Quantcast

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Regulus

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40
1
Quote
The problem with the "lesbians" remark is not a lack of political correctness.  The problem is a lack of correctness.

No one should be offended by factually accurate statements that hurt someone's feefees.   Reality hurts sometimes.

But this statement is not supported by evidence, it is just some grumpy old man shooting off his mouth backed up by nothing other than ignorance and prejudice.   "It seems to me there are..." is not the same as "there are ...".   Reality hurts sometimes.

Thanks for the comment / input.

However:

I highly doubt that the complaining party was miffed by the lack of scientific studies cited to back up a certain point.  (If indeed that were the case, the complaining party could have easily posted on the board citing statistics, various studies, sources, links, and what-not.  Similar to what Cataceous did.)

The complaint had everything to do with political correctness.  And someone's feeling getting "hurt" over a comment about lesbians.

To think otherwise is simply naive.

Thanks,

A

I'm not naive.   I am fully aware that the complaint had to do with the grumpy old snowflake's feelings being hurt.   I was simply being polite by taking his comments at face value. 

I also understand what you are saying so please don't think I don't get what's going on here.   I just think the poor little snowflake whose feelings are being hurt is the guy who thinks he's in the right complaining about other people's feelings being hurt.

2
Quote
I've received a complaint about this remark in particular ...

Exactly!  See my post above ... I stated: "everyone's feeling are "hurt" / offended at the drop of a hat"

ALSO:

HRT Guru is entitled to his opinion, regardless of hurt feelings and complaints ... and regardless of all of these scientific, um, "studies" ...

Is it not simply common sense that a male needs a male figure (not two females, regardless of their sexual orientation) to raise him ... ?

It seems to me that there are a ton of scientific studies that say raising children (of any gender) by a single mother (no father present) is highly detrimental and, in fact, one of the leading causes of both (future) poverty and (future) criminality.

Common sense states that young boys need a male authority figure ... not two females ( straight or lesbian ) ... in their lives

NOW:  Cue up the "complaint line" and the offended / hurt feelings to my above comment ...

Which simply proves the point made in my original post above ...

Thanks,

A

The problem with the "lesbians" remark is not a lack of political correctness.  The problem is a lack of correctness.

No one should be offended by factually accurate statements that hurt someone's feefees.   Reality hurts sometimes.

But this statement is not supported by evidence, it is just some grumpy old man shooting off his mouth backed up by nothing other than ignorance and prejudice.   "It seems to me there are..." is not the same as "there are ...".   Reality hurts sometimes.

3
Testosterone, Hormones and General Men's Health / Re: Milk and dairy
« on: February 01, 2019, 04:05:49 pm »
I used to consume a lot of milk and dairy, but have now been vegan for several years.   There's no way to attribute specific positive or negative experiences to having eliminated dairy, as there are plenty of other confounding variables, but I can say that overall I feel great, have good energy, and my lab results are good all around.

It's an annoying vegan trope to bring up, but the fact is that consuming milk past weaning, or consuming the milk of another species at all, is a pretty unusual thing to do in the natural world.   That's not necessarily a conclusive argument against it, but I think it is a conclusive argument against the idea that we somehow need it.

The hormones are I think the strongest argument against it, to my mind, though I also have doubts about whether or not some of the proteins dairy contains are something we are really equipped to deal with.

Almond milk and soy are both good substitutes (tastes vary);  personally I use walnut milk (Elmhurst) in my coffee and on cereal and in white Russians.   Vanilla soy also makes a fine white Russian.

Non-dairy cheeses are getting better, and Kite Hill yogurt (almond milk) is quite good.

4
Testosterone, Hormones and General Men's Health / Re: Circumcision
« on: January 02, 2019, 12:17:51 am »
I am circumcised, and it doesn't particularly bother me.   But while I can't honestly say I've experienced any negative effects, I sure have't experienced any positive ones either, and I sure don't appreciate having had my genitals mutilated.

It is genital mutilation, pure and simple.  It is barbaric and absolutely outrageous that it is even legal to do this.


5
Totally.   Never met the guy in person but he was a good friend.   Miss him greatly.

6
Why not just donate blood anyway?

Even if you don't need it medically yourself, it's a good thing to do.

That's good but where is best place to donate Blood in the U.K Regulus?

Sorry, I have no idea about the UK, I live on the other side of the pond.   But surely blood donations are needed in the UK and they can't be that hard to find!

7
I don't understand what coming off for just a month would prove.   Even if your body somehow would bounce back, you'd still have exogenous T in your system for at least a few weeks after you stop, and you'd almost certainly still be shut down a month after.   If you really were trying to see if you could quit and your body self-regulate, you'd need to wait a couple months to see.  Your doc's proposal makes no sense at all.

8
Testosterone, Hormones and General Men's Health / Re: Ridiculous
« on: August 03, 2018, 04:58:54 pm »
I am not quite sure if this is ridiculous or outrageous.  But in any event....

I got a 90 day script for 5mg Cialis filled at CVS for an enlarged prostate.  Apparently name brand Cialis is cheaper than generic according to my drug plan, because they filled the name brand for me.  I paid $25 for 90 days supply, which is awesome.  It was $25 for me, but they also included the list price for the script on the label.  Any ideas on how much the manufacturers cost is listed at?
.
.
.
.
$1349.00!!!!!!

I don't know if anybody really pays that much for the drug.  But somebody somewhere is using this figure to inflate profits along the line.  And while I do not pay $1349 directly, I have a feeling that somehow this cost comes back to me and everyone else on the insurance plan. 

This is emblematic of what a f*cked up system we have to deal with.   Mind you, this is just one little prescription.  Think about this getting repeated everywhere on a daily basis.  A friend I know from the gym got cancer and had to take Revlimid.  This stuff is a mere $117,000 per month.  Sheesh.

