeks; my biceps don't fit in my shirts anymore. In 6 months I'll be unrecognizable, then I am getting out. No matter how much heart I put into the gym, I cannot lose weight with diet and exercise.
It is so frustrating dealing with doctors at this age. They'll tell you "diet and exercise" knowing full well you don't have the hormones to lose weight or recover from exercise, and that medical science has proven diets don't work because obesity is primarily a hormonal problem or a reaction to stress. About five years ago, I hired a professional bodybuilder as a diet coach/trainer and he diagnosed me with low T and adrenal insufficiency. I brought the tests to my doc he says, "this is good stuff", and he still won't prescribe T, but he still has the balls to say, "I want to see you at the gym."
I am going to run the gauntlet this one last time. Wish I wasn't single, however. I just try to burn it off the energy at the gym.
I'm glad you've reached some stability, and thanks for the thoughtful reply. :)
Dealing with a divorce on tren+pose+t is, awful. But the results are hard to argue with. I go to the gym 6 days a week, I lift all the things I'm supposed to, and the weight comes off, and the muscles grow. I've lost a shirt size in 8 weeks; my biceps don't fit in my shirts anymore. In 6 months I'll be unrecognizable, then I am getting out. No matter how much heart I put into the gym, I cannot lose weight with diet and exercise.
It is so frustrating dealing with doctors at this age. They'll tell you "diet and exercise" knowing full well you don't have the hormones to lose weight or recover from exercise, and that medical science has proven diets don't work because obesity is primarily a hormonal problem or a reaction to stress. About five years ago, I hired a professional bodybuilder as a diet coach/trainer and he diagnosed me with low T and adrenal insufficiency. I brought the tests to my doc he says, "this is good stuff", and he still won't prescribe T, but he still has the balls to say, "I want to see you at the gym."
I am going to run the gauntlet this one last time. Wish I wasn't single, however. I just try to burn it off the energy at the gym.
I'm glad you've reached some stability, and thanks for the thoughtful reply. :)
If I may chime in: trenbolone and boldenone will hit your psyche hard.
Here's a short on pro bodybuilders. Most of them know jack shit about endocrine system. I'm sorry, but I work in this business. I've seen pros with IFBB pro card having their "pupils" on 100iu insulin daily. It's pure stupid. And I don't blame your doc because adrenal insufficiency is moot, there's a ton of good evidence on that. I've also seen one idiot with IFBB pro being wheeled into ER because he was doing cocaine while on juice and decided to fix with muscle cramps by giving himself IV with potassium. Put together hyperkalemia and cocaine and you're in for a V-fib.
I've also seen pro bodybuilders suggesting other stupid things. Some work, some not, main difference is that when you get "diagnosed" by a pro bodybuilder he's responsible for nothing :)
To my point: diet and exercise do work. Your adrenal insufficiency was probably effed up cortisol curve (lack of sleep? stress? caffeine hard all day?) but it's not adrenal insufficiency. Adrenal insuffiency is a SERIOUS clinically recognized condition called Addison's diseases and it's symptoms are rather obvious.
Low T as for a bodybuilder usually means anything below 400ng/dl. Not 100% healthy and certainly not the best for gym (600ng/dl-800ng/dl range is best), but your doc ins't responsible what's legal in US.
My advise would be, if you feel bad on low T, remain on testosterone alone. The main problem with boldenone is CV load (elevated hematocrit) and trenbolone REALLY damages psyche and kidneys. It messes up serotonin metabolism HARD. You can check any respected AAS guru and he will tell you that a month on Trenbolone is ALL that should be done and that's for pros only.
I do get that you want fast effects, but it's not worth it. Any bodybuilder I know who used to run trenbolone long term has huge psychological problems, with few ending in the funny town.
In short: if you need to do it, drop trenbolone and boldenone, switch yourself to nandrolone, monitor your BP and hematocrit (you can ask your doc for telmisartan) and limit yourself to something like 400mg of testosterone a week. You will just live longer and better.
Here's a short on pro bodybuilders. Most of them know jack shit about endocrine system. I'm sorry, but I work in this business. I've seen pros with IFBB pro card having their "pupils" on 100iu insulin daily. It's pure stupid. And I don't blame your doc because adrenal insufficiency is moot, there's a ton of good evidence on that. I've also seen one idiot with IFBB pro being wheeled into ER because he was doing cocaine while on juice and decided to fix with muscle cramps by giving himself IV with potassium. Put together hyperkalemia and cocaine and you're in for a V-fib.
