Interesting question-

From what I've heard, the daily and weekly range of any individual's concentrations range quite a bit... large deviations to the mean. It may require several tests to find that temporal baseline range and median value for T for any individual. Any single test for T is suspect without a series of values to provide a range, st dev and median.

After establishing a person's range of values and the median value over time then it could be compared to benchmarks to determine if its many times greater than the therapeutic dosages. Without that work, its likely any claim about performance enhancements are pure spectulation. Seems like a lot of work to me ... with not much return.

On a side note: I feel like I'm eighteen, but I keep getting kicked out of the dorms. 

-uneducated guess

C. Smith wrote: Acceptable levels are pretty clearly defined in the medical field.  If you have a doctor that is willing to do what you need him to do, then good for you.  I still don't see an issue.  There are lots of people, young and old, that currently compete with this condition.

+1 This condition is a serious one. bone lose, joint damage , muscle loss and that includes the heart. If the Dr can fix it I am for it.

Abuse is a very different thing.

I don't think it's cheating at all, so long as the patient isn't doubling up on their dosages outside of their doctor's knowledge. But then again, they would run out of their script faster and the doc would know what's up.

According to WADA, the accepted T/E ratio is 4:1. If your natty levels are at 200ng/ml and you take test enough to supplement up to 800ng/ml, you will pass the test. The specific dosage required to get to 800ng/ml would be different for everyone, depending on their natty production and absorption. Even if an athlete was not tested, so long as they are within the natural levels of 250-1100ng/ml, I wouldn't have any issues.

In regards to an instant 10% increase in performance, I don't think that is possible. Going from below average test levels (say 150ng/ml) up to 500ng/ml will yield very little performance results. It's moreso for your libido, mood, quality of life, than it is for recovery and muscle growth. Yes, there will be SOME peformance enhancement, but IMO, this just brings the individual up to where the general population is. Instead of only being able to train twice a week before getting overtrained, you can train an 3x a week and your injuries heal a tidbit faster.

Take that vs someone who is actually on legitimate PEDs at high dosages. Being able to train 5-6 days per week, 100% effort for 2-3 hours at a time without overtraining, those are the ones that should be ridiculed (in a tested sport).  

As someone who knows first hand, the effects of Low T, I can say that using HRT makes a huge difference on Quality of life. It doesn't make my throws any longer or higher, but using Androgel or Testim allows me to train like someone with a Normal Testosterone count. 

These medications are designed to bring the person suffering from low testosterone back into a well documented Normal Range of a person their age. My Dr. stated a typical count should be around 500-600. When I tested at 225, she said I had an issue that we could resolve with medication. It's made a huge impact on my energy levels and day to day functioning. With daily use, my numbers hover around 550. Pretty normal results based on data. the substance is highly controlled and I dare say any Dr. that wants to keep their license, would be hesitant in prescribing to someone without medical data supporting the use. Blood tests are required every 6 months to track T levels and it only takes 1 bust and investigation to create an issue for a Dr.

There are those who would seek this for alterior motives. As with any drug, when abused, it can and will have consequences. For those who have normal testosterone levels and great strength and seek a medical or chemical advantage, I would simply state that what they gain in strength, they lack in other areas.

I would say, by in large though, most men who use HRT's do it primarily to maintain a normal quality of life. It doesn't make us Superman and it really doesn't give us any competitive advantage. It only brings us to the level of someone who doesn't suffer from Low T. 

My solution:  Instead of using HRT....  I just throw another plate on the bar!!

There's a good article on WebMD:

http://men.webmd.com/features/low-testosterone-explained-how-do-you-know-when-levels-are-too-low - http://men.webmd.com/features/low-testosterone-explained-how -do-you-know-when-levels-are-too-low

It's fairly common in men 40 and older. Most don't recognize or report the symptoms.

Again, treatment is aimed to improve "Quality of Life" not make you a Superior Athlete. Testing should be considered by anyone over the age of 40.

Is it cheating? I wouldn't consider it cheating.

Can it be abused? Certainly!

Is there any Major Advantage? Not really, according to Medical Data. It would have to be used in large Qtys and it's Very, Very Expensive.

