|
Home > Archive > Impotence Support > December 2005 > Odd test results
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com 2005-12-24, 10:52 am |
| All this time I thought I had low Ts. But my T (474) and free T (113
and 238 for free and weakly) are normal even for my age. However, my
esterdiol is 13, borderline low. My DHEA-S, by the way is through the
roof, 252. I have had gynecomastia (since adolesence) and some other
mild hypogonadism symptoms, but now oddly no blood work to back it up.
Any thoughts from the endo experts here? (BTW, I also have high LDL,
which is being addressed post haste.)
| |
| Muerta 2005-12-25, 10:52 am |
|
<miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1135426820.215089.257020@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> All this time I thought I had low Ts. But my T (474) and free T (113
> and 238 for free and weakly) are normal even for my age. However, my
> esterdiol is 13, borderline low. My DHEA-S, by the way is through the
> roof, 252. I have had gynecomastia (since adolesence) and some other
> mild hypogonadism symptoms, but now oddly no blood work to back it up.
> Any thoughts from the endo experts here? (BTW, I also have high LDL,
> which is being addressed post haste.)
>
I am fascinated when something comes through here that is not routine and
defies explanantion.
You were prudent to have the tests done, but as you can imagine.........gyno
with low estrone level?
As you have probably seen, most of our activity here as far as estrones go
is the battle against them. However, those who have been around for awhile
and have been in the fight, soon realize that if they go *too* low, we lose
libido and function. Curiouser and curiouser.
I would assume the doc is now going to test for 17-ketosteroids and 17-OH
progesterone to investigate the possibility of an adrenal cancer or
hyperplasia?
Keep us posted.
| |
| Ignatz's Bricks 2005-12-25, 10:52 am |
| miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com wrote:
> All this time I thought I had low Ts. But my T (474) and free T (113
> and 238 for free and weakly) are normal even for my age. However, my
> esterdiol is 13, borderline low. My DHEA-S, by the way is through the
> roof, 252. I have had gynecomastia (since adolesence) and some other
> mild hypogonadism symptoms, but now oddly no blood work to back it up.
> Any thoughts from the endo experts here? (BTW, I also have high LDL,
> which is being addressed post haste.)
>
Am I missing something here?
Normal DHEA ranges are listed as
Male: 31-50 Years: 59-452 ug/dL
which puts you right in the middle.
What is the normal range for the lab that did your tests?
Also, what is your LDL and HDL Cholesterol and Triglycerides and lab
ranges for same?
IB
| |
| Muerta 2005-12-26, 12:52 am |
|
"Ignatz's Bricks" <IgnatzBricks@aol.com.no.net> wrote in message
news:43aebce5$0$30218$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com...
> miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Am I missing something here?
>
> Normal DHEA ranges are listed as
> Male: 31-50 Years: 59-452 ug/dL
> which puts you right in the middle.
>
He referenced DHEAS which if he's over 60 (I don't know), the roof range I
saw was 200 ug/dL. Depends by lab, I s'pose.
31 to 50 years, you'd be right in the ball park with the correct reanges,
IB.
Don't know, I got hooked by the gyno/low estrone thing.
| |
| miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com 2005-12-26, 12:52 am |
| Yes it is DHEA-S, which is different that DHEA. So, I am indeed high, a
bit with 252 (25-240 mcg/dl is the normal range.) And, to clarify, it's
estradoil not estrone, that is 13 with 10-50 the normal range.
Estradoil at 13 with gynecomastia does not compute.
| |
| Wanderer 2005-12-27, 10:50 am |
| On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 20:19:26 -0500, miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com wrote
(in message <1135559966.741246.325670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ):
> Yes it is DHEA-S, which is different that DHEA. So, I am indeed high, a
> bit with 252 (25-240 mcg/dl is the normal range.) And, to clarify, it's
> estradoil not estrone, that is 13 with 10-50 the normal range.
> Estradoil at 13 with gynecomastia does not compute.
>
Many have commented here that low estradiol is subjectively worse than high
estradiol. Absence of estradiol absolutely kills libido. Hence, a lot of fine
tuning is often necessary with DIM to find the amount that decreases
estradiol without pushing it into the ultra-low range. The real goal is to
nudge the hormones into balance with one another.
As for the gynecomastia, apparently that can be caused by DHEA. Here's a
link:
http://tinyurl.com/8d7p8
Wanderer
| |
| Muerta 2005-12-28, 10:52 am |
|
<miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1135559966.741246.325670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> And, to clarify, it's
> estradoil not estrone, that is 13 with 10-50 the normal range.
