#274 - Performance-enhancing drugs and hormones: risks, rewards, and broader implications for the public | Derek: More Plates, More Dates
Episode Stats
Length
3 hours and 14 minutes
Words per Minute
176.91931
Summary
In this episode of The Drive Podcast, host, Peter Atiyah chats with fitness educator, entrepreneur, and YouTube channel creator, Derek Stanko, about the use of performance-enhancing drugs by bodybuilders and athletes, and the potential implications for the general population.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey, everyone. Welcome to the Drive podcast. I'm your host, Peter Atiyah. This podcast,
00:00:16.560
my website, and my weekly newsletter all focus on the goal of translating the science of longevity
00:00:21.540
into something accessible for everyone. Our goal is to provide the best content in health and
00:00:26.760
wellness, and we've established a great team of analysts to make this happen. It is extremely
00:00:31.700
important to me to provide all of this content without relying on paid ads. To do this, our work
00:00:36.980
is made entirely possible by our members, and in return, we offer exclusive member-only content
00:00:42.720
and benefits above and beyond what is available for free. If you want to take your knowledge of
00:00:47.960
this space to the next level, it's our goal to ensure members get back much more than the price
00:00:53.220
of the subscription. If you want to learn more about the benefits of our premium membership,
00:00:58.060
head over to peteratiyahmd.com forward slash subscribe. My guest this week is Derek from
00:01:06.640
More Plates, More Dates. Derek is a fitness educator and entrepreneur behind the More Plates,
00:01:11.860
More Dates YouTube channel, podcast, and companion website. I've been following Derek now for a couple
00:01:17.460
of years, and I have always found him to be very thorough in his analysis and assessment of areas
00:01:25.480
that are very difficult to get insight into from the mainstream channels by which we would go about
00:01:32.900
searching for insights, for example, using published literature. Derek in particular has a lot of
00:01:39.440
expertise around molecules and the types of molecules that are both used and abused by bodybuilders
00:01:46.480
and athletes. A lot of our discussion today focuses on that. By way of background, Derek himself is
00:01:53.060
heavily into bodybuilding, fitness, and talks very openly about his past use with performance-enhancing
00:01:59.180
drugs and his real interest in understanding the science around these things. We really cover these
00:02:04.920
things in great detail. You might be asking, well, why is this relevant to a general audience? I think it's
00:02:11.120
because not a day goes by when I don't get at least one patient asking me a question about one of these
00:02:17.880
compounds. And the compounds I'm referring to, of course, include things like growth hormone,
00:02:22.320
testosterone, HCG, androgens, other hormones, SARMs, CERMs, peptides, oh my god, don't get me started on
00:02:29.700
peptides, clomid, estrogen, and much more. So throughout this conversation, we look a lot at how bodybuilders
00:02:35.660
are using these compounds because bodybuilders use them in the highest amounts. They also talk very openly
00:02:40.300
about these things. And then we ask the question, what can we learn about this for the general
00:02:46.380
population? Are these things all bad, carte blanche, or is there some nuance to this that we can understand?
00:02:52.860
This interview with Derek really is a part one because we just don't get through most of what I want to cover.
00:02:58.820
So we'll likely be doing this, and there'll be a part two, hopefully, in the not-too-distant future.
00:03:03.360
So without further delay, please enjoy my conversation with Derek.
00:03:12.280
Derek, awesome to have you here. Thank you for swinging by Austin. I know it's a little bit out
00:03:16.600
of the way for you. And great to meet you in person. We've had a lot of communications over
00:03:21.000
email and text, but... You as well. Thanks for having me.
00:03:24.340
Let's give people a little bit of background on you and maybe how you've come to know a lot about
00:03:29.120
stuff that's awfully technical, actually. So I don't know much about you, Earl. I'm going to
00:03:33.260
pretend I don't know much about you, other than that we share the same nationality and that you're
00:03:38.180
a fellow Canuck. So tell me about yourself growing up. Yeah. So I am from the West Coast of Canada,
00:03:44.680
born and raised Vancouver, British Columbia. How do you summarize? Like a childhood, how far do you
00:03:51.000
want me to go? First of all, when did you get interested in lifting weights, nutrition? When did the
00:03:55.720
topics that you now have pretty significant expertise in start to become a passion of yours?
00:04:01.920
Probably grade 11. I don't know if in the US there's like... We call it 11th grade or junior year,
00:04:09.180
but yes, continue. So that one. I can translate between the two. Yeah. So I was a rail, probably 130,
00:04:17.140
I think 138 pounds at my same height and basketball player. A lot of my friends were getting into working
00:04:23.240
out, putting on muscle, and I was the last one to get into it. And they were heavily encouraging me.
00:04:31.000
I was the only one who was left out if I didn't start. So I thought, okay, well, I might as well
00:04:35.460
join and I have nothing to lose by putting on some weight because I was pretty damn skinny at the time.
00:04:41.440
Got in the gym and a lot of people can relate to being bit by the iron bug where you start to get
00:04:47.200
the newbie gains and the quick progress becomes quite addicting. Then you get on a full-blown routine
00:04:55.080
thereafter. And I was kind of skewed away from actual sports like basketball because my three-pointer and
00:05:02.120
some of the muscle memory stuff really got thrown off when you start to gain 30 pounds in a matter of
00:05:08.220
months. All of a sudden your mechanics don't feel exactly the same anymore. So I got pretty into
00:05:13.140
working out and lifting weights. And as you get into lifting weights, it's kind of hard to avoid
00:05:19.740
some of the discussion around anabolic steroids, drug use, and bodybuilding. How are these insane
00:05:26.660
brontosaurus physiques you see on stage achieved and what goes into them? Because you often heard it
00:05:31.760
was, you know, that dare cell tech or some other supplement on the front of a cover or in a supplement
00:05:37.400
store sold by somebody. And then as I dug into it more, started to learn about hormones,
00:05:43.140
pharmacology. I actually had hair loss caused by androgens when I was experimenting with them as
00:05:51.020
a recreational bodybuilder. And then from there, I started to dig heavily into anti-androgens,
00:05:58.200
5-alpha reductase inhibitors, and had this weird broad spectrum pharma knowledge on weird niche stuff,
00:06:05.440
but it was all overlapping with the basis of androgen therapy, synthetic derivatives.
00:06:11.320
Just for sort of a timescale here, are you in college now or are you still in high school when
00:06:16.600
you're developing this level of interest? My initial interest peaked in 12th grade.
00:06:23.200
That grade, I developed my interest. When I get interested in something, I just go
00:06:27.480
hard. I just completely bury myself in reading whatever I can find. And back then it was a lot
00:06:34.160
of underground forums with Jim Burrows going back and forth talking about their experience with
00:06:39.020
fill in the blank compound, or this is what I did. And this is what I hear person X is doing.
00:06:44.880
And a lot of it was just anecdotal. Not that there's a lot of good literature anyways, but I mean,
00:06:49.100
just going on the forums, learning, digging into whatever science I could understand and
00:06:54.680
conceptualizing, getting a framework of understanding about how hormones impact physiology,
00:07:00.840
muscle growth potential, I don't know, genetic variability in response to that.
00:07:05.180
And as I got into university, in my first, second year, I got pretty hardcore into the
00:07:10.860
bodybuilding, got up to 260 plus pounds at my biggest. And that's when I actually discovered I
00:07:17.480
had sleep apnea that was severely exacerbated by getting that heavy that quickly. Sort of gave me
00:07:23.460
my first taste of side effects and what the potential downsides are of bodybuilding. Because a lot of
00:07:29.980
times when you're that young, it's like 20, 21 years old, you just think you're invincible and
00:07:35.440
you just think you can blast compounds. And at 260 pounds, how lean were you at that stage? Or were
00:07:42.260
you relatively unlean? Relatively unlean, I would say. And you were using lots of anabolic steroids or
00:07:48.820
just exogenous testosterone and calling it a day? We'll go into more detail about the nuances of this,
00:07:54.080
but just for reference. By our standards, a lot. But by bodybuilder standards, not really that much.
00:08:00.180
Probably at peak exposure, a combined weekly dosage of 1,500 milligrams to two grams or something.
00:08:09.240
So just for reference for the listener, when we prescribe testosterone, like when a physician is
00:08:13.480
prescribing testosterone to a patient for replacement, we're really only using testosterone. We're not using
00:08:18.180
nandrolone, oxandrolone. These are the things which we will talk about. But from a dose perspective,
00:08:22.960
I don't think I've ever prescribed more than 150 milligrams in a week of testosterone cipionate for
00:08:30.020
physiologic TRT. So you're already talking 10 to 12, 13 times more than that, more than what we would
00:08:38.480
consider a physiologic level. Yeah. And to conceptualize that, it does not equate to 12 to 13x the
00:08:45.500
results. That is something you learn pretty quick. There's a severe diminishing returns as you escalate
00:08:51.300
for sure. And you can even see this in the dose response studies. There is all, but it's still
00:08:56.220
pretty significant. There is slightly less each increment you go up proportionally. So that was my
00:09:04.220
first foray into extreme bodybuilding, I would say. And also my first taste of side effects and really
00:09:12.620
kind of led me down the rabbit hole of learning about, oh, what are the actual implications of using
00:09:17.340
this stuff, getting diagnosed with sleep apnea, getting a CPAP machine, correcting my sleep apnea,
00:09:23.340
but then also realizing that it's kind of a band-aid to the problem too. You should probably not be 260
00:09:28.480
plus pounds and taking all this shit. So the other question I have for you at this point in time is
00:09:35.620
how sophisticated is your understanding of managing the side effects of these hormones? Because obviously,
00:09:42.540
and again, we're going to talk about these in detail, but I think it's a great intro to the story of
00:09:46.180
you're learning this the hard way sometimes. But for example, like the estrogen effects,
00:09:50.480
the DHT effects, you've already alluded to them a little bit with hair loss. What is your degree
00:09:54.600
of sophistication around those in your early 20s when you're taking these doses?
00:09:59.800
Quite minimal. So back then you were told you take X amount of drug, has to be a base of testosterone
00:10:07.260
at this dosage relative to your other synthetic androgens that you're using alongside it,
00:10:11.600
based on what exactly? Arbitrary bro rules that are passed down the grapevine, essentially.
00:10:17.320
It's like your ratio of test to DECA must be two to one or else you get DECA-DEC, things like that.
00:10:24.360
Well, back then they thought it was too little test compared to DECA, because if you had...
00:10:31.440
Yeah, so nandrolone is a progestin that is derived from testosterone, but it is quite different in
00:10:36.900
how it behaves. And interestingly enough, is the base for some of the synthetic progestins that
00:10:42.020
women use for oral contraception. That compound is riddled with certain side effects for people who
00:10:48.040
are prone to more the progesterone receptor interaction and its unique effects on cognitive
00:10:55.680
health, especially too, and even sleep quality. But back then, anyway, you were told random
00:11:00.880
things that were just passed down the grapevine and based on no real science. It was just anecdote.
00:11:07.280
I tried it and this is how I felt. My penis worked or it didn't work. Now it's working,
00:11:11.680
so this must be the correct way to do it. Stuff like that. And then also predetermined dosages of
00:11:16.880
aromatase inhibitors. You have to be on a milligram of Arimidex every day or every other day because
00:11:23.120
you're on 500 tests or more per week. Stuff like that was seen as acceptable and smart.
00:11:30.160
Taking preventative health measures by doing things like that is what we thought back then.
00:11:35.120
Minor attention is paid to blood pressure. If you have a bloody nose in the squat rack,
00:11:39.680
it's probably a sign that you should either lower the D-ball or think about something. But not much
00:11:45.120
talk about angiotensin receptor blockers or even how to choose a compound more intelligently. It was
00:11:52.160
often you must have estrogen side effects or something.
00:11:55.280
By the way, what was your monthly cost of drugs at that point in time?
00:12:00.400
When it comes to anabolics, it's actually not that expensive. Vial of test is probably 60 to 70 bucks.
00:12:07.680
So vial of testosterone is 2000 milligrams, right? It's two grams is a vial.
00:12:11.680
Usually underground labs dose it at 250 per milliliter. I don't know why. It's kind of interesting
00:12:17.280
because in pharma you're used to the 200 increments, but in UGL underground lab, it's almost always 250.
00:12:23.520
If it's test E, testosterone enanthate or testosterone cipionate, almost always 250.
00:12:30.000
Underground labs, tell me about that. Obviously you're not walking into the pharmacy and getting
00:12:34.080
branded depot testosterone, which is the FDA approved version of testosterone. Does that
00:12:40.800
mean these are compounding pharmacies that are doing this or how does this work?
00:12:43.760
No, no. It's literally just some guy who orders raws from China and then makes them in what you
00:12:50.400
hope to be a sterile and professional environment, but you have no idea if it's his bathtub or what.
00:12:59.440
Well, also is if I screw this up, people aren't going to come back to me to buy the drug.
00:13:03.600
Wow. So when we talk about GMP, good manufacturing process,
00:13:07.680
which is what ensures sterility for injectable compounds, that's not the case. Recently, I did an AMA
00:13:13.360
on compounding pharmacies and the problems associated with them because they're not
00:13:18.880
subjected to the same GMP requirements, especially the community-based compounding pharmacies. They've
00:13:23.920
had a number of these awful incidents, including one where literally hundreds of people died from
00:13:30.400
compounded solumedrol because it was injected. So these were being manufactured without proper
00:13:35.840
sterile technique, sent to hospitals. So this was all being done legally. And then the hospitals were
00:13:40.560
using these to do, you know, facet blocks and things like that for people with back pain.
00:13:44.880
And literally in one outbreak, more than a hundred people died of meningitis,
00:13:50.160
of fungal meningitis due to this. So the stakes are very high when you're talking about injectable
00:13:54.480
compounds not being done sterile. So I guess we ought to come back to visiting the topic of what the
00:13:59.120
underground market looks like for these compounds.
00:14:00.880
Yeah, I guess what they bank on is the fact that with synthetic
00:14:05.280
anabolics, you don't have acute health issues. It's more chronic over a span of decades of abuse.
00:14:12.640
So even worst case scenario, if you get a badly compounded version of whatever,
00:14:18.160
if you can even call it that, you would have a elevated CRP from the carrier oils or solvents.
00:14:24.000
But most people weren't even checking blood work, let alone. And if you had a side effect,
00:14:27.920
you assumed it's the copious amounts of anabolics you're on, not necessarily
00:14:31.280
anything related to the manufacturing or anything. As long as the reputation of the lab
00:14:36.320
was maintained across the forums and the bros were happy, that meant this is high quality.
00:14:41.920
So some people would actually send it for third-party testing. There were certain people
00:14:45.280
who would come out with access to university labs and whatnot, and they would kind of under the table,
00:14:50.960
you would send a milliliter of your stuff in like a perfume atomizer, and they would test it for you
00:14:56.880
and send you HPLC results, and you would find out if the UGL underground lab has good stuff relative
00:15:02.800
to what it says on the label. But that was essentially it, as far as quality control.
00:15:06.720
How many of the guys that you were training with and yourself understood, for example,
00:15:11.040
the impact on fertility and long-term effects vis-a-vis gonadal function at that age?
00:15:16.800
Very few people ever brought concern to it, because we were always told,
00:15:23.440
when you come off, you will restore fertility in due time, once ester is cleared, etc. As long as you
00:15:31.280
had good baseline function, you weren't primary hypogonadal to begin with, you're going to be
00:15:35.440
good. You just have to get the compound out of your system, was what we were told back then. No
00:15:39.920
attention was paid to maintaining testicular volume, light excel stimulation to maintain things.
00:15:47.520
Nothing. It was just, come off your stuff. And the PCT regimens, post-cycle therapy to restore
00:15:53.120
fertility were just, made no sense when you look back on it. Back then, it made sense. But now,
00:15:58.320
in hindsight, the rule of thumb was literally, stop your drugs, wait two weeks, start a PCT of Novodex
00:16:06.240
plus Clomid for four weeks, you recover fully, you just assume, you don't actually check your blood work.
00:16:11.920
And then after that, as long as you are healthy, the responsible thing is wait time on equals time
00:16:17.680
off, and then you go time back on. But often it was just, come off two weeks, PCT, and then get
00:16:24.320
back on, or wait until some arbitrary amount of time has passed, or regardless of health markers,
00:16:29.040
and then get back on. What dose of Clomid were you guys taking in the PCT?
00:16:32.800
It was like 50 milligrams once or twice a day. 25 to 50 twice a day, depending. And it wasn't
00:16:40.720
based on anything scientific, it was just, you just choose. Amazing doses. Again, just so high
00:16:47.600
compared to what we would use clinically in traditional TRT. If we have time, we can come
00:16:52.320
back and talk about some of the risks associated with Clomid use, period. From a lipid perspective,
00:16:56.800
that is. So, you're in college, university, to be sensitive to the Canadians. You're obviously
00:17:01.920
studying, are you in biology, biochem? What are you studying?
00:17:05.040
Business. So, for me, I was pursuing a undergrad in the business faculty at Simon Fraser University,
00:17:12.960
and that was to lead me to a job as an accountant or something of that nature to be determined.
00:17:20.880
And I was working as a bouncer downtown while I was getting my degree, and then I kind of just
00:17:27.440
transitioned into posting online and then realized I could replace my income doing that on a computer,
00:17:33.920
rather than having to bounce, which is not like a sustainable job. I don't know. It was like,
00:17:38.400
I always felt like I should not be an accountant. This isn't something I find exciting. It's not
00:17:42.480
really where my interest lies. I'm okay with numbers, but it was kind of just from high school
00:17:47.920
thinking, oh, what's a good business job? Go downtown Vancouver, get a job as an accountant at a big
00:17:53.440
company, and you're good. That was the dream back then. Not that it was, but it was, you know,
00:17:58.240
the end goal in mind of getting your degree. Didn't end up doing that, fortunately, and started
00:18:04.160
making online content on a WordPress blog. It wasn't actually on YouTube for a couple months, but
00:18:10.560
started writing about, you know, dieting, how to bulk with not getting fat, how to cut, some basic stuff
00:18:17.520
about, you know, diet principles, bodybuilding, sort of talked about dating, social circle dynamics,
00:18:23.440
stuff I was super interested in at the time. And then it kind of transitioned from there into
00:18:28.080
discussion about my foray into anabolic side effect management, anything I could think of that was of
00:18:33.680
use that I thought I could impart on the viewer. Hey, don't screw yourself up. I've gone through this
00:18:39.680
and learned the hard way potentially. So let's go back to kind of your journey through that. So
00:18:45.360
you're in your early 20s, and you're kind of at peak anabolic steroid use. Are you using growth
00:18:51.920
hormone as well? I did try it periodically. I didn't notice a ton from it. And it seems to be
00:18:58.040
variable in how people respond. I think a lot of it is conflated with the effects on fluid dynamics.
00:19:05.280
So a lot of people that get a lot of edema, water retention that they perceive to be enhanced muscle,
00:19:11.800
and then they say, Oh, my, you know, genetic ceiling is higher now because of all the satellite
00:19:17.160
cell proliferation and hyperplasia that's happening. So I'm gonna keep using it. Or it makes me never get
00:19:23.880
fat, which is something I would hear quite often, which is not true. But I did try it up to I think
00:19:29.960
the most I use at a time is like, I might have tried six I use six to eight I use acutely.
00:19:35.800
Meaning six to eight I use daily. Yeah, which is quite a bit. That's a huge dose.
00:19:40.920
But it was for a span of like weeks, essentially, and didn't really notice a lot from it. So
00:19:46.440
decided it wasn't worthwhile to continue because it's super cost prohibitive. Like that's the thing
00:19:50.940
that drives costs mostly for bodybuilders. It's not the anabolics, it's the growth hormone,
00:19:55.720
typically, or health screening, because a lot of people don't want to pay for that. So they got to
00:19:59.660
have their budget for the anabolics and the food, but blood work out the window.
00:20:03.400
I mean, I think this probably for folks paints a picture of your empirical curiosity in the topic.
00:20:12.200
Whenever we have patients in our practice ask us questions about growth hormone, and we have our
00:20:18.380
research team go and look at answers, a lot of the times what we say both to the patients and what I
00:20:25.040
have to remind the research team is look, you're going to get very limited, very narrow information
00:20:30.800
from the literature. This is not like researching the question of what are the effects of physiologic
00:20:37.620
hormone replacement, you know, testosterone, estrogen, progesterone, things like that.
00:20:41.700
For that, we can turn to the literature and we can get a lot of information. But when you're trying
00:20:46.060
to ask the question, hey, what happens when you take growth hormone outside of its medically intended
00:20:51.020
purpose, such as low levels of growth hormone or things like that? I said, look, it's not an appealing
00:20:56.100
answer, but you're going to have to kind of go into bodybuilding forums. It sounds like the most
00:21:00.460
unscientific thing, but a bodybuilder with a good head on his shoulders or good head on her shoulders
00:21:06.620
will probably have more relevant observations about the good, the bad, and the ugly with these compounds.
00:21:13.880
What I find so interesting about your work, Derek, is that you've, in my mind, taken the best of both
00:21:19.360
worlds. So I think you've learned a lot through your own experience with these compounds,
00:21:23.980
coupled with obviously observing, you're being, you're, you're surrounded by a lot of bros who
00:21:28.500
maybe don't have your observational skills. And then you've coupled that with your own obsession
00:21:33.360
of going down the rabbit hole. And that's why I think if anybody can extract meaning from some of
00:21:38.260
this stuff, it's you. Maybe we'll start with going a little deeper on growth hormone, since I think
00:21:43.480
in many ways, that's the one for which we have, I believe, kind of the least insight outside of that
00:21:50.400
very narrow application, which is, you know, people who have growth hormone deficiencies,
00:21:54.980
where clearly replacing growth hormone is a good thing to do. Let's start with one application of
00:22:00.680
growth hormone. Now, I will admit, this is a question that has literally been asked of me more
00:22:06.100
than once. And the first time it was asked of me, I was shocked. And I don't say that to pass judgment,
00:22:12.040
but it never occurred to me that one would do this. But it's been asked enough times that I have to
00:22:18.220
believe it's a real thing. So a person approached me, a person I know, and said, look, my son is 12.