Borges wrote: I know that I would not attend a 'Championship' or claim a 'record' if I were using HRT. That's a personal choice in an area where there is no clear consensus, and certainly no clear written rules or policies. Others may choose differently and I'm not trying to judge them here.

Not sure I agree. For instance:

Athlete A is 100% lifetime drug free and has natural test production of 800ng/ml.

Athlete B has natural test production of 200ng/ml and is prescribed 150mg/wk of test to bring his test up to 800ng/ml.

--------------

So, if athlete B were 100% lifetime drug free, then Athlete A would have the advantage, correct? Athlete B isn't trying to be superior. He's merely trying to be at the same level as Athlete A, both phyiscally and emotionally. Hypogonadism is a pretty severe medical condition. There is only speculation as to the cause that can lead to poor childhood diet, testicular trauma, prior PEDs usage, etc.

I don't see any problem with Athlete B competing in a championship game or setting records. If he passes a test with or without a TUE, he (or she) should be good to go. If he failes the T/E ratio test, then further tests are done (as prescribed by WADA) and it is up to the organization to allow or not allow the TUE due to prescription testosterone supplementation.

Incidentally Craig, I wouldn't be in the least surprised by the number of athletes in their 30s who are on HRT. There have been numerous medical studies that have noted the prevalence of low testosterone levels in highly trained athletes. There have even been http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sex_news_sports_funny_grok/your_doctor_your_dealer - articles on how to manipulate your testosterone levels lower prior to blood testing so that you can get a doctor to prescribe HRT .

Also, I don't know what the specific TUEs are for say Masters T&F or other related sports. That is an interesting question in and of itself.

Sully,

  So how about an athlete that is 'low normal' or 'normal'. Is it proper for him to bump it up to 'high normal'?

  I guess I disagree with your premise - which seems to be that there is such a thing as a level playing field and that it is alright to use chemical interventions to attempt to make things 'fair'. Some athletes are simply better than others (I know because a number of those better athletes have been kicking my ass for my entire career). That's a whole different issue than treating hypogonadism. Although I find it telling that almost every mention of such treatment in this thread calls for bringing the person back to 'high normal'. Not once has someone talked about how they wanted their doc to bring them back to 'low normal' or 'normal'.

Borges wrote: Sully,   So how about an athlete that is 'low normal' or 'normal'. Is it proper for him to bump it up to 'high normal'?   I guess I disagree with your premise - which seems to be that there is such a thing as a level playing field and that it is alright to use chemical interventions to attempt to make things 'fair'. Some athletes are simply better than others (I know because a number of those better athletes have been kicking my ass for my entire career). That's a whole different issue than treating hypogonadism. Although I find it telling that almost every mention of such treatment in this thread calls for bringing the person back to 'high normal'. Not once has someone talked about how they wanted their doc to bring them back to 'low normal' or 'normal'.

As previously noted, ATHLETES aren't taking HRT for athletic gains, they are taking them for personal medical issues outside of athleticism when at the same time, they are trying to have some kind of a physical lifestyle. There may be SOME kind of performance enhancement, but nothing beyond what athlete A with a natty test level of 800 would have. Whether your test is 600, 800 or 1000, there isn't going to be a difference in athletic performance. Now, to go from 200 to 800 or 1000, there will be an enormous difference emotionally in how that person feels, how their body partitions nutrients, how they recover from illness, injury, etc, but is nothing that would exceed what the natural athlete feels with 800-1000 T levels.

The difference is when athlete A goes from 800ng/ml test and injects 500mg/wk of test, bumping his levels to 2-3000+ng/ml. THEN that's performance enhancing.

When you talk about using chemical interviention to make things fair, lets talk about the guy with low T. Athlete A gets a cold and is over it in 3 days. Athlete B gets the same cold and because of low T it takes him 3 weeks to get over it. Athlete A pulls a hamstring and is good to go in 4-6 weeks. Athlete B has the same injury and then re-injures it numerous times over the next 4-6 months. What were minor illness and injuries can turn into chronic issues and tears. It's really amazing what T does for us.

