Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 12:36am PT
|
it sounds like you're bringing a pretty strong personal bias to this discussion.
Nah. I just hate to see someone screw themselves up (i.e. compromise your bodies ability to make it's own) due to a lack of understanding of the effects of supplementation. I've done the reading, and encourage you to do so as well, that's all.
At the end of the day, if you think the trade off of permanently requiring T supps is worth the potential for a little extra, then go for it. I would say that unless you are already maxing out the other variables...diet, training, sleep, stress, etc, I'd focus on them first since there are only benefits and they don't really cost you much other than time and planning.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
-A race of corn eaters
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 11, 2012 - 10:40am PT
|
I just hate to see someone screw themselves up
me, too.
"leaving you reliant on supplementing" - "the trade off of permanently requiring T supps"
you make this sound quite authoritative. I didn't gather this from my readings or research.
if you're alluding to aspects like (a) testicular shrinkage or (b) estrogenation of the T, etc., let's remember there are a variety of dosing regimens, certainly not just one, and not all are necessarily abused or excessive.
More here,
http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/1532186/Anyone-Taking-Vitamin-T
perhaps tmi, but it's been 8 months now on the Vit T and my preciouses are as HUGE as ever. At 52, cholesterol is in check (at 158) and psa is 1 (1-4 range), colonoscopy shows clean as a whistle. T is steady state at about 850 ("normal" range 348-1197). -New man, esp attitudinally.
weather's great, winter's summer, let's climb! ;)
P.S.
Based on my limited research, there's no comparing the two: hgh and vit t on many counts. No longer interested in the hgh question for personal use. But it continues to pain me nevertheless that there is little to no research on its benefits among the aging - and again not in regarding to prolonging old age (who wants that? certainly not me) but to enhance quality of life in remaining years. Maybe times will change for the better in the future, we can hope.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 12:02pm PT
|
|
|
Crimpergirl
Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 02:45pm PT
|
I know next to nothing about this stuff. But I find it interesting that there is appears a general negativity toward male supplementing T, at the same time there is negativity toward females who do NOT supplement E.
Why is the general consensus that it is okay for one group and not the other? Anyone have any insight?
|
|
monolith
climber
albany,ca
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 02:54pm PT
|
I hadn't heard this. Are you talking about post-menopausal supplementing E? There's a fair amount of controversy about that as well.
|
|
Crimpergirl
Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 02:56pm PT
|
I'm not. But know many who are. And many who (I thought anyway) were but the controversy has women confused.
Maybe I'm uber confused (not the first time) and women generally take progesterone as they age?
edit: A QUICK google shows hormone replacement therapy for women (during and post menopause) "involves taking the hormones estrogen and progesterone. (Women who don’t have a uterus anymore take just estrogen). MHT can be very good at relieving moderate to severe menopausal symptoms and preventing bone loss. But MHT also has some risks, especially if used for a long time."
|
|
monolith
climber
albany,ca
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 03:03pm PT
|
ST may not represent the general attitude about guys and supplementing T. The companion question would be what do the women of ST think about supplementing E & P?
|
|
Crimpergirl
Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 03:11pm PT
|
Agreed.
My thoughts come from society in general (my sense, no study).
It seems to me that people in general are more likely to be against males supplementing vit T.
At the same time that people in general are okay with women supplementing with vit E & P.
Seems the E&P controversy is relatively new and that pretty much all women supplemented as menopause hit.
I just find this different view for males and females interesting and wondered why it may be. Perhaps my sense on how the public views these things in general is distorted though.
As far as my own views on females supplementing with E&P - I've not idea at all! The recent controversy confused me for sure. Hopefully I've got time before I have to decide for myself.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 03:22pm PT
|
Ooops, I thought this was about Humongously Gratuitous Hyperbole.
My bad, carry on using.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 03:24pm PT
|
good question, crimpy
My guess is that the public somehow views males as, well, less than manly or something if they don't produce enough T and may need to supplement it?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
-A race of corn eaters
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 11, 2012 - 04:12pm PT
|
you guys don't remember all that "estrogen therapy" rage in the late 80s and early 90s? I think it was; and then the subsequent busting of the rage bubble later in the 90s as estrogen therapy was linked to increased breast cancer incidence in particular.
crimpers, perhaps you're too young to remember.
certainly, increased cancer risk is a number one concern with the Vit T. It's one of the reason I track the psa with the testoterone and let my doc feel me up so much. okay, tmi.
I researched when I started with the T. Reports indicated the ET-breast cancer troubles were a different ballgame altogether. Let's hope. It's also my sense that ET isn't in vogue as it used to be. Although I haven't been following the subject at all in recent years of course in part because it hasn't been in the news like it used to be when it was all the rage and bruhaha, also of course because I'm not a near-postmenopausal female. Thanks for piqueing my interest on it, I'll review it later to see what the thinking is nowadays.
But, bottom line, increased risk of (growing) cancer is a lead risk factor with T too. Afterall, it is an anabolic steroid that stimulates growth.
Time to go work my abs. Gym climber, out...
.....
EDIT to ADD, 7:01p
Thanks, Crimpers. For your thoughts as well.
Here's to good health and to pulling hard on the rocks - to both of us and to all!
|
|
Crimpergirl
Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2012 - 05:37pm PT
|
Thanks HFCS -
Thanks, but am old enough to recall the HT craze for women. I came of age in the 80s and 90s so my brain thought it's what every woman just did as they aged. It seemed the norm and no craze. I probably thought women had been doing it for decades. At the time, women who didn't engage in hormone replacement were ridiculed.
So, from that backdrop my question (above) emerged. I guess it's more appropriate to say that today, the general consensus is that the public views vit t and vit E&P as bad?
I personally am not saying it's good or bad - I know too little to make a statement. Just thought it interesting societal views. And some day - likely not too far off, I'll have to figure it out for myself. Ugh.
Thanks for your thoughts. Have fun at the gym!
|
|
phylp
Trad climber
Millbrae, CA
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2012 - 10:06pm PT
|
Crimpie, the whole HRT for post-menopausal women issue is very complicated right now. The data is complicated by comparing apples to oranges (comparing studies with different exclusion criteria, different chemical entities, different delivery methods, different doses etc.)
Despite the brouhaha created by the outcome of the WHI studies, plenty of gynecologists are still very comfortable prescribing HRT based on individual need and medical history. Sometimes only estrogen, sometimes estrogen and progesterone, depending on the individual. There is real risk, and there is real benefit. Each person has to decide what's right in their own case. I use it!
On the original topic, I just got the latest issue of Vanity Fair in the mail and it contains an article about HGH use in Hollywood! I haven't read it yet, but will provide a summary here once I do. Too bad, it's not one of the articles available on their web site.
Ta, Phyl
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!