I've also seen pro bodybuilders suggesting other stupid things. Some work, some not, main difference is that when you get "diagnosed" by a pro bodybuilder he's responsible for nothing :)
To my point: diet and exercise do work. Your adrenal insufficiency was probably effed up cortisol curve (lack of sleep? stress? caffeine hard all day?) but it's not adrenal insufficiency. Adrenal insuffiency is a SERIOUS clinically recognized condition called Addison's diseases and it's symptoms are rather obvious.
Low T as for a bodybuilder usually means anything below 400ng/dl. Not 100% healthy and certainly not the best for gym (600ng/dl-800ng/dl range is best), but your doc ins't responsible what's legal in US.
My advise would be, if you feel bad on low T, remain on testosterone alone. The main problem with boldenone is CV load (elevated hematocrit) and trenbolone REALLY damages psyche and kidneys. It messes up serotonin metabolism HARD. You can check any respected AAS guru and he will tell you that a month on Trenbolone is ALL that should be done and that's for pros only.
I do get that you want fast effects, but it's not worth it. Any bodybuilder I know who used to run trenbolone long term has huge psychological problems, with few ending in the funny town.
In short: if you need to do it, drop trenbolone and boldenone, switch yourself to nandrolone, monitor your BP and hematocrit (you can ask your doc for telmisartan) and limit yourself to something like 400mg of testosterone a week. You will just live longer and better.
You may, and thank you for the reply. You are correct about this. I'm 6 weeks in with tren and near major depression. I'm going to try falling back to T as you've suggested.
However, I have NEVER run tren more than 8 weeks, and maybe half a dozen cycles in my life. It is just too powerful.
Again, thank you.
However, I have NEVER run tren more than 8 weeks, and maybe half a dozen cycles in my life. It is just too powerful.
Again, thank you.
If I may, and this is a delicate topic but I often suggest talking to a psychiatrist who specialises in depression or a clinical psychologist. I know antidepressants (and visiting a psych is still a stigma somewhere, it shouldn't be) have a very bad reputation (in part because prescribing rules were relaxed and tons of people live on SSRIs for years) but profesionall help is priceless.
I've met men with really scary problems they weren't even able to talk about and I mean tough guys who look like Ron Swansons tough uncle. I recently talked to a guy owning a biz in construction AND being a first responder. Testosterone helps because it has antidepresive effect but the issue may be more complicated - it's good to be able to talk to someone.
I've met men with really scary problems they weren't even able to talk about and I mean tough guys who look like Ron Swansons tough uncle. I recently talked to a guy owning a biz in construction AND being a first responder. Testosterone helps because it has antidepresive effect but the issue may be more complicated - it's good to be able to talk to someone.
I've been mulling over a response to this for a few days. I appreciate the advice and recognize it as true. I am ok, however. When I said I had major depression, I meant, I recognized the feeling of it having been diagnosed with it in the past. I have in the past sought help and am aware of the difference between depression caused by hormones, drugs, situational depression, etc. I have always found that clean living-- exercise, sleep, and in my case staying away from wheat and other allergens, almost always alleviate the problem in a few days.
Again, Thanks.
Again, Thanks.
Cool, happy you have your stuff together :)
> and that medical science has proven diets don't work because obesity is primarily a hormonal problem or a reaction to stress
Wait, when did that happen?
Wait, when did that happen?
A comma would have made that sentence much better, my apologies. The clinical data on long-term weight loss is miserable. The fact is that almost everyone gains weight back (as high as 95% of patients after 5 years), and something like 60% gain more weight back than they started.
I went on to speculate that most people who are obese have an underlying condition.
I went on to speculate that most people who are obese have an underlying condition.
They usually have underlying psychological condition which they fail to address. Note that all the "regain" studies were done in cohorts that had either severe problems or lacked proper professional assistance (which these days you can get online for 100USD).
The fact that you can loose weight is simple physics. The fact that these people often have endocrine issues is near tautology because adipose tissue HAS endocrine activity and thus ones changes hormonal profile if in excess. Usual set of changes include: insulin resistance, lower testosterone, low thyroid hormones, leptin resistance, higher SHBG and usually higher estrogen.
