Forum Statistics

Threads
27,576
Posts
541,651
Members
28,555
Latest Member
Kiddorism
What's New?

Pretty obvious to me, but encouraging to see UofM study validate it

tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,313
5,000
Study showing that what is "low" test levels should vary depending on your age.

 
R

rawdeal

TID Board Of Directors
Nov 29, 2013
4,314
3,476
Can't remember exact numbers, but the DIY online blood work I use defines normal range for total Test is around 300 - 1100, BUT the fine print adds that is for a population from 19 - 39yo.

I've been both of those ages, but it's been a while .....
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,313
5,000
I didn't dig too deep, but it appeared to say that "low" for a male age 20-40 should be about 410, rather than 300, and that low for a male in his 40s is around 350 rather than 300. It's not a crazy change, but it certainly medically validates what many of us have said that having a level around 300, and the doc saying that's OK because it's within range is hogwash.
 
R

rawdeal

TID Board Of Directors
Nov 29, 2013
4,314
3,476
I didn't dig too deep, but it appeared to say that "low" for a male age 20-40 should be about 410, rather than 300, and that low for a male in his 40s is around 350 rather than 300. It's not a crazy change, but it certainly medically validates what many of us have said that having a level around 300, and the doc saying that's OK because it's within range is hogwash.
Agreed, and, a confession:

I only glanced at the study before my first post, but I dug a little deeper for this one.

Ages 20-24, "Low" is < 409. Ages 40-44, "Low" is < 350. Thereafter, subtract 4.3dl/ng for each additional year of age.

So my math says 350 minus 43 = 307 for those here who are 50-4yo, and another minus 43 = 264 for 60-4yo men.

Your "hogwash" point stands. :)

Individual Patient differences must be considered, as must individual doctor's pre-conceived notions, however, AND various "Studies" as well. :(
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,313
5,000
What my naive hope would be is that this type of study simply opens things up for the docs to look at each patient individually, and to tailor a dosing protocol that meets both the health and quality of life objectives of the patient.

If the patient feels a significant improvement in quality of life at 650, for example, why should the doc be focused on whether the patient is above/below some arbitrary threshold?
 
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top