Is your TT trough reading, really your trough? Or actually close to your Peak???

[halfape211]

I ask members to consider this and give an opinion. I find there are two ways to look at this and here's why.

We always speak of a TT trough reading, as being taken just before the next injection. Sounds sensible on the surface.
Doctors generally ask to have weekly injections and a Blood test just prior to the next injection. So that's getting a blood test seven days after the last injection, right? Given seven days after an injection is what I and many doctors consider to be a trough. (To be clear, I'm not saying I'm a doctor.)

So if Doctors allow our TT to drop over 7 days, why do many of us take a blood test at 3.5 days? Is 3.5 days after injection, actually very close to our peak numbers as I think we peak about the second day? (I'll let someone else provide the more accurate peak date, but I don't think I'm too far off.) For everyone plus those who want a higher TT in our bodies, are we not gypping ourselves by testing on the 3.5 day versus waiting 7 days?? Yes I understand that most inject twice per week, and therefore we blood test 3.5 days later. However if all "2 pins a week" people waited 7 days to blood test and the next injection, I think they would get a number that better represents their real trough. I worked it out, based on a 7 or 8 day half life, the amount of T in you body at the 7 day mark is only 10% less then if you were pinning once a week. Consider (A) You have the same amount of T (within 10%) in your body at the 7 day mark whether you had been pinning once or twice a week. (B) but at seven days, you have allowed enough days from injection to actually be in the trough.

Just to try to be clear, here is an example of pinning and test times: If pinning half your weekly dose twice a week on Sunday and Thursday, make your last pin on a Thursday. Then skip Sunday injection and test on the next Thursday. Why must we test at 3.5 days, just because we pin every 3.5 days if there is only a small difference of T in our bodys??

Now I know this will be hypocrisy to some. lol So try to consider this on it's merits and if you disagree, please do so.

And maybe I'm completely wrong! I know I was once wrong back in the 70s.

 

[halfwit]

Okay, let's first define peak and trough. Peak is going to obviously be when serum concentrations are at their highest (48 hours post injection regardless of injection frequency), and trough being the low point during the protocol.

If one is injecting E7D as you mentioned, peak is 48 hours later, with trough at the lowest point - the day of your next injection, before injecting.

On an E3.5D protocol, peak is still 48hrs later, but as these peaks are smaller, so are the troughs - which still fall on the day of the next injection.

That's the reason behind more frequent dosing, as it keeps the peaks and troughs relatively smooth - preventing large spikes, which triggers a higher conversion of estradiol.

A trough is still a trough, a peak is still a peak. It's just a matter of the dose being properly dialed in for either protocol.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[halfape211]

Halfwit, you always make sense!! You're a freggin genius Lol. Anyways..., what if the peak on a E3.5D protocol is only 10% less than the peak of E7D?? As you know, much of how high your TT is, is from the several week of prior injections. And, on both protocols you are getting the exact same weekly amount of T. The only difference is on that last injection day, you are either injecting the weekly full amount or half that amount. Now..., on a E3.5 day protocol, your TT does not go down by half (only 10%). I base this on math and a 7 day half life of cyp.

SO..., you have 90% of the TT with E3.5D, But...., you only have 50% of the wait time between pin and test!!! Your blood test numbers are going to be higher than with E3.5D and 3.5 day to bloodtest.

I did not do a one man study to back this up, but the math backs this up.

(I guess to even the 10% drop in TT, you would technically wait 90% of the week.)

I'm welcome to other data and will accept if I'm wrong.

 

[halfwit]

Halfwit, you always make sense!! You're a freggin genius Lol. Anyways..., what if the peak on a E3.5D protocol is only 10% less than the peak of E7D?? As you know, much of how high your TT is, is from the several week of prior injections. And, on both protocols you are getting the exact same weekly amount of T. The only difference is on that last injection day, you are either injecting the weekly full amount or half that amount. Now..., on a E3.5 day protocol, your TT does not go down by half (only 10%). I base this on math and a 7 day half life of cyp.

