Can I get Gyno after 2 years on TRT?

KvanH

KvanH

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • RockStar
Letro is the gyno killer fyi.
I'm pretty sure it's actually not, fyi. Unless you mean immediate course of action when gyno symptoms arise. When trying to reverse already formed gyno, serms are better and more healthy option.
 
BigShadow

BigShadow

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I'm pretty sure it's actually not, fyi. Unless you mean immediate course of action when gyno symptoms arise. When trying to reverse already formed gyno, serms are better and more healthy option.
Lol you obviously have no idea what you are talking about but ok clown, educate me! You might 1st want to Google Letrozole and educate yourself before you try educating anyone in this forum.
 
KvanH

KvanH

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • RockStar
Lol you obviously have no idea what you are talking about but ok clown, educate me! You might 1st want to Google Letrozole and educate yourself before you try educating anyone in this forum.
Dang, that was a bit harsh 😄 I did try to educate myself a lot on the subject some time ago. How I see it is you can do it with either an AI or a SERM. With a strong AI (Letro is the strongest, yes) you can drive your E2 so low that very little to no E is circulating in your body and thus binding to ER's on breast tissue. Or you can occupy the ER's with a serm that has a high binding affinity to breast tissue, thus letting very little to no E the possibility to bind to the ER's on breast tissue.

With the AI you'll have all the nasty low E symptoms and even with Letro it might be hard to get your E so low that no binding to brest tissue occurs. Also the treatment when trying to reverse already existing gyno might take months, so pretty uncomfortable and unhealthy to have very low E fo so long.

With the serm you'll still have E circulating in your body and the selectiveness of the serm will allow the E to bind to in other areas in the body. No nasty sides and less unhealthy.

Now if you are on a cycle and you start to experience gyno symptoms, the first immediate action is to introduce an AI or more of it, if you were already using one, to get the E in control for other reasons too and I also think AI's lower E quicker than serms saturate the receptors.

By my research I kind of got the idea that Letro is the old school way of combatting gyno, but serms especially Ralox is preferred now that people know better. Also if you look up medical practicies for gyno treatment, I think it's mostly done with Tamoxifen, which also has a high binding affinity to breast tissue.

But if you have personal or other anecdotal experience on getting rid of existing gyno with Letro, I would like to hear about it. I have plenty of Letro and am willing to try pretty much anything at this point for my own pubertal gyno that got worse at some point. I have not been able to get ahold of Ralox.
 
Last edited:
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Lol you obviously have no idea what you are talking about but ok clown, educate me! You might 1st want to Google Letrozole and educate yourself before you try educating anyone in this forum.
lol, @KvanH is correct and you are wrong sir. Debate is healthy of course and this is not to say that letro doesn’t have a place in the pantheon of compounds to address gyno side effects.......but it’s not the ideal tool for reversal at all imo (and my opinion is formed from listening to people better qualified than me and reading the available studies).

for many, me included, exem is a better ai to use than letro to mitigate estrogen before gyno forms
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Here it is ... i did not get a prolactin test which in hindsight was a mistake as i am on 3IU GH (5 on 2 off)

Looks like the test and E are Ok ... i would appreciate anyones insight to the readings

I had the labs drawn at noon monday. My last Primo / Test injection was the Friday morning before that so this would be a trough reading I beleive