What about "natural" supplementation (yohimbe, tribulus), diet, regular exercise? 

I have found that using supplements that are for "male enhancement" coupled with tribulus and B12 give me tons of energy when working out and afterwards.  The major side affect that I dislike is that since I train in the evening and use these products at about 6:00pm daily I have trouble sleeping and usually don't get to sleep until about midnight. 

Ideas? Thoughts?

JSiau10 wrote: Is it Ethical? probably not.

I don't understand this.

It seems that everyone has a chip on their shoulder. If I were to have low T levels in february and you beat me, then I get my T levels fixed by november and I beat you, that makes me unethical? Despite us having the same test levels now, regardless of my technique improving, not to mention time involved in the sport? Didn't that make you unethical before for beating me because you had higher T levels?

What about the college wrestler with only 1 leg. Is it unethical to wrestle him because you have 2 and he has 1? Are you going to point your finger and accuse him of PEDs because you lost to him? He was delt a bad card, but he's trying to make the best of it and be an athlete regardless.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-03-19-anthony-robles-wrestling-championships_N.htm - http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-03-19-anthony-ro bles-wrestling-championships_N.htm

Ethics? TRT isn't about performing better on the field, it's a medical condition.

ROB EVANS wrote: What about "natural" supplementation (yohimbe, tribulus), diet, regular exercise?  I have found that using supplements that are for "male enhancement" coupled with tribulus and B12 give me tons of energy when working out and afterwards.  The major side affect that I dislike is that since I train in the evening and use these products at about 6:00pm daily I have trouble sleeping and usually don't get to sleep until about midnight.  Ideas? Thoughts?

Do you have low T? Energy is probably the least important issue you have. Depression, libido, illness and injury recovery. Those are far more important.

BTW, tribulus is an estrogen blocker/inhibitor which thereofore SIMULATES an increase in testosterone, but doesn't actually increase it. FYI

jsully wrote: ROB EVANS wrote: What about "natural" supplementation (yohimbe, tribulus), diet, regular exercise?  I have found that using supplements that are for "male enhancement" coupled with tribulus and B12 give me tons of energy when working out and afterwards.  The major side affect that I dislike is that since I train in the evening and use these products at about 6:00pm daily I have trouble sleeping and usually don't get to sleep until about midnight.  Ideas? Thoughts? Do you have low T? Energy is probably the least important issue you have. Depression, libido, illness and injury recovery. Those are far more important. BTW, tribulus is an estrogen blocker/inhibitor which thereofore SIMULATES an increase in testosterone, but doesn't actually increase it. FYI

Not that I am aware of.  I do have issues with injury recovery.  But that could be from going "balls out" when I train no pun intended , age and training incorrectly for a number of years .  I don't have a family history of low T.  Both parents come from large families (that might not mean that grandpa had low T) (he and grandma might just like to screw )

jsully wrote: JSiau10 wrote: Is it Ethical? probably not. I don't understand this. It seems that everyone has a chip on their shoulder. If I were to have low T levels in february and you beat me, then I get my T levels fixed by november and I beat you, that makes me unethical? Despite us having the same test levels now, regardless of my technique improving, not to mention time involved in the sport? Didn't that make you unethical before for beating me because you had higher T levels? What about the college wrestler with only 1 leg. Is it unethical to wrestle him because you have 2 and he has 1? Are you going to point your finger and accuse him of PEDs because you lost to him? He was delt a bad card, but he's trying to make the best of it and be an athlete regardless. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-03-19-anthony-robles-wrestling-championships_N.htm - http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-03-19-anthony-ro bles-wrestling-championships_N.htm Ethics? TRT isn't about performing better on the field, it's a medical condition.

let me clarify by saying I didn't just mean HRT. If someone I am competing against is using anything of any kind that gives him an advantage that he would not have had without it, it isn't for me to call them out, I just need to work harder. that is what I meant.

jsully wrote: What about the college wrestler with only 1 leg. Is it unethical to wrestle him because you have 2 and he has 1? Are you going to point your finger and accuse him of PEDs because you lost to him? He was delt a bad card, but he's trying to make the best of it and be an athlete regardless.

