Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [3Aims] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
3Aims wrote:
You are probably right. I'm sure the 40+ crowd only uses it for the right reasons.


We have this type of stuff all over Dallas. The local radio guy, Russ Martin, is in his mid 50s and is sponsored by a local HGH therapy place. He was telling someone that his doctor has his levels in the 1,300 range. Seems legit.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [gpdtx] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gpdtx wrote:
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.

The question you can't answer is "is that T level normal for them?" This was the lie lance told everyone when he "told the truth". Lance's VO2 Max is ~82. Lemonds' was ~95. Lance doping so that he could perform at the same level as Lemond "leveled the playing field" between them, but one is cheating and the other is not.

You are the exact reason why USAT hardly ever gives out a TUE for Testosterone and you clearly don't understand the process, because filling out the paperwork to give to WTC isn't going to do any athlete you're treating any good.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [gpdtx] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gpdtx wrote:
Actually it is legal to take testosterone for low levels provided that governing bodies are forewarned with medical evidence and thereby exempted.

Forewarned isnt enough. it has to be an approved TUE and for Testosterone that is extremely rare at least in triathlon and cycling.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [Ultra-tri-guy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:
I agree but sadly it seems this whole "doping" madnees is starting to get out of hand.It would be a tragedy if people now have to choose between treatment for a condition and the ability to participate in a recreational sport (notice I did say "participate" and not race)

---

do me a favor and differentiate between race and participate in a USAT sanctioned event under existing rules, thanks.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am just glad I am not in ur AG although u are usually playing for overall and not AG :0)

__________________________________________________
Official Polar Ambassador
http://www.google.com/...P7RiWyEVwpunlsc2JtQQ
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
It was bad 10 years ago here in LA, i knew of docs doing what this guy is doing for just about everyone that walked through the door, I can only imagine how much worse it has gotten since then. And it is really hard to blame most of the athletes when there are docs like this guy justifying it to them that it is ok, when it clearly is not..

I've been expanding my research and visiting some of the seedier parts of the internet. There are people with user names like "ironman07" "tri guy" "swimbikerun" and others talking about EPO microdosing in various steroid forums on the web....way back in 2007! It's mind boggling. They talk about process, recovery, even the brands of drugs, everything except their sources of course, because no one wants to let that out. With the newer forms of EPO and other new drugs these days... i haven't looked into some of the stuff that's been hinted at recently in the cycling news. But this testosterone thread... T is the gateway drug of endurance doping; people get it legally prescribed, doctors like this schmuck are a dime a dozen, and the people who operate the clinics often arent even doctors, they're basically doping pharmacists while the doctor they work with just fills out pad after pad of prescriptions.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [kathy_caribe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kathy_caribe wrote:
klehner wrote:
gpdtx wrote:
Actually it is legal to take testosterone for low levels provided that governing bodies are forewarned with medical evidence and thereby exempted. Low testosterone levels has been labeled a disease process. Low levels have been associated with a symptom complex, and those often debilitating, and sometimes deadly (heart disease) effects actually gets better with treatment.

A hematocrit of 39 or 40 is not associated with a disease process and would not qualify for treatment by a physician. The only reason to take epo would be for athletic superiority and that is cheating.

people who suffer from low T levels and want/need to take them to ameliorate symptoms should not be ban from sports.


Your attitude is sickening and ignorant. Good luck with anyone having a non-zero testosterone level getting a TUE. Aging is not a disease process.

I don't care is someone has no naturally occurring testosterone: if he takes exogenous testosterone, he shouldn't be allowed to compete. Period. Participate without competing, maybe, but not eligible for any results/prizes/accolades.

I'm 54, and I would like to think that the guys I compete against are playing the cards they were dealt.


Except many are ALREADY not playing the cards they were dealt and doing so legally. The asthmatics, the joint folks, the low vitamin D folks, the depressed folks, the heart diseased folks, the diabetic folks. All these folks are allowed to change their "dealt cards" and improve their abilities - albeit, the improvement is simply a leveling of the playing field, and in the case of diabetics, they are constantly just trying to reach that level playing field - they're almost always still disadvantaged. You've got a doctor here saying that bringing someone to a heart-healthy situation without increasing his T over the norm (and honestly just barely TO the norm) will not give him superhuman abilities but *you* (in general) seem Stuck on the illegality of T regardless of the logic. I recently got tested and I'm at 0 T. Zippo. My quality of life has sucked for a while now but I'm trying to figure a way out if it without hormone supplementation. HOWEVER, I wouldn't think twice about HRT if that became the choice I had to make because triathlon is just a SPORT, a HOBBY and FUN and my quality of life is so much more than that.

