Progesterone induced hypogonadism

[Fit4Life05]

What would cause the progesterone to rise and in response low T levels? For me I got strep throat which caused this. But what is the mechanism behind it? Is there perhaps an underlying problem that was brought out by the strep and 2 week illness I had?

 

[Michael Scally MD]

What would cause the progesterone to rise and in response low T levels? For me I got strep throat which caused this. But what is the mechanism behind it? Is there perhaps an underlying problem that was brought out by the strep and 2 week illness I had?

This is an extraordinary absence of information. I do not claim any psychic powers. you need to provide alot more info - alot more. As the post stands, you are making the diagnosis/cause, which I might not agree with at all. But, I definitely am unable to comment.

 

[Fit4Life05]

This is an extraordinary absence of information. I do not claim any psychic powers. you need to provide alot more info - alot more. As the post stands, you are making the diagnosis/cause, which I might not agree with at all. But, I definitely am unable to comment.

well then, i will try to shorten what i could write a novel about....

5-6 years ago (age 18) i came down with strep throat. i was sick for about 2 weeks. within the first week i started to notice e.d. problems. now that i look back at it, a lot like what ppl complain of after using deca (deca dick aka zero libido and dick ifeels like its not even there). i also began to notice all of the symptoms of low testosterone (fatigued, loss of strength/energy, no concentration, zombie-ish, depression, etc, etc).

i went to like 4-5 different doctors, tons of bloodtests with little to no clarity. doctors all thought i was crazy. the one thing that i did notice was that for my age my testosterone was low (always ranged from in the 200's-400's). so i "knew" that was the problem. i also noticed that my progesterone was high, but none of the dr's commented on it and i had no idea what it meant....

so i went on trt..standard test cyp and hcg. i noticed some help in areas, but nothing huge and no improving in sex drive and erection strength. i then spent the next 4 years w out having sex a single time or any girlfreind, mainly because i didnt want to deal with the sex problem.

over this time i had continued and continued doin research on my own over the net. i began to read about deca dick/high progesterone, etc. i noticed that all of my tests over these years have shown high progesterone, often times over the range. more and more research into it and i came to my own conclusion that high progesterone was my problem and was also causing low t. a very good dr in this field agreed that seems like it may be my problem. but he said there is nothing he can do for me as very little is actually known about the effect of high progesterone in men.

so again more research and i noticed that winstrol (stanzolol sp?) and ru486 are some of the few known anti-proesterones out there. i couldnt get a script for either of them. i didnt know any steroid dealers so i wasnt going to be able to get ahold of winsrol. so i bought some mifeprex/ru486 from an online pharmacy. i took 50mg for 12 days. during this time, and for the first time in 5-6 years, i noticed morning wood, 100% hard erections, and i actually had a sex drive. i could actually "feel" my dick.

this lasted (finally feeling like a normal 23 yr old) for about a 5-6 weeks. i should have stopped trt at that point, but i didnt and my e2 began to raise, and i started to notice gyno-ish signs. thats where i am right now....

----------------------------------

so basically my question is how would strep throat cause the high progesterone in me (which imo caused the low t). could the lowed immune system that i had for 2 weeksish cause my adrenals to go haywire??

ps. here is a study i read that helped some in regards to the whole progesterone/low t/ru486 situation. i was desperate and took a chance. ive spent my 19th-23rd years on this earth as a zombie with out having sex once. im not living the rest of my life this way!

http://www.endocrine-abstracts.org/ea/0020/ea0020p626.htm

sorry so long haha

 

[Michael Scally MD]

well then, i will try to shorten what i could write a novel about....

5-6 years ago (age 18) i came down with strep throat. i was sick for about 2 weeks. within the first week i started to notice e.d. problems. now that i look back at it, a lot like what ppl complain of after using deca (deca dick aka zero libido and dick ifeels like its not even there). i also began to notice all of the symptoms of low testosterone (fatigued, loss of strength/energy, no concentration, zombie-ish, depression, etc, etc).

i went to like 4-5 different doctors, tons of bloodtests with little to no clarity. doctors all thought i was crazy. the one thing that i did notice was that for my age my testosterone was low (always ranged from in the 200's-400's). so i "knew" that was the problem. i also noticed that my progesterone was high, but none of the dr's commented on it and i had no idea what it meant....

so i went on trt..standard test cyp and hcg. i noticed some help in areas, but nothing huge and no improving in sex drive and erection strength. i then spent the next 4 years w out having sex a single time or any girlfreind, mainly because i didnt want to deal with the sex problem.