00:22:26.240
He's a very good athlete. He's an exceptional tennis player. But I'm 5'9". My wife is 5'5". He's
00:22:35.060
not going to be an inch above 5'10". He's never going to go anywhere in tennis, despite his remarkable
00:22:41.160
athleticism. Can we give him growth hormone to get him to be a 6'1", 6'2", kid, so he really has a
00:22:50.020
chance to be a pro tennis player? So when you hear that, do you think, I can't believe someone would
00:22:54.420
ask that? Or are you like, yeah, dude, welcome to the world? Yeah, I'm not surprised somebody would
00:22:59.860
ask that. To be honest, I've heard much worse. But it's not something that I believe you could look to
00:23:07.140
any literature and find, oh, you're going to completely surpass your otherwise predetermined
00:23:13.260
genetic ceiling. Some of the literature on idiopathic short stature is interesting because
00:23:17.700
they actually have prescription protocols that are even higher than GH deficiency. So you have an
00:23:24.220
unexplained lack of height velocity as you're growing up, but not necessarily, you know, IGF-1 deficiency or
00:23:31.480
anything you can point to in the blood work that looks odd. And they are prescribed upper end range,
00:23:36.980
even higher than GH deficient patients, which seems kind of odd to me. But for individuals who don't
00:23:43.320
have, they're not lagging behind significantly, and there's no indication for it, it's kind of hard to
00:23:47.980
justify, I imagine, especially as a doctor who's hearing that. I don't think this person was asking
00:23:53.820
me to do anything about it. I think he wanted to bounce the idea off me. I mean, I think he clearly
00:23:58.680
knew I would never have anything to do with this. And I wanted to sort of not get preachy, which I don't
00:24:03.200
think I did. But what I said was, look, it strikes me as a bad idea because you just don't know what
00:24:10.400
the risk associated with this is. And I'm not even talking about like, oh, what if your kid has cancer
00:24:14.940
and you make the cancer worse, which at that age, pretty small risk. We can talk about the risks of
00:24:20.040
cancer and growth hormone in terms of propagation. But I said, look, if you were asking me to come up
00:24:24.900
with a risk I would be worried about, I would be worried about bone health, for example. And I'm making
00:24:30.480
this up. But I'm saying, look, how do we know if these new elongated bones that your son is going
00:24:37.600
to develop that take him from being his natural or genetically predetermined 5'10 to 6'2, how do we
00:24:44.220
know if those bones are of the same caliber? And how do we know if we're not setting him up for
00:24:48.640
osteopenia when he's 50 instead of a normal life? I said, look, given all the unknowns, you just have
00:24:54.860
to ask yourself the question like, is it worth that risk? Have you seen some of the recent surgeries
00:25:00.960
to enhance height in adults? It's crazy. They like put screws in their knees and then they basically
00:25:07.560
increase their height by a millimeter every day and they crank it until they've got upwards of
00:25:12.280
half a foot and extra height. And then that area just fills in with new bone. They have to learn to
00:25:18.080
function with these new mechanics, both the femur and the apparently you pick if you want to do both
00:25:25.020
or if you do one or the other, but you put screws in. And if you want to max out your height, you can
00:25:30.740
basically crank upwards of half a foot and extra height. And there are people doing this and paying
00:25:36.220
for surgery and going to these facilities where you basically get manually stretched and then bone
00:25:45.180
forms in the space. And then you have to learn to move with those new mechanics. And this is becoming
00:25:50.580
a more, it's not a trend, I would say, but there's a lot of viral content surrounding it right now.
00:25:55.060
And certain people that are showcasing before and afters as marketing material too. It's pretty crazy.
00:26:01.020
How do you accommodate that from a muscle and tendon perspective?
00:26:04.860
That's the question. Proponents for it seem to assert that you eventually adjust to it with
00:26:11.140
very intensive exercise routines, rehabilitation stuff. And you try and basically learn all your
00:26:18.900
motor patterns again. And eventually everything adapts. I would assume that your athletic capacity
00:26:25.540
would be inhibited pretty dramatically, permanently potentially. And there's huge risk there, but it's
00:26:30.560
just, just showcases how extreme some people are willing to go.
00:26:34.460
All right. So if that's the most extreme story I've heard about either the use of growth hormone or
00:26:40.640
even surgical technique, let's talk about a far more typical story. So my patients and probably most
00:26:46.220
people listening to this are not bodybuilders, but I think there is a belief that growth hormone is the
00:26:52.340
elixir of life. And there are no shortage of longevity doctors out there, which is why I bristle at the
00:26:59.940
term when I'm looped into that group. Longevity clinics out there whose basically sole intervention is
00:27:08.320
giving you growth hormone. It's like, here's a bunch of supplements that are proprietary and
00:27:11.960
whatever, and growth hormone. There are two responses to that. So if you look at the traditional
00:27:18.160
medicine approach to that, the, what I call Med 2.0, what you might call just sort of the evidence-based
00:27:24.340
medicine guidelines, that group, which is the majority of medicine, would look at people doing that
00:27:29.520
and say, that's the most dangerous, careless, unethical thing you could ever do. Those people are not
00:27:35.760
doctors, shame on them. At the other end of the spectrum, you have the people that embrace that
00:27:40.040
point of view, which is like, the other people are idiots. This is modern medicine. This is the future.
00:27:44.900
We should all be on growth hormone once we reach a certain age. And I find myself on neither side of
00:27:50.640
that because I simply can't come up with an evidence-based point of view. So my very naive point
00:27:56.560
of view, which I'll acknowledge is naive, is given how many people are taking growth hormone,
00:28:02.680
and it is quite ubiquitous, especially in sports, which I think we'll talk about.
00:28:08.040
If there are really serious consequences to its use, even chronically, I feel like epidemiology
00:28:15.620
would give us that answer. So it's possible that no one's looking. It's possible that there is a
00:28:22.280
signal there, but it's not large. It's possible that not enough people take it for long enough.
00:28:27.620
There's so many explanations for why this isn't happening, but there isn't a clear signal.
00:28:31.380
Conversely, I think that there are probably a lot of reasons why growth hormone chronically
00:28:37.120
given exogenously, especially if it's kind of super physiological, could be problematic.
00:28:42.880
For example, if you have a tumor that is growth hormone or sensitive to growth hormone,
00:28:47.460
and it's already initiated, are you propagating it? So that would be kind of both sides of that.
00:28:52.200
So let's go back to tell people about what growth hormone is, where it comes from,
00:28:56.620
what are the challenges of measuring it? Let's just do kind of a growth hormone 101.
00:28:59.680
Yeah, so growth hormone is, most people know it as like the primary hormone responsible for
00:29:05.720
determining height as you grow in adolescence. Androgens are more sexual differentiation,
00:29:12.760
maturation, but growth hormone and the subsequent growth factor production, IGF-1, will be a fairly
00:29:19.620
significant determinant on if you grow to, I guess, like target height, whatever you could become.
00:29:24.960
And it's pretty, during puberty especially, pretty important for the proper development
00:29:32.460
of your infrastructure, bone, etc., connective tissue. As you get into adulthood, it becomes
00:29:38.160
one of those things where it drops significantly, first off, as you reach adulthood. And as you get
00:29:43.820
older, it drops precipitously as well. That kind of begs the question, is this one of those things that
00:29:48.760
you should be replacing to optimize function, fat loss, vitality, what have you. And it's tough
00:29:56.160
because a lot of the proponents that assert such things have financial incentive. It's kind of hard
00:30:01.600
to wade through the nonsense and kind of figure out what is the truth here. And it is often framed out
00:30:06.860
to be like this fountain of youth elixir, HGH. Oh, it's so cost prohibitive. It's what all the pro
00:30:12.720
athletes are using. This is the thing you need to be on to prevent any age-related decline in bone
00:30:19.640
strength. Your ability to burn fat as you get older is going to go down. So you need to be on growth
00:30:24.220
hormone, etc., etc. And at a bird's eye view, it's kind of responsible for the growth, broad spectrum
00:30:31.020
growth of tissues as you grow up. And then as you get into adulthood, it's not irrelevant, but it's far
00:30:36.500
less important because you're not trying to push a human from childhood into adulthood, essentially.
00:30:43.320
And even when you have this push of exogenous growth hormone to manually manipulate your levels,
00:30:49.900
after it's called epiphyseal plate closure, there does not seem to be any benefit to be gained from
00:30:57.880
enhancing the length of bones, for example. You could still enhance bone mineral density to some
00:31:03.960
extent, and it seems to be, you know, you could enhance connective tissue integrity. It kind of
00:31:08.540
depends on what your situation is and how IGF-1 deficient or lack thereof you are. But it's not going to
00:31:14.800
impact your height in adulthood. It's not going to really do anything other than regulate lipolytic
00:31:20.740
action. How does it do that, by the way? Liberates free fatty acids into circulation. So it's kind of
00:31:26.620
seen as the opposing hormone to insulin. Does it do that through lipoprotein lipase? Is it actually
00:31:32.420
acting on a substrate on the adipocyte? It seems to be driven through different baseline states that
00:31:40.420
you're in. Like if you have ghrelin receptor agonism from being fasted, for example, a lot of people point
00:31:45.900
to the literature on if you're deprived of calories, oh, growth hormone goes up. There are different
00:31:51.000
situations in which it'll go up. Deep sleep, obviously, is super impactful on if you're going
00:31:55.880
to have release or not as well. But the main actions that I'm aware of, at least in a state
00:32:02.760
of growth hormone pulsation is kind of the underpinnings are you are trying to liberate
00:32:08.720
free fatty acids for utilization as substrate for energy or anti-catabolic action. So the actual
00:32:15.760
like mechanism enzymatically and whatnot, it's a bit fuzzy. What's the relationship then between
00:32:21.540
gh and igf in the liver? How does this all work? Because we don't really measure gh in people,
00:32:27.620
right? Because it's pulsatile. So what are we stuck with as a proxy? Yeah, even if you inject
00:32:32.940
gh, a large dose of it, you will only see a spike in serum for a transient period of time. And people
00:32:39.380
who are trying to assess the quality of their growth hormone with the underground stuff, they would be
00:32:44.720
trying to time it very specifically down to the minute to assess the quality of their stuff. But the
00:32:50.100
best proxy for gh production endogenously seems to be widely accepted as IGF-1, which is after you
00:32:59.420
produce growth hormone from the pituitary, there is action in the liver, but also paracrine and
00:33:05.580
autocrine action on muscle, especially if you are exercising resistance training. But a lot of the
00:33:13.280
serum IGF-1 is driven through liver production and has its own implications in terms of its effects.
00:33:19.960
that seem to be more intelligentic in itself to some extent. Which is kind of counterintuitive,
00:33:25.700
right? Because if IGF-1 has intelligentic properties, which are promoting a fat storage,
00:33:32.040
and gh is promoting lipolysis, don't those act at odds with each other? And how does one
00:33:37.040
become more dominant? Yeah, it's this weird orchestrated feedback loop. And these feedback
00:33:43.840
loops are present in the body and multiple different hormone substrates will reduce in
00:33:49.500
multiple different metabolites that then have negative feedback through different systems. And
00:33:53.760
this seems to be no different if you have GH at a certain level, and it results in a certain amount
00:33:58.180
of IGF-1, you will have negative feedback that will then lower your production of HGH while the IGF-1
00:34:05.220
is elevated. And as it declines, you have this decrease in inhibitory feedback that then tells
00:34:11.620
your body, okay, now the IGF-1 is not present in significant quantities, it's okay to release GH
00:34:16.820
again. So it's this finely tuned balancing act in your body where your body has counteracting things.
00:34:23.360
It's not counteracting, but it's like the balance between anabolic or anti-catabolic. Frankly, I don't
00:34:30.740
even know how to elucidate like a super clear way that is completely accurate, but it seems to be
00:34:36.400
when one is high, the other one would be low. And conversely, in order to kind of maintain a,
00:34:42.660
not necessarily at the same times, but to maintain like a balancing act in the body.
00:34:46.980
We have a real sense of how to dose, for example, testosterone or estradiol in the case of HRT for
00:34:53.420
women, because we know what physiologic normal levels are during various periods of a person's life.
00:34:59.840
And so if we're replacing testosterone to the level that we think is normal, either for your age or for
00:35:06.660
some earlier age, we can measure the hormone, we administer it, and we can do the calculation. Hey,
00:35:13.200
this person has a lot of sex, someone buying a globulin, or they don't, or whatever the case
00:35:16.340
might be. When people are administering growth hormone, and again, let's just talk about this
00:35:20.700
through the lens of the context you're talking about it now, which is rejuvenation or longevity,
00:35:27.520
the wastebasket term. How do they know? Because typically they're using about one to two units
00:35:33.120
per day. Isn't that the typical dose? Yeah, it depends largely on liver function too. So some
00:35:39.260
people with compromised function or type one diabetics, for example, they could have super high
00:35:44.300
GH production, but very low IGF-1 from seemingly lack of insulogenic signaling, because it also has a
00:35:52.060
positive relationship with IGF-1 production. But it can be difficult because you could have a
00:35:58.060
person on a ketogenic calorie deprived diet model who has an IGF-1 that is on the low end of the
00:36:03.680
reference range, be manually administering growth hormone and be using a higher dose than would
00:36:08.380
otherwise be necessary to get to high normal optimal function, put in quotation marks. That's the best
00:36:16.120
proxy we have, as far as I'm aware, is that serum biomarker IGF-1, but there's not really a cut and
00:36:23.940
dry way. So people would use the Z-score presumably of their IGF-1 as the output for determining how much
00:36:30.760
GH to administer. Yeah, my understanding is that regardless of its idiopathic short stature, GH
00:36:36.160
deficiency, they would use IGF-1 as a metric to kind of dial in the dose. So if your IGF-1 is higher than
00:36:44.240
the target, then you would dial the dose back accordingly, or if it's not high enough,
00:36:48.480
then you would increase it accordingly. What do they target? A Z-score of 1 to 2,
00:36:52.820
meaning 1 to 2 standard deviations above the mean is therapeutic, or just being above 0,
00:36:58.360
for example, which means you're above the 50th percentile? The target, I think it's mainly just
00:37:03.560
correcting, but as far as what is correct, I guess the reference range, if it's in the middle or
00:37:09.100
the high end of normal, I don't recall off the top of my head, but it's something in the neighborhood
00:37:13.780
of middle of a standard LabCorp reference range as far as I know. Could be off on that.
00:37:18.760
Okay, so let's talk about the physiology of this. So you give GH, there's a feedback signal,
00:37:25.260
because GH comes from the pituitary, but it's spoken to by the hypothalamus. So we're going to
00:37:30.560
talk about this again when we talk about testosterone, of course, because that's a really
00:37:33.760
obvious issue. What happens upstream of the pituitary, i.e. what happens to the signal
00:37:40.400
from the hypothalamus to the pituitary to make endogenous, to make your own growth hormone when
00:37:46.340
you take it from the outside? Does that get shut off as well? Yeah, the negative feedback that I
00:37:51.280
spoke about briefly, when you have elevated IGF-1, it will give negative feedback, and there is an
00:37:57.320
elevation, something called somatostatin, basically tells your body, don't make as much GH, essentially.
00:38:03.000
And there is different receptors, which gets a bit confusing as to how you produce the growth hormone
00:38:10.020
upstream. There's the ghrelin receptor, which super confusingly is also called the GH receptor,
00:38:16.440
I believe it's also called. And then you have the GHRH receptor and the production of GHRH endogenously,
00:38:23.020
as well as the agonism of ghrelin receptors, can both stimulate growth hormone and the way by which
00:38:31.240
they achieve your end output can be different. And that's why there's different drugs that target
00:38:37.440
different receptors for actual elevation. Typically, GHRH drugs are coupled with GHRPs to get like a 1
00:38:45.320
plus 1 equals 3 effect of sorts. But this is why also when you are fasted or malnourished, you could
00:38:52.840
have significantly more output via the ghrelin receptor agonism. And this is the same ghrelin hormone
00:38:58.660
that plays an important role in management of hunger. Yeah. So for people who don't know, ghrelin is like,
00:39:04.780
I don't know if it's the primary, but I think it's probably pretty accepted that leptin and ghrelin are
00:39:09.300
kind of like the signals that you're full versus hungry. So ghrelin and ghrelin receptor agonism is what
00:39:16.460
would tell your brain you're hungry. So for example, if you gave somebody a really potent ghrelin receptor
00:39:23.160
agonist like ibutamoran is a commonly orally bioavailable GHRP, you use that even if you're not
00:39:30.840
hungry, you'll want to eat your pantry like it's insane. So that compound plus a GHRH will seemingly
00:39:38.440
have a downward pressure on somatostatin activity and simultaneously increase the output from the
00:39:45.640
pituitary to produce more GH. So you can kind of like max out your endogenous production through these
00:39:51.480
peptides essentially. But those are the primary mechanisms involved. Like those three things is
00:39:58.880
the ghrelin receptor, GHRH, and then also somatostatin as a negative feedback.
00:40:04.820
So if someone is just taking exogenous growth hormone, how long would they need to take it
00:40:09.660
before they would start to compromise their own ability to make endogenous growth hormone once they
00:40:14.520
came off? I think it's pretty quick. IGF-1 elevations are not instant. In the serum,
00:40:22.040
you would see GH spikes in a matter of minutes. Like it's very transient in your system, very short
00:40:27.080
half-life, but the downstream IGF-1 conversion can increase over days and then stay elevated for days.
00:40:34.720
And this is why IGF-1 as a biomarker has been asserted to be a potential way to catch people doping
00:40:40.620
further out than the HGH isoform differential immunoassay, which is the current accepted gold
00:40:47.360
standard test that they use. Because IGF-1 will stay elevated for a relatively long period of time.
00:40:54.080
Let's just say a person's on GH for two years and then they stop it. Does their pituitary go back to
00:41:01.320
making GH? Yeah, seemingly. It seems pretty flexible in that. In that sense, it's different than LH
00:41:07.500
and FSH and the testes making testosterone. Yeah. And the reason for that, I can't help but
00:41:15.360
think because there's multiple actions of the pituitary, it's not going to atrophy in the same
00:41:20.920
way, I would think. And this is just speculative. But for example, people always want to know if I
00:41:26.100
take anabolics or testosterone replacement for years, but I don't take HCG or I don't take these
00:41:31.400
fertility drugs. Will I be able to restore fertility in short order? And it seems to be like a use it or
00:41:39.160
lose it kind of thing where not necessarily, but it's more difficult to restore fertility in somebody
00:41:44.140
with like severely atrophied organs that has not had stimulation directly for years versus the
00:41:51.780
pituitary does multiple different things. So I can only imagine that the maintenance of output of
00:41:57.380
other hormones and things are at least maintaining its flexibility to some extent, but super speculative.
00:42:03.340
Let's talk a little bit about the use of GH in restoration of tissue during periods of healing.
00:42:11.600
So I think there's some accepted medical use for GH in burn victims, for example, right? So
00:42:16.820
if a person sustains a significant enough burn, the body surface area is burnt. I mean,
00:42:22.020
that's one of the most catabolic activities that human can sustain. And therefore, the reversal of that
00:42:26.940
is one of the most anabolic demands that a human can sustain as an adult. What about during
00:42:32.140
orthopedic injuries? So you look at a person who's having either elective or emergent surgery for an
00:42:39.140
injury. So we've had patients who have had injuries, so like a torn bicep. We've looked at the literature,
00:42:46.080
found, I would say, at best modest evidence suggesting maybe for that person, an eight-week course
00:42:54.320
of anabolic steroids and growth hormone can aid in recuperation. The few times we've done this,
00:43:01.320
we've seen great outcomes, but that means nothing. It's so anecdotal. We'd have no contrapositive
00:43:06.440
or opposite view there of what would happen otherwise. So do you have any insight either from
00:43:11.640
literature or from just the underground world as to what the use of modest amounts of growth hormone
00:43:19.260
would look like in periods of rehabilitation? Yeah, it's more anecdotal because like you said,
00:43:24.920
you could find very... Yeah, there's just no counterfactuals to any of these stories.
00:43:28.860
Yeah. And oftentimes when I'm talking about this stuff, I want to say it's not necessarily founded
00:43:33.140
in literature, unfortunately. It's kind of a mix of extrapolations, rodent studies, anecdotes in humans,
00:43:41.000
stuff like that, which is unfortunate. I would love to be able to make hard-hitting factual statements
00:43:45.580
every time I say something on this stuff. But with GH, anecdotally, it seems to be quite effective
00:43:51.840
in rehabilitation. I think that it is worthwhile in an acute timeframe. That's where the ROI
00:43:57.860
makes sense, in my opinion. So I do see people... But again, it's not like you have a control of that
00:44:03.640
same guy with the injury not taking it. So we can only go by what you discern to be a reasonable,
00:44:11.120
I don't know, recovery period. And then, well, it seems like it's recovering quicker than you would
00:44:15.840
have expected. Good. Probably good. I think I may have told you this. Like a year and a half ago,
00:44:21.480
I had shoulder surgery. And really, this was an operation I had been postponing for 15 years
00:44:26.060
until it got to the point where I sort of had to have it. And I really was so hesitant to give up
00:44:32.160
so much because of the size of the tear in the labrum. It was going to be four months before I could
00:44:39.600
really do anything again other than very light movements. My plan was to take... I did a little
00:44:45.560
bit of homework and came to the conclusion that a certain cocktail of nandrolone and growth hormone
00:44:49.600
was going to be the best cocktail. So I found that so interesting that you didn't use a base of
00:44:54.140
testosterone with the nandrolone because you could effectively wipe out your estrogen with that
00:44:59.580
combination. Interesting. Well, I ended up taking it for a total of one week.
00:45:03.580
Yeah. I noticed. Yeah. I saw that your post on Facebook where you mentioned how you're... I think
00:45:10.380
you had a blood pressure elevation and also... Blood glucose went up. My blood pressure went up.
00:45:15.560
My temperature was up at night. Now, in retrospect, what I realize is I think I was sick. I think I
00:45:21.420
actually got an infection. So I don't think anything to do with the hormones, but I felt so bad on the
00:45:26.640
hormones that I was like, well, I'm definitely not doing this. So I'm the counterfactual, I suppose,
00:45:31.220
for not having done anything, which of course means I still know nothing. I still have no
00:45:36.080
insight into what this is, but I do find this interesting. And like you, I do find it frustrating
00:45:40.960
that this is a question that isn't studied. Now, I understand that there isn't really a financial
00:45:45.280
incentive to study this because of course, it's not something that is a new drug. Recombinant GH
00:45:50.400
has been around for over 40 years now, hasn't it? Yeah. It was like cadaver derived in the 80s. And
00:45:56.640
then soon they went to recombinant, I think late 80s or 90s. Yeah. So over 30 years, it is a shame
00:46:03.720
because I've talked to many orthopedic surgeons and to a person, they all said the same thing,
00:46:08.180
which is I really wish we knew the answer to this question. It would really be wonderful to study this
00:46:12.460
rigorously and know, could we make a difference in the outcomes of patients by using these things in a
00:46:18.640
very narrow opportunity? And the other question I guess I'm wondering is, because I can't find a clear
00:46:24.100
answer to this in literature. Do you have a sense of the use of growth hormone in osteopenia?