SO..., you have 90% of the TT with E3.5D, But...., you only have 50% of the wait time between pin and test!!! Your blood test numbers are going to be higher than with E3.5D and 3.5 day to bloodtest.

I did not do a one man study to back this up, but the math backs this up.

(I guess to even the 10% drop in TT, you would technically wait 90% of the week.)

I'm welcome to other data and will accept if I'm wrong.

You're correct, except for one little caveat... The dose is halved in an E3.5D protocol. The numbers actually are a bit LOWER on E3.5D for peak, and higher for trough.

The two do balance out with regards to total testosterone over about 12 half-lives, but the peak/trough values will be slightly different as you've surmised.

 

[halfape211]

You're correct, except for one little caveat... The dose is halved in an E3.5D protocol. The numbers actually are a bit LOWER on E3.5D for peak, and higher for trough.

[/QUOTE]The two do balance out with regards to total testosterone over about 12 half-lives, but the peak/trough values will be slightly different as you've surmised. [/QUOTE]

This is where we may differ. I don't think the two balance out. (A) Dose amount - Assume a 10% reduction in TT from going E3.5D pin. (B)Time factor - Very roughly assuming a 100 point drop every day after pin. After 3.5 days the TT is down 350 points. 350 points is 35% of say an average 1000 TRT level. 7 days in causes a 700 drop which is a 70% drop


E3.5D Calculations: So 90% TT to start because of half dose (assumption (A). Take 35% TT off for 3.5 day drop (assumption (B) which is 31.5. Therefore 90-31.5 = a 58.5% TT level on a E3.5D protocol SO 58.5%

E7D Calculations: At the end of 8 weeks plus of pinning, you are at the max TT that you can get from this Protocol. So you are at 100%. Take 70% drop because of 7 day wait leaves you with a 30% of TT that you started with. SO 30% TT

E3.5D Calculations with 7 day wait to bloodtest: So 90% TT to start because of half dose (assumption (A). Take 70% TT off for 7 day drop (70X90+63) (assumption (B) which leaves 63% of TT. Therefore 90-63 = a 27% TT levelSO 27%
In my humble opinion, I think a E3.5D protocol with a 7 day wait for bloodtest provides a more authentic or real TT number.

Notice how the E7D (30% remainder of the TT) is almost the same as the E3.5D (27% of TT) when modified to have a 7 day wait between pin and blood test. Notice how use of a E3.5D protocol combined with a 3.5 day wait gives you a TT number that is twice as high as the other two. Now..., given that many doctors believe the 7 day wait time is the gold standard, should not we be using the 7 day wait combined with the healthy benefits of the E3.5D protocol?? In my humble opinion, I think we are using an incorrect measuring stick. We may be cheating ourselves of proper medical care in some cases. Just because we've adhered to the 3.5 day wait to test for so long, doesn't mean we shouldn't rethink this testing at 3.5 days.

I'm not Stephen Hawkings. so decide for yourself and I'd be very interested in feedback.



I guess the half life of cyp is different for everyone. My TT goes down fairly quickly so I used a 7 day half live in my calculation.

 

[IMT staff]

When doing 2x per week your probably swinging 200 points at best. So not much difference between peak and trough to begin with.

 

[Gossamer]

When doing 2x per week your probably shining 200 points at best. So not much difference between peak and trough to begin with.

What does "shining 200 points" mean?

 

[IMT staff]

gerdarn autocorrect

 

[halfwit]

This is where we may differ. I don't think the two balance out. (A) Dose amount - Assume a 10% reduction in TT from going E3.5D pin. (B)Time factor - Very roughly assuming a 100 point drop every day after pin. After 3.5 days the TT is down 350 points. 350 points is 35% of say an average 1000 TRT level. 7 days in causes a 700 drop which is a 70% drop


E3.5D Calculations: So 90% TT to start because of half dose (assumption (A). Take 35% TT off for 3.5 day drop (assumption (B) which is 31.5. Therefore 90-31.5 = a 58.5% TT level on a E3.5D protocol SO 58.5%

E7D Calculations: At the end of 8 weeks plus of pinning, you are at the max TT that you can get from this Protocol. So you are at 100%. Take 70% drop because of 7 day wait leaves you with a 30% of TT that you started with. SO 30% TT

E3.5D Calculations with 7 day wait to bloodtest: So 90% TT to start because of half dose (assumption (A). Take 70% TT off for 7 day drop (70X90+63) (assumption (B) which leaves 63% of TT. Therefore 90-63 = a 27% TT levelSO 27%
In my humble opinion, I think a E3.5D protocol with a 7 day wait for bloodtest provides a more authentic or real TT number.