You lost me with this one because I don't see how it relates to the current discussion. I agree with you that it is not unethical for a two legged guy to wrestle the one legged guy. The critical difference is that the one legged wrestler isn't asking for an extra leg before he hits the mat, he's doing the best he can with the cards he was dealt. And I want to be extra careful to note that I'm not equating that with the topic currently under discussion, just trying to make the point that this analogy doesn't belong here.

JSiau10 wrote: [QUOTE=jsully]If someone I am competing against is using anything of any kind that gives him an advantage that he would not have had without it, it isn't for me to call them out, I just need to work harder. that is what I meant.

I consume 100g dextrose 15 minutes before a games, and then at least 100g per hour while I'm competing.

That gives me an advantage over you because I am actively re-supplying my glycogen levels and therefore keeping performance at a higher level while your glycogen levels are depleting throughout the day with every throw. Does that make me unethical? No, and it doesn't mean you need to train harder either. It means you need to learn more about nutrition, hahaha.. :)

I'm not trying to be a dick by any means. Just trying to open the eyes of some of the people who say TRT is unethical and cheating when those on TRT are only trying to achieve levels somewhere close to what your average male ALREADY has.

Borges wrote: [QUOTE=jsully] You lost me with this one because I don't see how it relates to the current discussion. I agree with you that it is not unethical for a two legged guy to wrestle the one legged guy. The critical difference is that the one legged wrestler isn't asking for an extra leg before he hits the mat, he's doing the best he can with the cards he was dealt. And I want to be extra careful to note that I'm not equating that with the topic currently under discussion, just trying to make the point that this analogy doesn't belong here.

I should have finished my point, my apologies. So if it's fair for a 2 legged man to wrestle a 1 legged man and it's also fair for a 2 legged man to wrestle a 2 legged man, why is it unfair for someone with a T level of 200 to bring theirs to 800 so that they can compete against others at 800? Should we have feds based on T levels? haha

I'm not sure everyone clearly understands what true TRT does. I think there is a study out there somewhere on pubmed that shows the results of low T by taking individuals with normal levels, then lower them down to subpar levels then raising them back up. I'm too lazy to look it up, I'm sorry. Anyways, if you take an athlete who is at 800, and then drop them to 200. You'll notice a huge difference in everything about them, from their personality to their performance. If they stay low for, lets say 1 year, they'll adapt but only to a point. Performance will gradually improve but their personality and emotional issues probably won't. Then raise their test levels back up to where they were. Performance will go back to where it was previously as well as personality and any emotional issues they may have incurred. When I say "performance will go back to where it was" I'm referring to how hard they are able to train and recover. They will be simly be back to where they were before. Instead of taking 1 year to put 10lbs on your bench, it might take 3 months like a "normal" person would.

Mind you, the #s I'm supplying are purely hypothetical. A vast majority of scripts written only take patients to 400-500ng/ml.

Brandell

I'm with you Brother.

I'm told I'll be taking it for life as well.

If nothing else comes out of this thread than some of these guys go and get tested and treated properly then this has been very positive.

I guess I am really not ashamed or embarrassed about this topic. 2 or so years ago my Dr started monitoring my levels because they were in the low (500’s). I even posted a question if this treatment could cause me to fail a drug test. If I remember right most everyone agreed you gatta do what’s right for your body. I decided I felt pretty good and opted not to take the treatment. Last year they dropped from the mid 5's to 214. It felt like I had the flu, weak tired lack of energy. My Dr told me I really need to reconsider, because it was at a level that could cause some long term damage. I decided I should listen to the Dr he is the Expert. I went and saw a specialist and got on 2.5g of androgel a day for 6 months and I was back to mid 500’s and feeling good. Im not stronger than I was before and I don’t throw any further. I didn’t have roid rage, I didn’t put on 20lbs muscle, and my DL didn’t jump 100lbs. I am pretty sure my 600 level is going to cause me to fail a drug test. If for some reason my levels fall again I will defiantly do it again. That’s like telling my Dr I would not take my Cholesterol medication. (Krazy right?) Quality of life is way more important. IMO.