Test Name Result Flag Reference Range Lab

FASTING:YES
FASTING: YES

COMPREHENSIVE METABOLIC PANEL W/EGFR

GLUCOSE 82 NORMAL 65-99 mg/dL 01

Fasting reference interval

UREA NITROGEN (BUN) 21 NORMAL 7-25 mg/dL
CREATININE 1.47 HIGH 0.60-1.35 mg/dL
eGFR NON-AFR. AMERICAN 57 LOW > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2
eGFR AFRICAN AMERICAN 66 NORMAL > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2
BUN/CREATININE RATIO 14 NORMAL 6-22 (calc)
SODIUM 139 NORMAL 135-146 mmol/L
POTASSIUM 4.5 NORMAL 3.5-5.3 mmol/L
CHLORIDE 103 NORMAL 98-110 mmol/L
CARBON DIOXIDE 29 NORMAL 20-32 mmol/L
CALCIUM 9.2 NORMAL 8.6-10.3 mg/dL
PROTEIN, TOTAL 6.4 NORMAL 6.1-8.1 g/dL
ALBUMIN 4.2 NORMAL 3.6-5.1 g/dL
GLOBULIN 2.2 NORMAL 1.9-3.7 g/dL (calc)
ALBUMIN/GLOBULIN RATIO 1.9 NORMAL 1.0-2.5 (calc)
BILIRUBIN, TOTAL 0.9 NORMAL 0.2-1.2 mg/dL
ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 34 LOW 36-130 U/L
AST 18 NORMAL 10-40 U/L
ALT 14 NORMAL 9-46 U/L

IGF-I, ELECTROCHEMILUMINESCENCE
- IGF 1, LC/MS 147 NORMAL 52-328 ng/mL
- Z SCORE (MALE) 0.1 NORMAL -2.0 - +2.0 SD

This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano. It has not been cleared or approved by FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

Z SCORE (FEMALE) DNR NORMAL
ESTRADIOL, ULTRASENSITIVE, LC/MS/MS
ESTRADIOL,ULTRASENSITIVE, LC/MS 14 NORMAL < OR = 29 pg/mL

This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano. It has not been cleared or approved by FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

TESTOSTERONE, FREE AND TOTAL, LC/MS/MS
- TESTOSTERONE, TOTAL, MS 1062 NORMAL 250-1100 ng/dL

(Note) For additional information, please refer to http://education.questdiagnostics.com/faq/TotalTestosteroneLCMSMS (This link is being provided for informational/educational purposes only.) This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by medfusion. It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

TESTOSTERONE, FREE 426.1 HIGH 35.0-155.0 pg/mL

(Note)
This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by medfusion. It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

PSA, TOTAL
PSA, TOTAL 1.0 NORMAL < OR = 4.0 ng/mL

The total PSA value from this assay system is standardized against the WHO standard. The test result will be approximately 20% lower when compared to the equimolar-standardized total PSA (Beckman Coulter). Comparison of serial PSA results should be interpreted with this fact in mind.

This test was performed using the Siemens chemiluminescent method. Values obtained from different assay methods cannot be used interchangeably. PSA levels, regardless of value, should not be interpreted as absolute evidence of the presence or absence of disease.

CBC (INCLUDES DIFF/PLT)

WHITE BLOOD CELL COUNT 3.9 NORMAL 3.8-10.8 Thousand/uL
RED BLOOD CELL COUNT 5.02 NORMAL 4.20-5.80 Million/uL
HEMOGLOBIN 16.3 NORMAL 13.2-17.1 g/dL
HEMATOCRIT 47.8 NORMAL 38.5-50.0 %
MCV 95.2 NORMAL 80.0-100.0 fL
MCH 32.5 NORMAL 27.0-33.0 pg
MCHC 34.1 NORMAL 32.0-36.0 g/dL
RDW 12.4 NORMAL 11.0-15.0 %
PLATELET COUNT 297 NORMAL 140-400 Thousand/uL
MPV 9.3 NORMAL 7.5-12.5 fL
ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 1798 NORMAL 1500-7800 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE BAND NEUTROPHILS DNR NORMAL 0-750 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE METAMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE MYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE PROMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1591 NORMAL 850-3900 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 367 NORMAL 200-950 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 62 NORMAL 15-500 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 82 NORMAL 0-200 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE BLASTS DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE NUCLEATED RBC DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
NEUTROPHILS 46.1 NORMAL %
BAND NEUTROPHILS DNR NORMAL %
METAMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL %
MYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL %

PROMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL %
LYMPHOCYTES 40.8 NORMAL %
REACTIVE LYMPHOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0-10 %
MONOCYTES 9.4 NORMAL %
EOSINOPHILS 1.6 NORMAL %
BASOPHILS 2.1 NORMAL %
BLASTS DNR NORMAL %
NUCLEATED RBC DNR NORMAL 0 /100 WBC
COMMENT(S) DNR NORMAL

