alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,769
- 19
- 81
Yep. Not defensive at all.
Anyways, the thread's title was "Testosterone Gel-Anyone used?" I thought all talk of testosterone was open territory in this thread especially after you opened things up first? If you or the OP would rather not hear of my side any more then you can have the mods ban me or I think there's some kind of ignore feature built into AT so that anyone who wants can ignore my posts.
Bro, you are getting way ahead of yourself here...there is no animosity...no hate...no call to have you banned. I am thinking you are now trying to be dramatic.
Im sorry you think that Im attacking your personal credentials and feel the need to prove your street creds while attacking mine, but Im actually attacking your position of open endorsement without the caveat that the best evidence isnt in yet. Obviously you're supposed to approach all internet info with a grain of salt, but people could easily get the wrong impression here and make a different decision if they had known that there was still obvious uncertainty here. Clearly someone with your background can concede that at least and if you dont then im even happier that Ive uncharacteristically crawled outta my lurking hole this long to counterbalance this thread.
Credentials? Street cred? WTF?!? Here is the deal. TRT/HRT that andro-gels and injections are used for are an entirely different playing field than those going 500mg Testosterone Ethanoate stacked with Stanazonol and the like.
TRT/HRT is proven medicine. Low testosterone is a proven condition. This is not new science.
There is no need for you to unlurk to simply play devil's advocate and throw up wall's of text that are totally irrelevant.
You are confusing life extension claims and those quick loss weight centers promise and ignoring there is no debate on people with low testosterone needing it to function properly. This is the typical sophomoric error. Hearing one thing, seeing that same thing in another and then correlating both.
Sigh, i've unfortunately spent decades of my life reading a lot of bad(and surprisingly good) articles and a lot of them were not only on google scholar, but also on pubmed as I flipped through article after article for hours on even just this topic alone. This field in particular clearly needs more researchers given the growing public interest(including mine) in testosterone. Unfortunately, peer reviewed research is the best we got so far and you're right that even with peer review there's room for errors/deception. However, articles are meant to be read/digested/criticized and serve as springboards for more experimentation/discussion to confirm what was found and hopefully extend the field of knowledge farther in quality/breadth. I think it's best to gather as much evidence as possible before having to make a decision. In my circle, i'd rather be known for evaluating the available evidence and erring on quiet reservation rather than bold recommendation.
You have yet to qualify yourself as anyone with experience, educational background, etc in this. I truly doubt you have spent years researching testosterone, you are simply googling up any bad article you can on it in and admit to discredit anyone taking it.