My understanding differs to yours. You may be right but then many others would be wrong.
Would you agree that One's T-levels are not set in stone? Sure there is an upper limit which once attained, or surpassed, will result in no more T-being produced. That is T-production is cut-off, and one's HPTA is shutdown.
As we age out T-levels drop. Why? Because the body needs less T? Or because the means of production becomes less efficient?
Fir this arguments sake, let’s assume it’s an production efficiency problem, rather than an implicit biological need to down regulate the body’s T-levels.
This is assumption is supported by research. If, for example, one diet is improved, then one’s T-levels can be bolstered. The dietary impact on raising or lowering T is well researched.
The main point here being that one’s T-levels are not set in stone.
With that established (or agreed in theory) imagine a room with a heater.
Every night this heater in ramps up and aims to heat the room to a comfortable 30C. Once 30C is reached the thermostat kicks in and tones down the heaters output as the optimal temperature has been reached.
Now imagine that heater get old, and never quite manages the room to 30 degrees. After a while is only reaches 20C and things start to fell chilly to the point where you decide to get a supporting heater.
Here you have a few options.
Option #1 - You bring in a great whopping heater to replace the old and set the thermostat to 35C. The heater gets to work and maintains the temperature at 35C at all times - 24/7 - No ups or downs, or on or off switch. Everything is nice and warm
The only problem is that the original heater shuts down altogether. With its thermostat set at a mere 30C, its need for production is completely overridden. It shuts down an grows rusty.
Alternatively the second heater brought in, Option #2, is designed to support rather than replace the existing heater in place.
This second heater only runs in the morning, after the main heater has been hard at it, doing the best it can, the support heater jumps in and raises the temp from 20 to 30 or maybe even 35 for a short while, but then shuts off.
Toward the evening things cool down again and the main heater kicks in and does its job as best it can.
While a balmy 35 temperature is not maintained at all times, it is achieved most to the time. As a bonus, the main heater remains is use, and doesn’t rust up.
A third option (#3) is this support heater has it thermostat set to 40. Every day its cranks up and an raises the temperature until 40C and at the end of the day it’s still 35C. As a result the main heater doesn’t switch on. Here the new, supporting heater simply takes over the job, much like in option 1, except that it works in 24hours bursts – up and down. And again the problem is that the main, original heater shuts down.
Obviously these three scenarios are meant to serve as an analogy for shots (#1), creams at a minimal dose (#2) and creams at a maximal dose (#3).
It one’s optimal T-levels is 900 say, and one takes shots that raise one’s T beyond that – for even part of a week. Then one’s natural production will shut down. Toward the end of the week. When one’s T-levels drop below 900, the problem of ramping production back up becomes an issue (#1)
With creams however, one normal level of 700 may be topped up of a morning to say 1000. Given the rapid decay, by night fall ones levels are back to 700 and one’s own production kicks off again (#2)
If the creams are overused however and levels are raised to 1200 say, then one’s natural production is held off. The next day more cream is required to hit that excessive goal of 1200, and endogenous production is further shut down (#3).
The other key factor is the Androgen receptors. These are spread out throughout the body and, in response to a lack of free T, will shut down according to Herrings law. That is, the most important will stay receptive, while the least will shut down and leave the free T for where it’s needed most. This is seen in reverse where raised T will cure low-t symptoms in the reverse order. Typically mind symptoms and mood symptoms will resolve certain physical symptoms. Although key issues such as insulin sensitivity are prioritised.
All this, of course, is purely theoretical and untested. But still, such theory or ‘armchair philosophy’ is the start or scientific enquiry.
Thoughts?
