David Zs Primer on TRT, HCG and E2 Management - Part 2 of 2

[wildfox]

In another forum, someone (Phil, I think) who often says "DIM lowers E2" posted a link to http://www.dimfaq.com/site/diagram.htm.

The way I read it, DIM does not lower E2 (as if to lower it being aromatized from T), but rather it influences or is involved with the metabolites (the products of what the body does with) E2. In other words, as DavidZ said above: "helps the liver digest/metabolize Estradiol into more benign/healthy estrogens".

The way I see it, E2, regardless of a given quantity at a given moment in time, will eventually be metabolized by our livers into something else. DIM helps or influences the liver's function in this, but does no lower the given quantity at a given moment to begin with.

Dr. Crisler, is what I'm saying accurate?

WF

 

[SWALE]

You got it, WF.

 

[stat1951]

In another forum, someone (Phil, I think) who often says "DIM lowers E2" posted a link to http://www.dimfaq.com/site/diagram.htm.

The way I read it, DIM does not lower E2 (as if to lower it being aromatized from T), but rather it influences or is involved with the metabolites (the products of what the body does with) E2. In other words, as DavidZ said above: "helps the liver digest/metabolize Estradiol into more benign/healthy estrogens".... The way I see it, E2, regardless of a given quantity at a given moment in time, will eventually be metabolized by our livers into something else. DIM helps or influences the liver's function in this, but does no lower the given quantity at a given moment to begin with. WF

Yes, if you read the material that Dr. Zeligs sends (upon request) concerning his "bioavailable DIM" product, he makes it clear at multiple different points in that literature that DIM does NOT lower E2 levels per se, but that DIM aids the metabolization of E2 into more favorable metabolites.

I have thoroughly examined the "blood test chart" provided by DZ:

Date, T, E2, T/E2 Ratio

03/03/00 1303 101 12.9
03/21/00 595 69 8.6
04/29/00 753 72 10.5
06/05/00 463 38 12.2
08/09/00 795 81 9.8
09/16/00 981 91 10.8
10/09/00 494 50 9.9
11/11/00 1144 76 15.1
12/04/00 471 54 8.7
01/13/01 638 78 8.2
01/29/01 503 52 9.7
02/17/01 906 61 14.9 Started Chrysin (transdermal)
03/22/01 910 43 21.2
04/14/01 874 61 14.3
05/19/01 587 58 10.1 Ended Chrysin (transdermal)
07/02/01 1202 47 25.6 Started Indolplex/DIM
08/02/01 829 40 20.7
09/22/01 708 39 18.2
12/01/01 782 55 14.2
02/23/02 895 40 22.4
05/18/02 696 55 12.7
07/27/02 889 30 29.6
08/24/02 1202 71 16.9
10/05/02 534 38 14.1
12/07/02 1115 80 13.9
03/08/03 791 51 15.5
04/19/03 762 42 18.1
05/17/03 713 38 18.8
06/28/03 460 30 15.3
07/26/03 703 49 14.3
12/27/03 851 35 24.3
03/06/04 776 40 19.4
05/22/04 823 40 20.6
07/24/04 690 39 17.7
09/29/04 812 46 17.7
02/26/05 605 21 28.8
03/26/05 607 21 28.9
04/26/05 682 39 17.5
05/31/05 639 36 17.8
08/11/05 620 45 13.8
09/28/05 661 30 22.0

And I have noted a number of specifics.

First of all the chart only specifies Total T (no Free T or Bioavailable T), E2 (no Total Es) and a Total T/E2 ratio. It seems to me that a Free T / E2 ratio would have been more enlightening.

Secondly, I noted that there's no information given as to the specifics of the TRT regimen. This was an HcG-Only protocol over this time period (i.e., no administered external T), but nothing is said as to amounts and/or frequency (500 IU once a week? 350 IU twice a week? 100 IU daily?). Also there's NO mention of what reference ranges were employed by his testing lab(s) over this six year time period. Obviously the protocol of the HcG - as to total weekly amount, amount per dose, and number of doses per week - all can play into accounting for E2 levels, yet the reader has none of that information available.