Doesn't mean dieting won't work but if someone is long-term overweight he needs more work than just a difference in bodyweight.
The fact that you can loose weight is simple physics. The fact that these people often have endocrine issues is near tautology because adipose tissue HAS endocrine activity and thus ones changes hormonal profile if in excess. Usual set of changes include: insulin resistance, lower testosterone, low thyroid hormones, leptin resistance, higher SHBG and usually higher estrogen.
Doesn't mean dieting won't work but if someone is long-term overweight he needs more work than just a difference in bodyweight.
For me, it was celiac disease.
It happens. There are multiple others possible problems, but I'd say that it's 20% other and 80% diet
This is pure honesty and wanting to help. People who feel better on cycle usually a) in fact do need TRT and b) should consider professional counsel in regard to their psychological help. Testosterone is very potent antidepressant - if you only feel good on T it means you only feel good on antidepressants. This information with the context you mentioned (trenbolone which has net negative effect on serotonin metabolism in the brain) suggests you should visit a doc and talk about SSRIs. Seriously.
As a man in my early twenties, I found myself with a sexual partner for the first time and was dismayed to find that I couldn't achieve orgasm through intercourse. I asked a doctor and he found my testosterone to be very low, well below the "normal range" cutoffs. I was prescribed testosterone replacement therapy (TRT), where I would inject myself every other week with testosterone, not unlike body builders though with the goal of obtaining normal levels not supraphysiological ones. According to bloodwork, that goal was met (which means if my T levels were now normal in the middle of the two weeks that they were certainly well above the normal range for the first day or two after an injection).
However, I felt no effects of the hormone. It did not solve the original problem - my libido was flat, my erections still adequate but no more energized than before, my intercourse still failing to stimulate me to orgasm. But I had also read the literature ahead of time and had come with expectations of many other side-effects that sounded great: the obvious muscle and strength effects, increased alertness or energy, decreased fat percentage. It seemed like everything that could be improved, was! (Except infertility and a chance to grow boobs in an ironic twist of stereotypes.) But I didn't see any of those effects - my numbers at the gym were still unremarkable, I still sometimes felt tired for no reason, my body looked the same. As far as I could tell, I was on placebo - except the bloodwork confirmed its effects. (I think I experienced more spontaneous nighttime erections, something that I only naturally got sporadically and considered more of a nuisance than a benefit.)
This was extremely disheartening. I stopped taking it after half a year when my relationship died in large part due to lack of good sex.
I say this mostly because all accounts of TRT seem to skew towards the miraculous. Like all things, its effects vary from person to person. Had I had tempered expectations, maybe I would not have been so discouraged. Maybe I would have tried alternative approaches to solving my problems. I don't know.
Some years later, I finally had satisfying sex. No medication involved, just a little persistence and finding the right person. I still struggle with not climaxing every time and sometimes am fantasizing that I could go back onto T and fix that. Maybe I'll try it again with expectations for a small, incremental improvement. Or maybe not.
So while this article is being met with a fairly negative reception in this comments, I actually found it a breath of fresh air. Had I read it ahead of time, I might have had more realistic expectations! I didn't really read it as giving a stamp of approval to attempts to over-state the sociological and gender studies points of view (it seems fairly critical of those, opting more to just say that it was too complex a hormone to sum up as a miraculously masculine molecule). Those using it to reshape society seem to be criticized by the article as possibly relying mostly on placebo effects, on society's expectations for what testosterone should do, ironically.
Also, the literature on TRT is surprisingly limited. I thought that young males with below normal levels, as one of the most approved recipients of TRT, would have been a large portion of the studies. Instead, I struggled to find ones that studied my cohort. Older men with dropping T levels (which is entirely normal) were often the subjects, presumably because that's where the money is these days. I worry also that the increasing use of it in young transgender people may be equally poorly studied.
However, I felt no effects of the hormone. It did not solve the original problem - my libido was flat, my erections still adequate but no more energized than before, my intercourse still failing to stimulate me to orgasm. But I had also read the literature ahead of time and had come with expectations of many other side-effects that sounded great: the obvious muscle and strength effects, increased alertness or energy, decreased fat percentage. It seemed like everything that could be improved, was! (Except infertility and a chance to grow boobs in an ironic twist of stereotypes.) But I didn't see any of those effects - my numbers at the gym were still unremarkable, I still sometimes felt tired for no reason, my body looked the same. As far as I could tell, I was on placebo - except the bloodwork confirmed its effects. (I think I experienced more spontaneous nighttime erections, something that I only naturally got sporadically and considered more of a nuisance than a benefit.)
