Still blows me away that the FDA will allow your standard FP doctor to prescribe a drug that will greatly enhance a patient's risk for cancer and heart issues. Why doesn't he just prescribe smoking, sounds like the same long term effects.

Your standard FP has usually done 4 years in college, 4 years in med school, 3 years of residency, and often times, a fellowship. A family practitioner, is more often than not, a very well trained professional. Also, they tend to be far more cautious than say an endocrinologist (who are typically who you will see if you want little magic T pills). And if a patient wants T supplements, they will most of the time refer them to a specialist.

And it doesn't 'greatly' enhance risks of cancers and heart issues. It does to some extent. I'm strongly opposed to using T when not necessary, but no need to make it sound even worse than it already is.

I don't think that we should make any concessions for people that take performance enhancing drugs for vanity reasons. If you medically, legitimately need T therapy, go get a TUE. If you really want to take T because you don't like being old, that's fine by me. Just be man enough to accept that you can't compete. Or, if you choose to compete (And lets be honest, the vast majority of the low T takers are never going to be at a level where it matters), accept the fact that you may get tested/banned. All of these "fixes" just create logistical nightmares in a system that is already built to accommodate it as it should be.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

clarified thanks.

Exactly. I have said it before on here, I'm not advocating for mass testing. I think it would be unwieldy, intrusive for the vast majority, expensive, etc.

But, among the KQ, the perennial All American, top amateurs, etc., I am all for them being in the random testing pool. I'm not going to pry, but you have been a Zoot sponsored athlete for a while now, I would be willing to wager that you get a significant chunk of change in the form of shoes, gear, travel, etc. each year. While not enough to live on, it's certainly a level of reward that a lot of people would only be too willing to dope for.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

I am a 58 year old competitive cyclist. I suffer from age-related low T (<200 ng/DL). I have been treated for this condition by my primary physician since my 50-year old annual physical. He said that whether I was an athlete or not, there are all sorts of reasons that men want their T in a normal range. When treated my T returns to the normal range and usually settles at 280 which is still low but in range. Other than the T and some vitamins, I take no other drugs or supplements.

With that said, I stopped my T prescription from December 2009 - October 2011. At that time, I had decided to make a cycling comeback and try to win the National Championships. When I left the sport in 1984, there was no drug testing. I had been away from the sport since then and had no idea that drug testing was now part of day-to-day competition nor that it applied to old guys like me. So, it took me awhile but I eventually learned that I was going to be drug tested. I then started determining if anything I was taking - vitamins, prescriptions, over the counter - was illegal. I soon found out that T was a banned substance in- and out- of competition.

I met with my doctor and he explained that it would not be wise for my long-term health to stop my T supplementation. With his urging, I did some research, found USADA and contacted them. They explained I could apply for a Therapeutic Exemption of Use and sent me the paperwork which I took to my doctor. He reviewed it and told me that to comply with their testing requirements (complex endricrinology testing and consultation with high-end endicrinologists) I would have to spend about $20k (his estimate) out of pocket because my insurance would never cover these tests.

I contacted USADA and while sympathetic, they had no alternative. They said there was no provision written in the regs for aged athletes; we meet the same standard as a 20-year old who needs T supplementation. A 20-year old that needs T definitely has some sort of medical condition. A 58-year old that needs T is probably just an aging man. I thanked them, stopped my T and competed. When done, I started back up on my T under my doctor's supervision and urging.

Conclusion: masters men just have to live with this reality. We are not a big enough nor important enough for USADA to expend the energy and resources to update the regs to better match with medical realities. I commend USADA for what they have done to clean up sport and I absolutely think athletes should compete clean. So, I just let them do their thing (which they do well and for a great purpose) and if I want to compete, I have to comply with their regulations. Simple as that.

---

life's short. ride hard.
bill
mobile: 404-242-5966
rustylion54@gmail.com

So, you can still compete without testosterone supplementation? Do you have any symptoms aside from a low total T? Was there a free T test done also?

You are an honorable man Bill, I congratulate you on your decisions. I'm only a year behind you and would like to think i would make the same decisions you have in your shoes. Thankfully I do not have low T, but I do have issues with my growth hormones. Mostly it is just getting old and i'm learning how to deal with those realities. But if i had to go to the drug back for my health, i'm pretty sure i would also relegate myself to fun runs and participatory sports. I just wish that the others in our AG taking the drugs and competing at very high levels, would find the courage that you have and step out of the way of us racing naturally, so that we might know for real what old guys can really do..