By the way I will be 39 in Sept. It happens to us all

S McCracken wrote: I guess I am really not ashamed or embarrassed about this topic. 2 or so years ago my Dr started monitoring my levels because they were in the low (500’s). I even posted a question if this treatment could cause me to fail a drug test. If I remember right most everyone agreed you gatta do what’s right for your body. I decided I felt pretty good and opted not to take the treatment. Last year they dropped from the mid 5's to 214. It felt like I had the flu, weak tired lack of energy. My Dr told me I really need to reconsider, because it was at a level that could cause some long term damage. I decided I should listen to the Dr he is the Expert. I went and saw a specialist and got on 2.5g of androgel a day for 6 months and I was back to mid 500’s and feeling good. Im not stronger than I was before and I don’t throw any further. I didn’t have roid rage, I didn’t put on 20lbs muscle, and my DL didn’t jump 100lbs. I am pretty sure my 600 level is going to cause me to fail a drug test. If for some reason my levels fall again I will defiantly do it again. That’s like telling my Dr I would not take my Cholesterol medication. (Krazy right?) Quality of life is way more important. IMO.   By the way I will be 39 in Sept. It happens to us all

I could have misinterpreted when doing my research, but from what I found, epitestosterone is made at the same rate testosterone is made, hence you would naturally have a 1:1 ratio of test to epitestosterone. There are exceptional people who's ratio is higher and I've found there is also differences among races. The way T/E tests work is if your test ratio is higher than 4:1 (per WADA standards) you fail. Therefore, if your test is 214, your epitest is 214. So a ratio of 4:1 would be 856:214. With a test level of 600, you would pass.

Aside from getting tested, I'm not sure how else to prove this theory right.

I'd rather lose to someone while they're on TRT than win against someone with the test levels of a 5 year old girl, knowing that they're fighting a terrible medical disorder.

Better yet, I don't care who my competition is. I just do my best.

OK, I usually just read and then leave. However, this topic has prompted me to actually post something.

Here's my take: Most (but not all) men on HRT or those who need it will be competing in the over 40 or over 50 masters divisions. Age related declines in testosterone and other hormones are a natural function of aging and a big part of age related declines in performance. That seems to be why those divisions exist in the first place. By all means, get HRT if you need it. Of course everyone will have to decide for themselves what is right...but maybe those older guys who have restored their testosterone to "youthful" levels should compete in an open age division.

Ok this has all led me to do some further research.  At first I was wondering what kind of data all these low test Dx were made on.  To be quite honest I wondered if low test was merely just a function of ageing and the charts being used were just based on one  lump sample.  So I dug a bit.  Please add more if you have more to add I haven't (and will not) have as much time as I'd like.

Seems most of this comes from a 1996 study by a guy named Oddens.  You can get the abstract and some basic data charts online.  He later turned it into a more bookish technichal manual available on amazon (I might be able to get a copy from my Mrs, but they don't have much medical stuff).  The original study and later manual goes by the title: Androgens and the Aging Male.  The data seems quite robust.  Good sample sizes (over 100/group) broken into age groups with mean and standard deviations calculated for the various androgens in each age group.   Assuming most physicians work off this data it seems a Dx of a low androgen would be quite legit and take into account the natural decline in age.

So then my questions would be why does it seem we have so many of us that have low levels?  Is it from higher levels at a younger age?  Are we more likely to notice the effects because we are more in tune with our strength levels?  Do the high demands we place on our systems tend to contribute?  Ah times like this I wish i had decided to stick with research....

Not to sound rude, but IMO you need to swallow your pride of being "lifetime drug free" and get help.

If I were in your situation, feeling 100% trumps telling someone I'm lifetime drug free.

thegnome wrote: So then my questions would be why does it seem we have so many of us that have low levels?  Is it from higher levels at a younger age?  Are we more likely to notice the effects because we are more in tune with our strength levels?  Do the high demands we place on our systems tend to contribute?  Ah times like this I wish i had decided to stick with research....

When I was researching there were several "reasons" for this and aging was only one of them. As we age, our test production reduces. I'm not sure if it's reducing because we aren't producing as much in our teses, or if it's reducing because there are issues with the pituitary sending the correct LH (leutinizing hormone) signals.