over this time i had continued and continued doin research on my own over the net. i began to read about deca dick/high progesterone, etc. i noticed that all of my tests over these years have shown high progesterone, often times over the range. more and more research into it and i came to my own conclusion that high progesterone was my problem and was also causing low t. a very good dr in this field agreed that seems like it may be my problem. but he said there is nothing he can do for me as very little is actually known about the effect of high progesterone in men.

so again more research and i noticed that winstrol (stanzolol sp?) and ru486 are some of the few known anti-proesterones out there. i couldnt get a script for either of them. i didnt know any steroid dealers so i wasnt going to be able to get ahold of winsrol. so i bought some mifeprex/ru486 from an online pharmacy. i took 50mg for 12 days. during this time, and for the first time in 5-6 years, i noticed morning wood, 100% hard erections, and i actually had a sex drive. i could actually "feel" my dick.

this lasted (finally feeling like a normal 23 yr old) for about a 5-6 weeks. i should have stopped trt at that point, but i didnt and my e2 began to raise, and i started to notice gyno-ish signs. thats where i am right now....

----------------------------------

so basically my question is how would strep throat cause the high progesterone in me (which imo caused the low t). could the lowed immune system that i had for 2 weeksish cause my adrenals to go haywire??

ps. here is a study i read that helped some in regards to the whole progesterone/low t/ru486 situation. i was desperate and took a chance. ive spent my 19th-23rd years on this earth as a zombie with out having sex once. im not living the rest of my life this way!

Progesterone suppression of the male hypothalamo-pituitary gonadal axis is partially reversed by the progesterone antagonist mifepristone

sorry so long haha

That is a very interesting story. If true, this would be an excellent case report. I am not being sarcastic. I really like your hypothesis. Are you familiar with a N-of-1 clinical trial? [If you need more info on the N-of-1, let me know. It is one of the more powerful forms of evidence.] This should be introduced to your doctor. I think he/she would be more likely to prescribe the SPRM. Finally, can you post labs?

 

[AlexanderDenmark]

I find this really interesting as my progesterone metabolites are way above range in 24 hour urine testing. The progesterone antagonist mentioned sparks my curiosity. I also have deca dick without having ever used deca or AAS.

 

[Fit4Life05]

That is a very interesting story. If true, this would be an excellent case report. I am not being sarcastic. I really like your hypothesis. Are you familiar with a N-of-1 clinical trial? [If you need more info on the N-of-1, let me know. It is one of the more powerful forms of evidence.] This should be introduced to your doctor. I think he/she would be more likely to prescribe the SPRM. Finally, can you post labs?

Thank you. No, I haven't heard of that study...care to shine a little light on it for me?

I haven't gotten new labs since the ru486...money issue atm. But I do have some past labs if you want to see them right now....

 

[Michael Scally MD]

Thank you. No, I haven't heard of that study...care to shine a little light on it for me?

I haven't gotten new labs since the ru486...money issue atm. But I do have some past labs if you want to see them right now....

In determining optimal treatment for a patient, conventional trials of therapy are susceptible to bias. Large-scale randomized trials can provide only a partial guide and have not been or cannot be carried out for most clinical disorders. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in individual patients (N of 1 RCTs) may in some circumstances provide a solution to this dilemma. In an N of 1 RCT a patient undergoes pairs of treatment periods (one period of each pair with the active drug and one with matched placebo, assigned at random); both the patient and the clinician are blind to allocation, and treatment targets are monitored. N of 1 RCTs are useful for chronic, stable conditions for which the proposed treatment, which has a rapid onset of action and ceases to act soon after it is discontinued, has shown promise in an open trial of therapy. The monitoring of treatment targets usually includes quantitative measurement of the patient's symptoms with the use of simple patient diaries or questionnaires. Pairs of treatment periods are continued until effectiveness is proved or refuted. The cooperation of a pharmacy is required for the preparation of matching placebos and conduct of the trial. Formal statistical analysis may be helpful for interpreting the results.