THYROID PANEL WITH TSH (T3 UPTAKE, TOTAL T4, FTI, TSH)
T3 UPTAKE 39 HIGH 22-35 %
T4 (THYROXINE), TOTAL 5.7 NORMAL 4.9-10.5 mcg/dL
FREE T4 INDEX (T7) 2.2 NORMAL 1.4-3.8
TSH 1.22 NORMAL 0.40-4.50 mIU/L

LIPID PANEL (CHOL, HDL-CHOL, LDL-CHOL, TGL)

CHOLESTEROL, TOTAL 201 HIGH <200 mg/dL
HDL CHOLESTEROL 30 LOW > OR = 40 mg/dL
TRIGLYCERIDES 56 NORMAL <150 mg/dL
LDL-CHOLESTEROL 155 HIGH mg/dL (calc)
- Reference range: <100

Desirable range <100 mg/dL for primary prevention; <70 mg/dL for patients with CHD or diabetic patients with > or = 2 CHD risk factors.

LDL-C is now calculated using the Martin-Hopkins calculation, which is a validated novel method providing better accuracy than the Friedewald equation in the estimation of LDL-C. Martin SS et al. JAMA. 2013;310(19): 2061-2068 (http://education.QuestDiagnostics.com/faq/FAQ164)

CHOL/HDLC RATIO 6.7 HIGH <5.0 (calc)
NON HDL CHOLESTEROL 171 HIGH <130 mg/dL (calc)

For patients with diabetes plus 1 major ASCVD risk factor, treating to a non-HDL-C goal of <100 mg/dL (LDL-C of <70 mg/dL) is considered a therapeutic option.
 
Last edited:
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Test Name Result Flag Reference Range Lab
FASTING:YES
FASTING: YES
COMPREHENSIVE METABOLIC PANEL W/EGFR
GLUCOSE 82 NORMAL 65-99 mg/dL 01 Fasting reference interval
UREA NITROGEN (BUN) 21 NORMAL 7-25 mg/dL 01
CREATININE 1.47 HIGH 0.60-1.35 mg/dL 01
eGFR NON-AFR. AMERICAN 57 LOW > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2 01
eGFR AFRICAN AMERICAN 66 NORMAL > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2 01
BUN/CREATININE RATIO 14 NORMAL 6-22 (calc) 01
SODIUM 139 NORMAL 135-146 mmol/L 01
POTASSIUM 4.5 NORMAL 3.5-5.3 mmol/L 01
CHLORIDE 103 NORMAL 98-110 mmol/L 01
CARBON DIOXIDE 29 NORMAL 20-32 mmol/L 01
CALCIUM 9.2 NORMAL 8.6-10.3 mg/dL 01
PROTEIN, TOTAL 6.4 NORMAL 6.1-8.1 g/dL 01
ALBUMIN 4.2 NORMAL 3.6-5.1 g/dL 01
GLOBULIN 2.2 NORMAL 1.9-3.7 g/dL (calc) 01
ALBUMIN/GLOBULIN RATIO 1.9 NORMAL 1.0-2.5 (calc) 01
BILIRUBIN, TOTAL 0.9 NORMAL 0.2-1.2 mg/dL 01
ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 34 LOW 36-130 U/L 01 AST 18 NORMAL 10-40 U/L 01 ALT 14 NORMAL 9-46 U/L 01
IGF-I, ELECTROCHEMILUMINESCENCE
- IGF 1, LC/MS 147 NORMAL 52-328 ng/mL 02
- Z SCORE (MALE) 0.1 NORMAL -2.0 - +2.0 SD 02

This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano. It has not been cleared or approved by FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

Z SCORE (FEMALE) DNR NORMAL 02
ESTRADIOL, ULTRASENSITIVE, LC/MS/MS
ESTRADIOL,ULTRASENSITIVE, LC/MS 14 NORMAL < OR = 29 pg/mL 02

This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano. It has not been cleared or approved by FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

TESTOSTERONE, FREE AND TOTAL, LC/MS/MS
- TESTOSTERONE, TOTAL, MS 1062 NORMAL 250-1100 ng/dL 03

(Note) For additional information, please refer to http://education.questdiagnostics.com/faq/TotalTestosteroneLCMSMS (This link is being provided for informational/educational purposes only.) This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by medfusion. It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

