High oestradiol and prolactin

[Jin23]

Didn’t have bloods done on blast, just after my cruise to make sure everything was ok before I blasted again. Will check again in few weeks. I took 12.5 e3d on last blast.

You need to start doing this more responsibly. You need to be on top of your blood work, mid cycle, and trt or cruise. And with b&c don't forget about organs scans, especially the heart.

Btw, 12.5 e3d was most probably way to low on blasts. So your e2 is probably unmanaged for some time.

I hope youre at least checking your BP ...

 

[Dog8999]

You need to start doing this more responsibly. You need to be on top of your blood work, mid cycle, and trt or cruise. And with b&c don't forget about organs scans, especially the heart.

Btw, 12.5 e3d was most probably way to low on blasts. So your e2 is probably unmanaged for some time.

I hope youre at least checking your BP ...

Yeah agreed, all new but not an excuse. Have had 3 lots of bloods done in last 12 months so I wouldn’t say I’ve been completely irresponsible. Check BP, even bloods sugars and latest test was complete and came back perfect except hormones.

I will stick to a high level of aromasin for now until next test in few weeks.

 

[JeffroCat]

Gyno doest show up just in one day. It takes time to develope.

I wish this were 100% true. Unfortunately sometimes gynecomastia does, quite literally, develop in one day.

Wether or not it becomes permanent depends on how quickly you address it.

 

[Jin23]

I wish this were 100% true. Unfortunately sometimes gynecomastia does, quite literally, develop in one day.

Evidence?

 

[JeffroCat]

Evidence?

Umm... like what? A tissue sample?

 

[Jin23]

Umm... like what? A tissue sample?

Literature, studies, etc. Any empirical proof of your statement.

 

[JeffroCat]

Literature, studies, etc. Any empirical proof of your statement.

I could proffer my own experience and the experiences of friends over the past 2+ decades. That would count as empirical evidence.

I could tell you about the first time I took Orgenon Sustanon and developed a large lump under my left nipple over night. That was under 24 hours. No pain, no itching, no swelling, no warning. Just gyno from thin air.

I could tell you about the first time I tried ugl testosterone in mct oil. Itchy, sweaty nipples within minutes. Again, gyno overnight.

I could show you pictures of the scars on my areolas from my gynecomastia surgery to prove that I have some experience in this area.

But you would have to believe me for any of it to matter. And to not believe me would mean you'd think I have some reason to make this up. This is a point of personal shame for me, not something to brag about. And what possible motive could I have to make this up anyway?

You presumably do believe that gynecomastia is a real thing and not a deep state conspiracy, no? I imagine you don't ask people who've developed gynecomastia over the course of, let's say, two weeks to two months to produce studies as evidence?

If this is truly a board that values harm reduction, then I've done my small part.

 

[BigTomJ]

I could proffer my own experience and the experiences of friends over the past 2+ decades. That would count as empirical evidence.

I could tell you about the first time I took Orgenon Sustanon and developed a large lump under my left nipple over night. That was under 24 hours. No pain, no itching, no swelling, no warning. Just gyno from thin air.

I could tell you about the first time I tried ugl testosterone in mct oil. Itchy, sweaty nipples within minutes. Again, gyno overnight.

I could show you pictures of the scars on my areolas from my gynecomastia surgery to prove that I have some experience in this area.

But you would have to believe me for any of it to matter. And to not believe me would mean you'd think I have some reason to make this up. This is a point of personal shame for me, not something to brag about. And what possible motive could I have to make this up anyway?

You presumably do believe that gynecomastia is a real thing and not a deep state conspiracy, no? I imagine you don't ask people who've developed gynecomastia over the course of, let's say, two weeks to two months to produce studies as evidence?

If this is truly a board that values harm reduction, then I've done my small part.

Swelling is not gyno.
And you, for a fact, did not develope additional gyno tissue less than 24h after a single shot of sustanon.


Personal anecdotes aren't worth much.
3rd person anecdotes are worth less.


Gyno can become inflamed and swell very rapidly, but tissue cannot develop overnight

 

[JeffroCat]

Swelling is not gyno.
And you, for a fact, did not develope additional gyno tissue less than 24h after a single shot of sustanon.


Personal anecdotes aren't worth much.
3rd person anecdotes are worth less.


Gyno can become inflamed and swell very rapidly, but tissue cannot develop overnight

1. Try to be a more careful reader.
2. Who said swelling was gyno? I certainly didn't. A stimulated mammary gland that presents as a protrusion from beneath your nipple is absolutely gynecomastia. And if not treated quickly will remain gynecomastia.
3. You, for a fact, have no earthly idea what I did or did not experience.
4. The man asked for empirical evidence. People's personal experiences, aka anecdotes, are empirical evidence. That is what I provided.
5. If you've found what I've written to be worthless, then please believe the feeling to be mutual.