Mahon J, Laupacis A, Donner A, Wood T. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. BMJ 1996;312(7038):1069-74. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice -- Mahon et al. 312 (7038): 1069 -- BMJ

Abstract Objective: To compare outcomes between groups of patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation given theophylline by n of 1 trials or standard practice. Design: Randomised controlled study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. Setting: Tertiary care centre outpatient department. Subjects: 31 patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation who were unsure that theophylline was helpful after an open trial. Interventions: n Of 1 trials (single patient randomised multiple crossover comparisons of theophylline against placebo) followed published guidelines. For standard practice patients theophylline was stopped and resumed if their dyspnoea worsened; if their dyspnoea then improved theophylline was continued. For both groups a decision to continue or stop the drug was made within three months of randomisation. Main outcome measures: Exercise capacity as measured by six minute walking distance, quality of life as measured by the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire at baseline and six months after randomisation, and proportions of patients taking theophylline at six months. Results: 26 patients completed follow up. 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients than standard practice patients were taking theophylline at six months (5/14 versus 10/12; 95% confidence interval of difference 14% to 80%) without differences in exercise capacity or quality of life. Conclusions: n Of 1 trials led to less theophylline use without adverse effects on exercise capacity or quality of life in patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation. These data directly support the presence of a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment during open prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation. Confirmation in a larger study and similar studies for other problems appropriate for n of 1 trials are needed before widespread use of n of 1 trials can be advocated in routine clinical practice. Key messages Several common clinical problems suit n of 1 trials, including prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation, yet they are rarely used Among patients with chronic airflow limitation randomised to receive theophylline by an n of 1 trial or standard practice 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients were taking theophylline after six months without difference in exercise capacity or quality of life There seems to be a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment in standard prac- tice in this setting; n of 1 trials may limit this bias

 

[m_ob]

In determining optimal treatment for a patient, conventional trials of therapy are susceptible to bias. Large-scale randomized trials can provide only a partial guide and have not been or cannot be carried out for most clinical disorders. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in individual patients (N of 1 RCTs) may in some circumstances provide a solution to this dilemma. In an N of 1 RCT a patient undergoes pairs of treatment periods (one period of each pair with the active drug and one with matched placebo, assigned at random); both the patient and the clinician are blind to allocation, and treatment targets are monitored. N of 1 RCTs are useful for chronic, stable conditions for which the proposed treatment, which has a rapid onset of action and ceases to act soon after it is discontinued, has shown promise in an open trial of therapy. The monitoring of treatment targets usually includes quantitative measurement of the patient's symptoms with the use of simple patient diaries or questionnaires. Pairs of treatment periods are continued until effectiveness is proved or refuted. The cooperation of a pharmacy is required for the preparation of matching placebos and conduct of the trial. Formal statistical analysis may be helpful for interpreting the results.


Mahon J, Laupacis A, Donner A, Wood T. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. BMJ 1996;312(7038):1069-74. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice -- Mahon et al. 312 (7038): 1069 -- BMJ

Abstract Objective: To compare outcomes between groups of patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation given theophylline by n of 1 trials or standard practice. Design: Randomised controlled study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. Setting: Tertiary care centre outpatient department. Subjects: 31 patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation who were unsure that theophylline was helpful after an open trial. Interventions: n Of 1 trials (single patient randomised multiple crossover comparisons of theophylline against placebo) followed published guidelines. For standard practice patients theophylline was stopped and resumed if their dyspnoea worsened; if their dyspnoea then improved theophylline was continued. For both groups a decision to continue or stop the drug was made within three months of randomisation. Main outcome measures: Exercise capacity as measured by six minute walking distance, quality of life as measured by the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire at baseline and six months after randomisation, and proportions of patients taking theophylline at six months. Results: 26 patients completed follow up. 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients than standard practice patients were taking theophylline at six months (5/14 versus 10/12; 95% confidence interval of difference 14% to 80%) without differences in exercise capacity or quality of life. Conclusions: n Of 1 trials led to less theophylline use without adverse effects on exercise capacity or quality of life in patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation. These data directly support the presence of a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment during open prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation. Confirmation in a larger study and similar studies for other problems appropriate for n of 1 trials are needed before widespread use of n of 1 trials can be advocated in routine clinical practice. Key messages Several common clinical problems suit n of 1 trials, including prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation, yet they are rarely used Among patients with chronic airflow limitation randomised to receive theophylline by an n of 1 trial or standard practice 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients were taking theophylline after six months without difference in exercise capacity or quality of life There seems to be a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment in standard prac- tice in this setting; n of 1 trials may limit this bias

I don't know. I put that thread up about the signfignance of high progesterone, yet I still have a sex drive even with low T and high progesterone. It is a confusing game we play with these hormones.