Finally, I see no real established pattern that could be explained by means of strictly DIM usage (especially in amounts stated... 1/2 tablet, etc., etc. - Communications with Dr. Zeligs have him indicating that would be ridiculous, that he feels males need 200 - 400 mg of DIM for any type of effective estrogen control - not reduction, but control - via metabolization).

Anyway, from March of 2000 to November of 2000 (with no transdermal chrysin or DIM ingestion) one sees the following:

03/03/00 1303 101 12.9
03/21/00 595 69 8.6
04/29/00 753 72 10.5
06/05/00 463 38 12.2
08/09/00 795 81 9.8
09/16/00 981 91 10.8
10/09/00 494 50 9.9
11/11/00 1144 76 15.1
12/04/00 471 54 8.7

While there's a lot of bouncing around going on, the main characteristic is that when Total T was high then E2 tended to be high - and when Total T was lower then E2 was lower. Not completely consistent, but then again this is the start up of this protocol. And - again - no detailed information given as to the HcG protocol being employed over this time period. High levels of HcG employed too frequently could account for much of the early elevated E2 levels.

I then looked at the time frame from when the DIM was started:

08/02/01 829 40 20.7
09/22/01 708 39 18.2
12/01/01 782 55 14.2
02/23/02 895 40 22.4
05/18/02 696 55 12.7
07/27/02 889 30 29.6
08/24/02 1202 71 16.9
10/05/02 534 38 14.1
12/07/02 1115 80 13.9
03/08/03 791 51 15.5
04/19/03 762 42 18.1
05/17/03 713 38 18.8
06/28/03 460 30 15.3
07/26/03 703 49 14.3
12/27/03 851 35 24.3
03/06/04 776 40 19.4
05/22/04 823 40 20.6
07/24/04 690 39 17.7
09/29/04 812 46 17.7
02/26/05 605 21 28.8
03/26/05 607 21 28.9
04/26/05 682 39 17.5
05/31/05 639 36 17.8
08/11/05 620 45 13.8
09/28/05 661 30 22.0

One sees even more clearly that relationship. It seems to demonstrate even more emphatically that the E2 levels have paralleled the levels of Total T. The last eight test results showed Total T in the 600s in seven of those tests. The one exception was just over 800. The E2 level was a 46 for that 812, yet there was an E2 of 45 when the Total T was down to 620??? But overall, once again, it was obvious that the lower Total T levels resulted in lower E2 levels.

Additionally, assuming a reference range of 260 - 1000, I personally would not consider Total T levels in the 600s to be "optimum levels". The upper quarter of that range would be roughly 800 - 1000. (I used that reference range only due to the number of instances that Total T came back well over 1000).

Anyway, my examination of this "chart" only seems to verify that E2 levels primarily paralleled Total T levels... once those Total T levels were stabilized with an apparently fiemly set HcG protocol... prior to that stabilization it seems like there was a lot of experimentation and tweaking going on with the way that numbers were up and down so drastically.

Personally I believe that DIM (used in conjunction with TMG) has some definite health benefits but that it does not fall into the same definitions as AIs or Anti Es for E2 / estrogen control purposes. I also believe that Dr Zeligs info is more likely correct, that doses in amounts of 200 - 400 mg are therapeutic levels for those health purposes versus half tablet theories, but then that's just IMHO...

Larry

 

[stat1951]

Sorry I have been away from the board for a little while. Work has a way of doing that from time to time.

From my limited understanding HCG raises E2 in many men. I am a little confused as to how someone would think that gradually lowering their HCG dosage could not have played a role in the outcome of their labs.

Yes, it appears that there were a lot of lab results that were drawn after starting Indolplex/DIM that show lower E2, but I am confused. If one is manipulating multiple variables at the same time, how can one then attribute 100% of the reduction in E2 to one variable while ignoring the other? This is totally against what I have learned regarding conducting studies that have any validity.