Joe,

Agree with you but a couple things.   One is that the "$1349" is bogus.   Nobody pays that, and your insurance doesn't.   It's like the rack rate at a hotel.   Your insurance probably pays less than half of that.   Which, nonetheless is outrageous.   

You got brand name Cialis because the generic is not yet available.   Cialis goes off patent in a couple of months, and generics will start appearing shortly after that.   Prices should decline a lot.   But drug companies also like to jack up the list prices of drugs before they go generic, so that they can "cut the price" once the competition hits.   Lilly is definitely doing that with Cialis.   I buy my Cialis in Canada (not some shady online Canadian internet pharmacy, I have a home in Canada and fill the rx at Costco) and the cost is waaaaaaaaaay less than that, largely because Cialis is off-patent in Canada.   (I get the generic tadalafil, but the cost of Cialis not that far above the generic.)

But to your point, yes, here in the US we have a system where the system is set up to keep anybody from knowing what the stuff really costs or what a fair price is or what anyone else is paying.  Not a surprise that the drug companies take advantage of that system.    GoodRX is a big deal;  if they continue, they will do a lot to change that.

9
Why not just donate blood anyway?

Even if you don't need it medically yourself, it's a good thing to do.

10
On GoodRx.com you can get a price in my area of $27.50 at Walgreens for a 10 ml vial.

That must be the 100 mg/mL at $27.37? The 200 mg/mL says $40.69. In any case, still an excellent price.

...  I've heard of black market sources charging upwards of $120.

That's the premium for having someone else import it. There are suppliers in Europe who send it to the US for about the Walgreens price.

You are correct Cataceous, I was sloppy with my lookup.   $40.69 is the correct price.   Still, pretty cheap.   

11
On GoodRx.com you can get a price in my area of $27.50 at Walgreens for a 10 ml vial.

12


My Dr said:

"Just to clarify, the propecia medication can potentially decrease the conversion of testosterone to its active compound ( even the gel/Injection testosterone) and hence decrease the effectiveness of whatever form of testosterone that you take. I believe, we had already sent the testosterone gel to the pharmacy but we will verify that for you.
In regards to the compounded testosterone, it is not recommended by Endocrine society/American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists as formulation of the testosterone by pharamcies varies significantly and there is no uniformity in the dosing and hence one cannot predict the levels of testosterone to be consistent ( there is also risk of over and under dosing and related side effects). I do not prescribe compounded testosterone in my practice and I believe none of my colleauges do it either ( most Endocrinologists do not prescrive compounded testosterone)."

Shyam Narayana
Assistant Professor of Medicine Division of Endocrinology
Penn State Hershey Medical

If you google him, a lot of good review and info.
[/quote]


I have to wonder about this.  Mainstream medicine is influenced by the pharmaceutical companies.  Of course they don't want competition from compounding pharmacies.  I know someone who was prescribed Androgel, and the pharmacist did not even fill it.  The cost was $900, she said it didn't work very well and this guy is married with kids, so she thought it unwise because of transfer.  She recommended he get testosterone black market from someone in a gym.  Besides, if your compound pharmacy is not making quality product, your labs will bear that out.
[/quote]

No reason to go black market.   Test cyp is cheap and available at just about any pharmacy.   No disrespect to compounders, but if your doc does have an issue with them, they're not required.   Your doc can write an rx for good old regular test cyp from any ordinary pharmacy.    If your doc won't do that, his or her issue isn't with the compounders, it's an issue with self-injections, and you can and should find a better doc.

13
i have yet started trt but im considering it. i have a question, people say it shuts down your natural production if you start trt. but what if i stop and fix what was causing test drop? will it go back to normal?

If you go on for a short period of time and stop, there's ample evidence that you'll go back to where you started (though it's of course not guaranteed).   There's not much if any evidence of anyone going to normal levels after a period on TRT.

There just isn't that much data out there if you are on long-term and stop.   Seems to me that what little is out there suggests that you actually do go back to where you'd have been without TRT, but I sure wouldn't bet on that.

If you go on TRT for longer than just a brief trial, you really have to do it with the assumption that you'll be on it for life.  I would never have gone on TRT if there were any prospect of getting my levels up to something tolerable without it.   

14
Regulus, thank you. Yes, I'm all about it being easy, and yea, still debating. Now, with the shot, I've heard some say you might limp after for a bit? I'm in the gym 4-5 days a week, run 3-4 miles a day, is that an issue with shots.

Then you think about being that active and dealing with GEL and sweating, etc..... Appreciate it again.

I do subcutaneous shots, usually in the buttocks though I have done leg and stomach.   Can't imagine one of these shots causing anyone to limp, or even to have anything other than a slight sting.  Seriously, it's nothing.

 I have no experience with IM injections, but I've not heard of anyone limping as a result.   Gotta think that if it's causing you to limp you're doing something wrong!  ;-)

15
A lot of guys start out with gel and then switch to shots.   I think the majority on this site prefer shots over gels, but it's not 100%.
 I did and am much happier with the shots, but your mileage may of course vary.

Peaks and valleys really should not be too bad with once a week injections.   If it is, you can go more often.   I do twice a week (subcutaneous) and have zero issue with swings.   With twice a week the peak to trough variation is really quite small, given cypionate's eight day half-life.  I can walk you through the math if you want details.

I guess your friend's opinion about nuisance is an individual thing.   Personally I find taking two shots a week a lot less of a pest than every day having to mess around with the gel, waiting for it to dry, being super careful to avoid cross contamination of my wife, etc.   Not to mention the fact that I found that it did not absorb consistently.    But again it's an individual thing.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40