From what I found, it's more typical for your LH to drop, which then your testes aren't getting the signal to make test any more. They CAN make it, but they aren't because they aren't being told to. This is exactly what happens when someone is on PEDs, natural test production temporarily stops because they are getting it from an exogenous source. Aside from PEDs usage, there are any number of things that could cause this issue, look at all the people with thyroid issues. A thyroid issue can cause pituitary issues and just spiral the affect down until you've got the T levels of a 2 year old. It could be from poor diet, overtraining too often, head trauma, etc.. lots of reasons.

The least common is testicular trauma, where the boys just can't make it anymore. This leads to infertility. Many guys with lowT can have kids, which tells you its not primary hypogonadism, just an issue with them getting the signals.

This is all a dumbed down version off the top of my head as I'm not into looking up all the articles again. I'm with a few hours and a lot of google, you can find the same info I did.

I think athletes are more aware of their body which tend to signal us to get things checked out if we don't feel right.

For your everyday 9-5er, he might not notice it as much because he isn't as physically active. He may just think his sleep is off, or stress is too much at work, etc.

thegnome wrote: I think what I'm asking is it seems (based on this conversation) that a disproportionately high number of "us" have had a Dx of low androgen levels compared to the general public.  Is it because we notice it more (and would be more likely to get it checked), or is it because of what we do?

There are a number of studies out there that note very low T levels in highly trained athletes as well as a high correlation between overtraining and low T. There is also a lot of anecdotal evidence if you dig hard enough. Some note, and I tend to believe, that one cause is trying to continue training with a frequency and intensity that your body can no longer support. In such cases, significantly reducing your training will restore your T to a normal level (there is anecdotal evidence to support this but no study that I can find). Of course, significantly reducing your training will also significantly reduce your athletic performance (and hence the higher observed incidence of low T among highly trained athletes).

And I think that is the real delicate balance here. Hypogonadism is a real medical issue with complex and varied causes and I recognize that. But consider a hypothetical situation: Two athletes A and B both use the same heavy training regimen and experience low T. Athlete A changes to a much less rigorous training schedule with far more rest, and athlete B gets TRT. Both return to the same T levels. Equitable? These are tough questions and I fully understand why USADA and others struggle with them. That's why TUEs are so hard to write. For insulin dependent diabetics the question is fairly simple, no insulin and the athlete is a corpse. For low T it ain't so clear cut. And note that I say this because it is easy to point the finger at the USADA types and call them hypocrites, but theirs is a VERY difficult task.

Okay-

It's been suggested that the one group in our community of athletes herein with a very direct connection -due to age- would be the Scottish Masters Athletics. So I'll accept that burden and respond. 

I'd like to suggest that we form a small group athletes to develop a written policy that can be posted on our Scottish Masters website and then send it to the current active email list to clarify where we stand on this HRT issue.

It will only be a simple paragraph representing our declaration of support for every athlete's health concerns and nothing else.

We can not afford to get into any drug testing and we are not proposing any drug testing.

If I can organize a group of 6 athletes from his group to help me draft a written policy, then I will post it on the SMAI website, send it out to the email list and copy it here for all to see and comment on.

I'd like to suggest John Allen, Brian Randell, Carlos Borges and Wayne Hill for sure - but am offering: 2 more people to join us, if possible.

Please send an email to me at mailto:Kevin.Rogers@scottishmasters.org - Kevin.Rogers@scottishmasters.org and we can work together to make all athletes aware of our concerns and committment to healthy living and this sport.

This is my first attempt at something like this so please be patient with me. I'm completely uneducated in the details of the HRT so please help me out and give me a hand. I'm also up to my ears in planning this MWC Calgary, so it may not be finished immediately. 

-K 

When I started this process I was not training because I was coming off my shoulder surgery and couldn’t. I thought that was some of  my issue since I suddenly had to stop. Dr Said no chance that was the problem. He said my issue was most likely caused by improper functioning of thyroid gland that leads to a decreased secretion of the hormone androgen to make testosterone. He said this is prime causes of  low production of the test in younger men. He put me through a barrage of test, I was poked by so many needles I can’t even count.  I had thyroid and pituitary test ran along with several others. I never did hear what my levels of this androgen were since I was only concerned with the solution. I guess I should have asked but he told me this was my problem, I did the TRT and got on with life. I don’t think over training would cause it to be low. Most of studies I have read in the past said just the opposite.

