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

201–210 of 308 posts

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#201

Post by ddeck »

will_work4tears wrote: post #125
omegaham wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good point. Men do more dangerous jobs, are much more likely to be murdered, do riskier behavior, and commit suicide more often. On the other hand, women bear children, which historically would have been a huge cause of early death. Not as much these days, though.

That makes me wonder though, is the statistic that women live longer than men a first world, modern thing, or is it a historical trend? I'd think as little as a hundred years ago it might not have been as true, or am I off base?

According to this study referenced by Wikipedia [1] ("Why Men Die Younger: Causes of Mortality Differences by Sex" [2]):

>In her extensive review of the existing literature, Kalben concluded that the fact that women live longer than men was observed at least as far back as 1750 and that, with relatively equal treatment, today males in all parts of the world experience greater mortality than females.

A counterpoint to the point made on higher war related male mortality in the past is that mortality rates for females in child-bearing age groups have traditionally been higher than men of the same age, although this is no longer the case. [1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy#Gender_differen...

[2] https://www.soa.org/news-and-publications/publications/other...

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#202

Post by jessaustin »

gadders wrote: post #140
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…

>>Many males as they get older become more lovable and more pleasent to be around because of natural hormone declines. I resent that. I don't have low testosterone but I'd still say I was a loving father and husband and a generally good person. Being "manly" doesn't mean being a dick, quite the opposite.

I resent that.

Perhaps at a certain testosterone level, this sort of statement wouldn't bother you so much?

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#203

Post by kingmanaz »

vannevar wrote: post #165
golemotron wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. If testosterone is the culprit for increased risk of coronary artery disease, prostate cancer and sleep apnea, then doing things that naturally increase testosterone will increase risk also. Don't succumb to the naturalistic fallacy. The body doesn't care where it gets its chemicals from.

Don't succumb to the reductionist fallacy. The body is complex, and more than the sum of its parts, including its hormones. It's entirely possible that the process that produces testosterone naturally also has other effects that mitigate the downside of testosterone.

>Don't succumb to the reductionist fallacy. The body is complex, and more than the sum of its parts

The above needs to be repeated more often, particularly on HN.

Tech culture is overdue for an epistemological yin to its empiricist yang.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#204

Post by joncrocks »

gabemart wrote: post #62
paganel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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)?

"Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general."

Rip?

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#205

Post by slantyyz »

whizzrd wrote: post #31

Read the leaflets for this product: side effects may differ depending on the region of application ;) AU: http://www.besins-healthcare.com/pdf/testogel%20patient%20in... US: http://www.besins-healthcare.com/pdf/androgel_PI.pdf

I'm on TRT for life (see my other posts on this article for why), and I have used Androgel packets daily for 7 years.

The side effect that I have experience with is hair growth on some of the body areas (that were hairless before I started using it) that I apply it.

Keep in mind that I may be encountering fewer side effects because my body is not producing any significant testosterone itself. If you're using it as a supplement, you could experience more side effects.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#206

Post by johnward »

slantyyz wrote: post #187
johnward wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies have shown that creams are pretty terrible. Especially if you happen to have thyroid problems. They seem to work at first and then fade out for a lot of people. Shots just simply work and are cheaper.

I'm on TRT for life as a result of having testicular cancer twice. There are pros and cons to the various types of testosterone you could take. I'm using Androgel. From what I remember when researching my options in 2007 (things have possibly changed a lot since then): Monthly shots -- the thing with shots is that your levels go up right after you get your shot and slowly taper off. It's possible that your moods are…

I took weekly shots at 100mg. Cypionate is usually prescribed in the US. Enthate everywhere else. Monthly is way too long. Most doctors recommend every two weeks. However, there was a new report (http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-72185-4_11) that shows the half life (http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/articles/article-steroid-half-li...) of which they thought was closer to 12 days is actually something like 8. So at the end of the second week you're likely to start feel physical effects again (I know I do). Let me see if I can find it.

Orals shouldn't be considered.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#207

Post by johnward »

freshfey wrote: post #176
johnward wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original poster had High T levels to start with. Maybe he didn't notice much of a change. I noticed a significant change going from <120ng/dl to 500ng/dl (still less than OP). I always drop weight when I am on T and get much leaner without changing anything else. Well it does make it easier to work out and diet but even without any changes it makes a big difference. Each time I go off and onto something else like…

For a 23 year old, I wouldn't consider 4xx high, to be honest.

I believe he said he got close to 1000ng/dl naturally, which I consider on the high side based on lab ranges. 400ng/dl is actually interpreted by some doctors as low depending on symptoms even though it's "in range".

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#208

Post by pyre »

delecti wrote: post #200
vannevar wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't succumb to the reductionist fallacy. The body is complex, and more than the sum of its parts, including its hormones. It's entirely possible that the process that produces testosterone naturally also has other effects that mitigate the downside of testosterone.

It's perfectly reasonable to assume that the healthy living things that drive up T result in a longer lifespan, but I also don't see any conflict in thinking that it would make you live even longer still if not for that higher T.

True, but this:

> If testosterone is the culprit for increased risk of coronary artery disease, prostate cancer and sleep apnea, then doing things that naturally increase testosterone will increase risk also.

states that the result of higher T through natural processes is increased risk. It discounts the possibility that there is a net decreased risk due to the processes themselves decreasing risk to the point that it offsets the increased risk due to increased T.

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#209

Post by seestheday »

eyeJam wrote: post #149
johnward wrote: post #107

I'm 28 now and I have hypogonadisn and have experience using T and other options like clomid. My total T was I finally went to the doc. Got the blood work and was put ona low dosage of Testosterone. Enough to get me to the 500ng/dl range. My quality of life improved dramatically and I was the happy and productive person I used to be. I felt like I did in my early 20s instead of like I was approaching 50. Now I have t…

If anyone's ever watched the documentary "Bigger, Stronger, Faster*" they raise some interesting points questioning why steroids are demonized. Professional musicians take beta-blockers, athletes get laser eye surgery and take cortisone and opiate shots before/during competition, programmers take Adderall and Modafinil, male porn stars shot their penises full of drugs to stay erect for hours on end, etc. etc. Plenty…

Unfortunately the problem is that they work too well. Every time they are legalized in a limited capacity they are abused in professional sports.

The effect is massively amplified if you give women drugs because they don't have testosterone levels like men do. Those records that were set in the 70's pre-testing will likely never be broken.

The issue is that if it is legal, there is a huge incentive to take it to an abusive point especially in a celebrity economy like what exists is professional sports.

In some sports, professional athletes are almost constantly injured. Off the top of my head I can give you MMA (UFC) and american football as examples but I'm sure there are many others.

Healthy sports end where competitive sport begins.[1]

Right now we have an arms race that barely keeps it at bay. It's not an ideal solution but I think its better than athletes fully abusing their bodies with massive amounts of drugs like they did back in the East German Olympic days.

For non-professional athletes, I agree with you. It should not be demonized to the extent it is.

1. Quote from Brecht, referenced many times, e.g here http://gladwell.com/drugstore-athlete/

Re: Testosterone is the drug of the future

#210

Post by johnward »

JosephBrown wrote: post #155
johnward wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies have shown that creams are pretty terrible. Especially if you happen to have thyroid problems. They seem to work at first and then fade out for a lot of people. Shots just simply work and are cheaper.

Can you provide some references? I've been prescribed T and get it via a compounding pharmacy in liposome cream form, so now I'm curious if it's actually worth it.

I'll try to find the ones I was referring to. In general absorption rate on the skin is poor. From experience weekly shots are much better for me.
Post reply on HN