00:46:28.700
Yeah. One thing I can say circling back to the justifying if it makes sense or not,
00:46:32.840
I think there's certain things you can use to discern if it's a better idea, like baseline IGF-1,
00:46:40.360
are you somebody who is in a ketogenic diet and you're trying to recover from an injury
00:46:44.320
simultaneously? Are you calorie deprived? Like there are certain things that could otherwise be
00:46:49.620
significantly influencing your recovery capacity from a growth factor standpoint that you may be
00:46:55.160
able to manually backfill that for another person. Some people naturally have IGFs that are like
00:46:59.260
top end of the reference range. Or if you were acromegaly, had acromegaly, you would not use GH,
00:47:04.820
obviously. So it's definitely context dependent. Or if you had insulin resistance at baseline or
00:47:10.600
something, like there are certain things that may otherwise sway you in the direction of the ROI
00:47:14.840
makes sense versus not. I feel like that should at least be said so people don't think it's a total
00:47:18.800
blind roll the dice thing. That's right. Yeah. That's a good point. And let's throw the same
00:47:22.220
caveat in there. So let's say we're talking about an individual with osteopenia or osteoporosis.
00:47:28.020
Let's assume further, you're going to do all the normal stuff you would do. So you're going to do
00:47:32.400
all the things you would do nutritionally with respect to vitamin D, calcium, amino acids. You're
00:47:37.800
going to increase load bearing activity, particularly strength training. If necessary, you're even going
00:47:43.000
to bring on Fosamax and the type of drugs that may help in that regard. But if in the context of all
00:47:49.200
those things, an individual has a low IGF-1, do you think, first of all, is there any evidence that
00:47:57.460
in that setting, GH administration will improve bone density?
00:48:02.420
Yes. I can say with almost near certainty that that literature exists. Even if it didn't,
00:48:08.600
I would say almost without a shadow of a doubt that it would be worthwhile, especially in somebody
00:48:14.260
with low IGF. I'd have to circle back and make sure the literature was not wrote and extrapolated,
00:48:19.340
but I'm pretty sure that anybody, especially with lower IGF-1, you kind of get into the
00:48:23.680
discussion of can you even sustain adequate bone integrity, especially in, I don't know,
00:48:29.680
old age where you might have, I think you're probably most prone to that to begin with.
00:48:33.340
Like it's almost certainly justified, I would say, in that scenario.
00:48:38.020
Yeah. It's interesting. I'd like to find that and maybe we can include that in the show notes.
00:48:41.500
I feel like the last time I looked, I didn't find anything that suggested not doing it,
00:48:45.320
but I didn't find something that was a slam dunk home run. You mentioned a couple of peptides. So
00:48:50.980
let's talk about these peptides that are upstream. So I can't even keep track of how many there
00:48:58.200
are. There's like CJC1295, Samoralin. What are the others? On the GHRP side, the easiest way to
00:49:07.920
segregate these is by GHRP, GHRH. So GHRP are the ones that act on ghrelin receptor. GHRH are the ones
00:49:17.600
that look very similar to GHRH and act on that receptor. So like that's the easiest way to segregate
00:49:23.600
them in terms of categories. And then from there, they're pretty different in how they affect things.
00:49:28.920
Like for example, ipamaryllin is often used in these like anti-aging clinics and whatnot.
00:49:34.240
Sorry, the GHRP ones are also going to drive hyperphagia.
00:49:38.760
Depending on the compound, this is the weird thing about it. So even if you are stimulating the ghrelin
00:49:44.640
receptor, the effects on appetite are quite different. So for ipamaryllin, for example,
00:49:52.400
despite the fact that that's the receptor it's working through, and it is a ghrelin receptor
00:49:56.620
agonist, it does not influence hunger to even any reasonable magnitude within striking distance of
00:50:03.820
MK677 ibutamoran. That difference is literally like you eating 2000 more calories a day, not by
00:50:11.400
choice, but you're just starving perpetually. So it's almost like it's inducing Prader-Willi
00:50:15.640
syndrome or something, which is a condition where you have uncontrolled eating.
00:50:19.060
Yeah, like the willpower necessary to avoid overeating on MK677.
00:50:23.460
So what's the clinical use case for that? Is that used in AIDS wasting, cancer wasting,
00:50:29.020
Orally active. So adherence is much more reasonable to expect. The application, it's not FDA approved,
00:50:36.320
by the way, but it is for GH deficient children, I believe. And we've seen restoration of IGF to the
00:50:43.980
top end of the reference range when using it. So going from, I don't know, like a
00:50:47.620
low end IGF to a 200 to 300 or something. It's not going to push you into super physiologic
00:50:53.220
territory because it's working through your endogenous capacity, but you can kind of max
00:50:58.760
out what your pituitary output potential is. So similarly to a HCG or something, you can kind
00:51:05.980
of manually at least stimulate natural production to the upper threshold of your capacity. It seems
00:51:12.580
to be efficacious in that. But not going to have a high application among adults who don't need an
00:51:17.640
extra 2000 calories a day. No, but it also depends because some people maybe have low appetite and you
00:51:23.280
want to gain weight or you're in a state of recovery and your appetite is suppressed from some other drug
00:51:29.020
you're using because that's fairly common. Depends on the context. So what is the FDA approved indication
00:51:35.100
for this drug? It is for GH deficiency in adolescents, I believe. Even though it's prescribed
00:51:41.400
among clinics and whatnot, it's not, I don't even think it's achieved FDA approval yet. It's like in
00:51:46.460
phase two or three. So how is this oral? How does this peptide survive the gastric environment?
00:51:52.440
That is a great question, but it is the only one I know of that is often referred to as a
00:51:59.100
efficacious option in this laundry list of GHRPs to restore IGF-1 to high and normal. So how the
00:52:07.280
actual pharmacokinetic profile looks, all I know is the half-life is like 24 to 36 hours.
00:52:13.200
And it must just be enterically coded. It's not hepatotoxic from what I remember.
00:52:17.360
It's got to be something that it just survives through coding, like you said, or something of
00:52:22.340
that nature. Any other GHRPs that are worth discussing?
00:52:26.740
Yeah, I think ipamorelin is probably the one most prescribed in clinics. And that one seems to be
00:52:35.360
probably more targeted in the outcomes you'd want to see out of like a growth hormone
00:52:40.300
releasing peptide in that you get enhancement of sleep. Doesn't make you hungry, really,
00:52:47.160
even though it operates through the same receptor pathway. Definitely increases IGF-1. It is,
00:52:52.920
is it FDA approved? I believe it might be for lipodystrophy.
00:52:55.620
It might be tessamorelin. But these are the two, ipamorelin is the primary one that is prescribed.
00:53:02.120
And then there's a bunch like GHRP-6, GHRP-2, which significantly impactful in hunger. GHRP-6 is
00:53:07.720
probably the worst one. That's what bodybuilders use when they reach a bottleneck of food intake and
00:53:12.100
they can't eat anymore. They will, MK-677 is around the clock, but GHRP-6, after you inject it,
00:53:17.960
it's like you can modulate acutely when you're hungry. So if you had an eating contest to win,
00:53:23.280
or you were going out for an all-you-can-eat buffet, or you're just a bodybuilder who can't
00:53:27.840
eat your 5,000 calories a day, that's when you would be, you'd look disgusted as I'm saying it.
00:53:33.600
No, I just, I mean, it's, uh, yeah, there's so much to unpack there.
00:53:38.100
But ipamorelin is the one that is prescribed most often, the other ones.
00:53:44.680
And so is that used by athletes and bodybuilders?
00:53:52.920
Yes, yes. Depending on if you get the growth hormone underground or not. Through pharmacies,
00:53:57.860
certainly, but there are generic growth hormone preparations that are pretty cheap now. You could
00:54:04.960
get a hundred IUs of pretty high quality HGH from China for 150 bucks.
00:54:11.040
By comparison, what would that cost at a pharmacy? I'm trying to think.
00:54:16.300
Yeah. Especially if it's like a big brand name. Like back in the day,
00:54:20.400
people would go to AIDS patients and convince them to sell their serostin. That's what bodybuilders
00:54:27.420
Okay. So on the GHRH side, who were the big players?
00:54:31.680
Tessamoralin and Samoralin, but I would say Tessamoralin probably more commonly. Samoralin
00:54:37.180
seems to just, people just don't really get the results they want out of it. And it's more
00:54:41.660
anecdote than any kind of literature that points to it being sub-efficacious, but Tessamoralin
00:54:47.640
plus Ipamrelin is kind of the primary combo utilized in clinics, especially nowadays.
00:54:53.100
So they combine them. They'll combine Tessamoralin with Ipamrelin.
00:54:56.400
Yeah, typically. And there's also, there's like the CJC-1295 and there's with drug affinity
00:55:03.680
complex, which is basically extends the half-life significantly.
00:55:10.400
The GHRH receptor. And then there's a shorter version of it. It's like ModGRF-129.
00:55:17.580
These are not FDA approved compounds. These are literally the wild west of compounds.
00:55:22.000
Tessamoralin and Tessamoralin are FDA approved, I assume?
00:55:25.820
Yeah. Some of them have, I know one of them in particular is approved for lipodystrophy.
00:55:30.340
And there are some unique applications in which some of them have FDA approval, but most of them,
00:55:35.780
the GHRP-6, GHRP-2, Hexoralin, I believe. And a couple of the GHRHs on that list do not have FDA
00:55:42.740
approval. And MK-677, as far as I know, is like off-label prescribed. It's kind of weird because it's
00:55:48.320
like there's no company that makes a branded, you know, FDA approved version of it, but then
00:55:52.060
compounding pharmacies will still make it. There's a lot of questions as to, well, what are the
00:55:56.740
standards that go into making it then? And are you just ordering it from China similarly to an
00:56:02.360
Yeah, there are no standards. I mean, there are no standards. That's the whole point of compounding,
00:56:06.280
right? Is they can make anything. I mean, at this point, the real question is, where is the line
00:56:12.560
between, if something has a GRASC designation, it's generally regarded as safe by the FDA,
00:56:17.420
you can sell it on Amazon. It's an over-the-counter. What's the most potent GRASC thing out there?
00:56:22.400
It's probably DHEA. In other countries, DHEA is, I think, appropriately treated as a hormone.
00:56:32.260
Why? I don't know. Because actual steroids are not as regulated.
00:56:37.720
Yes. But in the US, DHEA, amazingly, is over-the-counter. So that means it has a GRASC
00:56:42.420
designation. I'm guessing that CJC-1295 does not have a GRASC designation. So that means you cannot
00:56:48.660
sell it without a prescription, but yet it doesn't have an IND. It's not an investigational new drug.
00:56:54.980
It hasn't gone down the pathway of an approval. I think it's just sort of in this gray area.
00:56:59.640
Some of them are abandoned. It'll be like a drug that was in a pipeline.
00:57:05.700
Yeah. So it's like, sometimes is it financial? Is it lack of efficacy? Is it some, like in some
00:57:10.920
cases, there's a drug called carterine. It's a PPAR delta agonist, which is actually pretty good
00:57:16.900
results on lipid management. It's kind of like one of those exercise mimetic drugs. But when you
00:57:22.460
look at the metrics that it improves, it looks great. But then there is some rodent study. It was
00:57:28.640
like every dose of carterine resulted in cancer in these rodents. And then I guess the response to
00:57:35.340
that was a public outcry of worry, concern, et cetera. And it just, no reason why publicly it
00:57:42.820
got scrapped, but it's weird because it was like preclinical rodent literature supposedly caused it
00:57:49.320
to get canceled after it was already in phase two in humans. So it's like some of this stuff
00:57:53.740
and carterine is prescribed through clinics too. But yet all the rodents who took it got cancer?
00:57:58.500
Yeah. Every dose. I mean, that would be disconcerting.
00:58:02.700
Yeah, for sure. Okay. So again, talking about this through the lens of,
00:58:08.720
I have one patient, by the way, who came to me having been prescribed some oral and from the
00:58:14.480
outside. I asked him to stop because I was like, look, I'm not going to take over the prescription
00:58:19.000
on that because I don't know anything about it. So he did. And like, I don't know, a year,
00:58:24.300
a year and a half later, he's like, look, I really want to be back on this. I've just never felt the
00:58:28.340
same since I was on it. You know, it just gave me such a feeling of vitality and hit a lot of
00:58:34.300
reasons why he felt it was the thing to be on. And I said, look, man, I'm not going to be that guy
00:58:39.420
who says no, just to say no, but I need to understand this a little bit more. And I think
00:58:44.800
we need to think through what are the risks and benefits of this. And so we kind of negotiated
00:58:49.140
this back and forth for six months where I said, look, I guess if we do a bunch of really good cancer
00:58:53.820
screening and can convince ourselves that you don't have cancer, you know, we do the PRNUVO,
00:58:58.800
we do a gallery blood test, check a colonoscopy, like basically to the level of detection
00:59:05.140
of our modern technology, you don't have cancer at the moment. I'll be happy to find an endocrinologist
00:59:11.700
who's more comfortable with the dosing. And we did. So we found a great endocrinologist and she was
00:59:15.600
like, okay. And he went and saw her and she's prescribing it to him and he's as happy as can be.
00:59:20.380
There's not a judgment around this. It's, I'm genuinely curious. I still can't make sense of,
00:59:26.500
would you want to be on samoralin, tesamoralin? It sounds like you're saying tes is better than
00:59:31.100
samoralin or, but that again, could just be anecdotal versus growth hormone. And then of
00:59:35.880
course, I never really understood the stacking where you would start to stack both compounds.
00:59:39.560
So do you get the sense that hitting both targets, both receptors is better than just using GH?
00:59:45.280
Does it give more specificity? One thing you could say for certain is when you push
00:59:49.580
endogenous production, you were fulfilling the full production of all spectrum of variants. So
00:59:56.040
there's different kilodalton isoforms of HGH and this is how they detected in doping. And these
01:00:03.120
variable like molecular weight growth hormone outputs that you get from the pituitary,
01:00:08.900
we don't know why they are put out in different formats, essentially. For all we know, they have
01:00:15.980
different actions in the body that may not be facilitated by the recombinant straight like 22.
01:00:21.860
So when you take a recombinant HGH, you are telling your brain don't make more essentially.
01:00:27.260
So you are actually losing the production of those other variants and you were relying entirely on this
01:00:33.100
one. So what the implications are of that from a health perspective or a performance, what have you,
01:00:39.640
obviously we can manually push your IGF to super physiologic, which you will not be able to do
01:00:44.660
with the endogenous kind of up regulators of sorts with the peptides. And you can kind of manually
01:00:50.320
just choose where you go with it. So there's certainly a case to be made just like with
01:00:54.480
testosterone. It's like, Oh, well, why would you use a GNRH agonist? Or why would you use a CIRM? Or
01:00:59.920
why would you use an aromatase inhibitor? What have you and modulate these upstream pathways when you
01:01:03.600
could just take the straight hormone and manually pick where you land. And oftentimes that could be the
01:01:09.880
reasonable answer, especially for somebody who wants like a very targeted end goal and knows
01:01:14.800
exactly where they want to land on their IGF or doesn't need or potentially has worse output relative
01:01:20.960
to the input of those peptides. Cause again, it's working off your natural capacity. So there's
01:01:25.700
definitely potential pros and cons. You can, if you have good functioning, entire hypothalamus pituitary,
01:01:34.200
all the output is satisfactory from an infrastructure standpoint to output natural hormones at an
01:01:40.200
adequate level. The natural peptides may be useful and you know, you're getting all the variants of
01:01:45.240
all the kilodalton molecular mass variants. But with exogenous, it's just like, you know, exactly what
01:01:50.740
you're getting. You can manually choose what you're getting out of it. And I think it's more could be
01:01:56.300
reserved for people who don't have the natural output that they are trying to get out of the peptides.
01:02:02.120
They don't respond that well, or there's just more data too.
01:02:07.160
So is there kind of an analogy here where taking growth hormone, exogenous common growth hormone
01:02:12.780
is like taking testosterone, whereas taking the peptides is like taking Clomid?
01:02:18.580
Yeah. I would say with exception that you're not blocking negative feedback, you are positively
01:02:24.940
modulating it. Correct. Clomid works by creating a block.
01:02:28.100
Yeah. So it would be like analogous to probably an HCG and recombinant FSH or more like a HCG probably
01:02:36.160
or combined HMG or something. What does the literature say and what does the non-literature
01:02:44.800
say about the role of GH alone, not in combination with anabolics, in terms of its capacity to help build
01:02:53.280
muscle and oxidized fat? The literature is so sparse on being able to say without a shadow of a doubt
01:03:02.620
that it is going to enhance muscle growth potential and performance especially. Like there are very
01:03:09.300
few studies that really show a clear enhancement of athletic performance. So I think what is clear
01:03:17.380
in the literature is the body recomp effects. You do gain lean mass. Part of that presumably is water
01:03:24.680
retention. You do lose fat mass, right? Yeah. And for like lipodystrophy, if you're able to,
01:03:30.100
I don't know, liberate free fatty acids and be able to actually improve your utilization of
01:03:37.760
substrate, you could absolutely improve your body comp fairly significantly with it. But when it comes to
01:03:44.740
actual protein synthesis, muscle accrual, it's very wishy-washy and certainly not something that
01:03:52.540
you should hang your hat on as the reason why you're taking it, in my opinion. So from a muscle
01:03:57.120
growth and athletic performance perspective, the jury is out in terms of if it does anything
01:04:00.760
significant enough to justify its use. Bodybuilders will claim to high heaven that it's, some think it's
01:04:06.680
an expensive fat burner and some think it's actually quite useful and they notice huge changes, but
01:04:12.540
it also very much depends on your response from a fluid dynamics perspective. It can definitely
01:04:19.080
increase sodium retention and things that you may interpret as muscle growth that may just be
01:04:24.680
volume. And with that said, the muscle is how much water at the end of the day. So is that to be ignored
01:04:30.020
from a cosmetic perspective, it certainly looks good on a bodybuilding stage. You might not have the
01:04:34.260
function. Yeah. So you may not get enhanced force production outcomes like you would be seeking
01:04:39.180
from like a true anabolic agent, but it doesn't improve cosmetic appearance of muscle, almost
01:04:46.720
certainly, and can help you improve your body composition, especially if you time it well with,
01:04:52.940
because if you just use it and liberate free fatty acids and sit around and do nothing, you could just
01:04:57.080
redistribute that and not necessarily get the benefit out of it that you're seeking. So do you
01:05:02.240
think that the liberation of fat is the more reproducible finding of GH use? Oh yeah. You
01:05:09.040
know, that's happening when you use it for sure. And you will become acutely insulin resistant as a
01:05:14.080
result of that too. So based on that knowledge, when is the ideal time to take it? Do people take
01:05:18.880
this once a day, twice a day? It depends on the dose because if you're using a very high dose and it
01:05:24.440
also depends on your lethargy from it, it is very lethargy inducing. You could feel sleepy all day. If
01:05:31.280
you're blasting a high dose of it. What would be a high dose? Like what you were taking six to eight?
01:05:35.720
Yeah. I would say when I took it, it was mostly in the two to four IU range. I only did six to eight
01:05:42.280
for like a very short period of time. Even that, the lower, lower, but still pushed me to like a 500 IGF
01:05:48.760
was lethargy inducing for me personally. For how long? Man, that was so long. I had tried it for
01:05:57.680
full durations of cycles. So, you know, upwards of a few months was probably the longest I had taken
01:06:03.680
that. Did you have lethargy the whole day or was it just like, if you took it in the morning,
01:06:07.400
you'd feel that way till noon, then you had to work out in the afternoon to get around it.
01:06:10.980
With the doses I was using and splitting it up the way I was, it was pretty around the clock.
01:06:17.100
Why is that? It seems to have a very intertwined connection with sleep. So you have your biggest
01:06:24.340
GH pulse when you're getting to sleep and people find seemingly pretty positively correlated with
01:06:31.780
aging. You have a decrease in IGF and seemingly deep sleep metrics also decrease precipitously too.
01:06:38.900
And I think this is the biggest case to be made on potential attenuation of cognitive decline is
01:06:44.340
its impact on sleep. If you're somebody who gets significant enhancement in deep sleep metrics,
01:06:50.120
however you want to track that, I can't imagine you can extrapolate from there that it's helpful.
01:06:54.340
For somebody who has, if you have a crashed IGF and you have horrible sleep as a result of it,
01:06:59.780
like there's clear literature to show that IGF deficiency will impair sleep. So if you're able
01:07:04.100
to correct that to some level, the minimum effective dose, you don't need to push it.
01:07:08.280
But you're saying with a higher IGF, you were more lethargic. You would think that you'd be
01:07:14.980
Yeah, probably. It's also gets conflated with bodybuilding diets too, because typically when
01:07:20.740
you're using it, you're in a calorie surplus trying to gain a bunch of muscles. So you could
01:07:23.740
definitely conflate those findings a bit and it is anecdotal. But in general, people using peptides
01:07:29.220
even and growth hormone will often find that their sleep is seemingly enhanced, like it's deeper,
01:07:41.120
Is it possible then that the GH is inducing too long asleep? So you sleep well, not at night,
01:07:46.700
but then it's carrying over to the day, like there's a hangover of sleep?
01:07:49.800
Potentially, for sure. Like it seems to be a hormone that is quite rejuvenative during your
01:07:55.800
sleep. And I can't imagine not that I really read into like ancestral history or how your body
01:08:01.700
functions relative to the ancestors that much. But it's like the time you are trying to recover and
01:08:08.580
rest the deepest, having the highest spike of GH, like it seems to be, I think it's something you could
01:08:14.940
at least extrapolate as a interesting anecdote, nonetheless, that I can understand why I might
01:08:20.820
be tired when the deepest point of rest is also the time that this is simultaneously the highest
01:08:26.440
endogenously. So if I'm manually creating at least half of the conditions that are associated with when
01:08:33.280
I would otherwise get the deepest sleep, maybe I can manually induce that myself, if I'm deficient,
01:08:39.440
or what have you. But as far as timing and the justification for it, it depends on if you were
01:08:44.620
trying to use it for lipolysis, or if you were trying to use it to enhance sleep, or what the
01:08:50.060
conditions are, because you are going to be suppressed at a certain level regardless. So
01:08:55.420
oftentimes, the logic would dictate, at least in my opinion, that you would probably put part of your
01:09:00.720
dose before bed, given that you're not going to get the same output when you're using exogenous GH.
01:09:06.200
So if I'm using, let's just say all of my GH in the morning, and then I'm going to exercise to try
01:09:12.160
and use the fat. Yeah, which is not a bad idea. There's definitely a, at least I think a justification
01:09:19.080
that part of that dose or potentially all of it when your IGF one or GH output is suppressed,
01:09:26.220
that you would actually allocate your dose to pre bed. So it depends on goals too. And if you notice
01:09:32.760
an enhancement of sleep or not, but you can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that feedback loop
01:09:37.060
will suppress your natural output, you're not going to just get the best of both worlds.
01:09:40.840
And so would you say more people today would be using the two receptor approach,
01:09:46.520
the two peptide receptor approach rather than GH? Is that a more common approach today?
01:09:50.660
I think among those in the clinics, for sure, because it's less cost prohibitive. That's what I think.
