Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Serum test level 530.6. 24 y/o male help reading bloodwork

ddemark

ddemark

Member
I had a full hormone panel done but Idk what I'm looking at. Is 530.6 for serum test levels considered normal?
 
Middle of the range. Not as high as you might want, but not low enough for TRT. How do you feel? If you're not having any low T symptoms, then I wouldn't worry about it. If you are, then I would look into raising T levels through natural means.
 
I feel fine, little lethargy throughout the day, but I'd say that's because of my job/lifestyle. Slow, but continuous strength/size gains in the gym.
 
Total test means nothing with out context (all other numbers). For you it could be absolutely fine, for someone else it could be inadequate.

My total T is never much higher than that and im 100% fine in that regard.
 
Generally seeing higher numbers would be nice but it's not terrible. If you aren't impacted by it then I'd say you're gtg

We need context to make sure tho
 
NoAddedHmones said:
Total test means nothing with out context (all other numbers). For you it could be absolutely fine, for someone else it could be inadequate.

My total T is never much higher than that and im 100% fine in that regard.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Some would even say SHBG and free test are more indicative values than TT alone.

As Crisler says, if youre asymptomatic you dont treat. Docs and endos generally dont give a fuk what bros consider optimal for te gainz, for good reason.
 
Nac said:
Yep.

Some would even say SHBG and free test are more indicative values than TT alone.

As Crisler says, if youre asymptomatic you dont treat. Docs and endos generally dont give a fuk what bros consider optimal for te gainz, for good reason.
Click to expand...

Very good call NAM.
 
Yea thanks guys. I know the number isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially since I'm feeling fine. Sounds kind of immature, but I just imagined I had high test levels based on my physique and alpha mentality. No worries though, this won't change anything for me.
 
Your test levels are completely fine and normal for your age. Tip- always post the lab ranges as one lab can have 850 as a high and another 1150 and yet another 1320.

Remember that chasing numbers almost always gets people in trouble. Go by how you feel.
 
kisaj said:
Your test levels are completely fine and normal for your age. Tip- always post the lab ranges as one lab can have 850 as a high and another 1150 and yet another 1320.

Remember that chasing numbers almost always gets people in trouble. Go by how you feel.
Click to expand...
I'll double check and let you know the range, I think it was like 197-900? What does that mean though
 
ddemark said:
I'll double check and let you know the range, I think it was like 197-900? What does that mean though
Click to expand...
Well yours is above median for your rang which is good.

Basically if the range was like 400-1000 and you were at 500 your on the low end. But I'm not great with blood work, I could be wrong.
 
The first mistake people make is thinking that high test is the determining factor for gains. It is not.

The second mistake is thinking that because you see some numbers on a page means you can interpret them as well as understand the ridiculous complexity of the endocrine system.
 
ddemark said:
I'll double check and let you know the range, I think it was like 197-900? What does that mean though
Click to expand...

Well, as mentioned, test levels only part of a big picture if someone is dealing with symptoms. But, as ranges are different depending on what lab company was used, it makes a difference on your results. I don't recall laboratory names, but I believe Lab Corp uses 320-1150, another uses 250 - 850, and another uses 250 - 1320. So if your 530 was used on the 250 - 850 lab, you'd be on high normal side and the others on the lower side. It matters a lot.

However, you aren't dealing with symptoms and shouldn't be (related to test) as you have very normal levels, so the lab number means very little.
 
kisaj said:
Well, as mentioned, test levels only part of a big picture if someone is dealing with symptoms. But, as ranges are different depending on what lab company was used, it makes a difference on your results. I don't recall laboratory names, but I believe Lab Corp uses 320-1150, another uses 250 - 850, and another uses 250 - 1320. So if your 530 was used on the 250 - 850 lab, you'd be on high normal side and the others on the lower side. It matters a lot.

However, you aren't dealing with symptoms and shouldn't be (related to test) as you have very normal levels, so the lab number means very little.
Click to expand...

The reference ranges make a difference even if the total test is in the same units across the labs? Is there a dumbed down version of why?
 
The way I understand it, or make sense of it, is that the test numbers are relative rather than absolute. Possibly due to measuring idiosyncrasies unique to each lab; a guys blood that tests at 900 at one lab could measure differently at others.

At least, that is one reason for much of the skepticism over the unreliability of d3 test numbers (to take an exaggerated example).
 
Nac said:
The way I understand it, or make sense of it, is that the test numbers are relative rather than absolute. Possibly due to measuring idiosyncrasies unique to each lab; a guys blood that tests at 900 at one lab could measure differently at others.

At least, that is one reason for much of the skepticism over the unreliability of d3 test numbers (to take an exaggerated example).
Click to expand...

My understanding as well. When I was going between endos in the beginning of my TRT journey, there would be a 200pt difference depending on the lab company used and the reference ranges on their labs.
 
Nac said:
The way I understand it, or make sense of it, is that the test numbers are relative rather than absolute. Possibly due to measuring idiosyncrasies unique to each lab; a guys blood that tests at 900 at one lab could measure differently at others.

At least, that is one reason for much of the skepticism over the unreliability of d3 test numbers (to take an exaggerated example).
Click to expand...

kisaj said:
My understanding as well. When I was going between endos in the beginning of my TRT journey, there would be a 200pt difference depending on the lab company used and the reference ranges on their labs.
Click to expand...

Interesting. You would think that 1 nanogram per deciliter at one lab would equal 1 nanogram per deciliter at another lab. How could it not? It means 1 billionth of a gram of testosterone per 1 tenth of a liter of blood. How could it mean anything different? Not saying you guys are wrong, but it doesn't make much sense.
 