One other thing my Dr agreed on our degrees of normal a range are fare to wide. because not enough studies have been done since this is a pretty new treatment. He also said some men are good in 5-600 range and others need to be 8-1000, not every body functions the same. He said he shoots for the middle 6-800 and that has worked for the majority of his patients. I will say anyone that thinks this is an easy way to get TRT is crazy. It took several trips to the lab and it’s very expensive. Even with insurance. Everyone I dwelt with took this very seriously because the US government looks at this like you’re doing cocaine or heroin.

That’s my last 2 pennies.

I realize that HRT is a valid and legitimate medical treatment. There is no doubt about the positive affects it can have on quality of life. For those that need it, I'm sure it must be a godsend.

 The quality of life stuff and health concerns are bigger picture issues. As it relates to athletic competition and specifically age restricted competition, seems to be the more narrow focus of the cheating question. I suppose it really comes down to a personal choice. There are probably more than a few over 40s and over 50s that are on something and more than likely, no one will be testing anyway, so...

I would like to ask a hypothetical question:

 Suppose a competitive thrower in his late 40s goes on HRT with a legitimate Rx. Sure, it dosn't immediately add 100lbs. to his deadlift. or add appreciably to his throws but it does halt or slow down potential age related declines. It also alows him to train harder, more often. Now suppose he has been on HRT for many years(I assume that someone with low T levels that goes on HRT for any length of time will have to stay on for the rest of his life). At say, 60, his throws have been maintained at 95+% of where they were years prior.  Does anyone have a problem with that in a competition sense? Seems like the longer he is on HRT the bigger the advantage. Might be huge in the long run.

 Just wondering what the general consenus on that would be. Personally, I don't care what my competition is on... They could be using clenbuteral suppositories doing the event for all I care (not that anyone would at my level)...but then again, I don't compete in an age restricted division against people on a treatment for what is sometimes an age related decline.

 On a side note, I also think many athletes that throw and lift regularly may be chronically overtrained. After reaching a certain age, some may not be able to get away with it anymore and it negatively affects their T levels.

Tim P-

I was with you till you got to the "... hordes of brown-skinned hotties ..."

Now, that's just wrong... they are not always in hordes... and they don't like being called hordes.

Please just refer to them as "bands of sweet, toned, tropically-tanned Brazilian, lightly oiled, brown-skinned hotties" ... and then you'll see a real improvement in your training.

-K

Al Mac Farlane wrote: swollenknuck wrote: Now my real question is how is this any different then someone who has an honest case of Low T and gets it treated? The difference is the treatment for diabetes is not an anabolic steroid that is used by many people, often illegally, to improve their training and athletic performance.

Clearly you don't know much about steroid usage. Insulin is by far the most anabolic substance available. Without insulin to deliver the nutrients in your blood to your muscles, you will not grow or be stronger. Period. Nearly all top bodybuilders cyle high level doses with test, insulin and IGF-1.. IGF-1 allows your tissues to accept the insulin better, and the high insulin dosages allow you to increase food consumption and nutrient partitioning. Insulin can very well be abused.

Al Mac Farlane wrote: If Thrower A and Thrower B both throw the weight X feet, but Thrower B is unable to throw that far without the use of testosterone (prescribed or not), there's something not quite right about that.

Who said thrower B can't throw that far?

It's about being sick, recovering at the rate of a snail, not being able to have intimate relations with your wife, feeling depressed all the time, etc. thrower B can throw just as far, but then he tears his bicep. Because of low T, it takes him 4x as long to heal as thrower A.

150mg/week of test isn't going to give someone with the T level of 150ng/ml any kind of anabolic advantage. Hell, 150mg/week will hardly give someone with a T level of 800ng/ml any kind of advantage if any in regards to performance. Most likely they would just get moody and their skin would get really oily.