01:09:58.000
But in the underground bodybuilding world, they're typically pushing super physiological IGF one
01:10:03.640
levels. That's their goal. That's what they want to get out of it. So they typically try and find
01:10:08.300
pharma grade GH. And if they can't get it, they will go generic if they also can't afford it. And
01:10:12.380
that's what they're doing. They're pushing IGF to 500 and more.
01:10:16.220
Yeah, typically like that. It would be a minimum adequate amount for performance enhancement,
01:10:22.280
quote unquote performance enhancement, would be deemed higher than what is naturally achievable
01:10:28.620
based on typically a lab corp reference range is what most people would utilize.
01:10:33.460
Let's detour for a moment just to talk about bodybuilding before I want to kind of go back
01:10:37.380
and talk about anabolics. And then maybe this will be a nice dovetail into it. So in my gym,
01:10:42.640
I have a lot of pictures of bodybuilders, nice black and whites that I enjoy. And there's just a
01:10:46.880
real clear difference between Frank Zane, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sergio Oliva to Jay Cutler and
01:10:56.080
Ronnie Coleman. And I don't know when that jump took place. Maybe Lee Haney, maybe Dorian Yates,
01:11:03.620
but somewhere in there, there was a real transition in physique. Not to debate which of those is the
01:11:09.780
best. I think everyone can have their own preference for which era of physique was their favorite.
01:11:14.140
But if you sort of think of the things that can impact your physique, genetics, okay, that's not
01:11:18.580
changing. Nutrition and knowledge of nutrition, that's clearly evolved. Training and knowledge
01:11:23.780
of training, that's clearly evolved. Drug use, that's clearly evolved. And then maybe just even
01:11:29.640
injection. I've talked to bodybuilders today who say that they're actually injecting compounds in
01:11:34.620
their muscles to alter the shape. They're injecting like fats into muscles to actually create some
01:11:40.560
sculpting. So again, that's probably something new. Let's put that one aside. Of the three,
01:11:45.760
evolution of training, evolution of nutrition, evolution of drugs, how would you rate the relative
01:11:52.060
balance of those three for the difference of a 1970s physique versus a physique today of the best
01:12:00.240
bodybuilders in the world? Probably drugs at the top, almost certainly, followed by I would say
01:12:08.040
nutrition probably, and then training at the bottom. How much emphasis on each of those,
01:12:12.740
like 50, 40, 10? That's tough because these get scrutinized to hell because it's like I'm going to
01:12:17.440
put a number on it. People will be like, how do you think diet is only 20%? A lot of these things don't
01:12:22.780
live without the other. So you could definitely lean heavier and say, well, if you eat nothing,
01:12:27.660
the drugs aren't going to do anything. So I would say just in order of importance,
01:12:31.800
if you did perfect diet, perfect training with all of the modern knowledge that we have now,
01:12:38.720
your ceiling for muscle growth potential could be as much as 50 to 100 pounds lower as a natural,
01:12:46.240
depending on height, depending on genetic response. And by the way, I don't want to forget on the GH
01:12:50.900
stuff. One thing that is interesting is even in acromegalic patients, the incidence of death seems to be
01:12:58.240
cardiovascular significantly more than cancer incidence. So if there's anything to discern
01:13:04.280
from actual human literature, significantly chronically elevated IGFs into even 40 years
01:13:10.600
old, these individuals are dying from congestive heart failure and things like that.
01:13:15.060
And that's really interesting. So not even atherosclerotic disease. I have to look into
01:13:18.480
this. Actually, that's a very good point. I should look at the acromegaly literature.
01:13:22.220
One of the interesting things is how much fluid retention they hold and the stress that has on the heart
01:13:27.220
too. Yeah. That's very interesting. They also probably would be, I'm guessing,
01:13:31.200
maybe more prone to aortic dissection because they probably have larger connective tissue,
01:13:35.460
things like that. Yeah. Okay. So you're putting drugs at the top of the list and then nutrition
01:13:40.800
and then training, I think was the order you had them in. So let's talk about the drug use.
01:13:45.380
So I've spoken to 70s bodybuilders and if they're being honest with me and I have no reason to believe
01:13:53.140
they're not. You would think. Yeah. Like what do they care? I was shocked at how little drug use
01:13:58.820
was going on back then amongst the best of the best. And we're talking like one to 200 milligrams
01:14:05.580
of testosterone a week, eight weeks at a time, eight on, eight off, eight on, eight off. In other words,
01:14:13.080
they're basically taking TRT. Yeah. They're not telling the truth. Okay. So that's your view?
01:14:17.820
Most of them almost certainly are not when you're saying you're taking a borderline female HRT
01:14:25.060
dianable dose. It's like back then that's what it was prescribed for or like muscle wasting in old
01:14:29.980
age or whatever. Some of the old like SEPA dianable ads are hilarious by the way, but those dosages are
01:14:36.400
almost impossible to wrap your head around producing outcomes that they are like, you might as well have
01:14:42.800
stayed natural almost at that point. So I too bought into the idea of, well, they seem to have
01:14:48.180
consistent stories. They seem to have all taken one shot of primo a week and you know, one to two
01:14:53.160
dianable or what have you. And it's just not an outcome that you see as reproducible ever in those
01:14:59.060
dosage quantities. So maybe on the hyper extreme outlier scenario, you might have a guy who a total
01:15:05.120
weekly dosage of a few hundred milligrams across everything he's using. He may hyper respond and get
01:15:11.080
huge. But I would say the majority of the guys competing at the Olympia level were still like,
01:15:16.120
I've heard of people slugging D ball by the bottles. Even back in the seventies. Yeah. It's
01:15:20.900
just certain people are more outspoken about their abuse than others seemingly. And it seems like the
01:15:27.340
ones that are outspoken are more like this guy, Pete Grimkowski. I don't know if you've heard of him
01:15:31.160
before, but looked incredible. But the guy used thousands and thousands and thousands of milligrams.
01:15:36.340
And I can understand why you would arrive at that logic to take that because there was nothing to
01:15:41.720
tell you otherwise. So if you're competing against a guy at the highest level, and there's
01:15:45.500
relatively high stakes, you see a guy like Arnold, getting movie roles and stuff. It's like the peak
01:15:51.520
of achievement as a bodybuilder back then you couldn't do social media can do anything you would
01:15:55.300
try and emulate presumably what he was doing, or something of that nature. To think that you're not
01:16:01.060
going to escalate your dose past one to two dianable and a shot of primo or what have you or a shot
01:16:05.780
of Nandrolone because you didn't want to like hurt yourself. It's like, shut up, dude.
01:16:10.580
Yeah. I feel like I saw a video kind of recently of Tom Platt's discussing this.
01:16:15.540
He had changed the story. Yeah. With that said, his original breakdown was relatively conservative
01:16:21.580
still, but he's done public presentations about drug use back in the eighties, nineties. And
01:16:27.160
you could tell he was pretty reserved. Even back then he handled the situation very delicately.
01:16:32.820
You could tell he was picking his words carefully as he spoke. But more recently he came out and said
01:16:38.560
his dose was like, I don't know, a third of that or something. It's like, okay, maybe like, you know,
01:16:43.420
in 40 years or something, I don't expect you to remember exactly what you took, but to say your
01:16:47.440
peak dose was one third of what it was. I don't know. Like, I just, I just don't really believe you.
01:16:53.120
Well, at the other end of the spectrum, I've spoken to one bodybuilder who, and I couldn't
01:16:58.860
believe it, but he said at one point he was up to, are you ready for it? Yeah. 50 grams of
01:17:08.160
testosterone in a week. There's no way you would not inject that much. I was like, how is that
01:17:14.580
possible? You would run out of injections. How are you managing? I think a lot of people just don't
01:17:19.500
know what they take too. Oftentimes you ask people on TRT even, what's your dose? They're like, oh,
01:17:24.660
I took like, you know, a half as. We noodle with patients between 100 and 120 milligrams a week.
01:17:31.100
Like literally we will make movements that fine, 20 milligrams a week. Yeah. I think a lot of people,
01:17:38.100
they just go by, oh, my doctor told me to take this much of a syringe. And then they kind of just
01:17:43.320
remember some rough number, but oftentimes they don't know how many milligrams per milliliter what
01:17:47.720
they're using is. They don't know what their dosage is. They just take some scheduled protocol
01:17:51.740
and they stay on it for years. And then they don't even know what they're doing. But 50 grams is like,
01:17:56.160
it's impossible. You would have to dedicate your life to injecting essentially. That would be your
01:18:02.420
full-time job. Just sitting there pinning like five to 10 CC barrels of test all day.
01:18:07.320
Oh God. Given how remarkable the physiques were in the seventies at the top of the food chain in the
01:18:12.380
Olympia. Would you agree with me that something dramatically changed in the late eighties,
01:18:18.100
early nineties? Yeah. And it seems to be the emergence of growth hormone and insulin abuse,
01:18:24.420
as well as the escalation of drugs to an even more extreme magnitude and the availability potentially
01:18:30.760
granted they were prescribed readily seemingly, but people also seemingly push the limit more. And
01:18:38.640
there's the emergence of underground lab preparations and things of this nature. So
01:18:42.660
my understanding at least is, and there's no literature to document like, Oh, you know,
01:18:47.960
this dosage equated to this and therefore this is why it happened. But it seems to be dose escalation
01:18:53.900
of anabolics to some extent, but more so the implementation of growth hormone coupled with
01:18:59.600
exogenous insulineus. They're using insulin because of how anabolic it is.
01:19:05.280
Well, the goal is what they think it is. And obviously if there's terminology that may not be
01:19:12.220
exact on that, but it's like what they believe it's doing is shuttling a super physiologic amount
01:19:18.500
of nutrients into the muscle. Cause also when you take GH, you're acutely insulin resistant. So
01:19:23.020
need a little insulin to overcome that. Yeah. They're almost like doing both things at the same time as
01:19:28.060
the goal. And often when you're using really high doses of GH, fortunately this isn't as problematic
01:19:34.680
and replacement dosages. So I don't want people to extrapolate out. Oh, GH equals chronic insulin
01:19:40.340
resistance necessarily. But at the dosages people are using, they could induce diabetes essentially.
01:19:45.760
Like you could end up a diabetic from just your GH abuse and oftentimes to relieve stress off the
01:19:51.660
pancreas and the beta cells, they will use exogenous insulin. So you don't have to produce as much
01:19:56.060
endogenously to actually accommodate the amount of carbohydrate intake and just overall nutrients.
01:20:02.200
Because these diets to maintain a 300 pound physique, you're pounding 5,000 calories a day
01:20:06.860
sometimes. So the introduction of growth hormone with all of its benefits, presumably, which we've
01:20:13.500
talked about. It's funny because right as we finished talking about how it's not performance
01:20:17.160
and saying now the thing that causes the 20 to 30 pound lean mass jump is supposedly GH and insulin.
01:20:23.500
It's interesting to say the least, but continue. Well, I was going to say, so we have that issue
01:20:30.220
going on. You've also talked a little bit about, so my belief used to be all this GH and insulin use
01:20:37.980
is why we're seeing these big abdomens on not just bodybuilders, but also on athletes. So you'll see
01:20:45.500
track and field athletes who are insanely muscular, insanely lean, but they have huge protruding
01:20:54.620
abdomens that do not appear to be fat because you still see a six pack ripped on top of it, but from
01:21:02.000
the side, they look pregnant. And again, the thinking was, well, is this just organomegaly? Are their organs
01:21:09.520
just getting bigger? Now you've talked a little bit about an alternative hypothesis.
01:21:13.100
Yeah, I think it is multifactorial, but there is seemingly, I think the largest cause of it now
01:21:22.620
is significant distension caused by the excessive food intake and the result of significant gastrointestinal
01:21:30.680
issues that result from the absurd diet models. Because to get that many calories and get that
01:21:35.240
much protein, carbs often, and especially peri-workout when you're using insulin and you need to make sure
01:21:40.540
you don't go hypoglycemic in your workout, they'll be slamming like 100 to 200 gram shakes that have
01:21:47.160
hydrolyzed whey in them, branch cyclic dextrin, plus aminos, plus creatine, plus glutamine, plus this.
01:21:55.460
And oftentimes they're essentially in a state of, like I'm sure you've had a cheat day where your stomach
01:22:01.080
was incomparable to days when you're fasting, for example, it's a massive difference. Fasting,
01:22:06.900
you could do a vacuum and see completely invert your stomach almost versus when you have a giant
01:22:12.680
cheat day and just go off the rails. You couldn't keep your stomach in for the life of you. You have
01:22:17.560
to be flexing just to keep it not looking like you have a gut when you're sitting down. That is a
01:22:21.500
perpetual state of reality for bodybuilders who weigh that much to sustain that food intake and
01:22:27.440
the physiques that they have because it's not a normal amount of muscle to hold. So it requires a not
01:22:32.580
normal amount of food to accommodate the nutrients required to grow further or even like sustain it.
01:22:38.900
Good example of that is Ben Pakulski. He makes more health focused content now, but he's a former
01:22:45.100
high level IFBB pro. I think he won the Arnold Classic even at one point. And one of his biggest
01:22:50.220
criticisms was his distended gut. And you know, for certain the guy was using all the same drugs
01:22:56.300
everyone was using at the high level, but he was able to reverse it seemingly in a relatively short
01:23:03.600
period of time in his latter part of his career by reducing his food intake significantly seemingly.
01:23:11.900
And he actually showed up one year later with a vacuum on stage, which a vacuum for people who
01:23:17.520
don't know, I don't even know if I could explain it, but it's like you suck your stomach in and it
01:23:21.100
creates like an almost like an inverted, it kind of goes in, you can see your rib cage and like your
01:23:25.420
serratus lines and stuff. And most bodybuilders wouldn't be able to do that nowadays. No,
01:23:29.480
no. And that's a big notable differentiating factor of seventies and like nineties bodybuilders,
01:23:36.480
the amount of people that could do a vacuum dramatically. So many could in the seventies
01:23:41.420
and it looked great. And in the nineties, you'd be hard pressed to find somebody who has like an
01:23:44.720
aesthetic vacuum. Except for presumably natural bodybuilders are more likely to, or. Yeah. Yeah.
01:23:50.900
They don't have the food demand. Yeah. It also depends on like what they're eating because people
01:23:54.400
gut issues could have issues too, but it's more common in people who are pushing food extremely
01:23:59.980
hard. And then the drugs on top of that, like when you have hyperglycemia chronically, you might have
01:24:05.980
impaired intestinal motility and like all these things that could compound the issue significantly.
01:24:11.500
So I think you have people with SIBO and bacterial overgrowth and all this stuff that can influence the
01:24:17.100
distension that is kind of like a congregation of bad digestion, insane amounts of food,
01:24:24.680
poor choices of food that don't agree with your body because it's simply the only way you can get
01:24:28.600
the calories in to meet the demand of the muscle, et cetera. But anyway, Ben Pakulski, he, he showed up
01:24:33.620
with less muscle, but he had completely reversed his gut distension. So it seemed as if the food was a
01:24:40.700
large dictator of, okay, to get the biggest physique you ever got, you had to eat some diet that was not
01:24:48.200
conducive to the most aesthetic, non-distended appearance. And if he had organ growth, is it
01:24:54.640
reasonable to assume that he could have reversed that?
01:24:57.460
Here's another example of something that's very frustrating to me. This is knowable. Literally take
01:25:01.700
the bodybuilders, throw them into an MRI scanner. You can get organ volumes on everybody. And we could
01:25:06.760
compare that to controls and also look at them off drugs, on drugs, all that stuff. So again,
01:25:12.220
it's just an example of so many of the questions that we have here that we're not getting resolution
01:25:16.700
to are knowable. It's not like we're asking, is there life outside of the solar system? We're never
01:25:22.580
going to know the answer to that. One thing I can say is on autopsy bodybuilders that did die young
01:25:28.280
or what have you, oftentimes now with social media, those results are released publicly and people
01:25:32.920
dissect them and whatnot. You learn things from bodybuilders that have died that you might have
01:25:37.520
not even known because not that long ago, 10 plus years ago, people were saying, where are the bodies?
01:25:42.440
No one's dying from steroid use, et cetera. But there are guys dying with hearts three times the size of
01:25:48.040
what they should be. So there's certainly organ enlargement systemically for sure. So we could
01:25:52.900
say that. I don't know if it's necessarily pushing on the stomach wall to actually cause-
01:25:58.760
Interesting. But I can say with near certainty, there is organ growth for sure. I just, again,
01:26:04.740
multifactorial. Maybe it's part of it. It's a great point. So let's talk about the death of
01:26:08.840
bodybuilders. And we're going to, again, I want to come back and do a long discussion onto anabolic
01:26:13.720
steroids. There was a bodybuilder that died kind of recently, right? Yeah. Yeah. That was a shocking
01:26:18.560
one too. He's a 30 years old. One of the biggest social media influencers too. What was his name?
01:26:25.100
Joe Lindner. American or? German. German. Oh, that's right. Yeah.
01:26:28.400
Yeah. Yeah. So with him, the scariest part was he was one of the guys who was doing all the right
01:26:35.880
things, at least from a blood work standpoint. So he would get blood work done literally every two
01:26:42.040
months, if not more frequent and was very, very rigorous about trying to oversee his health status
01:26:47.960
and his blood work. Wasn't perfect always, but it certainly wasn't somebody who should be dying at
01:26:53.020
30 years old, regardless of back in the day or not that long ago, even it would be
01:26:57.900
unheard of for somebody to be dying. If he wasn't a massive bodybuilder by industry standards for
01:27:03.500
fitness, where we have this warped perception of what is big versus not, he was like probably like
01:27:08.000
50 pounds off of what you would consider a top level open class bodybuilder who would compete with
01:27:14.000
Ronnie Coleman or something. So he was more of like a jacked fitness model by fitness industry standards
01:27:21.500
and less drug use, significantly less drug use, less food intake. He was always in a calorie deficit,
01:27:29.700
shredded year round. The guy did lots of cardio, at least like 10,000 plus steps a day,
01:27:35.380
ate clean. Like there was no reason objectively, at least why he should die at 30.
01:27:41.140
And what are the known circumstances of his death?
01:27:44.180
So apparently his, and this is the thing that's, I don't even know if you're going to want this in
01:27:48.860
the podcast, dude, but it's, he got apparently the vaccine and two boosters on top of it, I believe
01:27:55.740
might've even been more, but after he got it done, apparently he went and saw, he got his blood work
01:28:01.960
done just routinely. And they saw supposedly that the blood they pulled out was like really coagulated
01:28:09.800
and weird looking. And I forget exactly his terminology, but he literally did a podcast,
01:28:15.900
maybe a week or two before his death, how he got a blood test done. And they were telling him that he
01:28:21.000
needs to get a plasma pharesis to clean his blood because it was so messed up from the vex. So he
01:28:27.860
did it twice apparently. And then supposedly his D-dimer went back down because it was super elevated in his
01:28:34.580
blood work. And they said he was fine now. And he cleaned his blood and reintroduced it back into
01:28:39.780
circulation. He would be good. He made a long trip to the U S I actually met him for the first time,
01:28:45.800
like a couple of weeks before his death. And then when he flew back to Thailand, which is a really
01:28:50.560
long flight and yeah, there's clotting risk, you know, associated with that on top of all the other
01:28:55.600
things, which is speculated to be something that's another variable, but he got back seemingly fine.
01:29:02.280
And then apparently a few days after he got back, he was complaining of neck pain. His aunt
01:29:08.220
supposedly died from an aneurysm in her neck. That is what we have been told. We have yet to see a
01:29:16.580
autopsy report on his situation, but his girlfriend at least reported that his aunt died from the same
01:29:22.800
thing and had a aneurysm in her neck. In her neck or in her head?
01:29:26.900
It was apparently neck specifically, which I would think is unusual.
01:29:31.200
Yeah. I won't even speculate without an autopsy. I think again, tragic, obviously, but hopefully an
01:29:37.480
autopsy sheds light on that. I mean, it's not difficult to know if someone dies of an aneurysm
01:29:41.620
on autopsy. Would you scope that out with like a Prunuvo scan before you even?
01:29:46.980
Yeah. That's actually one of the reasons we really do like whole body MRI is the incidence of aneurysms
01:29:53.500
you'll see on a whole body MRI is about, depending on the series, I mean, somewhere between one and
01:29:58.480
seven cases per thousand. Now, not all of those are aneurysms that pose risk, meaning they're not
01:30:04.300
all aneurysms that if left alone would ultimately rupture, but a number of those require intervention.
01:30:11.540
So we've probably in the last seven years had two patients, if you think about how small our
01:30:17.500
practice is, two patients who have had incidental captures of aneurysms that were in one case large
01:30:24.800
enough, in another case, growing quickly enough to a large enough size that they needed to be coiled
01:30:29.880
preventatively. So the aneurysms that typically kill people are in the head, behind the stomach.
01:30:36.640
Those are the ones that you kind of want to look out for. Also, as far as if he had a deep vein
01:30:41.360
thrombosis, which would certainly be a risk factor on a long flight, that could obviously kill you with
01:30:46.380
a pulmonary embolism. Again, very easy to diagnose on autopsy. So by the way, what's your current
01:30:52.040
flight stack? So I don't fly that much anymore. And when I do, most of my stack is around sleep.
01:31:00.100
What I'm thinking about when I'm flying is how do I eliminate jet lag? So I went to London,
01:31:05.260
I don't know, a few months ago. So you don't control for like clotting potential anymore.
01:31:10.000
I take baby aspirin, although the literature suggests that it's not necessarily helpful
01:31:16.920
against DVT. I used to take something else. Nato kinase. Yeah, that's right. I used to take that
01:31:22.580
for DVT. Nowadays, I just use compression hose, hydrate like crazy. And basically, I've got straight
01:31:30.560
legs most of the flight because I'm like laying down. Honestly, I think like hydration probably
01:31:34.640
plays a greater role than most things. At one point, I was like so ridiculous. I was taking
01:31:39.600
Lovenox injections. So Lovenox is like an unfractionated, it's like a type of heparin
01:31:45.060
basically. But after one time I took it where I injected it and hit a blood vessel and had like
01:31:49.880
the biggest bruise on my head. And I was like, oh, this is just not worth the hassle anymore.
01:31:54.040
Most of my effort really focuses around how to not get jet lag, which I've turned into a science.
01:32:01.580
Yes, yes. I can go to eight hour time zone away, be a hundred percent functional the minute I get off
01:32:06.840
the plane, get right into routine and rhythm. But traditional bodybuilder deaths, like this was
01:32:11.840
a bit of a unique one because a lot of people, well, until the autopsy comes out, no one really
01:32:16.020
knows. It might be that this is just a tragic death in someone who also happens to bodybuild and
01:32:20.540
it might have nothing to do with. Yeah. In general, what I've seen from the autopsies available on some
01:32:26.340
pretty young bodybuilders, it's almost always a cardiovascular issue. And not necessarily
01:32:32.580
atherosclerotic, but more cardiomyopathy type deaths. Yeah. Yeah. So like the left blood pressure
01:32:38.840
unchecked and had heart function just destroyed essentially. And hearts that are way larger than
01:32:45.260
they should be. I don't know if you've ever heard of Rich Piana, but he was a very famous and
01:32:50.340
influential bodybuilder in the fitness industry. And he died in his forties with, uh, I think it was
01:32:55.480
like a 660 gram heart. And then Dallas McCarver, probably the most notable one. He was like a
01:33:00.780
mass monster by IFBB pro standards, which is like one of the guys on the Olympia stage. Who's actually
01:33:07.400
the biggest of the guys on that stage. His heart was like 860 grams or something.
