Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Testosterone is the drug of the future

fusion.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 308 posts

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#71

Post by nailer »

paganel wrote: post #29
toolz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>- I didn't get huge muscles or less body fat with more testosterone (huge myth that I thought would change for me) The many studies done on this subject show that testosterone makes a huge impact on muscle growth. Take this 10 week study for instance, http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101 . The placebo group working out didn't experience nearly as much muscle gain as those taking testosterone did…

> The many studies done on this subject show that testosterone makes a huge impact on muscle growth Genuine question: Why this emphasis on increasing "muscle growth"? What benefits does it bring us (men)?

Many women find physically strong men more attractive than weaker men. The benefit this brings men is allowing their DNA to replicate.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#72

Post by danielbarla »

toolz wrote: post #50
raverbashing wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on a lot of factors. 1 - Exercise 2 - The dosage. Having a slight amount over the normal dosage won't cause a big gain in muscle mass. (600mg is a significant dosage, see Table 3 on the article for the sorological difference)

I'm not sure I'm understanding your point. Of course exercise changes muscle gains, but the surprising result was that the men who did not exercise had more muscle gains than those on the placebo who did exercise. As for the dosage, yes, this study had really high dosage and reports no negative side effects for the 10 week period it was used.

Personally, I'm not very surprised by this (testosterone causing larger increases than exercise). There are plenty of examples in nature of relatively "lazy" animals with large amounts of muscle (e.g. gorillas, lions, etc).

Of course, we're comparing animals with large genetic differences to each other, but my point is that exercise does not seem to be the primary cause of muscle, in general. It just happens to be the main parameter we're in control of.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#73

Post by freshfey »

return0 wrote: post #13
freshfey wrote: post #10

As someone who went from 430 ng/dl to 1024 ng/dl naturally in about two years time (from age 23 to 25) the only thing I can say is don't jump to too many conclusions here. - Your testosterone should be naturally high if you're below 30 (and male) - If not, something is wrong and you need to fix it (start with blood work, check your diet, move) - If you testosterone is in the normal ranges (blood work recommends betwe…

You 're quite young. i wonder if it is possible to change so fast when you're older.

take a look at the book "4 Hour Body" by Tim Ferriss, there in the chapter Improving Sex, sub-chapter: "Sex Machine I: Adventures in Tripling Testosterone"

I think in there the author, Tim Ferriss aged 34(?), mentions how he went from 2xx to 6xx in a very short amount of time, mainly by changing his nutrition.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#74

Post by vidarh »

mackwic wrote: post #45
collyw wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Placebo is an effective harm free way of improving many conditions. Why dismiss it so readily?

The question is not if Placebo is an efficient method. We know for sure that it is. The question is if training and practicing meditation is better than doing nothing. If you don't beat the placebo, it could mean that there's nothing to train and practice.

It is meaningless to speculate on this without a concrete paper doing a concrete comparison of a specific concrete form of meditation vs. a concrete form of placebo, and without knowing whether or not the placebo was compared to a control group doing nothing.

You're right, it could mean there's nothing to train and practice. It also could mean there'd be a substantial placebo effect and a big gap from "doing nothing" to either the placebo or meditation, in which case, even if meditation were to turn out to be 100% placebo effect it would still be worthwhile to train and practice unless said researchers were to come up with a placebo that works just as well with less time spent.

What I know is that meditation has substantial subjective benefits for me. I don't care if that's 100% placebo effect and/or if I'm just tricking myself in other ways.

Because you know what? It doesn't matter.

Meditation makes me feel relaxed. It makes me feel as if I get insights into my mind and thought processes. It makes me feel like I have more energy. It make me feel more in control and in touch of my emotions and the world in general.

No matter the actual biochemical and psychological reasons for those feelings, they're still just as worthwhile outcomes to me.

That's easy to lose sight of.

Beating a placebo is an important measure when looking at drugs, because they pretty much all have potential risks and downsides (including the downside of cost). Showing provable effects is also important if considering prescribing meditation practice for psychological disorders, for example, because it could mean avoiding other treatment.

It is also worthwhile in order to learn more about the processes involved, and see what effects can be proven.

But it is largely uninteresting when considering casual meditation for someone who expects only subjective effects on mental state. In that case, what matters is mainly whether the perceived effects are sufficiently positive for someone to find it worthwhile to continue.