Smitty,

Excellent points. Both. Exactly what points I was trying to develop. True studies are "controlled" with single variables. Studies usually utilize placebos... in other words, what would his E2 levels be over the last few months when Total T was down in the area of Total T in 600s if NO type of DIM was being used? Furthermore, studies - to be useful as regards a protocol that would be a positive working protocol for "most" individuals - should involve not just one subject, but multiple subjects (while remaining controlled and using placebos). And to be absolutely and fully accurate, the studies should be blind, or even double blind studies (the subject wouldn't know what week he was getting a DIM tablet and what week it was a sugar pill in the former case and in the latter case, neither the subject nor the researcher would know which was DIM and which was the sugar pill).

This specific "HcG only plus DIM" protocol may have worked very well for this individual (though there seemed to be a lot of tweaking and changes for such a "great program"). But that is beside the point. There are probably individual hypogonadal males out there who are doing great on 200 mg of Test Cyp every other week. There may have even been some who did fine on 400 mg of Test Cyp once a month... but clearly not for the majority of TRT patients. So hyping a non typical, non proven HRT / TRT protocol while claiming some unsupported scientific basis just doesn't seem to an ethical stance.

Thanks for making those points in a much more concise manner!

Larry

 

[SWALE]

I remember DavidZ posting a list of labs he got for T values which were all within 10% of each other, while he was trying to convince me of something or another. Well, you couldn't take the same sample, run it that many times, and get results that close. So I doubt the validity of any labs he posts.

There are so many errors in this "sticky", I have decided to "unstick" it, and let it settle down the list. Anyone who wishes to maintain the thread are still welcome keep it bumped with their own observations/thoughts.

 

[chap]

so sad to see us lose anyone from the forum, I am really interested in the concept of an hcg only protocal....

a couple of questions:

is hcg in itself more suppressive than testosterone, on a direct suppression basis as opposed to the hormones it causes to be produced?

is the estrogen raising we see with hcg a direct estrogen production in the testicles or elsewhere, or is it a result of aromatised testosterone?

 

[pmgamer18]

so sad to see us lose anyone from the forum, I am really interested in the concept of an hcg only protocal....

a couple of questions:

is hcg in itself more suppressive than testosterone, on a direct suppression basis as opposed to the hormones it causes to be produced?

is the estrogen raising we see with hcg a direct estrogen production in the testicles or elsewhere, or is it a result of aromatised testosterone?

Chap I feel the same way David Z has helped me a lot in the past 4 yrs. It is a shame we will not be seeing him post anymore. I can't help but wonder if he is feeling OK don't remember him having trouble before on the groups.

 

[cpeil2]

Chap I feel the same way David Z has helped me a lot in the past 4 yrs. It is a shame we will not be seeing him post anymore. I can't help but wonder if he is feeling OK don't remember him having trouble before on the groups.

Did I miss something? Did he say he wouldn't be posting anymore? He often lurks without posting for pretty long periods.

Editing this: I read back in the thread, so he's been banned. He's always been a difficult presence, but I will also miss his contribution.

 

[DavidZ]

I remember DavidZ posting a list of labs he got for T values which were all within 10% of each other, while he was trying to convince me of something or another.

Your memory is correct. The results I previously posted are exactly the same as the last 4 results posted abve. Very consistent aren't they?

Well, you couldn't take the same sample, run it that many times, and get results that close. So I doubt the validity of any labs he posts.

These blood tests were posted for months and you never questioned them. Then right after you banned me, you casted aspersions on these results.

How low class of you!!!!!!!!!!

If you ask nicely, maybe I'll send you copies of my test results.

Now you are gone. I hope you can find a Board where you can get along.

 

[DavidZ]

I have thoroughly examined the "blood test chart" provided by DZ:

First of all the chart only specifies Total T (no Free T or Bioavailable T), E2 (no Total Es) and a Total T/E2 ratio. It seems to me that a Free T / E2 ratio would have been more enlightening.

I could post them, too, but there's nothing additional to be gleaned from them, IMO.

Secondly, I noted that there's no information given as to the specifics of the TRT regimen. This was an HcG-Only protocol over this time period (i.e., no administered external T), but nothing is said as to amounts and/or frequency (500 IU once a week? 350 IU twice a week? 100 IU daily?).

https://thinksteroids.com/community/threads/134234868

Finally, I see no real established pattern that could be explained by means of strictly DIM usage

It's staring you right in the face, but you missed it. Keep reading.