01:33:14.420
And I think an athlete heart is like what? One third of that or something.
01:33:20.660
Yeah. Mike Mencer died young as well, didn't he? Yeah. He had known atherosclerosis, didn't he have?
01:33:26.880
He was also, and I don't want to speak at a term, but I've heard he was pretty into amphetamines
01:33:32.440
on top of that. So it was like stimulant abuse on top of potential anabolic exposure.
01:33:39.060
I do think that that's one of the difficult things to ascertain with respect to bodybuilding is
01:33:44.220
so much polypharmacy. Well, it's the polypharmacy and there's also like,
01:33:47.840
there's the psychological component that's very difficult to disentangle. That's part of the
01:33:51.800
profession. So let's go on and talk about testosterone and androgens in general. You've
01:33:57.340
already thrown around a lot of names that are going to be foreign to people, but before we kind of get
01:34:01.320
into the different anabolic steroids, you want to just kind of do a quick review of the relationship
01:34:07.040
between the hypothalamus, the pituitary, Leydig cells, Sertoli cells, like what's the whole
01:34:13.360
relationship between those hormones, testosterone production, and maybe we can even talk about DHT
01:34:19.440
androgen receptors and estradiol for that matter. So the body has a pretty, it's complicated,
01:34:26.300
but it seems to be pretty well-regulated way to know how much hormone to produce based on needs
01:34:33.340
in tissues, especially too. So your hypothalamus will create something called gonadotropin releasing
01:34:39.480
hormone. Just like the name suggests, this is the hormone that goes to your pituitary to actually
01:34:44.600
stimulate the production and release of gonadotropins. Gonadotropins are the hormones that
01:34:50.900
work on your gonads to produce testosterone, as well as assist with spermatogenesis and sustain
01:34:58.180
fertility. So the gonadotropins that come out of the pituitary, they elevate upstream and GNRH as well
01:35:06.200
in response or lack thereof to adequate. And there's so many to lesser magnitudes, but primarily
01:35:13.440
androgen receptor activation and estrogen receptor activation. And then there's also like some
01:35:19.980
stimulation of progesterone receptors that causes negative feedback as well, among other things too.
01:35:25.540
But the primary that are to be noted probably for this discussion, androgen receptors, estrogen
01:35:30.240
receptors, when those are satisfactorily or in an adequate amount stimulated, it will tell your brain,
01:35:38.880
okay, we have enough testosterone, as well as DHT and estrogen that we don't need to make more
01:35:46.280
essentially because we have a satisfied amount of estrogen receptor activation in the body. So we need
01:35:52.020
to clamp down and not make as much hormones because we don't want to have too much. So that will give
01:35:57.340
negative feedback to the hypothalamus pituitary testicular axis to not produce as much GNRH and
01:36:04.240
LH and FSH until those levels fall to where there's a need to make more hormones. So it's this like
01:36:10.480
finely tuned system where your body regulates how much it assesses how much it needs, waits until it
01:36:17.480
needs to produce more, and then it produces more. So the top of that is the GNRH stimulates pituitary output
01:36:23.820
of LH, luteinizing hormone, which acts on latig cells in the testes, and follicle stimulating hormone
01:36:30.060
that acts on sertoli cells as well. And this is, we'll definitely get into that email you sent me
01:36:35.500
about fertility and whatnot. Those will go down to the testes and stimulate the production of
01:36:40.560
intratesticular testosterone, as well as assist with the production of sperm and maintenance of
01:36:47.740
fertility. So those levels, I think that's probably a good summation of how you end up with testosterone,
01:36:54.480
probably. So then what's the fate of testosterone? The fate of it in terms of metabolites? Yeah, like once
01:37:00.680
it gets out there, how much of it is converted into estradiol, DHT? Yeah, and this is where a lot of people
01:37:07.780
who neglect lifestyle and diet don't realize all of the backhanded consequences of being too obese or
01:37:15.240
something like that. You could have, for example, aromatase strongly expressed in adipose tissue.
01:37:20.700
So if you are too obese, and this is problematic, especially in adolescents too, if you have a
01:37:27.120
disproportionate amount of aromatase expression, because of how fat you are, essentially, you could
01:37:34.140
otherwise be producing more estrogen than you would have if you were lean, telling your brain in a
01:37:41.560
indirect way that, hey, we have enough estrogen, so don't make more testosterone.
01:37:47.020
Because I use testosterone to make estrogen. Yeah, and I probably should preface this with
01:37:50.740
testosterone converts primarily to two hormones through the 5-alpha-reductase enzyme, 5-alpha-reductase
01:37:57.980
to DHT, dihydrotestosterone, which has a significantly greater potency for binding and transcribing
01:38:05.920
activity at the androgen receptor, and estrogen, estradiol, that will be the primary estrogen
01:38:12.260
receptor agonist in estrogen receptors around the body. So those two hormones regulate kind of a
01:38:19.520
balance of androgenicity and estrogenicity in the body, and it's like a finely tuned system.
01:38:26.420
And this system is also regulated by binding proteins produced by the liver,
01:38:30.640
and the differential between females versus men. It also works in the same way. It's just the
01:38:38.160
difference in how much of these hormones are produced is quite different, and also the binding
01:38:42.800
proteins to regulate that you stay feminine versus you have a masculine profile. So ultimately,
01:38:48.520
the balance of free androgen to free estrogen in the body is almost the thing, essentially,
01:38:54.140
that dictates if you are feminine versus masculine. You could flip-flop back and forth almost manually if
01:39:00.300
you really wanted to, and we see this in bodybuilding where females will literally masculinize themselves
01:39:04.880
to hell in order to win a show by using super physiologic amounts of drugs, and also in people
01:39:10.760
trying to transition from male to female or vice versa. And some of these changes are permanent,
01:39:14.320
of course, on the masculinization front. If you have a deep voice, it's almost certain that you're
01:39:19.200
not going to get it high after going on female hormone therapy. But at the end of the day,
01:39:23.880
this is kind of like the primary hormones to understand as far as the spectrum of androgenic male
01:39:29.720
to estrogenic feminine-like. It's not a female hormone because they exist in both sexes, but
01:39:36.220
DHT, the primary. Androgen that dictates androgenicity and sexual differentiation and maturation.
01:39:44.560
Testosterone, the main anabolic hormone, and drives a lot of the neurology, kind of the psychoactive
01:39:50.440
effects. And then estrogen is kind of like, it's a big balancing act, essentially.
01:39:54.760
Yeah. So let's, again, just make sure people understand the difference between androgenic
01:39:58.920
and anabolic, because we will come back to this more and more with other compounds as we talk
01:40:04.160
about the profile. Well, this one has slightly more androgenic behavior. This one slightly has
01:40:09.820
more anabolic behavior. Yeah. So the androgenicity or androgenic activity of a compound or your endogenous
01:40:17.520
hormones is essentially how masculinizing it is. So dihydrotestosterone, the 5-alpha reduced
01:40:25.180
metabolite of testosterone, is the most androgenic hormone in the body and can significantly inhibit
01:40:33.640
estrogen's activity, even in RNA transcription at the receptor site. It's very potent in what it does.
01:40:39.680
To frame how important it is, you could have a male. If you wiped out DHT before puberty,
01:40:44.660
basically, that's how you end up with a micropenis, essentially. You have individuals who will not
01:40:49.900
undergo full maturation unless you have the presence of this hormone. If you took a male
01:40:54.700
before puberty and just put him on detasteride or finasteride and zeroed out his DHT with making no
01:41:02.980
change on his testosterone. He would have the same amount of muscle, if not slightly more, but that's
01:41:08.600
debatable. But no temporal recession, probably not as much acne, not as much body hair, micropenis.
01:41:15.960
He would be probably visibly male voice, probably not as deep as it should be. And we see this in
01:41:22.240
pseudo hermaphrodites that have a mutation, the gene that encodes for 5-alpha reductase. So
01:41:27.220
this is kind of the advent of these enzyme inhibitors and how we even discovered how they work and
01:41:32.900
whatnot. But DHT, the most androgenic hormone in the body, the most masculinizing. Testosterone,
01:41:38.100
still very masculinizing too. And estrogen on the opposite side of the spectrum,
01:41:43.360
zero masculinization, very feminizing. I think that's the easiest way to kind of summarize.
01:41:48.700
So we talked a little bit, and I've discussed this on many previous podcasts, but just in case folks
01:41:52.880
haven't listened, right? So testosterone or DHT make their way into the cell, into the cytoplasm where
01:41:58.360
they bind to the androgen receptor. To your point, DHT does so with far, far greater affinity. I mean,
01:42:03.840
it's on the order of one order of magnitude more, maybe 20 times more binding efficiency to the
01:42:11.220
androgen receptor. This new complex of testosterone or DHT bound to the AR makes its way into the nucleus
01:42:17.880
where it acts as a transcription factor binding to DNA and imparting on it effectively transcription
01:42:24.180
translation. That's how we make stuff. It's how we make proteins. So that's how it
01:42:28.120
impacts muscle protein synthesis. I guess one thing I should have said is androgenic,
01:42:32.000
because you did actually ask me this, is not anabolic. So androgenic masculinizing,
01:42:37.020
but does not necessarily equate to muscle. So you could have severe masculinization with a relative
01:42:43.600
absence of actual muscle growth or translation to, I don't know, bone integrity and what have you.
01:42:53.600
Seemingly, it depends because from a cognitive health perspective, from a balance of estrogen
01:43:01.020
standpoint, from a vasodilation in the penis standpoint, like there are certain things where
01:43:06.780
you could say it's pretty critical. But then there's also you could just as easily say it's
01:43:11.980
not necessary or mandatory, like you will survive and likely thrive just the same with a lack of DHT
01:43:19.340
almost entirely. A lot of people will demonize 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors and justifiably
01:43:25.640
so in some cases. But even when you look to literature that compares placebo versus finasteride
01:43:31.660
versus dutasteride, side effect profiles are pretty similar even.
01:43:36.880
Yeah, dutasteride and finasteride being two drugs that block 5-alpha-reductase used initially for
01:43:42.980
reducing prostate size because DHT disproportionately drives prostate growth, but also used, I would say,
01:43:49.240
used more for hair loss now. But yes, and we have talked about this on two podcasts previously about
01:43:54.040
post-finasteride syndrome, which is a debatable idea. In other words, there is not a clear consensus
01:43:59.900
in the urologic literature about even the existence of this, let alone the prevalence, let alone
01:44:07.920
the reversibility of it. All of these things are really unknowns. And actually, it's created quite
01:44:15.240
a bit of a conundrum for us because we have a number of patients who take finasteride or dutasteride
01:44:20.100
for hair loss. And what's your stance on 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors?
01:44:25.280
Yeah, I mean, look, I think I'll be honest with you. I never really paid enormous attention to it until
01:44:30.380
about a year ago. I think right now our stance is I probably wouldn't start somebody on it.
01:44:37.060
So in other words, if a person has BPH, we're not going to manage that anyway. But a urologist has
01:44:42.000
far better tools to manage BPH than 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors. So I feel pretty strongly that if you're
01:44:48.920
presenting with BPH, you should not be on a 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor. It's like if someone
01:44:54.340
came to me and said, my APO-B is too high and I gave them a bile acid sequester in circa 1981.
01:45:00.660
I mean, it's just not necessary. There's no upside. If you're talking about it from a hair loss
01:45:05.860
perspective, again, not something I obviously know much about, I would say, and they're going
01:45:11.340
to go and see a hair doctor who's going to try to give them 50 different proprietary compounds,
01:45:16.180
which by the way, I want to come back to that in a second. I would encourage them if they've never
01:45:21.040
taken it before, not to. Because I think there are enough other compounds, oral minoxidil,
01:45:27.480
topical minoxidil, topical 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, PRP, transplants. I think there are
01:45:33.120
enough other tools that you can do to avoid the small but not necessarily zero risk of something
01:45:41.160
going wrong in terms of sexual side effects that in the worst case might not be reversible.
01:45:47.100
What about you? What do you think? I think that several of the drugs you just said
01:45:52.360
have either comparable side effect profiles like topical finasteride. You end up with the same
01:45:57.740
burden of 5-alpha-reductase inhibition systemically, despite the effect that it's marketed otherwise.
01:46:03.460
Topical dutasteride is interesting because it may have some capacity to stay local, especially if you
01:46:08.960
do mesotherapy. I wasn't aware of that difference. Yeah, it's thought to be the molecular-
01:46:15.100
Is it just hydrophobicity? It's more the molecular mass of the drug. So there's this like,
01:46:21.200
it's like an arbitrary rule, but if the molecule is greater or less than 500
01:46:26.020
daltons, I believe it is off the top of my head. It's been a while since I've revisited it, but
01:46:29.980
there is a lesser or greater ability to actually absorb it and get systemic circulation and
01:46:37.380
distribution across the body. With dutasteride, it's like, I think it's like 600 or 700. With
01:46:42.500
finasteride, it's like 300 or 200. I don't think that systemic minoxidil is necessarily
01:46:47.480
a benign drug. And the other thing is nobody really can give an explanation for what the
01:46:52.080
right dose is. If you look at how people- Oh yeah, like low-dose minoxidil.
01:46:55.280
Oral minoxidil, it's insane. So I don't like to be in the business of prescribing things for which
01:47:01.880
I don't have a great understanding, which is why I'm not in the business of treating hair loss.
01:47:05.680
Not because I don't think it's something worth addressing if it bothers someone, but I think the
01:47:09.980
bigger issue is it would be really awful if in trying to treat a cosmetic condition like hair loss,
01:47:16.740
you induced a devastating consequence on your endocrine system. That's really where I find
01:47:22.300
myself concerned. Now, it also appears that if you've been on finasteride for a long period of
01:47:28.740
time and you're not experiencing any of these side effects, you're probably fine. So I also don't
01:47:33.360
want this to turn into like someone listening to this who's been taking Propecia for 10 years,
01:47:38.740
who's never had an issue going like, oh my God, I got to stop this stuff. The literature would suggest,
01:47:43.400
and there is a pretty good review we'll link to, that if you're going to have these side effects,
01:47:48.380
you're going to have them in about six months. Yeah. In general, when it comes to hair loss,
01:47:52.380
the problem is oftentimes the treatments, if it doesn't actually interact with the AR or inhibit the
01:47:59.920
potential for stimulation or agonizing the AR through DHT reduction or even systemic antiandrogens,
01:48:08.240
it's not that I would recommend that, you are essentially just putting a Band-Aid on the issue.
01:48:12.040
So if you stimulate growth with minoxidil, you are still not preventing further loss. If you get a
01:48:16.980
transplant, you are putting hair on your head, but you're not preventing further loss of your actual
01:48:22.320
existing hair. So oftentimes it's like you're almost trying to row against a current or something,
01:48:29.460
and it's like you are continuously getting pushed back and eventually you're going to get to a point
01:48:33.100
where you have so few visible hair follicles even left that are healthy that it doesn't matter how
01:48:39.140
much you've been on minoxidil or what have you. And oral minoxidil, it's definitely effective,
01:48:44.720
but I think it should be reserved for people who have weak response topically, because topical seems
01:48:49.680
to be far more tolerated side effect wise and a lot more predictable with like hordes of literature and
01:48:56.500
great outcomes. And there are ways to enhance that and also turn yourself from a non-responder to a
01:49:01.280
responder, which we can get into. But finasteride in itself, it seems to be like, I don't want to
01:49:08.320
try and come out and say I'm a proponent necessarily. I try to take a balanced approach to
01:49:12.480
it, but the prevalence of side effects is not nothing, but it's quite overblown by the opposite
01:49:18.520
camp that wants to assert that why would you ever inhibit a hormone that is the primary androgen you
01:49:26.500
rely on. But similarly, why would you inhibit, I don't know, ApoB or something? Like there is a
01:49:31.980
clear outcome whereby there's benefit. And when there is DHT in somebody who's prone to hair loss,
01:49:37.980
it's hard to overlook that this is the primary thing dictating if you go bald or not. And some
01:49:43.800
people that hair loss, some people care a lot more than others, obviously.
01:49:47.640
So I do think there's a difference because I think ApoB serves no benefit.
01:49:51.480
If someone created an antisense oligonucleotide that knocked out ApoB,
01:49:56.200
all it would do is guarantee we don't have heart disease in our species. We would still be able to
01:50:00.280
use all the HDLs in the world for cholesterol transport, which we currently use LDL for.
01:50:06.100
But I think to take your analogy a step further, what you're basically saying is if a person cares
01:50:10.320
as much about hair loss as they do about heart disease, and by that logic, DHT is causal.
01:50:16.400
Which sounds absurd, but let's just run with it.
01:50:18.520
I would posit that there are lots of people who care more about hair loss than heart disease.
01:50:22.380
The psychological stress for some people is significant and should not be overlooked by
01:50:28.500
the silliness of, oh, just lose it and just shave it, bro. It's not a big deal. There's tons of
01:50:33.120
successful people who are bald. It's like, yeah, sure. Although I think there's a statistic that
01:50:38.000
no bald person has ever been president of the United States. So there you go. So there's a couple
01:50:43.140
of occupations you got to take off the list. Now you mentioned when you were going through your
01:50:48.140
insane anabolic steroid use, you at a very young age, if you're in your early 20s, we're already
01:50:52.900
starting to lose your hair. So how did you reverse that?
01:50:56.080
Part of it was just dropping the dose significantly and eventually just going down to replacement therapy.
01:51:02.680
But it was the introduction of 5-alpha reductase inhibitor, initially finasteride.
01:51:07.920
And then thereafter, I introduced a, and I wouldn't necessarily recommend this blindly,
01:51:13.380
but a topical antiandrogen that's experimental, never actually received FDA approval.
01:51:17.880
There are some that are in the FDA pipelines right now that actually look promising and have
01:51:23.520
safety data behind them and whatnot that I'm watching closely and hope one comes to fruition
01:51:28.300
because these are essentially compounds that compete for the androgen receptor locally,
01:51:33.540
but do not have systemic antiandrogenic activity. So you can maintain all systemic androgen levels
01:51:40.020
with just localized activity in the scalp essentially. So I use a topical antiandrogen coupled
01:51:45.700
with a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor. Those were the main two needle movers for me. I also use a
01:51:50.160
ketoconazole shampoo, but it's like a very mild antiandrogen. It's mostly just a good shampoo,
01:51:54.680
but those two things and decreasing the burden of androgen significantly were fairly effective at
01:52:01.720
getting me not to baseline. Meaning you never regain? No, no, no. And that's the thing with
01:52:06.320
hair. That's the sketchy thing is even if you're trying to decide, oh, you know, maybe I should
01:52:10.320
treat it. Maybe I shouldn't. I'll think about it for a bit. I'll see if it gets worse. The visual
01:52:14.220
representation of loss is typically not apparent until you've lost a lot of ground because you could
01:52:20.160
pull a handful of hair out of your head and see no difference whatsoever. Once you finally notice
01:52:25.860
diffuse thinning or recession, it's not something you've been looking for carefully because you've never
01:52:30.820
dealt with it. So oftentimes, once you actually notice it, picture or in heavy downlining or
01:52:35.340
something, you've already lost 20, 30% plus of your hair. And there's no guarantee that's coming back.
01:52:42.460
So did you regain hair that you had lost with this protocol or just completely stop some regrowth,
01:52:49.640
but expecting yourself to get back to baseline where you had, you know, like 17 year old immaculate
01:52:56.300
perfect hair. If you've been exposed to androgens at a level where you're visibly noticing it,
01:53:02.440
it's relatively unlikely. So that's not to say it's impossible. Like if I took minoxidil as well
01:53:08.260
as microneedle and did a bunch of other stuff, I could probably get a decent amount of the way
01:53:12.100
there. But the longer you wait and let hair follicles miniaturize, the more permanency you are
01:53:18.360
risking. So making back ground is way harder than preventing yourself from losing in the first
01:53:26.720
place. It's almost like maybe analogous to building muscle when you're younger. So then you don't have
01:53:32.280
to try and build it in old age when you have like anabolic resistance or what have you.
01:53:36.200
Let's make sure we give people the names of these compounds you're using.
01:53:39.040
So finasteride is like the main primary five alpha.
01:53:48.580
Yeah, I take 0.5 a day. So that is a soft gel that essentially wipes out systemic DHT.
01:53:56.420
It's like worse than a teenage girl. Yeah, it's terrible. But I smell okay. At least now.
01:54:00.420
I think one of the guys with the highest IQs on the planet has been on dutasteride for decades,
01:54:06.840
Okay, so then what else are you taking besides dutasteride?
01:54:09.160
Dutasteride right now is the only thing I take more out of convenience.
01:54:12.420
Because a topical application schedule can be quite burdensome.
01:54:16.820
But when you were doing that big salvage effort in your early 20s, what was the rest of the stack?
01:54:21.700
Oh, it was topical application of something called RU-58841.
01:54:28.860
So I don't necessarily recommend people use RU-58841
01:54:33.260
when there are actually alternatives with human safety data on the horizon.
01:54:38.180
With that said, it's also hard to tell me, however many years ago, that, wait,
01:54:48.280
And what are these things that are on the, that have more safety data coming down the pipeline?
01:54:52.440
This company called Kintor has a compound called pyroludamide.
01:54:58.700
And comparable outcomes of hair count increase to dutasteride, if I recall off the top of my head,
01:55:07.480
which is pretty substantial, given that there are very few things that produce outcomes that are even make it worth taking another drug.
01:55:15.100
Right now, the most effective things are going to be 5-alpha reductase inhibitors and minoxidil.
01:55:19.360
On top of that, everything else is like little sprinkles on the cake, essentially.
01:55:24.940
Some people might get better benefit from PRP than another person or what have you.
01:55:28.860
But in general, the main meat and potatoes are going to be minoxidil,
01:55:32.280
potentially microneedling with minoxidil if you're not a good responder
01:55:35.120
or have low sulfotransferase enzyme activity in the scalp
01:55:38.300
and the inhibition of free androgenic signaling in the scalp.
01:55:42.640
Whether you do that through 5-alpha reductase inhibition or antiandrogen activity locally,
01:55:49.820
Or some people are going to couple both of them like I did.
01:55:52.220
But those are the main needle movers, ultimately.
01:55:56.680
And the most crazy hair loss reversals you will see are always in men transitioning to women
01:56:03.480
I would never recommend anyone do that, but it's a pretty interesting data set to pull from.