Yes, I competed during that time without T supplementation. Even won the Nationals. No, no other symptoms other than low T - pretty healthy albeit old. Yep, did a free T test but at this moment, don't remember the results.

---

life's short. ride hard.
bill
mobile: 404-242-5966
rustylion54@gmail.com

So...why did your doctor recommend T? Kind of makes a point against it...as I've said several times already.

T in the normal range is part of the healthy male. There are numerous peer-reviewed medical studies documenting the longer-term effects on men with chronic low-T. T supplementation is not just for good athletic performance; rather it is a base from which to build the intricate male hormonal structure and balance. But, as with any treatment protocol, there are surely those who do not support T supplementation. I did not begin a T regimen blindly and did my own research and got a 2nd opinion. But I was comfortable enough with the other doctor's thoughts and the literature to agree with my primary care doctor's thought process and original recommendation.

---

life's short. ride hard.
bill
mobile: 404-242-5966
rustylion54@gmail.com

These peer-reviewed studies are done based on the current FDA inclusion and exclusion criteria for testosterone supplementation, and a 50+ yo male with a total T level
in the 200 range does not fit these. The large cohort studies done on supplementation for folks that are otherwise healthy are...currently done by NIA, and the data aren't
published yet.

Anyhow the bottom line is that people can rationalize whatever they want if they really want to do it.

I may have flipped too quickly through this thread but did not find any specific reference to the FDA study you just mentioned in your reply. So, I do not know what range the FDA would consider normal but I am pretty sure most studies and labs would agree that Normal is 250-1100 ng/dL for Total T. Again, I am not a doctor or researcher and might only know enough about this to sound like I know something at a cocktail party. Just sharing form my own experiences for what it may be worth.

---

life's short. ride hard.
bill
mobile: 404-242-5966
rustylion54@gmail.com

John,
I am not proposing a concession, I am proposing a predetermined PENALTY of two AGs for anyone on T therapy. If someone wants the quality of life they had when they were younger and is willing to take T to get it, then let them compete with those that are...well...younger. I don't think it's a logistical nightmare. Could just be a simple form.

Last, I completely understand the hard line approach and telling the T therapy patients they can't compete. I am a rule follower, big time. However, right now, these people are forced to keep their mouth shut and compete in their AGs because getting a TUE is either way too expensive or unobtainable in their circumstances. The T patients are going to be showing up at triathlons all over the country in increasing numbers whether you and I like it or not. If a provision like this is in place, it makes it much easier to ban them if they are caught competing in their own AG. However, as mentioned earlier, many will not raise their hand and admit they are on T therapy. Most would probably not want to publicly admit they were doing it simply out of embarrassment.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

"First, I thought that it was understood that drugs were illegal, not because they helped us, but because they were dangerous. I don't understand making something illegal just because it makes you better. "

To believe that government actors make illegal certain things for your betterment is a dangerous way to live. First, it puts faith in narcissists whose only goal is the betterment of their own egos and wallets. Now, there's nothing wrong with being selfish and wanting to advance one's self. You and I do that every day. But to trust those people as if their lawmaking has your personal safety in mind is hazardous for your self. This is 101 stuff that should be learned upon becoming an adult.

As for testosterone, why is it dangerous? Why do you call it a drug? And why are drugs dangerous? This is stuff that sounds to have been fed to you, and you've accepted it without question. If testosterone is dangerous, why is it more dangerous than the ozone you breathe every day? The sunlight at 12 noon in July? Ibuprofen? Cap'n Crunch cereal? Many older men have low testosterone, and supplementation has increased their happiness and zest for life with no medical detriment. I have older family members who have been reborn following testosterone supplementation. As soon as I'm in my 40's, 50's, or 60's, and my levels are low, I'll get the prescription. If that bans me from Ironman, so be it. I'll have had many years of legitimate competition under my belt and I can retire at ease.

---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Speed Concept 9 (race)
Madone 5 (training)
Trek 1000 (rain/snow/sleet/monsoon)

Testosterone replacement is NOT doping. Testosterone is given in doses of 20-60 mg compared to the thousands used by doping. It is used to correct low levels NOT get supra physiologic levels. It has been shown o decrease heart disease, depression, and muscle loss over time. I am a very natural doctor, using diet whenever possible. That being said if I have someone with low physiologic T levels AND symptoms I would not hesitate to treat. If they compete in sports I may be slightly leveling the playing field for them but, in no way, am I giving them an unfair advantage.