TESTOSTERONE, FREE 426.1 HIGH 35.0-155.0 pg/mL 03

(Note)
This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by medfusion. It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

MDF
med fusion
2501 South State Highway
121,Suite 1100 Lewisville TX 75067
972-966-7300
Michael Chaump, MD

PSA, TOTAL
PSA, TOTAL 1.0 NORMAL < OR = 4.0 ng/mL 01

The total PSA value from this assay system is standardized against the WHO standard. The test result will be approximately 20% lower when compared to the equimolar-standardized total PSA (Beckman Coulter). Comparison of serial PSA results should be interpreted with this fact in mind.

This test was performed using the Siemens chemiluminescent method. Values obtained from different assay methods cannot be used interchangeably. PSA levels, regardless of value, should not be interpreted as absolute evidence of the presence or absence of disease.

CBC (INCLUDES DIFF/PLT)

WHITE BLOOD CELL COUNT 3.9 NORMAL 3.8-10.8 Thousand/uL 01
RED BLOOD CELL COUNT 5.02 NORMAL 4.20-5.80 Million/uL 01
HEMOGLOBIN 16.3 NORMAL 13.2-17.1 g/dL 01
HEMATOCRIT 47.8 NORMAL 38.5-50.0 % 01
MCV 95.2 NORMAL 80.0-100.0 fL 01
MCH 32.5 NORMAL 27.0-33.0 pg 01
MCHC 34.1 NORMAL 32.0-36.0 g/dL 01
RDW 12.4 NORMAL 11.0-15.0 % 01
PLATELET COUNT 297 NORMAL 140-400 Thousand/uL 01
MPV 9.3 NORMAL 7.5-12.5 fL 01
ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 1798 NORMAL 1500-7800 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE BAND NEUTROPHILS DNR NORMAL 0-750 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE METAMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE MYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE PROMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1591 NORMAL 850-3900 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 367 NORMAL 200-950 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 62 NORMAL 15-500 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 82 NORMAL 0-200 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE BLASTS DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL 01
ABSOLUTE NUCLEATED RBC DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL 01
NEUTROPHILS 46.1 NORMAL % 01
BAND NEUTROPHILS DNR NORMAL % 01
METAMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL % 01
MYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL % 01

PROMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL % 01
LYMPHOCYTES 40.8 NORMAL % 01
REACTIVE LYMPHOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0-10 % 01
MONOCYTES 9.4 NORMAL % 01
EOSINOPHILS 1.6 NORMAL % 01
BASOPHILS 2.1 NORMAL % 01
BLASTS DNR NORMAL % 01
NUCLEATED RBC DNR NORMAL 0 /100 WBC 01
COMMENT(S) DNR NORMAL 01

THYROID PANEL WITH TSH (T3 UPTAKE, TOTAL T4, FTI, TSH)
T3 UPTAKE 39 HIGH 22-35 % 01
T4 (THYROXINE), TOTAL 5.7 NORMAL 4.9-10.5 mcg/dL 01
FREE T4 INDEX (T7) 2.2 NORMAL 1.4-3.8 01
TSH 1.22 NORMAL 0.40-4.50 mIU/L 01

LIPID PANEL (CHOL, HDL-CHOL, LDL-CHOL, TGL)

CHOLESTEROL, TOTAL 201 HIGH <200 mg/dL 01
HDL CHOLESTEROL 30 LOW > OR = 40 mg/dL 01
TRIGLYCERIDES 56 NORMAL <150 mg/dL 01
LDL-CHOLESTEROL 155 HIGH mg/dL (calc) 01
- Reference range: <100

Desirable range <100 mg/dL for primary prevention; <70 mg/dL for patients with CHD or diabetic patients with > or = 2 CHD risk factors.