01:56:08.880
So estrogen and progesterone would promote hair growth.
01:56:11.380
I mean, we do see it in women, actually, during HRT.
01:56:13.840
Especially progesterone can really thicken hair.
01:56:19.040
I'm more talking about antiandrogen plus estrogen.
01:56:21.580
So somebody transitioning would typically use a cyproterone acetate,
01:56:26.140
bicalutamide, something of that nature, plus exogenous E2 or a synthetic estrogen.
01:56:31.420
And the first two, which I'm not even familiar with,
01:56:33.600
are drugs that just block the androgen binding to the androgen receptor?
01:56:38.660
Cyproterone is a very potently anti-genadotropic, I believe.
01:56:43.400
So it's like it will inhibit you from producing GNRH.
01:56:55.080
The non-steroidal variant, bicalutamide, seems to be a bit better tolerated.
01:57:01.320
And it will actually raise your hormone levels on paper.
01:57:05.140
It's just you can't actually interact with the receptor because it's occupied by bicalutamide.
01:57:09.040
So it's like a silent androgen receptor antagonist.
01:57:14.840
They're like essentially irrelevant for anyone watching.
01:57:28.700
So we'll see how far my levels have continued to fall.
01:57:31.660
So I was going to actually talk right about that, right?
01:57:33.400
Because let's talk about, quote unquote, what's normal?
01:57:35.620
I've never found a compelling table for normal levels of free testosterone that are stratified
01:57:44.080
You can find these data quite easily for total testosterone level.
01:57:48.320
But I've only really seen data for broad chunks, prepubescent, pubescent, post pubescent.
01:57:57.740
Here are the percentile ranks for free testosterone, whereas for total, I can show you by decade
01:58:05.740
I guess it's worth putting some context to this, right?
01:58:07.720
So if a person's total testosterone is 800 nanograms per deciliter, most of that is bound.
01:58:16.520
And sex hormone binding globulin and albumin probably do the lion's share of binding.
01:58:20.980
And if a guy's got 2% of that as free or unbound, that would translate to 16 nanograms per deciliter
01:58:38.040
When you go to the lab and you get a test done, they're measuring testosterone.
01:58:43.620
By the way, we should talk about ELISA versus LC-MS, but they're estimating the free based
01:58:52.620
So that's introduction of potential error number one.
01:58:55.420
So you don't really know how much free testosterone you have.
01:58:58.100
The other thing is you don't know how many androgen receptors you have.
01:59:00.500
So you really don't have any idea whatever amount of testosterone you have is saturating
01:59:06.580
Are you playing below your weight or above your weight?
01:59:09.060
What do we know about the amount of total testosterone over time in a guy's life?
01:59:16.920
I know that after it peaks, you will have a steady, as opposed to women, where you see
01:59:27.320
And you can expect, I believe it's about 1% drop in total tests per year with an approximate
01:59:38.240
So at the same time, you would have 1% total T drop, 2% to 3% free.
01:59:42.520
Depends on age, lifestyle, but in general, like post age 30, 35, you can kind of expect
01:59:51.000
But that's not to say I haven't seen 70-year-olds with like 1,000 total T sometimes.
01:59:55.640
So you can certainly retain high-level production.
01:59:59.520
I don't want anyone to think, oh, now that I'm 45, my levels have probably dropped 20 plus
02:00:08.580
So those are kind of general numbers of decline that you can expect based on literature.
02:00:14.800
But I think it's reasonable to assume that a lot of people can retain good production as
02:00:20.520
It's just a matter of how well do you produce gonadotropins?
02:00:24.580
How well do you respond to them at your testes?
02:00:26.260
Because there is some level of function that declines with age 2, even in response to the
02:00:35.000
But that's kind of where you get into the nuance of is TRT justifiable for this person
02:00:38.680
based on pituitary output, lifestyle, diet, nutrient intake, sleep hygiene, is there sleep
02:00:48.400
Because there's an argument to be made if you have very good testicle response, like
02:00:54.480
Because you could top out your natural signal even.
02:00:59.040
Before we get to that, let's talk about the rationale for TRT.
02:01:02.720
So what do you think is the most compelling case for it?
02:01:05.740
And how often are people expanding that use case?
02:01:09.740
I think the most justified use for it is people who have primary hypogonadism.
02:01:17.140
So that is when you have gonadotropins going to your testes, but you're just not responding
02:01:22.640
So LH and FSH are, you will see these as high in your blood work, but your total T is still
02:01:28.500
Like that could be somebody who is, you should probably check, do you have a varicocele?
02:01:33.460
See where things are at structurally, functionally, et cetera, before you make any rash decisions.
02:01:38.360
Because there could be something you're overlooking.
02:01:41.340
And I do think a lot of people do overlook certain structural abnormalities that may otherwise
02:01:47.660
But typically, testicular failure in response to adequate signaling would be the obvious
02:01:53.580
more no-brainer versus if you had low LH and FSH, maybe your testicles are fine.
02:01:59.980
So why are you hapazerally getting on testosterone when maybe it's a lifestyle thing?
02:02:06.120
And so typically when we see that pattern, the second pattern you've described, which is low
02:02:10.760
testosterone, but in the setting of low LH and FSH, the most obvious things that usually
02:02:16.520
show up there are poor sleep, basically high glucocorticoids, which can also suppress the
02:02:23.380
And you'd measure the glucocorticoids through like a Dutch test?
02:02:27.880
We used to use saliva long ago, but yeah, so using a Dutch test.
02:02:31.400
Interestingly, those are not the easiest things to fix because people have to change behaviors,
02:02:35.760
which is a lot harder than taking a medication.
02:02:38.460
So let's just say we go down the path of we believe that TRT is the right thing to do and
02:02:49.660
What do we know about the dose response of testosterone?
02:02:53.320
And do we think that it makes sense to use fixed dosing and increased dosing or target
02:03:00.320
Because again, most of the studies, and we might talk about the TRAVERSE trial, they kind
02:03:04.400
of just use fixed dosing, which is at least for me, one of the criticisms of that approach,
02:03:08.600
by the way, is especially when you're using something topical and you have variable absorption.
02:03:14.100
I think in general, if you're going to be treating with exogenous testosterone, an accepted
02:03:18.800
entry-level dose that is on average safe and well-tolerated and will get you to a reasonable
02:03:25.560
total T that provides symptom relief for the majority of people is I can't see a more logical
02:03:32.680
start point than, for example, like 100 to 120 migs a week or something of that nature.
02:03:37.720
And just seeing what happens to the guy's total T, free T, this could also be variable based
02:03:48.200
Because maybe he just has a low free T instead of his total is fine.
02:03:51.260
In that case, you could have brutal symptoms, but your production is still good.
02:03:58.140
Do you have like severe liver issues or something?
02:04:00.620
So after you flesh all that out and you determine the guy needs T, I would imagine a reasonable
02:04:06.040
starting place is typically like 80 to 120 a week and then go from there.
02:04:11.500
And any advantage to dosing it once weekly, taking that dose and dividing it by two and
02:04:17.600
doing it twice a week, taking that dose and dividing it by seven and doing it every day?
02:04:22.040
I don't necessarily know that, like, for example, when patients come to you, I'm sure they're
02:04:25.980
looking for the highest level of optimization, hence why they're with you.
02:04:30.080
So maybe it's more reasonable to expect them to pin more frequently.
02:04:35.640
But there is a half-life with the drug, depending on the ester chosen, typically testosterone
02:04:41.180
cipionate will be prescribed, at least in the US, that's the most prescribed one, which
02:04:46.120
is a half-life of 10 days, if I recall off the top of my head.
02:04:48.900
It depends on the person, of course, where it's injected, blah, blah, blah.
02:04:51.920
But that half-life, you could extrapolate out from that, okay, it's going to take 50
02:04:58.140
days to achieve steady state serum concentrations in the blood.
02:05:01.800
And that's going to look on like a steroid plotter.
02:05:04.140
You could check online and see this kind of like spiking until all of a sudden there is
02:05:08.960
the same amount of dropping of the drug clearing out of your system.
02:05:12.180
You're getting an equal amount of spike back up.
02:05:14.660
Like there is no accumulation of drug burden after you've achieved steady state serum
02:05:21.060
So the advantage to injecting more frequently, and this is going to be determined largely by
02:05:27.380
patient adherence more than anything, because some people simply refuse to inject even more
02:05:33.020
than I've seen some insane stuff where people will let themselves drop to literally hypogonadal
02:05:40.220
And then remember, based on their dick not working, I'm going to, okay, now I take my
02:05:45.980
But in general, once a week is like bare minimum, I would say, but that's certainly not optimal.
02:05:52.520
And I would say that two times a week, at least for somebody seeking good quality oversight,
02:05:59.940
you know, preventative medicine, whatever, if they're coming to you or to somebody who believes
02:06:03.200
in the same things you do twice a week, I think is kind of minimum for decent, steady
02:06:10.320
We've sort of arrived at the same conclusion that that's the sweet spot.
02:06:13.660
We do have a couple patients who do daily injections.
02:06:18.000
And interestingly, in these patients, we see much less for the same dose of testosterone.
02:06:23.360
So you take 15 milligrams injected a day, which is actually very difficult to do.
02:06:28.600
You have to be very thoughtful about what kind of needles you're using to actually get such
02:06:31.660
a small volume in, but they will have much less FSH-LH suppression, which suggests to
02:06:38.040
me that the higher the peak, the more the FSH-LH suppression.
02:06:43.000
I don't know that there's anything physiologically relevant to that.
02:06:45.680
The studies, when you look at trough level, T levels, and when I say trough, I mean like
02:06:50.840
the lowest point of hormone concentrations after an injection.
02:06:54.080
Oftentimes, these studies assessing dose response will look a week after your injection.
02:06:59.160
So what you see in the literature isn't necessarily reflective of what's going to be in patients
02:07:05.600
But what I see personally and in Merrick Health and through all my blood work that I've seen
02:07:11.040
over the years, etc., the more frequent you get, there's a diminishing returns for sure,
02:07:17.020
but you can lower the aromatization spike and 5-alpha reduction by going more frequent.
02:07:24.280
So if you have a bolus administration of, I don't know, 150 milligrams once a week, you
02:07:30.220
are literally spiking your T into superphysiological territory acutely, and concurrently, you are getting
02:07:40.880
You also have a very, very aggressive spike in free androgenic signaling, which can crank your
02:07:46.320
sympathetic nervous system up, impair your sleep quality.
02:07:53.480
So when I had Mo Cara on here, he was talking about Netesto, which is the nasal formulation,
02:07:59.360
which has such a short half-life that it's actually a TID dosing schedule.
02:08:04.140
So it's 7 milligrams of testosterone injected intranasally three times a day.
02:08:09.880
I want to see somebody take that for more than a year and still tell me it's cool and fun to take.
02:08:13.860
So if you end up doing that for TRT, you've got to keep me posted.
02:08:20.020
The first is they don't have the hematopoiesis.
02:08:22.740
So these are not people who are making too many red blood cells that you have to actually be
02:08:27.140
careful of and have to go and get them therapeutically phlebotomized to take blood off them as their
02:08:34.420
Secondly, it's a FDA formulation that women can use because if a guy is taking 7 milligrams in
02:08:42.860
each nostril three times a day, clearly a woman could take one of those every other day.
02:08:47.960
And by the way, it's sort of an on-demand libido tool for women in particular.
02:08:52.580
So there are lots of interesting things around that.
02:08:55.200
Also, they're doing a clinical study and we're sort of observing what they're doing where women
02:09:00.880
are using intravaginal use, one application of that intravaginally before sex to enhance
02:09:08.240
It's always desirable to have an FDA-formulated product when you can kind of avoid the dark
02:09:15.340
I think the best way to conceptualize for the listener to why this frequent protocol or getting
02:09:21.680
a more stable level, why does it result in a lower side effect burden?
02:09:25.060
The closest you can replicate natural function, the more you will replicate natural side effect
02:09:32.260
profiles, which should be nothing if you are physiologic.
02:09:36.020
So with Natesta, which is like in and out acutely like so fast, you are not getting this huge
02:09:42.500
spike to like 1,500, 2,000 nanogram per deciliter total T.
02:09:46.400
There is no situation ever in which your testes would just blast you once a week with a hammer
02:09:52.380
of test and all of the associated metabolites and back end and consequences of that, you would have
02:10:00.960
And this is why you would test your blood as a natural in the morning when your testosterone is
02:10:04.720
spiking and it's going to ebb and flow over the day.
02:10:07.260
Your test level in the morning could be 300 nanograms per deciliter higher than later in the day,
02:10:13.280
So to expect that it's reasonable to jam yourself with an absurd amount of tests in one go and
02:10:21.980
then hang on that as it declines at your body and then crank it to the stratosphere again
02:10:25.880
once a week, it's just not representative of the physiologic state whatsoever.
02:10:30.460
So the more you can replicate that diurnal rhythm through the synthetic administration route,
02:10:36.040
the closer you're going to get to a lower side effect burden.
02:10:39.300
Like I've seen some guys that get gynecomastia from TRT dosages, go to ED everyday dosing
02:10:48.140
Just to translate that into English, you've seen guys who can take a weekly dose of testosterone
02:10:53.840
and in doing so, they make so much estrogen that they have to take an aromatase inhibitor
02:10:59.460
to prevent them from getting breast tissue gynecomastia.
02:11:02.600
And if they take that same dose and divide it daily, they can come off their aromatase inhibitor
02:11:08.140
Yeah, and some people it's problematic because they will give feedback to their doctor or
02:11:13.540
just give a judgment to what hormone therapy was like for them based on what is maybe not
02:11:21.540
the right dose, but also just not even close to an ideal dosing regimen and injection frequency.
02:11:28.080
When I got back into the practice of medicine and was learning about HRT, I couldn't find doctors
02:11:34.160
who weren't prescribing anything different than every two weeks.
02:11:43.400
But the standard dose was 200 milligrams every two weeks.
02:11:47.800
I remember going through Llewellyn's Pharmacology and looking at the pharmacokinetics and being
02:11:53.560
Any difference clinically between cipionate and enanthate?
02:11:58.520
Obviously, one of the advantages of enanthate is there's a commercial product called Zyested
02:12:05.880
for people who are squeamish about injecting that comes in a preloaded pen.
02:12:10.620
So we have some patients who just don't like the idea of having to draw up a syringe and
02:12:16.760
they just kind of want something that's a little more turnkey.
02:12:18.880
So Zyested, which is a slightly different form of testosterone, but clinically, I sort
02:12:24.400
of remember at one point there was some difference that might be age specific, but I don't recall
02:12:29.420
Enanthate is often thought to be a long ester, which it is relative to like propionate or
02:12:35.900
phenopropionate, but it's kind of like an in-between of cipionate and propionate.
02:12:40.960
It's like a half-life of, could be as short as four and a half to five days, I believe, off
02:12:46.460
the top of my head, whereas cipionate could be twice as long in some people.
02:12:49.720
So it depends on your individual metabolism of the drug often.
02:12:55.680
And also if you're pinning sub-Q or IM, like you could bleed out the effect more.
02:13:00.220
So I would say if you're injecting frequently enough, it's essentially irrelevant.
02:13:05.600
The Zyested protocol from the FDA is once weekly.
02:13:12.660
The difference of what you're supposed to take versus using it, like obviously frequent
02:13:16.440
frequency is of a lesser concern than you walking around with no test.
02:13:20.800
So if it's the difference between a guy taking it versus not, okay, take your once a week if
02:13:34.860
And I always tell patients, I'm like, look, if you're completely cost insensitive, I guess
02:13:39.900
But otherwise, getting cipionate in a jar is a fraction of the cost if you're just willing
02:13:47.180
But the enanthate, I think, only comes in three loaded doses of Zyested.
02:13:51.660
You also have less wiggle room if you're not happy with the output.
02:13:54.800
I would assert with near certainty that you are not optimizing your hormone status if you
02:14:01.160
I mean, just dialing in the stability of it and the side effect profile and potentially
02:14:06.000
quality of life as much as you could if you did a more frequent schedule, especially with
02:14:11.680
Meaning the more frequent you're giving it, the better.
02:14:14.480
I think the diminished returns are, there's a significant drop off when you go from every
02:14:19.280
other day to every day, but one week to twice a week, I'd say there's a pretty dramatic
02:14:25.480
Let's talk about the difference between sub-Q and IM.
02:14:28.120
IM, I have always advised patients to do sub-Q for the belief that it has, as you point out,
02:14:34.960
kind of you bleed out the effect a little bit longer.
02:14:37.160
I have to be honest, I don't think I've seen data to support that.
02:14:41.240
I have seen, and I think this is an extrapolation, but I believe it to be true, is when you look
02:14:47.800
at sub-Q dosing, you'll notice the total T levels are higher and then people take away
02:14:52.540
from that, oh, sub-Q is like, you get more out of your test.
02:14:56.920
But the reality is, is when they measure total test levels, it's often a week after
02:15:02.980
So I think you are almost giving yourself a sustained release through administering into
02:15:09.760
the fat tissue rather than intramuscular, which is more readily absorbed, quicker,
02:15:15.600
Just like if you did like an IV administration, it would be in your blood immediately.
02:15:19.280
Not that you would ever do that, of course, but the difference in pharmacokinetic profile
02:15:22.440
of IV to IM to sub-Q, like you can change the same drug dramatically in onset of action
02:15:28.360
You think that sub-Q is probably a better administration?
02:15:31.320
I think once you get to every other day dosing, it's almost...
02:15:35.380
But I think especially for people who are doing, and again, it depends on the amount,
02:15:39.620
because if you're doing once a week, is that going to be too much of a bolus to sit
02:15:45.880
But I would say, especially for infrequent, you'd be better sub-Q, ideally, if the volume
02:15:52.200
of oil isn't significant enough that it's creating lumps and stuff.
02:15:58.460
There was a study that I don't think gets enough attention.
02:16:02.520
I think it was 2014, might've been 2013 in the New England Journal of Medicine, that looked
02:16:08.900
So it took a group of men, chemically castrated them, divided them into two first.
02:16:14.440
Half of them get an aromatase inhibitor, half of them don't.
02:16:17.700
And then within each of those groups, there were four escalating doses of testosterone
02:16:23.120
So what you have are five groups times two, one with estrogen inhibition, one without,
02:16:33.640
So you end up with 10 outputs, which are ranging from low to high testosterone with high and
02:16:40.080
And the outputs were body composition, mood, libido, a whole bunch of, you know, erectile
02:16:47.100
The punchline was you were better off with more estrogen and more testosterone.
02:16:53.680
So the best outcome group was the high T, high E group.
02:16:59.440
I'd have to go back and look how high the E was.
02:17:01.900
I think it was probably in the ballpark of 50 picograms per milliliter.
02:17:05.300
But this was an important study because I think it suggested that estrogen is not the
02:17:09.980
I think there was probably a lot of people out there thinking, if you're taking testosterone,
02:17:16.960
And while that might be true at some doses, I guess let's start with normal physiology.
02:17:22.020
And then I'm kind of curious to hear what the bodybuilders are doing.
02:17:24.300
Back in the day, we thought that regardless of the dose of androgen, you should lower your
02:17:31.740
estradiol to 20 to 30 because it's in the middle of the reference range-ish for a man.
02:17:41.360
It was kind of like, this is a bad hormone to have above the reference range, even though
02:17:45.520
our androgens are literally like 10x the reference range.
02:17:49.380
What were your testosterone levels when you were back in the heyday?
02:17:52.420
I never got LCMS testing when I used my highest dosages, so it would get capped at like 1,500
02:17:57.480
or something, but it was in the thousands for sure.
02:18:01.300
But yeah, with estradiol, there is, and I've seen these studies too, where it shows neurotoxicity
02:18:07.160
when you add it in versus you take it out and there's a protective effect.
02:18:11.940
So neurotoxic outcomes are higher when aromatase is inhibited and less neurotoxicity when it's
02:18:17.700
taken out on the exact same input of testosterone.
02:18:20.580
I think it's pretty clear at this point that there is a role of estrogen in the body,
02:18:26.260
not just from a cardiovascular standpoint, but from a neurological standpoint too.
02:18:32.100
There is so many things that regulate mood as well.
02:18:35.860
I think even like temperature control too is going to be variable based on that.
02:18:40.000
It's kind of ties into the post-menopausal stuff.
02:18:42.600
But for men, it is certainly important and to crush it arbitrarily based on a reference
02:18:51.060
And I think most people, even in the bodybuilding space, are pretty aware now that estrogen is
02:18:58.160
And I think another thing that's really important for is bone health.
02:19:00.700
And by the way, you asked me earlier about when am I ready to start my TRT protocol.
02:19:04.520
I think I'm more troubled by the fact that my estradiol is so low because my T is routinely
02:19:10.760
between about 300 and 400 nanograms per deciliter.
02:19:14.140
And my estradiol is never above 25 picograms per milliliter, which is normal.
02:19:22.660
But to me, one of the big advantages of having a T of 1,000 would be that I'd hopefully have
02:19:29.620
Not to derail, but 5-alpha reductase inhibition, when you don't have conversion to DHT, you
02:19:37.340
branch off more T to estradiol and estradiol will reliably increase by 15 to 22% on finasteride
02:19:47.280
Some people who are very low aromatizers and have like a hyperandrogenic state, those people,
02:19:54.520
that's where unique individual variability comes into the consideration for drug implementation.
02:19:59.620
So a guy like that, even for actual quality of life, sometimes that like modulation.
02:20:06.820
I'm actually going to do both tests side by side next week where I'll do enzyme-based
02:20:12.120
test plus LC-MS for DHT, testosterone, and estradiol.
02:20:16.580
So I'll probably have a better sense of what they look like because we can talk about how
02:20:19.500
often enzyme-based testing gets estradiol wrong.
02:20:23.900
I've seen some brutal overestimations using ECLIA when it was like single digit.
02:20:28.700
But yeah, we've seen guys come back with estradiol levels of, we're using like say Boston
02:20:36.620
And they'll come back and they'll have an estradiol of 100.
02:20:40.440
And then you send them to LabCorp and specify LC-MS.
02:20:45.440
And this is especially important, I think, in especially hypogonadal men who have relatively
02:20:52.860
Like actually identifying where it stands is pretty important for sure.
02:20:56.140
Okay, let's talk a little bit about the other hormones.
02:21:01.520
So for most of the medical needs, is there any reason to be considering a hormone beyond
02:21:19.840
If you're just talking about health benefits and not performance benefits, we're going
02:21:28.620
So way back, I used to be a little bit more liberal and creative.
02:21:32.560
So one of the things I used to do was if guys had normal testosterone, the example used a
02:21:37.960
minute ago, a guy who's got a testosterone of a thousand nanograms per deciliter, but his
02:21:42.780
SHBG is a hundred for a guy is very high and his free tea is like eight nanograms per deciliter.
02:21:50.600
So he's like eight tenths of a percent free instead of say two.
