7 ms·

The Masculine Mystique of T

20 points by ehudla 8y ago

stanfordkid 8y ago
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 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.
- ttctciyf 8y ago
  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 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365
  - solarkraft 8y ago
    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.
    - chillacy 8y ago
      Sometimes the winner also riots and wrecks their city. Actually a lot of the time.
      - solarkraft 8y ago
        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).
        chillacy 8y ago
        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-france-vs-croatia-riots-Paris-French-celebrations https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-...
    - ttctciyf 8y ago
      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 :)
- 0xcde4c3db 8y ago
  > 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..
  - balfirevic 8y ago
    My understanding was that they are mainly interested in body-building.
  - mdomans 8y ago
    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)
    - atomical 8y ago
      Clomid works for some but not all. http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html
      - mdomans 8y ago
        The main point of Clomid are quite usual psychological side-effects, including such fun stuff as suicidal thoughts.
        atomical 8y ago
toomchsauce 8y ago
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.
- lambdaphagy 8y ago
  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 https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/92/1/196/2598434). Maybe society is indeed sick.
  - ecopoesis 8y ago
    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.
    - mdomans 8y ago
      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.
iguy 8y ago
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/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/old-t-rex/
- samueldavid 8y ago
  that was an interesting article
  - wycs 8y ago
    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.
    - iguy 8y ago
      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.
    - woodruffw 8y ago
      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/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/the-son-also-rises... [2]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/live-not-by-lies/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/live-not-by-lies/ [3]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/
1996 8y ago
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.
- bluedevil2k 8y ago
  DHT plus the male pattern baldness genes. Not everyone who takes T would even be affected at all hair wise, propecia or not.
anonymoustuser 8y ago
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.
bluedevil2k 8y ago
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/
- mdomans 8y ago
  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)
tranchms 8y ago
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.
- oceanghost 8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

20 points by ehudla 8y ago

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 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.

ttctciyf 8y ago
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 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365
- solarkraft 8y ago
  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.
  - chillacy 8y ago
    Sometimes the winner also riots and wrecks their city. Actually a lot of the time.
    - solarkraft 8y ago
      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).
      - chillacy 8y ago
        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-france-vs-croatia-riots-Paris-French-celebrations https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-...
  - ttctciyf 8y ago
    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 :)
0xcde4c3db 8y ago
> 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..
- balfirevic 8y ago
  My understanding was that they are mainly interested in body-building.
- mdomans 8y ago
  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)
  - atomical 8y ago
    Clomid works for some but not all. http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html
    - mdomans 8y ago
      The main point of Clomid are quite usual psychological side-effects, including such fun stuff as suicidal thoughts.
      - atomical 8y ago

toomchsauce 8y ago

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.

lambdaphagy 8y ago
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 https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/92/1/196/2598434). Maybe society is indeed sick.
- ecopoesis 8y ago
  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.
  - mdomans 8y ago
    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.

iguy 8y ago

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/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/old-t-rex/

samueldavid 8y ago
that was an interesting article
- wycs 8y ago
  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.
  - iguy 8y ago
    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.
  - woodruffw 8y ago
    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/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/the-son-also-rises... [2]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/live-not-by-lies/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/live-not-by-lies/ [3]: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/ https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/

1996 8y ago

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.

bluedevil2k 8y ago
DHT plus the male pattern baldness genes. Not everyone who takes T would even be affected at all hair wise, propecia or not.

anonymoustuser 8y ago

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.

bluedevil2k 8y ago

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/

mdomans 8y ago
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)

tranchms 8y ago

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.

oceanghost 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]