There are many types of estrones (estrogens), and estradiol is the strongest
of them, ergo measuring estradiol is used as an "overall view". If the E2 is
up, or down, you can bet the others are also.
However, 13 on a 10-50 scale isn't bad. the rule of thumb from this gropup
has always been to go on a 20:1 ration of testosterone to estradiol for a
good range. Therefore, if testosterone were 600 mg, the ideal estradiol
level would be 30 pg.
I believe that you are the first person I have encountered in my years in
this group, that actually has "low" estradiol.
> Estradoil at 13 with gynecomastia does not compute.
>
Check Wanderers reply.
| |
| miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com 2005-12-28, 10:52 am |
| The 20:1 ratio seems odd to me. If the "low" end of T was 300, say,
then an estrogen of 15 would be normal. In my case an estrogen of 13
would mean that my T should be 260, which is definately abnormal. My T
is 474. So I should have an E2 of 24, not 13, right? Is that
significant? Does it matter? I'm in terra incognito here.
Well I'm honored to the the first here ever with low estrogen. I guess
there are worse things.
I read the DHEA article that Wanderer posted. My critique:
1. I wasn't sure if they were talking DHEA or DHEA-S; the difference Is
important, I think.
2. The cases involving gyne involved high DHEA and high estrogen, not
high DHEA and low estrogen, unless I miss read.
| |
| miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com 2005-12-28, 10:52 am |
| Correction to my earlier critique:
No estrogen was mentioned just DHEA regarding gyne.
But that said, I am not clear if the study is just dealing with DHEA
supplements and syntehtics or naturally high levels. And DHEA or
DHEA-S.
The DHEA and cholesterol link (have moderately high cholesterol) seemed
more plausible to me than a DHEA gyne link given low estradiol.
MM
miscellaneousme...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The 20:1 ratio seems odd to me. If the "low" end of T was 300, say,
> then an estrogen of 15 would be normal. In my case an estrogen of 13
> would mean that my T should be 260, which is definately abnormal. My T
> is 474. So I should have an E2 of 24, not 13, right? Is that
> significant? Does it matter? I'm in terra incognito here.
>
> Well I'm honored to the the first here ever with low estrogen. I guess
> there are worse things.
>
> I read the DHEA article that Wanderer posted. My critique:
>
> 1. I wasn't sure if they were talking DHEA or DHEA-S; the difference Is
> important, I think.
> 2. The cases involving gyne involved high DHEA and high estrogen, not
> high DHEA and low estrogen, unless I miss read.
| |
|
|
<miscellaneousmedia@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1135426820.215089.257020@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> All this time I thought I had low Ts. But my T (474) and free T (113
> and 238 for free and weakly) are normal even for my age. However, my
> esterdiol is 13, borderline low. My DHEA-S, by the way is through the
> roof, 252. I have had gynecomastia (since adolesence) and some other
> mild hypogonadism symptoms, but now oddly no blood work to back it up.
> Any thoughts from the endo experts here? (BTW, I also have high LDL,
> which is being addressed post haste.)
You didn't mention your age or weight or how high LDL was. High LDL,
hypertension, smoking, overwieght (not obesity) etc do not cause ED. I've
read many scientific studies(not popular internet stuff) and there is very
little correaltion between, for example, hypertension or smoking and ED. It
is only when long standing hypertension causes some damage to the blood
vessels they it may be the cause of ED but by that time it's probably too
late to reverse the damage. BTW, people who have never smoked or had
hypertension still suffer damage just through aging and have ED. Besides,
blood flow is only one factor in ED. The #1 cauuse of ED is aging it's that
simple. There are people with Infantile Hypertension(hypertension from
childhood or teens onward), which is very serious, but they do not have ED.
There are plenty of people under 40 who smoke and do not have ED to any
greater extent than non smokers. There are plenty of people under 40 who
drink a lot of caffeine containing drinks who do not have ED.
Many posters here are obsessed with numbers but does anyone actually know of
anyone who had ED being cured by being given testosterone for example(if
that number was low). It might help for a few weeks until your body adapts
to a higher level but even with the higher level the person still has ED
after a while. There are multiple causes of ED and it's probably impossible
to treat them all. The only thing you can do is take drugs if they work for
you.
>
|
| |
|
|