02:21:55.040
You could use a very, very low dose of auxandrolone and you could eradicate his SHBG because it has
02:22:07.100
And of course, it also will inhibit, if you give too much, you'll inhibit testosterone production.
02:22:11.300
So there's a very fine balance where you might give him like 10 milligrams twice a week or three
02:22:18.680
You knock that SHBG down and you double his free testosterone.
02:22:25.620
I feel like it's just not worth the hassle, truthfully.
02:22:28.220
That's one example of an area where you can manipulate another part of the system without
02:22:33.760
But if you maybe take examples like that out, if you're just talking about the use of these
02:22:41.220
In some individuals, adrenal hormone replacement sometimes may be justified, but it's going to
02:22:52.760
So like DHEA, if you have like a bottom DHEA-S, maybe you would look to a DHEA replacement.
02:22:58.080
If you have low pregnenolone, that might make sense, but it's more for like neurological,
02:23:01.640
cognitive, perceived quality of life effects, not necessarily because there's any evidence
02:23:08.600
In general, the main needle mover is going to be your test and how much of 5-alpha reduces
02:23:15.020
And from there, you would never manually use more DHT.
02:23:19.100
You would never, almost never probably manually use estradiol on top, although it's not impossible.
02:23:24.500
So it's like upstream to that in the storiogenesis cascade, where might other stuff plug in?
02:23:28.960
I've seen progesterone use in men on TRT actually reasonably effective in sleep quality.
02:23:39.280
You don't have any HBTA suppression because you're shut down anyway.
02:23:41.880
So it can be impactful on quality of life because you get the downstream conversion to some of
02:23:47.260
those neurosteroids that may be inhibited in post-finasteride patients.
02:23:53.500
Not common, or why would it work in women and not work in men if you had a reasonably
02:24:01.220
You're not expected to have a sky-high progesterone anyway, but it's some of the downstream neurosteroid
02:24:06.080
metabolites that you make through 5-alpha reduction and whatnot that are very GABAergic
02:24:13.520
And maybe that's useful for a specific guy who has a low SHBG and is in a state of high sympathetic
02:24:18.660
drive on his test and needs to calm down, or there are certain use cases that are more
02:24:23.400
individual-dependent for sure and not necessarily dictated solely by, let's like, lab resulted
02:24:30.160
out and anywhere we just look for red and then replace it.
02:24:33.420
I don't really know the history at all of anabolic steroids.
02:24:36.240
Guessing testosterone's probably been around since the 30s or 40s, right?
02:24:41.180
I think when it was first synthesized, it remains up for debate maybe.
02:24:49.400
And so what was the first anabolic derivative of testosterone?
02:24:54.280
The first one I can think of off the top of my head is dianabol.
02:24:58.100
There might have been like methyl test or something.
02:25:02.760
But essentially what they did was they took the testosterone molecule and found they could
02:25:07.120
finagle it, manipulate it in ways to create testosterone derivatives like dianabol, methandrostenolone,
02:25:15.040
which is supposedly the breakfast of champions, according to Arnold.
02:25:20.920
Boldenone is a very commonly used drug as well still.
02:25:24.420
It was prescribed to horses, I believe, for a while.
02:25:27.040
And then I don't think it ever had a human use, but that is a testosterone derivative as
02:25:32.420
And there's other ones that came thereafter like halotestin, which I think famously one of
02:25:38.520
the presidents of the United States was on some aggressive dose of halotestin for,
02:25:42.940
I forget what it was, maybe fertility or androgen therapy, but some of the protocols back then
02:25:50.480
And through there, they also found, oh, if we take the 5-alpha reduced DHT, testosterone
02:25:55.460
converts to DHT, you would take that DHT molecule, you can manipulate it and create more
02:26:04.080
Like the idea of actually tweaking and modifying it to begin with came from the utility clinically
02:26:09.560
to implement in muscle wasting in androgen-sensitive individuals.
02:26:16.020
So you're not going to give a child testosterone who has, you know, like a burn patient, you're not
02:26:21.500
going to give them tests because you might masculinize the hell out of a female child,
02:26:25.500
So you have to come up with novel alternatives that are going to be anti-catabolic,
02:26:31.180
preserve tissue, keep somebody from wasting away in a state of fill-in-the-blank without
02:26:38.980
So the arms race of creating the best anabolic agent was from numerous pharmaceutical companies
02:26:45.240
and came an array of compounds that you know now to be the dianabols, the boldenones.
02:26:50.260
On the DHT derivative side, you had oxandrolone, one of the more refined, more recent, although
02:27:01.220
Proviron, I think still used actually to interact with SHBG.
02:27:04.420
It's probably one of the most potent drugs at binding SHBG is mysterolone.
02:27:09.120
But yeah, the ideal scenario would be you're trying to segregate the anabolic from androgenic
02:27:13.340
activity because testosterone is essentially equal.
02:27:15.660
At least based on rodent studies, you would find an equal amount of anabolic activity in
02:27:19.940
muscle relative to androgen-like activity, masculinization.
02:27:25.920
So you would try and take the compound, manipulate it to give maximum anabolic outcomes with a relative
02:27:32.360
lack of androgenic outcomes to create something that men, women, children, anybody could take
02:27:37.480
for muscle-wasting purposes and preserve tissue.
02:27:40.700
And they never successfully did it, but an array of compounds.
02:27:44.220
If sort of 1 to 10 would be, let's just make this a scale up.
02:27:51.360
So it is halfway between completely anabolic and completely androgenic.
02:28:04.060
What is the furthest example you have that's closest to 10?
02:28:11.580
So one would think that that would be like the drug of choice if you're a bodybuilder.
02:28:16.640
So typically men will take, I'm not saying it's the only drug because it depends on what else
02:28:20.460
you're trying to get, because sometimes the side effects, as absurd as it sounds, are desired.
02:28:24.220
So with Dianabol, for example, heavily water-retentive.
02:28:29.040
So that could help cushion your joints when you're doing heavy lifting, for example.
02:28:34.440
If you have better leverages on like a max out, you're going to be better with more water retention
02:28:39.800
around your muscle belly than if you, or in your muscle belly than you would if you had like a dry
02:28:45.800
compound that is not a substrate for aromatase and premabolin is extremely refined and specific
02:28:52.680
Like it's like a pure protein accretion compound with a relatively less burdensome androgenic
02:29:00.220
But the side effects of it, it doesn't interact with aromatase because it's a DHT derivative.
02:29:06.520
It does not 5-alpha reduce into a bunch of different things too.
02:29:13.520
Some people want to look cosmetically inflated with water.
02:29:16.720
Some people want to lift more weight or prevent injury.
02:29:24.560
But yeah, that's like skewing the furthest direction of anabolic relative to androgenic.
02:29:31.380
And I remember, again, just sort of reading like anivar, also highly prized among athletes.
02:29:40.660
If I was to give the most extreme anabolic relative.
02:29:54.780
You've talked about Clomid, Tamoxifen on this podcast before.
02:30:00.140
So these will interact in a tissue-specific way with estrogen receptors in various areas of
02:30:06.800
So you might have inhibition of estrogen receptor activity in the breast for somebody who has
02:30:11.780
breast cancer, for example, versus you would have pro-estrogen activity in other areas of
02:30:17.380
the body like bone, which is what makes the selective action of it desirable.
02:30:21.680
Because you can actually sort of choose where you get the activity you want, but also don't
02:30:28.340
impact the health of other tissues in other areas of the body.
02:30:31.960
So the same idea was kind of adopted for SARMs.
02:30:33.900
And they tweaked and modified anti-androgens, actually, to make these compounds that would
02:30:39.980
interact with the androgen receptor in a way that was tissue-specific and try and get pure
02:30:48.600
And proportionally, it's more successful probably than anabolic steroids, but the ceiling of anabolic
02:30:56.920
So when people use SARMs, they do not gain as much muscle as when they use anabolic steroids.
02:31:02.820
And oftentimes, in their quest for achieving a similar muscle-building outcome, the higher
02:31:08.880
and higher the dosage gets, the less selective it becomes.
02:31:11.380
So almost like certain, I don't know, beta blockers, for example, as you get higher and
02:31:15.600
higher, they become less receptor-selective, and you get more broad-spectrum.
02:31:20.200
What are the typical SARMs, or what are the most potent or commonly used SARMs?
02:31:29.160
These compounds often get traded around companies so often that they have new code names every
02:31:34.320
I think the most recent one was, I think it turned into VK5211 by Viking Therapeutics,
02:31:42.780
And it was in, I think, a phase two trial for hip fracture patients.
02:31:46.700
Osterine, also known as Enobo SARM, was probably the most well-known SARM.
02:31:52.260
But it has not been FDA-approved and seems to have not hit their target endpoints that
02:32:01.540
And oftentimes women who are trying to achieve a physique to step on stage to try and bridge
02:32:09.380
the gap between not using anything and using steroids, they will go for something like an
02:32:13.580
Osterine, and they don't viralize themselves when they take it.
02:32:20.440
Are these banned compounds in natural bodybuilding?
02:32:23.660
And they're super detectable because they're not supposed to be in your body at all.
02:32:29.020
Are these, if they're in phase two, compounding pharmacies, some of them make them.
02:32:34.860
I've heard some wild, nutty stuff just like, oh yeah, I'm prescribed Tren.
02:32:44.600
So that's actually classified as a steroidal SARM, interestingly enough.
02:32:48.480
So it was prescribed to women in the 80s, I believe, and was also used to beef up cattle
02:32:53.420
and might even still be, but it is super anabolic, but it also has very odd progestogenic activity.
02:33:00.860
So it interacts with the progesterone receptor, causes severe night sweats, it's called Tren
02:33:06.720
It also has this weird side effect called Tren cough.
02:33:10.680
No one can be sure of what is causing it, but it's one of the only drugs associated with
02:33:15.580
a prevalence of a severe coughing fit, like you're having an allergic reaction or something
02:33:21.100
So you inject it and you feel all of a sudden this tightness in your chest.
02:33:24.540
And then within 20 seconds, you're on the floor hacking up a lung for two minutes.
02:33:28.600
I had a patient come to me a little while ago who was seeing some fancy doc in LA who
02:33:39.400
Again, there's always like, how do you get people off these things?
02:33:45.260
Those compounds are more suppressive too, because they interact with the progesterone receptor
02:33:50.020
So it's like you get the negative feedback, not just through AR, ER, but PR as well.
02:33:54.700
So let's just kind of recap where you were on some of those.
02:34:00.080
Yeah, Deca is close to the more pure anabolic side.
02:34:05.640
It's not near the selectivity of a SARM at a therapeutic dose, but it is probably the,
02:34:12.780
interestingly enough, the only steroid that you can probably use at a dose that is, will
02:34:18.360
result in bodybuilder level results without hair loss, because it has unique interaction
02:34:23.800
where it gets so complicated when you think of the pharmacology of this stuff, because
02:34:27.540
it's like, it will 5-alpha reduce into a dihydronandrolone, which is almost no androgenic
02:34:37.080
So in the muscle, where you have a relative absence of 5-AR, you will retain the anabolic
02:34:43.860
properties of nandrolone where you want it, but then in your scalp, it'll 5-alpha reduce
02:34:48.060
into this metabolite dihydronandrolone, where it has almost no androgenicity.
02:34:52.520
So you get like the muscle building without the hair loss.
02:34:55.960
So do bodybuilders even take testosterone at this point?
02:35:00.560
So why are they taking testosterone when they have all of these more designer anabolics that
02:35:05.280
seem to have an advantage over testosterone in every way?
02:35:08.960
Testosterone is the base, because it provides your estrogen base layer of neuroprotection.
02:35:14.920
Because none of these things provide aromatization.
02:35:17.860
The only other compounds that could act as replacements for tests are things that are
02:35:25.800
But even then, you get these synthetic estrogen metabolites that have less predictable activity.
02:35:33.100
So for example, D-ball converts to methyl estradiol, which the potency of it at the estrogen receptor,
02:35:44.120
It doesn't have as predictable of outcomes in terms of providing the base layer of what
02:35:48.380
you want from like a broad spectrum, perfectly balanced androgenicity, converts to estrogen
02:35:57.400
Granted, at super physiologic dosages, you're in neurotoxic territory.
02:36:01.940
Certainly, you're not going to protect yourself with a base of test, but it's better than no
02:36:08.680
When you're saying it's super physiologic doses, you mean super physiologic doses of
02:36:15.100
Yeah, because I guess there's no actual physiologic level of them, but it's more just like the
02:36:19.780
androgen burden on your body is exceeding what it would be from a natural testosterone production
02:36:27.260
Let's just talk about an IFBP, top 50 bodybuilder in the world.
02:36:30.960
What percentage of the year is he on some anabolic steroid?
02:36:35.800
Oh, anabolic steroid, including testosterone, presumably?
02:36:40.760
They basically have accepted the fact that they've completely suppressed and lost any
02:36:45.440
endogenous production for life, and it's now just a question of how they cycle up the
02:36:54.920
I've seen firsthand multiple bodybuilders who've been shut down for decades come off and restore
02:37:04.960
Some of them just HCG, just coming off the drugs and waiting long enough.
02:37:07.880
But it begs the question, would they have been there had they not used the drugs until then?
02:37:13.880
Is that just what is representative of where they declined to naturally?
02:37:16.880
Or is it like a permanently lower ceiling potential because you've inhibited organ function for
02:37:25.080
Do we have data on people who have been on anabolic steroids for five years or greater and the ability
02:37:31.980
to forget spermatogenesis, just regain endogenous testosterone production?
02:37:39.340
The data are sparse or the frequency of people who do it is sparse.
02:37:45.020
I believe there's a study that shows the recovery capacity and there are people who recover function.
02:37:49.480
It's just relatively arduous if you don't know what you're doing too when it comes to post-cycle
02:37:53.340
therapy because you might have clearance of hormones and go to a crashed hypogonadal level
02:38:00.360
that you're dealing with until you hopefully kick in gonadotropins and hopefully respond
02:38:05.100
to those well and hopefully restore production to a level that provides symptom relief.
02:38:11.280
You have to bleed these hormones out of your system if you're using long-acting compounds
02:38:16.420
So there requires a lot of thought around bridging into your recovery and how you go about doing
02:38:23.740
People have to be implementing as the androgens clear, they'd be implementing, well, you'd
02:38:28.380
hopefully be on HCG to begin with to preserve testicular function.
02:38:31.920
Are these guys taking HCG the entire time they're on these other drugs to just maintain
02:38:37.020
Nowadays, it's becoming more understood that it's probably important.
02:38:41.640
But back in the day, and even me, I didn't do it because I was just told it doesn't matter.
02:38:47.000
You will just recover fine when you want to, when you want to come off.
02:38:49.960
I think more people are becoming aware though that stimulating activity in the latin cells
02:38:55.760
is of reasonable importance, almost certainly to retain an easier transition back into recovery
02:39:04.420
So at their lowest time throughout a year, they'd be on how much testosterone?
02:39:08.620
They'd be only on testosterone and they would be on...
02:39:10.840
Some people, they think that they're cleaning out by taking like a month off.
02:39:15.600
But in reality, it's like the drugs have almost some of them worked their way out of their
02:39:20.080
system by then, but they've been on grams of stuff that's achieved steady state and you're
02:39:27.560
And then you've never actually gotten out of your system and recovered function, which
02:39:31.820
So oftentimes they have either residual androgens in their system for the time they're trying
02:39:36.400
to clear, or most of them are staying on a base of TRT to bridge between blast phases,
02:39:45.580
So those bridges though of TRT, typically it's not actual TRT.
02:39:50.880
It's like fitness industry TRT where everyone's dose is 200 minimum.
02:39:57.920
Obviously, professional bodybuilding is not tested.
02:40:00.560
So the understanding is you're going to take anything and everything as often as you want.
02:40:04.880
Do they take a more middle of the road set of compounds as they're bulking up and then
02:40:10.980
move to the more pure anabolic, less water retention as they're leaning out?
02:40:18.600
In general, in an off season, when your goal is protein accretion, building muscle, they
02:40:25.960
are using it as, I think they still use a ton of stuff, but they will use less than when
02:40:32.860
And the thought is when I am trying to diet down aggressively.
02:40:37.180
When I'm in a calorie deficit, I need more help on the anabolic side.
02:40:40.260
Even though it's like, what threshold is it to preserve tissue at the end of the day?
02:40:46.260
But to build muscle, they will typically be using a base of testosterone plus one or two
02:40:52.980
In general, it's going to be a primabolin and an androlone or something.
02:40:59.200
Because they're about one to one to one, right?
02:41:01.140
No, it depends on the person how sensitive they are to estrogen.
02:41:03.460
Because there's also interaction with, for example, DHT derivatives, they also compete
02:41:11.480
I've seen people on the same dose of testosterone with and without a synthetic DHT derivative have
02:41:17.700
significantly lower estrogen without an aromatase inhibitor.
02:41:21.620
So they're actually lowering their estrogen input through competing for aromatase simply
02:41:30.460
So it's like you have to modulate that accordingly too.
02:41:32.540
So it's like oftentimes if you're a very estrogen prone individual or you get gynecomastia easily,
02:41:39.320
the male breast tissue development, these are things you are concerned of when you are
02:41:43.200
pushing your dosages to levels that your body cannot regulate on its own to prevent tissue
02:41:51.680
At TRT levels, most people will have no issues with gynecomastia development if they have a
02:41:55.620
good protocol in place and they're not obese or whatever.
02:41:58.500
But at super physiological doses of tests, not necessarily the case.
02:42:02.540
But you might be able to modulate that activity down by actually competing for aromatase with
02:42:11.160
And then you get to the progestins like nandrolone, which seem to have like a additive effect because
02:42:16.540
progesterone receptor agonism seems to be a stimulation.
02:42:20.160
It actually provides a stimulative input on breast tissue development too.
02:42:25.300
Like there's other things besides estrogen that stimulate breast tissue.
02:42:28.080
So you have GH also and IGF-1 stimulate breast tissue development.
02:42:36.320
These are all things you have to consider when you're using which drugs.
02:42:46.180
I mean, when you look at the guys on the Mr. Olympia stage...
02:42:49.680
Responding well does not equate to health often.
02:42:53.060
There's multiple ways to skin a cat and you can still gain similar amounts of muscle with
02:42:58.960
But the way you arrive there just might be more side effect burdensome or problematic and
02:43:05.780
How many of these guys require surgery for gynecomastia?
02:43:10.060
They proactively do it to make sure they don't have to.
02:43:13.100
Because one of the things that's brutal is guys who choose their drug protocol based on
02:43:21.900
So I've seen people use abusive dosages of aromatase inhibitors, CIRMs, just to tolerate
02:43:27.500
the androgen inputs, some of the drugs that are substrates for aromatase.
02:43:31.600
So it's like, to use the drugs I need to gain the muscle, I'm going to get gyno development.
02:43:35.780
Which I can't have on stage because it looks cosmetically not pleasing and I'll get marked
02:43:40.420
So I'm going to use aggressive Novodex and aromatase inhibitors while I'm using the androgens
02:43:49.520
But it's like, you can just imagine the androgenic signaling plus no estrogen.
02:43:54.760
It's like a horrible constellation of negative problematic factors.
02:44:02.840
And I'm really surprised there aren't more health consequences of this.
02:44:06.280
We see early deaths all the time in the bodybuilding world.
02:44:10.800
But these individuals are at least, you can say, lean.
02:44:14.760
They're typically following meticulous diets and training regimens.
02:44:17.500
So at that point, it's kind of just body weight and drug exposure because their sleep is usually
02:44:22.520
dialed to, at least as much as it can be relative to their drug-related side effects.
02:44:26.920
But yeah, when people say, where are the bodies?
02:44:30.060
I think it just hasn't been as documented as it should be.
02:44:33.420
There are a lot of people that you will never hear about because they're not a big name in
02:44:36.460
the industry that had heart failure at 27 or something.
02:44:41.080
Let's talk a word about how you measure this stuff.
02:44:43.240
So if you're taking testosterone, you can check testosterone.
02:44:46.740
But which of these other compounds show up on a testosterone check?
02:44:54.320
So if you use, for example, testosterone plus nandrolone, it is derived from testosterone
02:45:02.460
So you might have an elevated testosterone level through a standard immunoassay that is
02:45:08.600
not reflective of your testosterone doses you're using.
02:45:11.700
And similarly, we see things like estrogen metabolites that are synthetic, artificially
02:45:21.360
And there are certainly a group of supplements that seem to aggravate this problem, although
02:45:31.040
The artificial reading of enzyme-based testing of estradiol.
02:45:36.520
There's certain things that you shouldn't take before a blood test, even like biotin.
02:45:42.000
Yeah, there's some basic stuff that really messes up readings.
02:45:45.140
In general, if you're not getting liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry, it's like the
02:45:50.220
highest sensitivity of testing you can get for total testosterone and free testosterone.
02:45:55.860
This is something I haven't revisited in a while, but I recall equilibrium dialysis was
02:46:02.480
And if you don't use those, you will end up with cross detection.
02:46:06.280
I've seen on immunoassay for total tests and the calculation for free tests, numbers showing
02:46:12.980
that I'm in the reference range for testosterone when I did nandrolone monotherapy, which for
02:46:18.680
you, if you stayed on that DECA, almost for sure, your test would have ended up in the
02:46:22.620
gutter, estradiol in the gutter, and you would have just had nandrolone.
02:46:26.780
There's no nandrolone test, so you should have just had like a hypogonadal-looking testosterone
02:46:31.740
But if you got the cheap entry-level immunoassay testing, it probably would have been, oh, look
02:46:38.780
I guess 100 mg of nandrolone isn't that suppressed?
02:46:41.760
So that's like what some people might conclude.
02:46:43.400
So it's very nuanced, and it's not like you're taught to look for this stuff.
02:46:48.480
Often, most people aren't going to be prescribed this stuff to begin with, so it's a bit less
02:46:51.800
But in the bodybuilding world especially, pretty important, I would say, to know, especially
02:46:56.220
where your estrogen is at, thinking that you're good when you might have a DHT derivative competing
02:47:02.120
for aromatase, and your E2 on paper looks in range, and it's actually like crashed into
02:47:17.320
Maybe tell folks how they're used, and we can talk about some of the pluses and minuses
02:47:22.140
Human chorionic gonadotropin is present in pregnant women's urine, significant quantities, and
02:47:29.580
often it is pulled out, as absurd as that sounds, and purified because it can be used to stimulate
02:47:35.460
the luteinizing hormone receptor similarly to what endogenous LH does.
02:47:42.880
Some people say it's a mimetic, essentially, I think is the best way to put it, like it
02:47:45.680
mimics the effects of luteinizing hormone in the body.
02:47:47.780
And this is why it is commonly used in fertility regimens for men, because you can essentially
02:47:53.140
replicate the LH signal to your testes that may be suboptimal if you have low gonadotropin
02:47:59.360
output, or non-existent if you have HBTA suppression from your exogenous testosterone you're using.
