Worth taking trt with average t levels?

Deusmaximus

Deusmaximus

Fuchsia
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Posts
12,460
Reputation
26,953
Im at 578ng/dl, but want to build more muscles without the cardiovascular and hairloss risks. Would 150mg e5d bring enough benefits?
 
  • +1
Reactions: thecel and Htobrother
578 isn’t normal levels for an < 25 male. Only in 2020 has it become “average”.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Warlow, Incoming and Deleted member 8355
578 isn’t normal levels for an < 25 male. Only in 2020 has it become “average”.
You think there is a big difference for muscle building between average and above average (not supraphysiological) t levels?
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: CopingCel, Incoming and Deleted member 8355
Do you have any symptoms of low t?
 
Do you have any symptoms of low t?
I am not sweating anymore in the gym, cant increase weights or muscle mass. I am at this t level since i take finasteride. Before i was even lower (300-350ng/dl), and felt the same as today. I am now 26, but was a total different person at 19/20yrs old. More agressive, dominant and muscular than today.
 
578 isn’t normal levels for an < 25 male. Only in 2020 has it become “average”.
do you have a study on the normal t levels for age brackets? Not doubting it, just curious
 
do you have a study on the normal t levels for age brackets? Not doubting it, just curious

Average T level is 679 ng/ml for all males. If you're peak age then it should be higher.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jire, Incoming, Deleted member 8355 and 1 other person

Average T level is 679 ng/ml for all males. If you're peak age then it should be higher.
But still free t is the only number that counts for muscle building and well beeing. If average t level is 679, then i am not very far away with 578??
You still think i could benefit from 150mg e5d?
 
But still free t is the only number that counts for muscle building and well beeing. If average t level is 679, then i am not very far away with 578??
You still think i could benefit from 150mg e5d?
Average level is 679 for all men. That includes 60 year olds who get their T tested. Just take SARMs or steroids and lift weights to get ripped and look more high T. If you don't have low T symptoms then I don't see what TRT would do.
 
At 150mg E5D, you might as well just run high doses of HCG and Enclomiphene for your testes sake. That or just take real doses
 
  • +1
Reactions: Incoming and BlackPillChad
But still free t is the only number that counts for muscle building and well beeing. If average t level is 679, then i am not very far away with 578??
You still think i could benefit from 150mg e5d?
the difference between say 500 ng/dl and 700 ng/dl is neglible in terms of lean mass. You would need substantial improvements in test levels to make an actual difference. I remember reading a study where the difference between 500 ng/dl and 1300 ng/dl was a few lbs of lean mass
 
I am not sweating anymore in the gym, cant increase weights or muscle mass. I am at this t level since i take finasteride. Before i was even lower (300-350ng/dl), and felt the same as today. I am now 26, but was a total different person at 19/20yrs old. More agressive, dominant and muscular than today.
Wait does more sweat mean higher T levels?
 

Average T level is 679 ng/ml for all males. If you're peak age then it should be higher.
" Moreover, some researchers suggest that the healthiest men have testosterone levels between 400-600 ng/dL. "

>400 ng/dL
:soy::soy::soy::soy::soy::soy:
Soy2
 
  • JFL
Reactions: beyourself, Schönling, Deleted member 7580 and 1 other person
Haven't got it tested before but I'd guess somewhere around 700-900 ng/dL
Bro you cant say anything about peoples levels than. Yours might turn out to be 400 ng/dL
 
Bro you cant say anything about peoples levels than. Yours might turn out to be 400 ng/dL
I wasnt insulting anyone's levels.

I was insulting the cucked doctors calling 400-600 "the healthiest range". Its clearly a soy agenda against men
 
  • +1
Reactions: Incoming and MentalistKebab
I wasnt insulting anyone's levels.

I was insulting the cucked doctors calling 400-600 "the healthiest range". Its clearly a soy agenda against men
Oh okey. What is the healthiest range than ?
1200 ng/dL ?
 
Oh okey. What is the healthiest range than ?
1200 ng/dL ?
In my opinion, healthiest natural range is 900 - 1500 ng/dL.

This is how it was in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s before jews cucked everything with chemicals and birth control getting in the water and food.
 
  • +1
  • Hmm...
Reactions: Incoming and MentalistKebab
In my opinion, healthiest natural range is 900 - 1500 ng/dL.

This is how it was in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s before jews cucked everything with chemicals and birth control getting in the water and food.
Wait, were there tests from that era ?
 
Wait, were there tests from that era ?
In the 1940s it was around 900 - 1400 ng/dL average range I'm pretty sure

btw It was in the 1950s that the Food and Drug Administration approved female hormone use in beef cattle and sheep.
And then after this, other chemicals started getting added too
 
  • +1
Reactions: Incoming
In the 1940s it was around 900 - 1400 ng/dL average range I'm pretty sure

btw It was in the 1950s that the Food and Drug Administration approved female hormone use in beef cattle and sheep.
And then after this, other chemicals started getting added too
(((Food and drug administration)))
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 4332

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top