If it's all a trick of the mind, then fine. It still feels great.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#75

Post by freshfey »

toolz wrote: post #26
freshfey wrote: post #10

As someone who went from 430 ng/dl to 1024 ng/dl naturally in about two years time (from age 23 to 25) the only thing I can say is don't jump to too many conclusions here. - Your testosterone should be naturally high if you're below 30 (and male) - If not, something is wrong and you need to fix it (start with blood work, check your diet, move) - If you testosterone is in the normal ranges (blood work recommends betwe…

>- I didn't get huge muscles or less body fat with more testosterone (huge myth that I thought would change for me) The many studies done on this subject show that testosterone makes a huge impact on muscle growth. Take this 10 week study for instance, http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101 . The placebo group working out didn't experience nearly as much muscle gain as those taking testosterone did…

I can only answer with my personal experience here: During the intermittent fasting time (age 25), where I went from from 6xx to 1024ng/dl, I didn't gain significant amount of muscle, although I was working out with heavy (free) weights, 3x per week.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#76

Post by freshfey »

henryaj wrote: post #19
freshfey wrote: post #10

As someone who went from 430 ng/dl to 1024 ng/dl naturally in about two years time (from age 23 to 25) the only thing I can say is don't jump to too many conclusions here. - Your testosterone should be naturally high if you're below 30 (and male) - If not, something is wrong and you need to fix it (start with blood work, check your diet, move) - If you testosterone is in the normal ranges (blood work recommends betwe…

What are the details of your intermittent fasting?

in terms of timing you mean? I fasted for 14 hours and simply delayed/skipped breakfast, still eating 3 meals at around 2400 calories.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#77

Post by freshfey »

Simp wrote: post #18
freshfey wrote: post #10

As someone who went from 430 ng/dl to 1024 ng/dl naturally in about two years time (from age 23 to 25) the only thing I can say is don't jump to too many conclusions here. - Your testosterone should be naturally high if you're below 30 (and male) - If not, something is wrong and you need to fix it (start with blood work, check your diet, move) - If you testosterone is in the normal ranges (blood work recommends betwe…

"start meditating" Research has not shown that meditation beats a placebo Studies about meditation are usually of poor quality. Source: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/03/08/r...

Yeah again, if you only want to go after research, you might run in circles. Meditation has helped me and a lot of people I know, a lot. Whether it will work for you in your circumstances is a different question. But then: The study won't be much help, because you might have different variables in your life.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#78

Post by ansible »

paulojreis wrote: post #6
toadi wrote: post #2

Read about it 15 years ago in a Belgian magazine. A Belgian doctor was claiming the same. To be quite honest I use it already for 15 years and indeed it changes you. It helps me to be in "sana in corpore sano". Let's hope the negative health impacts on long term are not to bet so my body stays sano :)

Would you be kind enough to share your experience? I ask you this as a 29 yrs old who's mortified of aging and feels guilty as hell for having a "all-day-sitting" job.

Changing to sitting on an exercise ball or going to a standing desk is a less severe thing to try to increase your overall activity level. Cheap too.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#79

Post by Lio »

davak wrote: post #55

MD here. Just remember that women live longer than men. Although it'll never be proven that hormones are part of that provess, I think it's a good assumption. Many males as they get older become more lovable and more pleasent to be around because of natural hormone declines. There are a ton of health issues such as balding, coronary artery disease, prostate cancer, obstructive sleep apnea that are related to testoste…

"Women live longer than men" is interesting though.

Does that take into account the horrendous levels of male suicide? Statistically does this bump the average life expectancies down for men?

I'm definitely not disagreeing with you. It seems very plausible that human growth hormone could be linked to some cancers.

On a side note, is baldness actually a "health issue"? I mean I know mainstream media doesn't like to show balding men (40% over the age of 30. In TV and film not so much) but still, it's not actually life threatening.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#80

Post by raverbashing »

toolz wrote: post #50
raverbashing wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on a lot of factors. 1 - Exercise 2 - The dosage. Having a slight amount over the normal dosage won't cause a big gain in muscle mass. (600mg is a significant dosage, see Table 3 on the article for the sorological difference)

I'm not sure I'm understanding your point. Of course exercise changes muscle gains, but the surprising result was that the men who did not exercise had more muscle gains than those on the placebo who did exercise. As for the dosage, yes, this study had really high dosage and reports no negative side effects for the 10 week period it was used.

Not really surprising, I remember seeing a study with similar results, but I can't find it right now.
Post reply on HN