02:48:06.360
So if you use TRT, you can pretty reasonably expect that your LH and FSH will go down to
02:48:13.360
either non-detectable or close to there, depending on what you're using and the dose.
02:48:18.660
And replacing that LH, I would say, is of pretty high importance if maintaining fertility is
02:48:26.880
So you will experience testicular atrophy if you do not replace the LH somehow, whether
02:48:33.500
it's through recombinant LH, which is almost never used, or HMG, which is typically not
02:48:40.220
The most cheapest, lowest barrier to entry, predictable thing is HCG.
02:48:45.120
Which still is not that cheap if you're using the branded HCG.
02:48:50.280
Yeah, there's a clampdown on it recently, too, in the compounding world.
02:48:53.220
And then Clomid, I guess the primary clinical use is in women for fertility.
02:49:00.420
In men, it acts, this is how it works in women, too, but it's just like for fertility purposes
02:49:05.000
in men, it's a selective estrogen receptor modulator.
02:49:07.960
So we talked about SARMs earlier, and I mentioned SARMs and how they use that idea for SARMs.
02:49:13.260
It interacts with the estrogen receptor in either a positive or negative way in that it could
02:49:19.160
stimulate activity or prevent estrogen from binding to it and interacting and providing
02:49:29.140
So Clomid has anti-estrogenic activity in the hypothalamus, so it tricks your brain into
02:49:36.360
So the response to that is, we have low estrogen, so we need to make more testosterone to aromatize
02:49:41.980
into estrogen, so you uptick your GnRH output to the pituitary, which will increase LH and
02:49:50.300
And then you can intervene with that compound to trick your body to make more tests, I guess
02:49:56.900
And interestingly, I don't know if you want to go down the rabbit hole of N-clomiphene versus
02:50:11.180
And N-clomiphene is seemingly the more selective and actually antagonistic in the hypothalamus.
02:50:19.880
So it's kind of like doing the thing you want from the Clomid, whereas the zoo-clomiphene
02:50:23.820
is like anti-gonadic, like it's providing almost like a anti-androgenic type activity in a way
02:50:34.940
So when you think serum, you're thinking something that antagonizes estrogen receptors
02:50:38.480
purely in the hypothalamus, but then leaves estrogen activity everywhere else.
02:50:42.660
Bone integrity is maintained, cardiovascular, et cetera.
02:50:46.620
Everything is kind of backfilled accordingly, except for right there in your brain where you
02:50:50.020
want your brain tricked into thinking, make more testosterone.
02:50:53.680
So N-clomiphene, it also has a shorter half-life, significantly less.
02:50:57.180
I think it's 10 hours off the top of my head and zoo-clomiphene is like days or something.
02:51:01.920
So the actual ability to maneuver the drug like pharmacokinetically too, if you have a
02:51:08.380
bad side effect or something, you can't even get off it as easily with Clomid because you
02:51:14.980
So the idea and presumably creation of trying to get FDA approval on N-clomiphene was this
02:51:21.680
is a more pure version of the drug that does what we want.
02:51:23.980
And there's been at least one study that showed improved outcomes in women who took N-clomiphene,
02:51:32.760
But despite that, it doesn't stop people from prescribing it and people from using it.
02:51:36.940
I don't think that's a sustainable treatment protocol for your entire life, probably.
02:51:41.980
I think the reality, and it's not as easy to adhere to, but I would probably assert that
02:51:48.480
stimulating exactly what you want to do directly with an HCG plus recombinant FSH is a superior
02:51:54.660
outcome rather than perpetually inhibiting estrogen activity.
02:51:58.960
There's no drug that's purely selective exactly where you want and it's perfect.
02:52:02.960
And that's the only issue I would also have with it where I think if you took two individuals
02:52:08.460
and one of them you put on exogenous testosterone and one of them you put on Clomiphene, they were
02:52:14.740
identical in every way in terms of readout, equal testosterone, free testosterone, and
02:52:21.660
I think there's still an argument to be made that the guy who's getting it from exogenous
02:52:25.920
testosterone has a better outcome because he's not getting the central inhibition of estrogen.
02:52:31.660
So his libido is better, his mood is better, his sleep is better.
02:52:34.980
Some of the mood dysregulation on Clomid, wild.
02:52:40.100
Yeah, I mean, we never saw this stuff, but again, I think we're a very small sample size.
02:52:45.100
We're not running like a clinic on this stuff and we're using micro doses compared to where
02:52:52.200
If you're not asking those questions, you also might not get it.
02:52:55.000
Even when people report that, these are often people who are on the precipice of hypogonadism
02:53:00.000
already with very low quality of life as is, presumably to even get on the therapy, going
02:53:07.700
on something and then noticing a decrease in vitality and notable anti-estrogenic activity.
02:53:13.020
You are going from a baseline that is not good to begin with.
02:53:16.940
So it's like comparing that to the outcome of TRT, I feel like is often a misrepresentation
02:53:22.680
just for the sake of you're maintaining adequate function or you're maintaining the testicular
02:53:28.500
At the end of the day, a thing that I need to maintain in perpetuity just for the sake
02:53:34.860
of having an LH and FSH that comes from my pituitary instead of just manually doing it,
02:53:38.840
probably not if it's at the burden of permanently antagonizing one of the most important receptors
02:53:45.940
Yeah, I think as a general rule, if you start to muck around with the receptors in the brain,
02:53:49.980
you should have a pretty good idea of what you're doing.
02:53:53.920
So let's compare a guy who's on testosterone versus a guy who's on HCG.
02:53:57.540
So if you're on a high enough dose of HCG, you're going to see FSH and LH suppression.
02:54:03.720
I had dug into this specifically based on that case that you mentioned.
02:54:08.700
So you've got two guys, one guy's on testosterone, one guy's on HCG, and they both have a very high
02:54:14.800
testosterone, they both have completely suppressed LH and FSH.
02:54:18.940
Obviously, in the case of the guy on high testosterone, his Leydig cells are doing nothing.
02:54:26.660
In the guy on the high HCG, his Leydig cells are cranking out testosterone.
02:54:32.700
But in both cases, there's enough testosterone being made that the pituitary has stopped making
02:54:41.780
So what happens to these guys when you stop testosterone?
02:54:44.500
Let's assume they've both been on their protocol for several years.
02:54:48.080
The guy who has sustained organ function is almost certainly going to have a smoother
02:54:54.080
transition because he has maintained the natural function and output of the organ responsible
02:55:02.000
for intratesticular testosterone the entire time versus the other guy has literally deprived
02:55:08.320
the tissue so significantly that it's a fraction of the size.
02:55:12.040
So trying to compare a guy recovering with testes half the size or less compared to a guy who has
02:55:19.020
fully functioning testes that have been maintained, that guy just needs to discontinue and get rid of that
02:55:26.580
And he's likely going to return to natural function within short order pending his gonadotropin output from the
02:55:35.420
So it's to be determined if that guy is going to have adequate pituitary output given a bunch of other factors,
02:55:41.380
But probably that guy is going to be okay, I would say.
02:55:44.580
The question then is, why did that guy go on HCG to begin with?
02:55:47.740
Because it's presumably because he had low LH output.
02:55:49.900
So maybe if that guy got on with low LH output on HCG, because that's probably the main reason he would have,
02:55:57.180
he's probably going to go back to low LH output unless something dramatic has changed in his baseline lifestyle diet.
02:56:02.780
And he's older now with less testicular function just as a result of age.
02:56:10.020
But he at least has more potential to recover to whatever his baseline was than the other guy, in my opinion,
02:56:15.200
who's going to have a longer, more arduous road with, okay, you have to have enough.
02:56:19.840
You have to not only get the testosterone out of your system to stop having negative feedback.
02:56:23.560
Now you have to get the pituitary output back, hopefully to some satisfactory amount,
02:56:29.240
which if your baseline was low, because presumably it was if you got on TRT,
02:56:33.960
why else would you unless you had like testicular failure?
02:56:36.200
And that guy would have never got off test because that's the only option he has.
02:56:40.420
Essentially, that guy is going to have to have enough LH output to stimulate him back to baseline testicle size
02:56:48.300
to match the capacity of the other guy just from a morphologic standpoint.
02:56:53.480
So I would assert that the HCG guy is almost certainly going to be better off than the test guy.
02:56:58.780
Do you think that there's a way around it on the HCG guy if you dose him more frequently?
02:57:06.200
So kind of starter dose would be like 750 units twice a week or 625, I think makes the math easier.
02:57:12.960
I think 625 twice a week allows him to go whatever, eight weeks with a vial or something like that.
02:57:20.840
If you're not getting an amazing response at 2000 twice a week, which we would never go above that,
02:57:26.280
you're wasting your time and you're wasting money.
02:57:28.780
Curious, by the way, what doses are bodybuilders using?
02:57:31.580
Most aren't using it, but the ones that are typically, well, even the ones that are using it aren't following like literature recommended dosages.
02:57:40.900
But at least from what I've seen to maintain intratesticular testosterone at 100% while suppressed on exogenous androgens,
02:57:49.380
I think the dose is about like 375 IU every other day approximately.
02:57:56.900
But this is also assuming you're starting at full function and you're not trying to get back up from 0 to 100.
02:58:06.880
But that guy who is on HCG, I would assert probably have an easier transition for sure.
02:58:13.240
But we can definitely get into the FSH suppression and the frequency of administration.
02:58:19.380
So if you pin more frequently versus twice a week, half-life of HCG, I believe, is 24 to 36 hours off the top of my head.
02:58:28.260
But if you are going to an everyday schedule, you're probably going to maintain more stable serum concentration.
02:58:35.160
So you're not going to get as aggressive spikes in light excel activation.
02:58:39.380
So you're going to have probably more representative of natural output of tests.
02:58:44.460
But at the same time, if that level of test is satisfactory to achieve the hormone levels that your body needs from an androgen.
02:58:54.320
So the only way you wouldn't is either A, HCG was too low, B, your response to the HCG was too low, or C, your dosage frequency was so not ideal that you had little blips of time that you had deprivation, essentially, and your body reacted to it, which is not an ideal outcome either.
02:59:13.280
So the frequency thing, I think it's more so, I would recommend more frequent, probably, for just stability and side effect profile.
02:59:21.420
But it's based on the adherence of the patient.
02:59:27.640
We've been going a while, and I feel like I'm about halfway through this stuff I wanted to talk about.
02:59:31.580
But there was one peptide we didn't talk about, which is BPC-157.
02:59:38.080
One thing I should say before we get off the HCG, though, because you had that specific example of if FSH is suppressed, how do you know if the negative feedback is through the HCG dose, amplitude, etc., versus the testosterone that comes from it.
02:59:51.620
I found a really good study that was, it used HCG at 4,000 IUs in men who had normal gonadal function and those who were poor non-responders to HCG.
03:00:04.860
Yeah, but in addition, the people who responded, they used clomid on after.
03:00:09.260
So it suppressed FSH in the people who responded to the HCG, but not in the individuals who don't respond.
03:00:16.640
So from that, you can discern it's not necessarily the LH interaction and more so the downstream androgen receptor activation and subsequent to that E2 estrogen receptor activation, the negative feedback.
03:00:30.000
So that actually tells us that it's not that you've shut off LH, it's that you've ramped up testosterone that is turning the system down.
03:00:40.260
Sorry, it's not that HCG is mimicking too much LH.
03:00:44.500
Yeah, the LH receptor doesn't tell your brain, stop making tests.
03:00:49.840
And to confirm, they applied clomid in the responders to HCG to see if they could attenuate the FSH suppression, and they could.
03:00:58.660
So in that, you can assert that an estrogen is obviously a huge negative feedback regulator.
03:01:04.780
If you can maintain FSH at baseline with a high 4000 IU dose of HCG with pushing your total T way up, and use the serum concurrently and prevent FSH suppression, it's like, okay, it's really downstream to the LH activation, because it's literally the testosterone output and the estrogen.
03:01:23.900
Because you're still maintaining FSH with the same androgen signal and the LH receptor signal.
03:01:30.280
So from there, you kind of then need to discern, okay, one thing I can say from the literature I've seen too is intratesticular androgenic signaling seems to be the primary determinant on spermatogenesis far and above FSH receptor activation.
03:01:44.460
So one of the ways you can kind of conversely assess this too is finasteride and dutasteride reliably kill, don't kill, but it decreases significantly sperm quality and count.
03:01:56.420
It's something that is just reliably decreases all metrics of fertility from a semen parameters aspect.
03:02:01.420
So the intratesticular free androgen signaling seems to be the main dictating variable on spermatogenesis, and you can find even in people who have minimal or no FSH at all, getting them fertile on HCG only and maintaining it.
03:02:20.000
Now, there are certain people who don't seem to respond as well.
03:02:22.960
Off 5-alpha reductase inhibitor though, or well still on?
03:02:25.520
I'm just saying in general, like people who are on 5-IR inhibitors, you're diminishing your possibility of fertility almost certainly.
03:02:32.880
So again, it's not just intratesticular testosterone, it's also presumably, and this is how you confirm what the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor applied is when DHT goes down, T goes up 15 to 22%.
03:02:44.060
There's nothing changing about output of testosterone production other than DHT goes down when you have a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor.
03:02:51.720
So if fertility goes down, when DHT goes down, it's not just the testosterone, it's just broad androgenic signaling.
03:02:59.280
So the more androgenic of an environment you have, intratesticularly seemingly is the main dictating variable.
03:03:06.120
When DHT goes down, testosterone goes up by how much?
03:03:09.700
If it's finasteride, about 15%, and you are inhibiting upwards of, at best, if you use a 5-milligram ProScar tablet for benign prostatic hyperplasia, you're getting a 70% systemic DHT inhibition, which pushes your T and estrogen up by 15%.
03:03:26.380
Which is so interesting, because regular T conversion to DHT is not that high.
03:03:33.040
So it's like you're disproportionately getting a bump in T to the inhibition.
03:03:39.500
And I'm sure, this is probably something I'd have to almost write out, but I'm sure if you get into the modulation of how much DHT occupies SHBG, and then how much free testosterone there is.
03:03:49.380
Oh, is that a free increase in testosterone, not total testosterone?
03:03:52.960
But DHT also, the activity of it is going to be inhibited dramatically more proportionally to tests because of its affinity for SHBG is like 5X.
03:04:04.340
If I wrote it out, it would make more sense than me just trying to think all the way upstream.
03:04:08.220
But in general, the takeaway that I've seen is having high intratesticular androgenic signaling is the only thing that's mandatory for spermatogenesis and FSH receptor activation.
03:04:21.440
With some level of FSH, you can still maintain or achieve spermatogenesis with minimal to almost no FSH.
03:04:28.600
And in those individuals that still need a push, they either lack androgenic signaling or there's too much oxidative stress, potentially.
03:04:37.440
They need to utilize things like ubiquinol, NAC, like I don't know, like sometimes supplements actually make a difference.
03:04:42.120
It's carnitine, creatine, or get off their 5-alpha reductase inhibitor or a myriad of things.
03:04:47.400
But a little bit of FSH recombinant on top of that base of ensuring you have adequate intratesticular testosterone can be the differentiating factor on fertility for a minority of people, but it's not mandatory.
03:05:01.500
And at the end of the day, when I hear people talking about, well, maybe we should get back to, we should use Clomid instead of HCG because we're seeing FSH suppression.
03:05:09.140
I'm like, I'm thinking a little bit of FSH, it's cost prohibitive, but it's probably a much better alternative.
03:05:19.560
But I heard the other day there was a pharmacy in Texas that prescribes 1,500 IU vials for like a couple hundred bucks, which to me sounds cheap.
03:05:31.560
And I think it depends if you're getting like Gonal or if you're getting like which brand you're getting.
03:05:40.680
You can go as high as 75 every day if you need to.
03:05:43.040
So it's still significantly cheaper than growth hormone.
03:05:54.160
So body protection compound, I think is what the acronym stands for, 157.
03:05:58.660
It's like a peptide that's produced endogenously in your gut and it seems to have some like angiogenic properties that can be useful for certain injuries.
03:06:07.400
But it's like, I've seen some pretty remarkable improvements in like minor, not complete tears and certain injuries that are like of lesser.
03:06:19.900
I'm not overly familiar with it to a point that I could say with any certainty that it's going to be efficacious for fill in the blank thing.
03:06:26.960
But it seems to be something that if I had an area with low blood flow, like a tendon issue or something, that's when I would be looking to something that's pro-angiogenesis.
03:06:37.140
Because it's like, I also worry about cancer cell proliferation from something that's pro-growing blood vessels.
03:06:45.560
And does it need to be injected locally for it to have maximum efficacy?
03:06:48.520
So let's just assume you tear your rotator cuff.
03:06:51.160
This was one of the bro myths we were taught back in the days, inject it right into the injury site.
03:06:58.500
It seems at least the last I heard that you don't need to do that.
03:07:02.260
Do we hold out any semblance for hope that we might get a study that would shed light on this?
03:07:07.220
Because how could we ever possibly know the counterfactuals here?
03:07:11.220
And how could we possibly disentangle the single user experience on all these things?
03:07:18.320
I think it's something that so many people use at this point.
03:07:21.600
I imagine you can't patent anything or make any money off of studying it.
03:07:25.980
You'd probably know better than me off of how pharmaceutical pipelines work.
03:07:29.040
But I imagine it's kind of at a point where so many compounding pharmacies sell it.
03:07:32.820
The problem I see mainly, I don't really think it's not good to use.
03:07:36.780
I would probably use it if I had a minor injury to somewhere I needed more blood flow.
03:07:40.340
But I do think a lot of people use it proactively far too often for something that is directly
03:07:47.360
intertwined with increasing, I think it's VEGF, and is super correlated with cancer growth.
03:07:56.160
People who are using it preventatively, a lot of athletes use it as a preventative measure
03:08:00.720
to avoid injury or rehabilitation when it's not necessary.
03:08:04.080
And I think that's overkill and risky as hell, personally.
03:08:06.800
I think because there are so many other things I want to talk about that we should just wrap
03:08:15.980
Because we haven't talked about any of the stuff I want to talk about around nutrition,
03:08:22.680
Again, I think we've talked a lot about how bodybuilders use drugs.
03:08:26.420
And I think for many people, that's a pretty foreign idea.
03:08:29.480
But bodybuilders also, I think, in a way, through their own very empirical study, have really
03:08:37.900
figured out the science of how to get lean and how to do it with the maximum preservation
03:08:46.940
And that's why I can't imagine a demographic that better understands how to do that, even
03:08:51.920
if it's not necessarily the healthiest way to live.
03:08:54.200
But I think we could all take a page out of the book if we're saying, God, I could stand
03:09:00.360
Wouldn't it be cool if I only lost one to two pounds of muscle in the process?
03:09:05.360
When you see a guy with 50 pounds more metabolically active tissue demanding nutrients starve himself
03:09:13.280
to 5% body fat and step on stage, it's like, okay, I can cut my calories by 300 or find some
03:09:25.920
I also think we could spend some time talking about ways that people can prevent themselves
03:09:32.000
from being fooled by all the charlatans out there.
03:09:34.700
But these people wouldn't be as popular as they are.
03:09:37.400
They wouldn't be making tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars if there weren't people
03:09:42.280
who were falling for what they're talking about.
03:09:44.620
So probably there's something to talk about as far as like, what are signs that maybe what
03:09:48.900
this person is telling you might be too good to be true?
03:09:53.840
Anything else you want to add to a round two when we do it, which maybe we can do in the
03:09:59.100
Off the top of my head, I think the fertility discussion, I think we kind of scratched the
03:10:04.440
surface on what an ideal protocol might look like and things to be mindful of.
03:10:09.820
Banking sperm, concerns that people might have getting on TRT beforehand, how to vet if you
03:10:16.620
need it, even like criteria that would be worthwhile to know, because discerning, oftentimes people
03:10:22.640
are told, especially at the clinics, oh, your total T is 400.
03:10:28.080
And it's like, you might have high AR content and expression.
03:10:31.860
You don't know that you need more tests to actually achieve.
03:10:38.300
There's a lot of nuance that goes into that too.
03:10:40.440
And knowing, not just identifying content charlatans, but medical providers, even your
03:10:46.300
own doctor potentially, knowing who is looking out for your best interest, educating yourself
03:10:51.340
at a base level, I think is almost a necessity nowadays to wade through the nonsense.
03:10:59.140
Derek, this was a ton of fun and I look forward to continuing the discussion.
03:11:05.080
Thank you for listening to this week's episode of The Drive.
03:11:08.080
It's extremely important to me to provide all of this content without relying on paid
03:11:13.040
To do this, our work is made entirely possible by our members.
03:11:16.240
And in return, we offer exclusive member only content and benefits above and beyond what
03:11:22.700
So if you want to take your knowledge of this space to the next level, it's our goal to
03:11:26.800
ensure members get back much more than the price of the subscription.
03:11:33.500
First, comprehensive podcast show notes that detail every topic, paper, person, and thing
03:11:41.480
And the word on the street is nobody's show notes rival ours.
03:11:45.360
Second, monthly ask me anything or AMA episodes.
03:11:49.200
These episodes are comprised of detailed responses to subscriber questions, typically focused on
03:11:54.420
a single topic and are designed to offer a great deal of clarity and detail on topics
03:12:01.240
You'll also get access to the show notes for these episodes, of course.
03:12:04.960
Third, delivery of our premium newsletter, which is put together by our dedicated team
03:12:11.060
This newsletter covers a wide range of topics related to longevity and provides much more
03:12:19.340
Fourth, access to our private podcast feed that provides you with access to every episode,
03:12:25.160
including AMA's sans the spiel you're listening to now and in your regular podcast feed.
03:12:31.280
Fifth, the qualies, an additional member only podcast we put together that serves as a highlight
03:12:37.340
reel featuring the best excerpts from previous episodes of the drive.
03:12:41.340
This is a great way to catch up on previous episodes without having to go back and listen
03:12:46.900
And finally, other benefits that are added along the way.
03:12:49.920
If you want to learn more and access these member only benefits, you can head over to
03:12:58.200
You can also find me on YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter, all with the handle peteratiamd.
03:13:03.340
You can also leave us a review on Apple podcasts or whatever podcast player you use.
03:13:09.520
This podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute the practice of
03:13:14.180
medicine, nursing, or other professional healthcare services, including the giving of medical advice.
03:13:22.480
The use of this information and the materials linked to this podcast is at the user's own risk.
03:13:28.200
The content on this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice,
03:13:34.440
Users should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical advice from any medical condition they have,
03:13:39.800
and they should seek the assistance of their healthcare professionals for any such conditions.
03:13:44.680
Finally, I take all conflicts of interest very seriously.
03:13:47.760
For all of my disclosures and the companies I invest in or advise,
03:13:52.180
please visit peteratiamd.com forward slash about where I keep an up-to-date and active list of all disclosures.
03:14:02.460
For all of my disclosures and the companies I invest in,