 

[Fit4Life05]

In determining optimal treatment for a patient, conventional trials of therapy are susceptible to bias. Large-scale randomized trials can provide only a partial guide and have not been or cannot be carried out for most clinical disorders. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in individual patients (N of 1 RCTs) may in some circumstances provide a solution to this dilemma. In an N of 1 RCT a patient undergoes pairs of treatment periods (one period of each pair with the active drug and one with matched placebo, assigned at random); both the patient and the clinician are blind to allocation, and treatment targets are monitored. N of 1 RCTs are useful for chronic, stable conditions for which the proposed treatment, which has a rapid onset of action and ceases to act soon after it is discontinued, has shown promise in an open trial of therapy. The monitoring of treatment targets usually includes quantitative measurement of the patient's symptoms with the use of simple patient diaries or questionnaires. Pairs of treatment periods are continued until effectiveness is proved or refuted. The cooperation of a pharmacy is required for the preparation of matching placebos and conduct of the trial. Formal statistical analysis may be helpful for interpreting the results.


Mahon J, Laupacis A, Donner A, Wood T. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. BMJ 1996;312(7038):1069-74. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice -- Mahon et al. 312 (7038): 1069 -- BMJ

Abstract Objective: To compare outcomes between groups of patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation given theophylline by n of 1 trials or standard practice. Design: Randomised controlled study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. Setting: Tertiary care centre outpatient department. Subjects: 31 patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation who were unsure that theophylline was helpful after an open trial. Interventions: n Of 1 trials (single patient randomised multiple crossover comparisons of theophylline against placebo) followed published guidelines. For standard practice patients theophylline was stopped and resumed if their dyspnoea worsened; if their dyspnoea then improved theophylline was continued. For both groups a decision to continue or stop the drug was made within three months of randomisation. Main outcome measures: Exercise capacity as measured by six minute walking distance, quality of life as measured by the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire at baseline and six months after randomisation, and proportions of patients taking theophylline at six months. Results: 26 patients completed follow up. 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients than standard practice patients were taking theophylline at six months (5/14 versus 10/12; 95% confidence interval of difference 14% to 80%) without differences in exercise capacity or quality of life. Conclusions: n Of 1 trials led to less theophylline use without adverse effects on exercise capacity or quality of life in patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation. These data directly support the presence of a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment during open prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation. Confirmation in a larger study and similar studies for other problems appropriate for n of 1 trials are needed before widespread use of n of 1 trials can be advocated in routine clinical practice. Key messages Several common clinical problems suit n of 1 trials, including prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation, yet they are rarely used Among patients with chronic airflow limitation randomised to receive theophylline by an n of 1 trial or standard practice 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients were taking theophylline after six months without difference in exercise capacity or quality of life There seems to be a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment in standard prac- tice in this setting; n of 1 trials may limit this bias

hmm. so its basically a blind study, but instead of being a group study its individualized?

are you saying that my dr and i should look into doing this?>

I don't know. I put that thread up about the signfignance of high progesterone, yet I still have a sex drive even with low T and high progesterone. It is a confusing game we play with these hormones.

ya, high progesterone will comepletely ruin your sex drive, even if all other hormones are in order

 

[sade]

well then, i will try to shorten what i could write a novel about....

5-6 years ago (age 18) i came down with strep throat. i was sick for about 2 weeks. within the first week i started to notice e.d. problems. now that i look back at it, a lot like what ppl complain of after using deca (deca dick aka zero libido and dick ifeels like its not even there). i also began to notice all of the symptoms of low testosterone (fatigued, loss of strength/energy, no concentration, zombie-ish, depression, etc, etc).

i went to like 4-5 different doctors, tons of bloodtests with little to no clarity. doctors all thought i was crazy. the one thing that i did notice was that for my age my testosterone was low (always ranged from in the 200's-400's). so i "knew" that was the problem. i also noticed that my progesterone was high, but none of the dr's commented on it and i had no idea what it meant....

so i went on trt..standard test cyp and hcg. i noticed some help in areas, but nothing huge and no improving in sex drive and erection strength. i then spent the next 4 years w out having sex a single time or any girlfreind, mainly because i didnt want to deal with the sex problem.

over this time i had continued and continued doin research on my own over the net. i began to read about deca dick/high progesterone, etc. i noticed that all of my tests over these years have shown high progesterone, often times over the range. more and more research into it and i came to my own conclusion that high progesterone was my problem and was also causing low t. a very good dr in this field agreed that seems like it may be my problem. but he said there is nothing he can do for me as very little is actually known about the effect of high progesterone in men.