This was extremely disheartening. I stopped taking it after half a year when my relationship died in large part due to lack of good sex.
I say this mostly because all accounts of TRT seem to skew towards the miraculous. Like all things, its effects vary from person to person. Had I had tempered expectations, maybe I would not have been so discouraged. Maybe I would have tried alternative approaches to solving my problems. I don't know.
Some years later, I finally had satisfying sex. No medication involved, just a little persistence and finding the right person. I still struggle with not climaxing every time and sometimes am fantasizing that I could go back onto T and fix that. Maybe I'll try it again with expectations for a small, incremental improvement. Or maybe not.
So while this article is being met with a fairly negative reception in this comments, I actually found it a breath of fresh air. Had I read it ahead of time, I might have had more realistic expectations! I didn't really read it as giving a stamp of approval to attempts to over-state the sociological and gender studies points of view (it seems fairly critical of those, opting more to just say that it was too complex a hormone to sum up as a miraculously masculine molecule). Those using it to reshape society seem to be criticized by the article as possibly relying mostly on placebo effects, on society's expectations for what testosterone should do, ironically.
Also, the literature on TRT is surprisingly limited. I thought that young males with below normal levels, as one of the most approved recipients of TRT, would have been a large portion of the studies. Instead, I struggled to find ones that studied my cohort. Older men with dropping T levels (which is entirely normal) were often the subjects, presumably because that's where the money is these days. I worry also that the increasing use of it in young transgender people may be equally poorly studied.
[deleted]
Summary: Testosterone doesn’t have well-understood effects because they are complex and affect individuals differently. It’s more like a placebo and symbol of artificial expectations society has about what is “masculine”. The demand for T is a sign that society is sick.
Something I think should pointed out in the article is that the author tries to understand testosterone (I don't know why, since it's effects through maturation are actually quite a bit studied, there are medical textbooks on it) through it's effects on trans people and/or people abusing it or using it for rejuventaion.
If so, the picture is far more complicated.
This actually makes about as much sense as trying to understand Fourier transform based on how stupid instagramming is.
If so, the picture is far more complicated.
This actually makes about as much sense as trying to understand Fourier transform based on how stupid instagramming is.
Testosterone levels in the West have declined by about a factor of two over the past few decades (https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/92/1/196/2598434). Maybe society is indeed sick.
Or maybe it was always sick and is getting better? There’s no war in Europe. No war in the Western Hemisphere. Violent crime in the US is at a multi-decade low. There has been a human in space for the entirety of the 21st century. Most of the world carries a supercomputer with instant access to the sum total of human knowledge in their pocket.
We live in an age of marvels.
If society is indeed sick then the cure probably isn’t worth it.
We live in an age of marvels.
If society is indeed sick then the cure probably isn’t worth it.
It'd be a nice theory but we actually know that as men get their testosterone levels lower they get to be at higher and higher risk of certain diseases. For example, testosterone is often cited as carrying risk of CVD and for many years we were confused why men with below low cutoff testosterone are at even higher risk of CVD than men just above high cutoff. As it turns out, estrogen, another sex hormone, pretty important for CV health is made through aromatisation from testosterone in the walls of blood vessels. Thus, surprisingly being low on testosterone actually increases risk of CVD through estrogen insufficiency. Yes, human endocrine system is complicated like that, and no, testosterone is not a fashion or something we can improve because we're smarter. We're studying AAS for about 70 years now and we still know pretty little. Testosterone and estrogen are "kinda" understood as they're mainly endocrine hormones. As for those secreted in para- and autocrine fashion (e.g. DHT) we still know not enough.
I mean, who probably has more testosterone: the guy sitting at a desk typing for 8 hours a day, or the guy who just impaled an enemy with a spear and savagely roars
I have no clue whether anything in this article is true or false. Only that people might have used Testosterone to justify male dominance. Not saying it is false, but like what is the evidence? I just see vague anecdotes and personal opinions from people with no scientific training.
I admit, it did get me to think and I am very curious what the answer is.