LDL-C is now calculated using the Martin-Hopkins calculation, which is a validated novel method providing better accuracy than the Friedewald equation in the estimation of LDL-C. Martin SS et al. JAMA. 2013;310(19): 2061-2068 (http://education.QuestDiagnostics.com/faq/FAQ164)

CHOL/HDLC RATIO 6.7 HIGH <5.0 (calc) 01
NON HDL CHOLESTEROL 171 HIGH <130 mg/dL (calc) 01

For patients with diabetes plus 1 major ASCVD risk factor, treating to a non-HDL-C goal of <100 mg/dL (LDL-C of <70 mg/dL) is considered a therapeutic option.
horrible layout to read but it seems like

- you need to keep an eye on the egfr (kidney function)

- your estrogen is fine, if anything a touch low. Definitely taking a load of AI would be a bad idea (funny how that’s panned out 🙄)

- your total test is high end of range

- your free test is very high? Didn’t see shbg so assuming that might be very low?

- your cholesterol is pretty fucked. This should be a priority as I don’t recall from our conversations an obvious reason it’s that bad (it’s similar to mine at the end of a really heavy blast)

For clarity can you just remind me what you’ve been on for the last couple of months? Was it just trt doses of test?

if so the cholesterol needs sorting bro, that’s likely the reason for the low egfr.

I maintain the same view on the marble type knot you have. It is either fully formed gyno from previous anabolic use (in which case ralox may be able to reduce it to a insignificant degree or it’s something else. I’d still like to see a prolactin test to get the full picture.

I definitely think you need to ask your doctor their view on the cholesterol and why that’s as it is.
I can’t think of an easy link to the knot in the chest but I’d want that checked to be sure). Do not start slamming anti estrogens though, your e isn’t anywhere near high enough to be worsening that issue.
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
horrible layout to read but it seems like

- you need to keep an eye on the egfr (kidney function)

- your estrogen is fine, if anything a touch low. Definitely taking a load of AI would be a bad idea (funny how that’s panned out 🙄)

- your total test is high end of range

- your free test is very high? Didn’t see shbg so assuming that might be very low?

- your cholesterol is pretty fucked. This should be a priority as I don’t recall from our conversations an obvious reason it’s that bad (it’s similar to mine at the end of a really heavy blast)

For clarity can you just remind me what you’ve been on for the last couple of months? Was it just trt doses of test?

if so the cholesterol needs sorting bro, that’s likely the reason for the low egfr.

I maintain the same view on the marble type knot you have. It is either fully formed gyno from previous anabolic use (in which case ralox may be able to reduce it to a insignificant degree or it’s something else. I’d still like to see a prolactin test to get the full picture.

I definitely think you need to ask your doctor their view on the cholesterol and why that’s as it is.
I can’t think of an easy link to the knot in the chest but I’d want that checked to be sure). Do not start slamming anti estrogens though, your e isn’t anywhere near high enough to be worsening that issue.

I have been on this for the last month and a half :
Test 175/wk
Primo 450/wk
GH 3IU/day (5 on 2 off)


My Creatine is always slightly high - has been since i had a checkup around 2010. I have ben told leaner people usually have a higher creatine - is this wrong? eFGR is always around 50-57. Docs think it might be due to an old football injury. That was a guess. The bad news is that its not great. The good news is that it hasnt gotten worse in a decade ...

I do have a concern about kidney health longterm

@Whisky whats your take on the T3?
 
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
I have been on this for the last month and a half :
Test 175/wk
Primo 450/wk
GH 3IU/day (5 on 2 off)


My Creatine is always slightly high - has been since i had a checkup around 2010. I have ben told leaner people usually have a higher creatine - is this wrong? eFGR is always around 50-57. Docs think it might be due to an old football injury. That was a guess. The bad news is that its not great. The good news is that it hasnt gotten worse in a decade ...

I do have a concern about kidney health longterm

@Whisky whats your take on the T3?
ah ok, that explains the free test.....

T3 uptake isn’t high enough to be a concern for me personally. The anabolics will be causing it but we aren’t talking crazy numbers and when taken as part of the bigger thyroid picture I don’t see that as indicative of an issue (I’m not a doctor though).
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
would anyone have some insight to why the lipids are off?