so again more research and i noticed that winstrol (stanzolol sp?) and ru486 are some of the few known anti-proesterones out there. i couldnt get a script for either of them. i didnt know any steroid dealers so i wasnt going to be able to get ahold of winsrol. so i bought some mifeprex/ru486 from an online pharmacy. i took 50mg for 12 days. during this time, and for the first time in 5-6 years, i noticed morning wood, 100% hard erections, and i actually had a sex drive. i could actually "feel" my dick.

this lasted (finally feeling like a normal 23 yr old) for about a 5-6 weeks. i should have stopped trt at that point, but i didnt and my e2 began to raise, and i started to notice gyno-ish signs. thats where i am right now....

----------------------------------

so basically my question is how would strep throat cause the high progesterone in me (which imo caused the low t). could the lowed immune system that i had for 2 weeksish cause my adrenals to go haywire??

ps. here is a study i read that helped some in regards to the whole progesterone/low t/ru486 situation. i was desperate and took a chance. ive spent my 19th-23rd years on this earth as a zombie with out having sex once. im not living the rest of my life this way!

Progesterone suppression of the male hypothalamo-pituitary gonadal axis is partially reversed by the progesterone antagonist mifepristone

sorry so long haha

I'm confused why it only lasted 5-6 weeks! Could the excess estrogen have caused more problems? Thanks for posting! I have the same problem. High Progesterone.

 

[Jeton]

hmm. so its basically a blind study, but instead of being a group study its individualized?

are you saying that my dr and i should look into doing this?>

ya, high progesterone will comepletely ruin your sex drive, even if all other hormones are in order

but M_ob was saying that his sex drive continues...for my part i ran deca 200mg/week from 4/07 until fall of last year, with several 4-week periods of 400mg/week, and my sex drive was unaffected...however, it DID take me alot longer to cum. i think the effects of high progesterone vary.

 

[MAYO]

but M_ob was saying that his sex drive continues...for my part i ran deca 200mg/week from 4/07 until fall of last year, with several 4-week periods of 400mg/week, and my sex drive was unaffected...however, it DID take me alot longer to cum. i think the effects of high progesterone vary.

Serious question, differences aside. Why did you run Deca for 2 and 1/2 years?

 

[sade]

Loads of people take deca and still have low normal progesterone levels after they come off! I only ever used nolvadex as pct and I've recently found out that it upregulates progesterone receptors. Test E is a light progestin and I used it for almost a year. 3 x 12 week cycles with nolvadex as pct inbetween.

 

[Jeton]

Serious question, differences aside. Why did you run Deca for 2 and 1/2 years?

becuz none of my prior doctors had much experience with it, neither did i, but i wanted AAS to establish a reserve of Lean Body Mass, since when i've been AIDS-sick or had a major medication change, i've been vulnerable to catastrophic weight loss episodes. i'm with an HIV/AAS/Anti-aging specialist now...and have learned a bit from meso, even tho my own threads get few responses here.

 

[MAYO]

becuz none of my prior doctors had much experience with it, neither did i, but i wanted AAS to establish a reserve of Lean Body Mass, since when i've been AIDS-sick or had a major medication change, i've been vulnerable to catastrophic weight loss episodes. i'm with an HIV/AAS/Anti-aging specialist now...and have learned a bit from meso, even tho my own threads get few responses here.

The only info that I have seen on HIV/AAS interaction was the small segment in "Bigger, Stronger, Faster." I am aware that there is much more, but in all honesty haven't taken the time to look. What is your AAS protocol since discontinuing the Deca?

 

[Jeton]

The only info that I have seen on HIV/AAS interaction was the small segment in "Bigger, Stronger, Faster." I am aware that there is much more, but in all honesty haven't taken the time to look. What is your AAS protocol since discontinuing the Deca?

well i've been upped to 200mg x 2/wk since my levels swung too widely on weekly dosing n the best health-related outcomes of TRT in HIV+ men have been achieved by maintaining t levels consistently in the hi-normal/low-supra threshold.

about 6 weeks ago i started a cycle of 600mg test (i had some extra) 400mg deca n 50mg/day anadrol, but i ran out of money for the deca n wasn't able to re-up the t so i'm back to just 400mg of t. my weight stayed the same but my bodyfat percentage lowered by 4 points to 18% at 208lbs. not much water-retention here as i continuously take .25mg Adex 3x/week indefinitely, ever since i had a gyno-episode taken care of with letro early last year, which made me join meso to begin with.