Notice how the E7D (30% remainder of the TT) is almost the same as the E3.5D (27% of TT) when modified to have a 7 day wait between pin and blood test. Notice how use of a E3.5D protocol combined with a 3.5 day wait gives you a TT number that is twice as high as the other two. Now..., given that many doctors believe the 7 day wait time is the gold standard, should not we be using the 7 day wait combined with the healthy benefits of the E3.5D protocol?? In my humble opinion, I think we are using an incorrect measuring stick. We may be cheating ourselves of proper medical care in some cases. Just because we've adhered to the 3.5 day wait to test for so long, doesn't mean we shouldn't rethink this testing at 3.5 days.

I'm not Stephen Hawkings. so decide for yourself and I'd be very interested in feedback.



I guess the half life of cyp is different for everyone. My TT goes down fairly quickly so I used a 7 day half live in my calculation.

What formula are you using for decay?

Amount total = Amount (initial) x e^-/+kt?

e being Euler's number, K being the half-life constant, and t representing time.

That's what (or the log model is OK) is typically used, but it looks like you're using a polynomial approximation from Excel.

 

[halfape211]

OMG!! OMG!! Halfwit - You sure kicked this up a notch!!
First Off. Never met Mr. Euler and don't know anything about him. I have nothing against him or his work, I just never met him in my travels.
Second. I don't know if I used the "polynomial approximation from Excel".

I did however use two Excel spreadsheets, that added up the decayed values each week over 8 weeks with a 7 day half life. (one for E3.5D and one for E7D). I should go back and try a 12 day half life. But I think we are still getting too high a measurement of TT that does not represent what a real trough should look like. IMHO

See my reply to IMT staff

 

[halfape211]

When doing 2x per week your probably swinging 200 points at best. So not much difference between peak and trough to begin with.

This is good information. Thanks for jumping in. Now..., if there is only a 200 point swing or drop in TT using the E3.5D protocol (with 3.5 day wait til bloodtest), I think this verifies my point. I believe a 200 point drop is not a trough. It's your average!! I mean this respectfully. Most people here have way more knowledge than I, but what I'm theorizing makes total sense to me. I don't have a problem with the E3.5D protocol (because whether on 3.5 D or 7D your TT is about the same at injection time.) It's the 3.5 day wait time until blood test that I believe is wrong. 3.5 days do not allow enough time for TT to drop. Again look at the 7 day wait used by the medical community to ascertain trough. You need the 7 day wait to put your TT at a value that is recognized and used by Doctors and the medical community. Otherwise we and the medical community are using two very different measuring standards. Yes, we should modify the injection protocol to E3.5D, but I don't see any good reason to modify the wait time from what is a 'Standard Operating Procedure' for those Doctors that control our health. Using a 7 day wait time puts you at a very different TT range than 3 day wait time. Doctors are not going to modify how they see our TT numbers. They just look at a chart. They don't care if we only had a 3.5 wait time. And if the number is higher than they want, they cut us back.

(Also, if peak is two days after injection, then at 3.5 days you are getting blood test right after you hit your peak.)

And how did this 3.5 wait time become the standard here at "ology"? Was it well thought out? (I mean that very respectfully). Or do we use it just because 'the trough of a E3.5D is actually at the 3.5 day). Yes I agree it is technically the 'trough', but it really is the average TT.
Does this make sense?
Sorry for the length, but I felt the proper health of our members was important.