I was assuming my egfr was going to be low (its been low for over a decade)

i was a bit shocked at the lipds







Here it is ... i did not get a prolactin test which in hindsight was a mistake as i am on 3IU GH (5 on 2 off)

Looks like the test and E are Ok ... i would appreciate anyones insight to the readings

I had the labs drawn at noon monday. My last Primo / Test injection was the Friday morning before that so this would be a trough reading I beleive




Test Name Result Flag Reference Range Lab

FASTING:YES
FASTING: YES

COMPREHENSIVE METABOLIC PANEL W/EGFR

GLUCOSE 82 NORMAL 65-99 mg/dL 01

Fasting reference interval

UREA NITROGEN (BUN) 21 NORMAL 7-25 mg/dL
CREATININE 1.47 HIGH 0.60-1.35 mg/dL
eGFR NON-AFR. AMERICAN 57 LOW > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2
eGFR AFRICAN AMERICAN 66 NORMAL > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2
BUN/CREATININE RATIO 14 NORMAL 6-22 (calc)
SODIUM 139 NORMAL 135-146 mmol/L
POTASSIUM 4.5 NORMAL 3.5-5.3 mmol/L
CHLORIDE 103 NORMAL 98-110 mmol/L
CARBON DIOXIDE 29 NORMAL 20-32 mmol/L
CALCIUM 9.2 NORMAL 8.6-10.3 mg/dL
PROTEIN, TOTAL 6.4 NORMAL 6.1-8.1 g/dL
ALBUMIN 4.2 NORMAL 3.6-5.1 g/dL
GLOBULIN 2.2 NORMAL 1.9-3.7 g/dL (calc)
ALBUMIN/GLOBULIN RATIO 1.9 NORMAL 1.0-2.5 (calc)
BILIRUBIN, TOTAL 0.9 NORMAL 0.2-1.2 mg/dL
ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 34 LOW 36-130 U/L
AST 18 NORMAL 10-40 U/L
ALT 14 NORMAL 9-46 U/L

IGF-I, ELECTROCHEMILUMINESCENCE
- IGF 1, LC/MS 147 NORMAL 52-328 ng/mL
- Z SCORE (MALE) 0.1 NORMAL -2.0 - +2.0 SD

This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano. It has not been cleared or approved by FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

Z SCORE (FEMALE) DNR NORMAL
ESTRADIOL, ULTRASENSITIVE, LC/MS/MS
ESTRADIOL,ULTRASENSITIVE, LC/MS 14 NORMAL < OR = 29 pg/mL

This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano. It has not been cleared or approved by FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

TESTOSTERONE, FREE AND TOTAL, LC/MS/MS
- TESTOSTERONE, TOTAL, MS 1062 NORMAL 250-1100 ng/dL

(Note) For additional information, please refer to http://education.questdiagnostics.com/faq/TotalTestosteroneLCMSMS (This link is being provided for informational/educational purposes only.) This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by medfusion. It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

TESTOSTERONE, FREE 426.1 HIGH 35.0-155.0 pg/mL

(Note)
This test was developed and its analytical performance characteristics have been determined by medfusion. It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA. This assay has been validated pursuant to the CLIA regulations and is used for clinical purposes.

PSA, TOTAL
PSA, TOTAL 1.0 NORMAL < OR = 4.0 ng/mL

The total PSA value from this assay system is standardized against the WHO standard. The test result will be approximately 20% lower when compared to the equimolar-standardized total PSA (Beckman Coulter). Comparison of serial PSA results should be interpreted with this fact in mind.

This test was performed using the Siemens chemiluminescent method. Values obtained from different assay methods cannot be used interchangeably. PSA levels, regardless of value, should not be interpreted as absolute evidence of the presence or absence of disease.