Testosterone replacement is NOT doping. Testosterone is given in doses of 20-60 mg compared to the thousands used by doping. It is used to correct low levels NOT get supra physiologic levels. It has been shown o decrease heart disease, depression, and muscle loss over time. I am a very natural doctor, using diet whenever possible. That being said if I have someone with low physiologic T levels AND symptoms I would not hesitate to treat. If they compete in sports I may be slightly leveling the playing field for them but, in no way, am I giving them an unfair advantage.

Nice speech. Your patients to whom you prescribe the T treatments and who compete will be cheating. PERIOD!

I'm confused, is taking any synthetic T illegal, or is it having above a certian level of T?

The Outside magazine article a few years ago brought this up as well, but that guy didn't have to take a lifetime of shots or pills, he just had cream. So I don't understand the "in it for life" argument.

that is just stunning. I guess. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

People look for answers in eliminating doping from pro cycling. They need to look no further than crap like this to understand that it will never go away as long as there is underlying thinking like this among people in general. In essence ... this is what Lance said to Oprah -- leveling the playing field but not giving an unfair advantage.

So ... maybe the 50% dopers in AG triathlon mentioned recently is not an exaggeration.

How on earth is a testosterone level of 300-400 doping. I treat people with weight gain, impotence, depression, and incredibly low testosterone level for their age. I check levels to make sure they never get above PHYSIOLOGIC range. Lance and others were going for super human ranges. Physiologic dosing is just that: NORMAL levels.

are you a doctor? are you on T as well? What else are you on? Interested in your stats... name, age, etc. I see you're going to IMTX... any hopes of a KQ?

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

I am a doctor. Not ever going to qualify and not really concerned about it. Not on T. I am a surgeon but specialize in weight loss surgery and nutrition. If I was T deficient and had any chance of qualifying I would notify WTC with lab values and doctors notification of treatment. You should not be the least bit threatened by an athlete who has the same T value as you. There is ZERO advantage to small doses of testosterone to return someone to a normal expected level.

Theories abound as to why some people are low in T. One theory is that years of meat and dairy consumption loaded with steroids suppress natural testosterone release. In fact vegans, which I am, tend to have higher levels. Of course, there are many meat eaters with normal T levels.

In our sport there is a suspicion that high stress levels from long hours of exercise creates high cortisol which interferes with T production and/or metabolism.

Regardless, low T is a problem. Is it doping if an athlete with asthma takes asthma meds? Is it doping if someone gets cortisol injections into a sore shoulder? Same thing here. If you have low T you should be allowed to return to normal. This in no way compares to someone trying to cheat and get supra physiologic levels.

Doc, I am racing in the 55-59 age group. I am sure my testosterone levels are less than 10 years ago and probably a lot less than 30 years ago. I have not had it checked because I feel my T levels and most other levels decrease with age. I am competing with guys who also have lost some hormone level.
If you "pep" them up to levels above mine, how is that fair?
I am not sure you are doing that, but that is the tone I am getting????

---

Team Zoot So Cal

Well the obvious answer is that it's doping because the rules say that it is doping.

But aside from the rules, this sort of argument necessarily must raise the question of what is normal, who decides it, and why should we take the position that every athlete is allowed to manipulate themselves into what has been defined as a normal range?

If the population of Cat 1 racers in the US has an average Hct of 47 and mine is 39, does that mean I should be able to do 'physiologic dosing' (your words) of EPO to raise mine to what is 'normal' for that population? I'm 50+ now, so shouldn't I be able to raise mine to be on a level field with the younger guys?

yes, you'll come back and make the argument that you're treating abnormally low levels, blah blah blah. But the overall question remains, and there is no answer that satisfactorily justifies the doping.

You should not be the least bit threatened by an athlete who has the same T value as you.

An athlete who has their T value *boosted* to the same level...

Why don't we just say that a T value at the 90%ile level is ok for anyone to boost to? We only have an issue if someone is above that and boosted to get there. Seem fair?

Well... I don't think it's fair. I naturally already have a >90%ile T level... but my HCT is below average, and so is my VO2max, and for some reason I have more trouble recovering than the average person, and I could stand to lose 10 lbs. Should I be able to take drugs to fix all these "deficiencies"? If someone else can take T, why can't I take whatever I "need"?