It seems you guys just cannot reason at all and are stuck at the "illegal" and can't see the forest you're in. Can you explain to me how, when 200 ng/mL is the low end of normal, supplementing with T to reach the absolute bottom of normal is giving someone an advantage over someone else in the normal range of T? The logic simply Does Not Follow. Unless the only logic you can follow is "it's illegal".


If you actually are zero T (and im not doubting you, doctors prescribing low T i distrust), you have a good shot at getting a TUE approval from USAT and should be able to race. The issue comes down to that USAT has to draw the line somewhere and with Testorerone easily available, especially in comparison to other drugs, and no exact number a person should be in, it's better to have a strict limitation than no enforceable limitation because the range is murky and what normal is varies from person to person. if I always sat at 150 should I be able to treat up to 200?
Last edited by: pick6: Feb 17, 13 16:28
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [prattzc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
prattzc wrote:
I don't know, ever since I started training to be a MOP age grouper, I haven't gotten morning wood. I think I might qualify for T therapy.

OR

We can go with...it's against the rules of the sport I want to play, therefore I will not use. Screw the morning wood, it wasn't good for anything anyways.


At my current rate, I'll never qualify for supplimentary Testosterone. I get wood just thinking about my wife naked. And she's old an almost as fat as I am!

Training at swim squad in winter is an exercise in not looking or even thinking about the hotties in my lane! I remember reading an interview with some porn star years ago. He said he'd think about war atrocities, or his grandmother naked, to prevent going off too soon. I use that same line of thinking to be able to go out in public!

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 If you read the TUE, unless he can prove WHY he needs the Testerone, he has 0 chance of getting approved. Regardless of his testosterone level. Even IF he can prove why he needs to take it, it must be an Organic cause, read something like a anatomical problem. If it's a Functional cause, you're completely screwed. If a guy is taking TRT just to get to a 500 to 700 ng/mL level isn't cheating plain and simple.

People will disagree with that and it's their right to do so. But I, for one, don't see USADA/WADA as a body capable of rightly determining what the cutoff level is for medical treatments of any variety and then enforcing it consistently. They've proven that they can't do so already. Hope Solo, Levi, entire sports like cycling et al... They bust who they want, when they want, and how hard they want. If someone they don't want to get busted tests positive, they make it go away or give them a wrist slap.
Last edited by: lhpoulin: Feb 17, 13 17:05
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [lhpoulin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lhpoulin wrote:
If you read the TUE, unless he can prove WHY he needs the Testerone, he has 0 chance of getting approved. Regardless of his testosterone level. Even IF he can prove why he needs to take it, it must be an Organic cause, read something like a anatomical problem. If it's a Functional cause, you're completely screwed. If a guy is taking TRT just to get to a 500 to 700 ng/mL level isn't cheating plain and simple. People will disagree with that and it's their right to do so. But I, for one, don't see USADA/WADA as a body capable of rightly determining what the cutoff level is for medical treatments of any variety and then enforcing it consistently. They've proven that they can't do so already. Hope Solo, Levi, entire sports like cycling et al... They bust who they want, when they want, and how hard they want. If someone they don't want to get busted tests positive, they make it go away or give them a wrist slap.

What was wrong with the hope solo incident? She'd been seeing the same doctor for years (as opposed to some doctor she went to looking for some extra help), the prescription was for an item on the specified list, which USAT/USADA recognizes as items that are more likely to be inadvertent use of, so they gave her a warning as there appeared to be no intent. As for Levi, I assume you're talking about the original case, not his stuff involving Lance? rules were different then, and if USAC had results management as i believe they did, USADA cant do much about it. if youre talking about the USPS related case, it's another point people disagree on, but they use the same type of sentencing our legal system does for those who give evidence, and to me thats a good thing. I've learned most of what I know about anti-doping from ex-dopers, so if reduced sentences are what it takes to get people to talk, more power to them.