 

[Milton]

This is good information. Thanks for jumping in. Now..., if there is only a 200 point swing or drop in TT using the E3.5D protocol (with 3.5 day wait til bloodtest), I think this verifies my point. I believe a 200 point drop is not a trough. It's your average!! I mean this respectfully. Most people here have way more knowledge than I, but what I'm theorizing makes total sense to me. I don't have a problem with the E3.5D protocol (because whether on 3.5 D or 7D your TT is about the same at injection time.) It's the 3.5 day wait time until blood test that I believe is wrong. 3.5 days do not allow enough time for TT to drop. Again look at the 7 day wait used by the medical community to ascertain trough. You need the 7 day wait to put your TT at a value that is recognized and used by Doctors and the medical community. Otherwise we and the medical community are using two very different measuring standards. Yes, we should modify the injection protocol to E3.5D, but I don't see any good reason to modify the wait time from what is a 'Standard Operating Procedure' for those Doctors that control our health. Using a 7 day wait time puts you at a very different TT range than 3 day wait time. Doctors are not going to modify how they see our TT numbers. They just look at a chart. They don't care if we only had a 3.5 wait time. And if the number is higher than they want, they cut us back.

(Also, if peak is two days after injection, then at 3.5 days you are getting blood test right after you hit your peak.)

And how did this 3.5 wait time become the standard here at "ology"? Was it well thought out? (I mean that very respectfully). Or do we use it just because 'the trough of a E3.5D is actually at the 3.5 day). Yes I agree it is technically the 'trough', but it really is the average TT.
Does this make sense?
Sorry for the length, but I felt the proper health of our members was important.

keep us posted and let us know how it goes.

 

[halfwit]

OMG!! OMG!! Halfwit - You sure kicked this up a notch!!
First Off. Never met Mr. Euler and don't know anything about him. I have nothing against him or his work, I just never met him in my travels.
Second. I don't know if I used the "polynomial approximation from Excel".

I did however use two Excel spreadsheets, that added up the decayed values each week over 8 weeks with a 7 day half life. (one for E3.5D and one for E7D). I should go back and try a 12 day half life. But I think we are still getting too high a measurement of TT that does not represent what a real trough should look like. IMHO

See my reply to IMT staff

Okay, that's what I thought. Excel "guesses" at what the equation would be based on plot points in a graph, and is only is as accurate as the information (data points) given.

Euler's number is indeed named after a mathematician named Euler, but like the other discoverers of much of our mathematics, Leonard Euler has been deceased for several hundred years. e is actually a constant, much like pi, but used in logarithmic calculations, and is necessary to perform such calculations. (pi being roughly 3.14159..., and e being roughly 2.178...)

Testosterone, having a set decay rate based upon a half-life, utilizes such mathematics. Adding the cypionate ester roughly brings it to 8 days. I just worked an 11 hour day, so I'll give you the framework (I have a few spreadsheets on here somewhere that actually models E3.5D vs E7D vs EOD, etc) so you can see the better representation for yourself.

The first step is to find k, which is the only unknown based on the accepted half-life. This gives us: (using 200mg as a sample)

100 = 200 x e^-k(8)
Solve for k, by rearranging the equation around a bit.
Divide by 200 from both sides :

0.5 = e^-k(8)

Take the natural log of both sides:

ln(0.5) = - k8

Simplify.

-0.693 = - 8k

Solve.

k = 0.0866

Now we can solve for other values of t or A (final)

So, let's look at one half-life:
At E3.5D:
A(final) = 100xe^-(0.0866x3.5)

A(final) = ~73.853

E7D:

A(final) = 200 x e^-(0.0866x7)

A(final) = 109.084mg

Pretty darn close to half, which makes sense as the given half-life is just one more day away.

For the next half-life though, things get a bit trickier as you're adding a compound value to each. So for the E3.5D, we can use (it's going to be 7 days now, hence why I chose these ) both examples:

A(final) 1 + A(final) 2 = 73.853 +100xe^-(0.0866x7)
= 128.39mg

Now where things get interesting when we look at E7D:

A(final) 2 + 200 x e^-(0.0866x14)
= 109.084+ 59.496
= 168.58mg

Pretty significant difference, no? This is actually why E3.5D is better for estradiol, as the peaks are much smaller. Why inject in such a frequency then, you may be thinking? If the E7D is clearly more testosterone in the same time frame, it's like you're LOSING some, right?