...from March of 2000 to November of 2000 (with no transdermal chrysin or DIM ingestion) one sees the following:

While there's a lot of bouncing around going on, the main characteristic is that when Total T was high then E2 tended to be high - and when Total T was lower then E2 was lower.

Good observation!

During March 2000 to November 2000, my T/E2 ratio ran about 10. I used no E2 management during this period. Therefore, 10 is my "natural" T/E2 ratio. E2 is made from T. That's why they go up and down together.

The problem is that I don't do well at that ratio. Any benefits from an increase in T will be cancelled by an attendent increase in E2.

That why I need some E2 management. Something that will increase my T/E2 ratio.

I then looked at the time frame from when the DIM was started:

One sees even more clearly that relationship. It seems to demonstrate even more emphatically that the E2 levels have paralleled the levels of Total T.

Good observation, again. However, you missed the most important observation. Since starting Indolplex/DIM, my T/E2 ratio doubled --- from 10 to 20! Big difference!

The last eight test results showed Total T in the 600s in seven of those tests. The one exception was just over 800. The E2 level was a 46 for that 812, yet there was an E2 of 45 when the Total T was down to 620??? But overall, once again, it was obvious that the lower Total T levels resulted in lower E2 levels.

Additionally, assuming a reference range of 260 - 1000, I personally would not consider Total T levels in the 600s to be "optimum levels". The upper quarter of that range would be roughly 800 - 1000. (I used that reference range only due to the number of instances that Total T came back well over 1000).

The optimal T level varies from man to man. See pp 172-173 of The Testosterone Syndrome by Eugene Shippen, MD. The optimal T level is obtained from clinical evaluation (i.e. how you feel), not blood tests, unless you know what your level was in your 20s.

 

[xfjsx]

hi david z.

i tested high for testosterone and i tested low for e2, (8) while on prednisone during a colitis flare up. should i begin to try to raise e2 (take dhea) or should i take the reading as a fluke, and assume that taking 75mg of test cyp e3d is putting me over the limit on e2, and i should try and lower e2 (DIM, Arimidex)?

i know e2 isnt right because i have low libido, hard to build up erections, and brain fog.

 

[pmgamer18]

hi david z.

i tested high for testosterone and i tested low for e2, (8) while on prednisone during a colitis flare up. should i begin to try to raise e2 (take dhea) or should i take the reading as a fluke, and assume that taking 75mg of test cyp e3d is putting me over the limit on e2, and i should try and lower e2 (DIM, Arimidex)?

i know e2 isnt right because i have low libido, hard to build up erections, and brain fog.

xfjsxjhi David Z is not here anymore I don't even think he is on the web for low t anymore. I would stop the prednisone and let your body go back to normal. If there is still a problem then retest. Indolplex/DIM or Arimidex will bring down your E2 and in time total E's. Post to me when you want to try this I can help you with it so you don't go to low on your E2.

 

[xfjsx]

but is my e2 low or high? i guess its low cause it read 8 in the test.

i started taking 300mg dhea each day and 400mg vitamin b6 each day. dhea to raise e2 and b6 to lower prolactin


i guess i could try some arimidex and if it helps i guess im high.

my doctor is a very stupid person and wants me to wait 8 weeks for blood test from start of armour thyroid and 150mg test cyp....

i wanna get tested now now now!

 

[pmgamer18]

WTF are you doing on one hand you say your E2 is at 8 the normal range is 10 to 30 pg/ml. Now on the other hand you say your going to take some Arimidex now this will drive your E2 even lower. Stop the 300mg of DHEA and the B6. You were on prednisone this shuts your bodys cortisol levels down and messes up your hormones. Just don't take anythiing and give your body some time to go back to normal. I would not even do the T shots.

I feel at the rate your going you will be so messed up nothing will fix you. How long were you off the prednisone before your Dr. tested your Thyroid and Testosterone. Can you start a new thread and post your labs and give us more info on what happened to you and why your on Armour and Testosterone.