Finally, I think taking anything that makes your life good and is healthy for your body is a good thing. However I dont think you should be allowed to compete, even if you and your doctor feel it is just making you "normal" if it a product like testosterone. Very simply put, it's impossible to know that maybe 1/2 the "standard range" is normal for you, and you can compete just fine like that, and effectively doubling your ng/ml would then clearly be doping. Since they have no way of knowign that, all they can do is set a hard line and follow it.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I respect your point. But I disagree. I've found on this forum that it's impossible to actually change people's minds on this topic so I'll not continue further in an attempt to do so. It would be mutually disrespectful to attempt to do so.
Last edited by: lhpoulin: Feb 17, 13 17:18
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [lhpoulin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lhpoulin wrote:
I respect your point. But I disagree. I've found on this forum that it's impossible to actually change people's minds on this topic so I'll not continue further in an attempt to do so. It would be mutually disrespectful to attempt to do so.

understood, and I certainly can see where you're coming from. I just hope if you're currently in treatment that even though you disagree with the rules that you're following them.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
...and I hope you never draft. :D
Last edited by: lhpoulin: Feb 17, 13 17:44
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [lhpoulin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lhpoulin wrote:
...and I hope you never draft. :D

I can honestly say I never have. I know I might come across as holier than thou on here, but it's a sincere attitude. I saw WAY TOO MUCH in junior high and high school athletics as a kid that made me realize that a lot of people just don't think rules apply to them in sports. And while I don't claim to be perfect, I'm very careful to follow the rules when I train and compete.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I haven't been posting here long enough to know what you come of as. So far, you seem reasonable to me, and I wanted to bust out some pink text.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [lhpoulin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lhpoulin wrote:
I haven't been posting here long enough to know what you come of as. So far, you seem reasonable to me, and I wanted to bust out some pink text.

LOL. fair enough.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
pick6 wrote:
kathy_caribe wrote:
klehner wrote:
gpdtx wrote:
Actually it is legal to take testosterone for low levels provided that governing bodies are forewarned with medical evidence and thereby exempted. Low testosterone levels has been labeled a disease process. Low levels have been associated with a symptom complex, and those often debilitating, and sometimes deadly (heart disease) effects actually gets better with treatment.

A hematocrit of 39 or 40 is not associated with a disease process and would not qualify for treatment by a physician. The only reason to take epo would be for athletic superiority and that is cheating.

people who suffer from low T levels and want/need to take them to ameliorate symptoms should not be ban from sports.


Your attitude is sickening and ignorant. Good luck with anyone having a non-zero testosterone level getting a TUE. Aging is not a disease process.

I don't care is someone has no naturally occurring testosterone: if he takes exogenous testosterone, he shouldn't be allowed to compete. Period. Participate without competing, maybe, but not eligible for any results/prizes/accolades.

I'm 54, and I would like to think that the guys I compete against are playing the cards they were dealt.


Except many are ALREADY not playing the cards they were dealt and doing so legally. The asthmatics, the joint folks, the low vitamin D folks, the depressed folks, the heart diseased folks, the diabetic folks. All these folks are allowed to change their "dealt cards" and improve their abilities - albeit, the improvement is simply a leveling of the playing field, and in the case of diabetics, they are constantly just trying to reach that level playing field - they're almost always still disadvantaged. You've got a doctor here saying that bringing someone to a heart-healthy situation without increasing his T over the norm (and honestly just barely TO the norm) will not give him superhuman abilities but *you* (in general) seem Stuck on the illegality of T regardless of the logic. I recently got tested and I'm at 0 T. Zippo. My quality of life has sucked for a while now but I'm trying to figure a way out if it without hormone supplementation. HOWEVER, I wouldn't think twice about HRT if that became the choice I had to make because triathlon is just a SPORT, a HOBBY and FUN and my quality of life is so much more than that.

It seems you guys just cannot reason at all and are stuck at the "illegal" and can't see the forest you're in. Can you explain to me how, when 200 ng/mL is the low end of normal, supplementing with T to reach the absolute bottom of normal is giving someone an advantage over someone else in the normal range of T? The logic simply Does Not Follow. Unless the only logic you can follow is "it's illegal".