Except, we're not making a true apple to apple comparison. The first E3.5D is now going to climb another dose of 100mg at the next interval, while E7D decays another 7 before it receives another 200mg.

This is a lot of typing on my phone, but I'll save you some work by telling you that E7D will be higher again at 14 days out, and even at 21 days. It's not until around beyond four half-lives that the two values will be very close to converging on the same value. This is called the steady state value, where it will remain constant (peaks and troughs around this value of course) as long as none of the variables change.

The biggest difference being that both the peaks and troughs for E7D will be more exaggerated, while the E3.5D will have them following more closely to the steady state value.

Or as IMT stated, around 200ng/dL.

I don't remember the excel friendly formula, but you can likely find it on Google. That will help when you want to drag things out to several hundred time constants by just dragging the formula box to the right.

I hope that wasn't too dry, and it makes sense. I'm pretty brain dead right now, but I think I got the point across.

Edit: I just realized that I left out adding a fresh 100/200 every time interval, but the results will still end the same with respect to final values. I'm too lazy to change the post right now, but it's going to be the decayed value + 100/200, etc - and the decayed values will obviously become less significant as they head towards zero every 32 days. (half-life only works for the time at which it's at 50%, this does NOT mean it's at 0% at 16 days, but closer to 32 for the given half-life of 8 days)

 

[halfape211]

OMG! There's no words for this! I'll have to get a few cups of coffee in me before I tackle this.

 

[halfape211]

Question? Do you have Sheldon Cooper helping you??

 

[Slhardee]

My head hurts a bit from looking at this! However, it is good and interesting information.

 

[Rockya!]

So every 3.5 days is the best protocol?/ And when it comes time for labs wait 7 days after last inj?

 

[halfwit]

So every 3.5 days is the best protocol?/ And when it comes time for labs wait 7 days after last inj?

Trough (which is less pronounced at E3.5D) will always be the day of your next injection, before you take it. If you're on an E7D, it would be on your 7th day - E3.5D, the "4th day".

E3.5D is more stable and helps minimize estradiol issues, so in my opinion, it is superior. However, YMMV as we all have a preference.

LOL, Sheldon Cooper!

 

[halfape211]

Trough (which is less pronounced at E3.5D) will always be the day of your next injection, before you take it. If you're on an E7D, it would be on your 7th day - E3.5D, the "4th day".

E3.5D is more stable and helps minimize estradiol issues, so in my opinion, it is superior. However, YMMV as we all have a preference.

LOL, Sheldon Cooper!

Yes oh yes, the day before your next injection is technically "your trough". But Doctors ask us to wait 7 days so there is a certain amount of decay, so the trough reflects a week of decay. A 7 day wait (decay) is the 'measuring stick', the 'standard' used by the medical community to measure our trough. The total TT in your body at time of injection is about the same, whether you inject daily, E3.5D or E7D, as most of the TT in your body is a build up of the last 8 weeks. But we need to use a 7 day wait to get a real trough IMHO; to not be at a disadvantage when measuring our TT; to use the same measuring standard that our Doctors use to evaluate us, not to be on a different page from our doctors.
Another example is: What if you were injecting every second day? Now your "trough" actually your Peak!! You would not really have a true trough. As far as E3.5D as a good protocol , I agree 1000% on that.

PS Halfwit: I appreciate your civil and professional tone used in this thread.

 

[halfape211]

So every 3.5 days is the best protocol?/ And when it comes time for labs wait 7 days after last inj?

Yes, my theory is that 3.5 is the best protocol. Absolutely. But I'm trying to show that a 7 day wait is more reflective of what the medical community uses as a standard amount of decay. The total TT in your body at time of injection is about the same, whether you inject daily, E3.5D or E7D, as most of the TT in your body is a build up of the last 8 weeks. So why use 3.5 days just because it is only technically your trough? See post to halfwit above