Big Ed wrote: "Anabolic steroids do not enhance athletic ability".

I actually agree with this. Coming from someone who has used PEDs in the past, I gained no athletic ability whatsoever from it. Athletic ability is something you are born with. It is the ability to learn and perform complex movements. The better your athletic ability, the faster you'll learn them.

Anabolic steroids allow you to recover faster, therefore you can get more reps in, train at higher frequency, at higher intensity. The general population thinks that you stick yourself with a needle and then all of a sudden you get all puffy and you're benching 400lbs. That's not the case. Those on steroids work 10x harder than natural athletes. Not to discredit natural athletes, but we just can't handle that kind of recovery without breakdown or injury. Yes I say we because I have been off the needle for over 6 years. I didn't say 100% lifetime, but I can be considered natural at this point. I'd like to see a natural lifter train 3 hours, twice a day, 6 days a week at 110% intesnity. It just can't happen. Steroids don't improve our ABILITY to hit a baseball, or read a play and cut off the receiver for an interception or even footwork while spinning for WFD. Steroids (coupled with training) make us bigger, stronger and faster. Everything else are just motor controls.

Again, I reiterate that 150mg/wk of test is going to have absolutely no anabolic affect on a patient that has the test levels of a pre-pubescent boy.

brandell wrote: No, it is a medical treatment for a condition same as insulin, same as estrogen for menopausal women, same as inhalers for Asthma patients. As for as TRT vs 'Juicing' it is apples and oranges and there is no way around it.

I think we would both agree that both can be abused. I know plenty of people who are not diabetic that have used insulin to get bigger.

In a MEDICAL SENSE, TRT is ables and oranges to juicing.

Standard Testoerone steroid cyle= 8-12 weeks @ 500-750mg/wk of 200-400mg/ml test, depending on the compound you have chosen. The subject will test at 2000+ ng/ml blood concentration.

Standard TRT = life @ 100-200mg/wk of 200mg/ml test. The subject will test 600-900 blood concentration.

-------

How about we quit worrying about it. If the athlete can produce a prescription and pass a blood test, they are obviously not trying to cheat the system. It's really a shame how people feel they have to have that much pride to say someone is cheating when they both have the same T levels yet the person on TRT is performing better, through years of practice, training or sheer willpower.

JasonHamilton wrote: I would like to ask a hypothetical question:  Suppose a competitive thrower in his late 40s goes on HRT with a legitimate Rx. Sure, it dosn't immediately add 100lbs. to his deadlift. or add appreciably to his throws but it does halt or slow down potential age related declines. It also alows him to train harder, more often. Now suppose he has been on HRT for many years(I assume that someone with low T levels that goes on HRT for any length of time will have to stay on for the rest of his life). At say, 60, his throws have been maintained at 95+% of where they were years prior.  Does anyone have a problem with that in a competition sense? Seems like the longer he is on HRT the bigger the advantage. Might be huge in the long run.

Testosterone isn't the fountain of youth, growth hormone is, hahaha.

But srsly, I've gott a buddy that is 72 years old and he is on TRT due to his age. He is at approx 800ng/ml and lifts weights. He lifts once a week because his body can't recover from more than that. Test isn't going to 95% maintain your throws from when you were in your 30s. Your body still ages, tissues still break down and medical conditions still arise.

 Again, it doesn't matter to me what anyone else I may end up competing against puts in their bodies. People can take whatever they want or get TRT and growth hormone therapy too as far as I am concerned. It is their body and they will have to live with the results good or bad.

  However, I don't believe I am going out on a scientific limb here by saying I'm fairly certain that testosterone is anabolic. Or, at least it can be. It is all dose related. I sincerely doubt one could go from a chronic test in the 100-200 range to 600+ and receive no ergogenic benefit whatsoever. At the very least one will train longer, harder and feel like training more often (as has been pointed out in this thread already).

 Get TRT if you need it. Really seems a personal choice and no one else's business...much like the competition and age class side of things. At the same time, let's not say that testosterone will make no difference in one's trainign efforts. Especially if it raises your chronic levels 300-400%...whatever the new total may be.