If you actually are zero T (and im not doubting you, doctors prescribing low T i distrust), you have a good shot at getting a TUE approval from USAT and should be able to race. The issue comes down to that USAT has to draw the line somewhere and with Testorerone easily available, especially in comparison to other drugs, and no exact number a person should be in, it's better to have a strict limitation than no enforceable limitation because the range is murky and what normal is varies from person to person. if I always sat at 150 should I be able to treat up to 200?

Well, I'm a female in menopause so 0 T is, while, abnormal, not unheard of. IMO, since the docs are saying you get no benefit at 200, then yeah, you should be able to treat up to 200 just like any Joe can use an inhaler.

http://harvestmoon6.blogspot.com
https://www.caringbridge.org/visit/katasmit


Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
pick6 wrote:
gpdtx wrote:
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.


The question you can't answer is "is that T level normal for them?" This was the lie lance told everyone when he "told the truth". Lance's VO2 Max is ~82. Lemonds' was ~95. Lance doping so that he could perform at the same level as Lemond "leveled the playing field" between them, but one is cheating and the other is not.
...........


I agree with your line of thought, but I think you are giving way too much credit to Testosterone itself. Yes, LA used it, but you can be sure that the majority of his drug enhanced performance was from the other drugs/methods (EPO, blood doping, HGH).
If you're at Ironman and some guy on TRT beats you by a few minutes, you were gonna get beat anyway, IMHO. Hell, most folks would probably see more race day performance benefit from popping an ephedrine tab or some caffeine pills, than taking daily testosterone.
It's not a miracle drug, and it has a lot of side affects, some unseen, that can make it rather undesirable. Throws off other hormone levels (estrogen, DHT, etc.) shuts down testes, raises BP, water retention, harder to keep weight in check, etc etc
Last edited by: gibson00: Feb 17, 13 18:49
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [kathy_caribe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kathy_caribe wrote:
pick6 wrote:
kathy_caribe wrote:
klehner wrote:
gpdtx wrote:
Actually it is legal to take testosterone for low levels provided that governing bodies are forewarned with medical evidence and thereby exempted. Low testosterone levels has been labeled a disease process. Low levels have been associated with a symptom complex, and those often debilitating, and sometimes deadly (heart disease) effects actually gets better with treatment.

A hematocrit of 39 or 40 is not associated with a disease process and would not qualify for treatment by a physician. The only reason to take epo would be for athletic superiority and that is cheating.

people who suffer from low T levels and want/need to take them to ameliorate symptoms should not be ban from sports.


Your attitude is sickening and ignorant. Good luck with anyone having a non-zero testosterone level getting a TUE. Aging is not a disease process.

I don't care is someone has no naturally occurring testosterone: if he takes exogenous testosterone, he shouldn't be allowed to compete. Period. Participate without competing, maybe, but not eligible for any results/prizes/accolades.

I'm 54, and I would like to think that the guys I compete against are playing the cards they were dealt.


Except many are ALREADY not playing the cards they were dealt and doing so legally. The asthmatics, the joint folks, the low vitamin D folks, the depressed folks, the heart diseased folks, the diabetic folks. All these folks are allowed to change their "dealt cards" and improve their abilities - albeit, the improvement is simply a leveling of the playing field, and in the case of diabetics, they are constantly just trying to reach that level playing field - they're almost always still disadvantaged. You've got a doctor here saying that bringing someone to a heart-healthy situation without increasing his T over the norm (and honestly just barely TO the norm) will not give him superhuman abilities but *you* (in general) seem Stuck on the illegality of T regardless of the logic. I recently got tested and I'm at 0 T. Zippo. My quality of life has sucked for a while now but I'm trying to figure a way out if it without hormone supplementation. HOWEVER, I wouldn't think twice about HRT if that became the choice I had to make because triathlon is just a SPORT, a HOBBY and FUN and my quality of life is so much more than that.

It seems you guys just cannot reason at all and are stuck at the "illegal" and can't see the forest you're in. Can you explain to me how, when 200 ng/mL is the low end of normal, supplementing with T to reach the absolute bottom of normal is giving someone an advantage over someone else in the normal range of T? The logic simply Does Not Follow. Unless the only logic you can follow is "it's illegal".