CBC (INCLUDES DIFF/PLT)

WHITE BLOOD CELL COUNT 3.9 NORMAL 3.8-10.8 Thousand/uL
RED BLOOD CELL COUNT 5.02 NORMAL 4.20-5.80 Million/uL
HEMOGLOBIN 16.3 NORMAL 13.2-17.1 g/dL
HEMATOCRIT 47.8 NORMAL 38.5-50.0 %
MCV 95.2 NORMAL 80.0-100.0 fL
MCH 32.5 NORMAL 27.0-33.0 pg
MCHC 34.1 NORMAL 32.0-36.0 g/dL
RDW 12.4 NORMAL 11.0-15.0 %
PLATELET COUNT 297 NORMAL 140-400 Thousand/uL
MPV 9.3 NORMAL 7.5-12.5 fL
ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 1798 NORMAL 1500-7800 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE BAND NEUTROPHILS DNR NORMAL 0-750 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE METAMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE MYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE PROMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1591 NORMAL 850-3900 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 367 NORMAL 200-950 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 62 NORMAL 15-500 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 82 NORMAL 0-200 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE BLASTS DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
ABSOLUTE NUCLEATED RBC DNR NORMAL 0 cells/uL
NEUTROPHILS 46.1 NORMAL %
BAND NEUTROPHILS DNR NORMAL %
METAMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL %
MYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL %

PROMYELOCYTES DNR NORMAL %
LYMPHOCYTES 40.8 NORMAL %
REACTIVE LYMPHOCYTES DNR NORMAL 0-10 %
MONOCYTES 9.4 NORMAL %
EOSINOPHILS 1.6 NORMAL %
BASOPHILS 2.1 NORMAL %
BLASTS DNR NORMAL %
NUCLEATED RBC DNR NORMAL 0 /100 WBC
COMMENT(S) DNR NORMAL

THYROID PANEL WITH TSH (T3 UPTAKE, TOTAL T4, FTI, TSH)
T3 UPTAKE 39 HIGH 22-35 %
T4 (THYROXINE), TOTAL 5.7 NORMAL 4.9-10.5 mcg/dL
FREE T4 INDEX (T7) 2.2 NORMAL 1.4-3.8
TSH 1.22 NORMAL 0.40-4.50 mIU/L

LIPID PANEL (CHOL, HDL-CHOL, LDL-CHOL, TGL)

CHOLESTEROL, TOTAL 201 HIGH <200 mg/dL
HDL CHOLESTEROL 30 LOW > OR = 40 mg/dL
TRIGLYCERIDES 56 NORMAL <150 mg/dL
LDL-CHOLESTEROL 155 HIGH mg/dL (calc)
- Reference range: <100

Desirable range <100 mg/dL for primary prevention; <70 mg/dL for patients with CHD or diabetic patients with > or = 2 CHD risk factors.

LDL-C is now calculated using the Martin-Hopkins calculation, which is a validated novel method providing better accuracy than the Friedewald equation in the estimation of LDL-C. Martin SS et al. JAMA. 2013;310(19): 2061-2068 (http://education.QuestDiagnostics.com/faq/FAQ164)

CHOL/HDLC RATIO 6.7 HIGH <5.0 (calc)
NON HDL CHOLESTEROL 171 HIGH <130 mg/dL (calc)

For patients with diabetes plus 1 major ASCVD risk factor, treating to a non-HDL-C goal of <100 mg/dL (LDL-C of <70 mg/dL) is considered a therapeutic option.
 
KvanH

KvanH

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • RockStar
Tough to say much without knowing your lifestyle. If diet is ok, then I would look at the Primo. Many dht derivatives are not too good on lipids. I don't know about Primo precisly.
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Tough to say much without knowing your lifestyle. If diet is ok, then I would look at the Primo. Many dht derivatives are not too good on lipids. I don't know about Primo precisly.
i have run it before and never seen a lipid spike ... also i am not eating junk food. Its a bit of a mystery
 
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
How would you dose it for trt?
why you using letro benny?

this guy was suggesting it (incorrectly imo) for gyno reversal (rather than prevention where its a legit tool).

if your only on trt then letro would crush your estro. If your trying to reverse gyno then ralox is the better option by far imo
 
RIPDanDuchaine

RIPDanDuchaine

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I gave up on this thread after I was so rudely insulted and belittled by the other members of this forum, in particular @Whiskey, who I think is ignoring me now. So, you're on your own @LaserGoPewPew. The other people in this forum will hopefully steer you in the right direction.
 