I am not sure, all I know is that my levels would be different on each lab depending on the range and the endos indicated it is due to the lab companies used. Therefore I always ask about the ranges in use.
 
mike33511 said:
Interesting. You would think that 1 nanogram per deciliter at one lab would equal 1 nanogram per deciliter at another lab. How could it not? It means 1 billionth of a gram of testosterone per 1 tenth of a liter of blood. How could it mean anything different? Not saying you guys are wrong, but it doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

I havent delved too much into the specifics but I suspect the margin for error (or difference) may lie in the process of seperation, at least in part.

Crudely, consider how much "stuff" is in your blood. Whatever the tester is targeting will need to be isolated or seperated to some degree in order to measure it. I vaguely recall there being a special machine that spins the blood at high speed or something. How this exactly works, I do not know. But, its not like the testers can look at your sample through a magnifying instrument and count off testosterone molecules.

Also, if youve ever delved into quantum measurement...the more precise your measuring equipment, the more variation you will see between instruments. Imagine, to our naked eye, two litres of water measured evenly in two containers. As your measuring equipment becomes more precise at ascertaining just how much water is in each container, the more any differences in water quantity/volume will become apparent (container A has 1litre and 5.8764mls....container B has 1litre and 0.9644mls).
 
ddemark said:
Thanks for all the input guys this is reassuring
Click to expand...

Some guy across town from you got tested at another facility, had a TT reading of 850. Thats 50% higher than you! Sound good?

But his SHBG is higher than yours, and his free test is about 2/3 of yours. Plus, he has above-normal myostatin expression, and Crohns condition. He also smokes a pack a day.

You win.
 
Another factor to consider is that strenuous training can lower test levels for days after a training session. Just because numbers don't read what you might want, as long as it's not impacting your life I wouldn't stress it.
 
ccc1029 said:
Another factor to consider is that strenuous training can lower test levels for days after a training session. Just because numbers don't read what you might want, as long as it's not impacting your life I wouldn't stress it.
Click to expand...

Maybe doing a huge bout of cardio bunny stuff can, fall in T post resistance training is transient.
 
NoAddedHmones said:
Maybe doing a huge bout of cardio bunny stuff can, fall in T post resistance training is transient.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that test level rise immediately after training and the increase is what is transient. Either way, lots of things can affect levels and without symptoms there is nothing to worry about imo
 
Yet another range. What I find odd is that there are so many different ones.

In any case, you are mid-high on this one result. Be happy and forget about it.
 
kisaj said:
Yet another range. What I find odd is that there are so many different ones.
Click to expand...

Yeah its a bit of a head scratcher. The geek in me is so intrigued now, I want to email a lab technician to get their take on it.

Im certainly no statistician, but part of me thinks maybe the range could also be some sort of average? Do testing facility ranges evolve or change over time, as more samples are tested? *shrug*

Or, when they callibrate the machines they must use some sort of universal standard or sample or fukn something...whatever that universal something is, is what determines the range for that machine?

Lol the more I think Im getting my head around this, the more it appears Im not :/
 
Nac said:
The way I understand it, or make sense of it, is that the test numbers are relative rather than absolute. Possibly due to measuring idiosyncrasies unique to each lab; a guys blood that tests at 900 at one lab could measure differently at others.

At least, that is one reason for much of the skepticism over the unreliability of d3 test numbers (to take an exaggerated example).
Click to expand...

NG/DL doesnt change because the reference numbers change. number of nanograms per deciliter of blood. It is what it is no matter what the range is. The range is a reference only and not relative to this guys 524 ng/dl. He is slightly low for his age but keep in mind 1 test is terrible to go by. Testosterone can drop as much as 30% in a day given the time of day, stress etc..
 
user567 said:
NG/DL doesnt change because the reference numbers change. number of nanograms per deciliter of blood. It is what it is no matter what the range is. The range is a reference only and not relative to this guys 524 ng/dl. He is slightly low for his age but keep in mind 1 test is terrible to go by. Testosterone can drop as much as 30% in a day given the time of day, stress etc..
Click to expand...

Why give the ref range then? I mean, in your scenario, who gives a fuk? What is its relevance? And youre saying, if he sent that very same blood sample to another lab with a different ref range, he'd still get the exact same TT number?
 
Take a look at the wiki entry on this sh1t:

wiki said:
For standard as well as optimal health ranges, and cut-offs, sources of inaccuracy and imprecision include:

Instruments and lab techniques used, or how the measurements are interpreted by observers. These may apply both to the instruments etc. used to establish the reference ranges and the instruments, etc. used to acquire the value for the individual to whom these ranges is applied. To compensate, individual laboratories should have their own lab ranges to account for the instruments used in the laboratory
Click to expand...

wiki said:
A reference range is usually defined as the set of values 95 percent of the normal population falls within (that is, 95% prediction interval).[2] It is determined by collecting data from vast numbers of laboratory tests
Click to expand...
 
While I understand the mentality regarding your number is your number and I have researched the reasoning behind the different lab ranges (equipment used, methods of testing, manufacturers, etc..) it is cause for questioning. As it stands, you could be low on one range and mid-high on another, resulting in different treatment, especially if the doctor is one that treats numbers and not symptoms or addresses the cause.
 
ddemark said:
I had a full hormone panel done but Idk what I'm looking at. Is 530.6 for serum test levels considered normal?
Click to expand...

Those are decent numbers, though about 100pts lower than may be average for your age according to a few studies:

Invalid Link Removed

A situation that calls for maybe trying to optimize natural levels. You may want to look at KSM-66 ashwaghanda which has shown to increase T levels by about 100 pts in a few studies, as well as Zinc picolinate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top