The strict definition of the word versus the visible degree to which that suppression occurs versus interpretation of the word itself. I definitely understand the argument, but there will always be degrees to which any type of suppression can occur when measured against a fixed marker. Of course, all of those degrees could ultimately be labeled as suppression.
If individual A has a naturally produced level of total T that is around 700 (yes we know it will always fluctuate) and consumes medication that lowers his total T to a detectable level of 500, he is in essence suppressed from his measured baseline reading. If he than takes another medication and that lowers his detectable levels of total T to a level of 100, he is also surppressed, sure. There is however a difference between how low of a level his T was suppressed to by the different factors (medications).
Here's another consideration. Person A is usually in the range of 700-800 total T throughout the year. That person then decides to go on a strict cut and after some time lowers his total T to a detectable level of say 500. It stays there for an extended period of time and becomes his new normal. Is he supressed or is this just his new normal? How do we judge suppression, and what level of reduction in the amount of natural T production qualifies as suppression? In order for suppression to be measured, we would have to establish a baseline number of whatever is being measured and then compare it to another number (presumably smaller) after a certain variable has elicited a measured change(s). If two different variables (used within the same set of conditions) cause a different measured end-level when compared to the same baseline, that is a different level of reduction. The reduction we are measuring in this instance is suppression of endogenous Testosterone production by various factors. Levels and degress are the same thing in this instance.
If I take some pain medication on a short term basis and my total T drops 50 points, am I surpressed? If I take a massive dose of anabolics every day for a week and my total is then measured to have dropped from 750 to 50, is there not a difference in the level of reduction of total T between the two examples? Is in not measurable? Is this not a degree of what we are measuring - suppression of endogenous Testosterone by different factors? In order for there to be degrees of something, there has to be measurable differences in the eventual outcome, as well as the intermediate outcomes, of a chain of comparable events during a set time.
In medical literature where scientists have performed studies on viral infections and detectable levels of said virus when exposed to a specific medication, they will often site "rate of supression' when describing the level to which they can surpress the virus within the body. Is rate of suppression not a degree of suppression with different wording? They are using "rate" when deciding how much virus remians detectable in the body. The wording "degree of suppression", "rate of suppression", "duration of suppression" are all commonly used terms within the medical community. These terms are used as a way of describing differences in levels of suppression when compared against another set value.
If people want to argue that being surpressed is being surpressed, that's fine by me. Let's just not pretend that the aren't degress to which we can lower or slow down our natural production. There are way too many factors to account for.