BennyMagoo79

BennyMagoo79

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
why you using letro benny?

this guy was suggesting it (incorrectly imo) for gyno reversal (rather than prevention where its a legit tool).

if your only on trt then letro would crush your estro. If your trying to reverse gyno then ralox is the better option by far imo
I'm not using it, curious because a guy I train with got a prescription for it (he's on trt)
 

johnny412

Active member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
I gave up on this thread after I was so rudely insulted and belittled by the other members of this forum, in particular @Whiskey, who I think is ignoring me now. So, you're on your own @LaserGoPewPew. The other people in this forum will hopefully steer you in the right direction.
You gave up on it starscream? No dumbass you were BANNED!!! and yet here you are smdh!!!
edit: if you gave up on it why do you continue to post your nonsense?
 
Whisky

Whisky

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
I'm not using it, curious because a guy I train with got a prescription for it (he's on trt)
i mean it’s an ai so in the same way some docs prescribe Adex or asin they could just prefer letro..... but that’s assuming the mate needs an ai off a trt dose (which many people wouldn’t). Derek at MPMD talks often about just increasing the injection frequency as being a way to get rid of the need for an ai on trt (as you don’t have that spike..... guys don’t usually need an ai for naturally produced test so if the protocol is right and genuine replacement I believe in most cases one wouldn’t be needed
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
i mean it’s an ai so in the same way some docs prescribe Adex or asin they could just prefer letro..... but that’s assuming the mate needs an ai off a trt dose (which many people wouldn’t). Derek at MPMD talks often about just increasing the injection frequency as being a way to get rid of the need for an ai on trt (as you don’t have that spike..... guys don’t usually need an ai for naturally produced test so if the protocol is right and genuine replacement I believe in most cases one wouldn’t be needed
i am doing 3 injections a week ... i started that freq from the beginning since i wanted to avoid dramatic highs and lows and be more leveled out over time ... so given that info would you have any idea why i got the knot to begin with?
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
you appreciate that if a hard knot as already formed then an ai will not reverse it. An ai will prevent it worsening but it sounds like this is fully formed.

a serm (ralox would be my suggestion, nolva is also used) is the only drug based way to potentially reduce it)

I know you mentioned nolva further up the thread but the statement you just made (based on what he told you he had on hand) is suggesting he start slamming adex and asin. That’s absolutely not right. He should take the dose needed for estrogen control (same as if he didn’t have what might or might not be gyno - I’m not sure it is at all).

driving his estrogen into the ground is wrong.

a ralox gyno reversal procedure is the sensible approach, a serm plus a normal ai dose is the course of action for already formed gyno
Whisky lets assume the knot is from the low dose GH. This is my first GH run and while i was only on it for maybe a month and a half, i am making a guess that it caused a prolactin spike? I realize guessing isnt great but my labwork came back and showed I have very high levels of test (even when testing in the trough) and supringly enough i have mid to low E levels ... and E levels that I would consider "very low" when compared to how high my test was ... @KvanH @Whisky @Hyde @BennyMagoo79

So the ralox is in the mail and should arrive this week. I am planning on taking that to see if it helps reduce the knot.

My question is:

1. if this is prolactin based, would the ralox still work in the same manner?

2. will the ralox push my E levels down even further? I dont want to "crash them"

3. also has anyone here had any kind of knot or gyno from using GH?
 
Last edited:
BennyMagoo79

BennyMagoo79

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
If prolactin is involved, it would only be activating pre-existing breast tissue as it does not cause gyno (pretty sure).

Ralox should still work by targeting e receptors in breast tissue.

It might be a good idea to see a doctor at this point. Considering E is not high, is it possible the lump is a tumor?
 
LaserGoPewPew

LaserGoPewPew

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
If prolactin is involved, it would only be activating pre-existing breast tissue as it does not cause gyno (pretty sure).
its not visible. its not affecting the outer nipple. its deep like the underlying structure If the nipple
 
BennyMagoo79

BennyMagoo79

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
its not visible. its not affecting the outer nipple. its deep like the underlying structure If the nipple
To me, the best hypothesis is this is old gyno being flared by high prolactin levels. Check your prolactin if u can, or run caber for a few weeks and see if I reduces inflammation. I'm no expert, but in your position I'd run caber for a month before attacking it with Ralox.
 

Top