If you actually are zero T (and im not doubting you, doctors prescribing low T i distrust), you have a good shot at getting a TUE approval from USAT and should be able to race. The issue comes down to that USAT has to draw the line somewhere and with Testorerone easily available, especially in comparison to other drugs, and no exact number a person should be in, it's better to have a strict limitation than no enforceable limitation because the range is murky and what normal is varies from person to person. if I always sat at 150 should I be able to treat up to 200?


Well, I'm a female in menopause so 0 T is, while, abnormal, not unheard of. IMO, since the docs are saying you get no benefit at 200, then yeah, you should be able to treat up to 200 just like any Joe can use an inhaler.

Then why take it if it does "nothing" up to 200?
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
pick6 wrote:
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:

I agree but sadly it seems this whole "doping" madnees is starting to get out of hand.It would be a tragedy if people now have to choose between treatment for a condition and the ability to participate in a recreational sport (notice I did say "participate" and not race)

---


do me a favor and differentiate between race and participate in a USAT sanctioned event under existing rules, thanks.
---


I don't give a shit what it says in the exisiting rules..Guys like you are so fucking anal about this that no matter what anyone says you will keep throwing "the rules" our way.It is sad that you can't see the difference.

---
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [Ultra-tri-guy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:
pick6 wrote:
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:

I agree but sadly it seems this whole "doping" madnees is starting to get out of hand.It would be a tragedy if people now have to choose between treatment for a condition and the ability to participate in a recreational sport (notice I did say "participate" and not race)

---


do me a favor and differentiate between race and participate in a USAT sanctioned event under existing rules, thanks.

---


I don't give a shit what it says in the exisiting rules..Guys like you are so fucking anal about this that no matter what anyone says you will keep throwing "the rules" our way.It is sad that you can't see the difference.

---

And many of these same folks (not necessarily pick6...) think nothing of catching a draft during a 5 hour bike leg...
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [gibson00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gibson00 wrote:
pick6 wrote:
gpdtx wrote:
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.


The question you can't answer is "is that T level normal for them?" This was the lie lance told everyone when he "told the truth". Lance's VO2 Max is ~82. Lemonds' was ~95. Lance doping so that he could perform at the same level as Lemond "leveled the playing field" between them, but one is cheating and the other is not.
...........


I agree with your line of thought, but I think you are giving way too much credit to Testosterone itself. Yes, LA used it, but you can be sure that the majority of his drug enhanced performance was from the other drugs/methods (EPO, blood doping, HGH).
If you're at Ironman and some guy on TRT beats you by a few minutes, you were gonna get beat anyway, IMHO. Hell, most folks would probably see more race day performance benefit from popping an ephedrine tab or some caffeine pills, than taking daily testosterone.

Im not talking about getting beaten by TRT; Im talking about people getting beaten by folks who claim to be on TRT, but are dosing well above that. I recognize fully that EPO, HGH, blood doping are the strongest ways to get benefits during racing, but Armstrong and others use testosterone as a recovery agent primarily. If your T is low due to sustained consistent training, the performance benefit you're getting from it is not being exhausted the next day. That makes a big difference.
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [gibson00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gibson00 wrote:
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:
pick6 wrote:
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:

I agree but sadly it seems this whole "doping" madnees is starting to get out of hand.It would be a tragedy if people now have to choose between treatment for a condition and the ability to participate in a recreational sport (notice I did say "participate" and not race)

---


do me a favor and differentiate between race and participate in a USAT sanctioned event under existing rules, thanks.

---


I don't give a shit what it says in the exisiting rules..Guys like you are so fucking anal about this that no matter what anyone says you will keep throwing "the rules" our way.It is sad that you can't see the difference.

---


And many of these same folks (not necessarily pick6...) think nothing of catching a draft during a 5 hour bike leg...

----

Exactly..There are blatant draft cheats getting far more benefit from wheel sucking but that doesn't rile people nearly as much for some reason..

--
Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [YO mortaaay] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
YO mortaaay wrote:

Then why take it if it does "nothing" up to 200?

to increase libido, decrease fatigue, keep your heart healthy, stop insomnia and other reasons I don't personally know of.

http://harvestmoon6.blogspot.com
https://www.caringbridge.org/visit/katasmit


Quote Reply
Re: Testosterone -- my perspective [kathy_caribe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I know a guy who was essentially the definition of roid rage UNTIL he started taking TRT.
Quote Reply

Prev Next