 

[BigTomJ]

1. Try to be a more careful reader.
2. Who said swelling was gyno? I certainly didn't. A stimulated mammary gland that presents as a protrusion from beneath your nipple is absolutely gynecomastia. And if not treated quickly will remain gynecomastia.
3. You, for a fact, have no earthly idea what I did or did not experience.
4. The man asked for empirical evidence. People's personal experiences, aka anecdotes, are empirical evidence. That is what I provided.
5. If you've found what I've written to be worthless, then please believe the feeling to be mutual.

I'm saying what you experienced was swelling. Not massive tissue development.

 

[Jin23]

4. The man asked for empirical evidence. People's personal experiences, aka anecdotes, are empirical evidence. That is what I provided.

This is false. You provided anecdotal evidence - which doesn't count for much in the scientific world nor it's adjacent medical profession. I asked for scientific proof; case studies, literature on proposed mechanism of action, in vitro studies which show accelerated tissue growth, in vivo studies on animals and humans, etc.

You are clearly out of depth in this conversation and you are too much of a novice to understand it. We are all friendly here, no need to act defensive.

 

[JeffroCat]

This is false. You provided anecdotal evidence - which doesn't count for much in the scientific world nor it's adjacent medical profession. I asked for scientific proof; case studies, literature on proposed mechanism of action, in vitro studies which show accelerated tissue growth, in vivo studies on animals and humans, etc.

You are clearly out of depth in this conversation and you are too much of a novice to understand it. We are all friendly here, no need to act defensive.

I wasn't being defensive, I was being reactive. If I offended anyone, them I apologize. Truly.

You asked for evidence. You said you would accept empirical evidence. My experiences (and I am certainly not the only one too have experienced this) qualify as empirical evidence. So I've given you at least some of what you've asked for. Just because you don't believe it doesn't make it untrue.

To call me either a novice or out of my depth when it comes to gynecomastia is actually insane. I mean my experience with it is literally decades long with the scars to top it off.

Could you share some of your experiences with gynecomastia? Or are things just not true for you unless someone wrote it on paper?

 

[-Maui-]

Normal levels are 2 - 18 ng/ml and he is at 37 ng/ml. Prolactinoma, if that is what you are referring to, is usually associated with much higher levels. While his levels are a bit higher then what you'd typically see, they still are in the realm of possibility. You have to account for genetic variability/susceptibility.

Op hasn't mentioned what his prolactin levels are with normal physiological estrogen levels, but I presume they are normal. (Op have you measured prolactin otherwise?) If this is true, then estrogen is the most likely culprit, especially if estrogen has been high for some time as it can not just stimulate prolactin release but also cause an increase in prolactin releasing cells.

However, measuring prolactin is a slight issue as the body releases prolactin as a stress response once the vein gets punctured, so levels can appear to be elevated when in reality they are not. It's the reason why you'd want multiple draws to determine proper levels. But at "such high levels", I'd discount this as a possibility.

There are lots of reason why prolactin can be somewhat elevated, stress being one of them but what other (likely) causes are you referring to?

Of course, there could be many reasons.
But this is no reason to sit back and wait for a surprise from such prolactin.
It'll be interesting to see how aromasin affects his prolactin.

 

[Dog8999]

Any issues with me taking Caber as a precaution? Where do you get bloods done, not a fan of finger prick so go for a clinic visit.

 

[Burly]

Any issues with me taking Caber as a precaution? Where do you get bloods done, not a fan of finger prick so go for a clinic visit.

Just stop for 3-4 weeks and inject no Test. after 4 weeks start regular TRT dose. ~100-125mg weekly.

88.5nmol/L = 2252ng/dL, way out of TRT range

 

[Dog8999]

Just stop for 3-4 weeks and inject no Test. after 4 weeks start regular TRT dose. ~100-125mg weekly.

88.5nmol/L = 2252ng/dL, way out of TRT range

Think we’ve climbed this hill. Im not interested on what my levels are classed as (TRT, cruise, cycle, I don’t care) my blood work is spot on for blast just need to control estro/prolactin.

 

[Jin23]

Think we’ve climbed this hill. Im not interested on what my levels are classed as (TRT, cruise, cycle, I don’t care) my blood work is spot on for blast just need to control estro/prolactin.

The limited amount of bloods that you have done means nothing in regards of your general state of physiological health. It's a common misconception among internet bro lore that checking a few basic lab markers gives you a green light to cycle.

 

[Cyp180]

Why you want to kill your E2 and Prolactin and stubborn run your Test beside ? Out of reference value Test, means E2 and Prolactin increase as well.

Itś your health what you do and don´t do

 

[Dog8999]

The limited amount of bloods that you have done means nothing in regards of your general state of physiological health. It's a common misconception among internet bro lore that checking a few basic lab markers gives you a green light to cycle.

Any constructive comments or constant negativity? Any response to my questions? 40+ biomarkers no indication to my health then what is??

 

[Dog8999]

Why you want to kill your E2 and Prolactin and stubborn run your Test beside ? Out of reference value Test, means E2 and Prolactin increase as well.

Itś your health what you do and don´t do

Don’t want to kill. Hence my question several times on dosages.