Is it possible that testosterone levels have to be kept within a strict range?

OK so... it's been a while since I really thought deeply about hair loss -related things.

Hi guys, by the way!

The reason I haven't thought about it too much is that I've had a lot of other health niggles that have taken my focus, as they're more pressing.

But my hair is still very slowly thinning and has now really started to finally get noticeable.

So as I recall, the receptors take in T and convert it via 5ar to DHT, right? It's been a while

My understanding though is that receptors can get more sensitive due to either high stimulation OR low stimulation. So if your T levels dropped with age or due to poor health, or let's say you took steroids, either one could sensitise the receptors, I guess?

I don't know if this would mean the acceptable T range is different for different individuals. I want to say yes, as it's well known that natural, healthy T levels do vary between men.

So... yeah. That's my theory, lol

Thoughts?


EDIT -- I guess SHBG would affect this too. And bound T can't activate the receptor so I guess I'm talking about the level of free T.

I'll attempt to break this down on the low common denominator - It's well known that when exogenous testosterone is added, any existent toxins will amplify.

So, yes indeed there are some truths to the pharmaceutical narrative, but overall it's a half-truth, because testosterone specifically isn't necessary the problem (unless it's exogenous/from outside the body).

So yes as we age, our toxin burden accumulates and one way our bodies do help to compensate for this is elevation of SHBG. On the flip side of this is when you're really young, because precocious (advanced, early MPB) occurs when SHBG is very low.

So the body does attempt to manage, and generally the best way to boost T-levels is to lower inflammation. When inflammation is low, the body knows it's safe to detach some globulin and allow more free testosterone.

Of course, it's not entirely all that simple, there's also cortisol and other stress hormones that affect inflammation, not to mention the toxic attributes that make or break testosterone from being an "enemy."

Generally, high testosterone is very healthy, it's just that in our world now, toxins are a thing.

So rather than worry about T-levels at all, better to focus on avoiding toxins and increasing their elimination.

Think of DHT as a way for the body to compensate for undesirable conditions.

CausticSymmetry wrote:I'll attempt to break this down on the low common denominator - It's well known that when exogenous testosterone is added, any existent toxins will amplify.

So, yes indeed there are some truths to the pharmaceutical narrative, but overall it's a half-truth, because testosterone specifically isn't necessary the problem (unless it's exogenous/from outside the body).

So yes as we age, our toxin burden accumulates and one way our bodies do help to compensate for this is elevation of SHBG. On the flip side of this is when you're really young, because precocious (advanced, early MPB) occurs when SHBG is very low.

So the body does attempt to manage, and generally the best way to boost T-levels is to lower inflammation. When inflammation is low, the body knows it's safe to detach some globulin and allow more free testosterone.

Of course, it's not entirely all that simple, there's also cortisol and other stress hormones that affect inflammation, not to mention the toxic attributes that make or break testosterone from being an "enemy."

Generally, high testosterone is very healthy, it's just that in our world now, toxins are a thing.

So rather than worry about T-levels at all, better to focus on avoiding toxins and increasing their elimination.

Think of DHT as a way for the body to compensate for undesirable conditions.

The way I was seeing it though is that something (or a lack of something) must be directly telling those receptors to become more sensitive.

My understanding is that receptors (in this case for free T) only up or down regulate if they're either triggered too much, or not enough.

I could be wrong. Maybe they have other mechanisms that I'm not aware of. But even if that is the case then there still must be something very specific that is making them upregulate.

low oxygen - caused by inflammation - caused by a toxin.

That's the formula for DHT

Chemical castration just isn't necessary, haven't gone done that path since 2004--and that was purely botanical, never touched the petrochemicals.

CausticSymmetry wrote:low oxygen - caused by inflammation - caused by a toxin.

That's the formula for DHT

Chemical castration just isn't necessary, haven't gone done that path since 2004--and that was purely botanical, never touched the petrochemicals.

Do you mean that low oxygen makes the androgen receptors more sensitive?

Also erm... I think I would be more inclined to increase free T to one's own healthy range, as opposed to try to reduce any androgen.

It seems like with age, free T is hit by a bit of a double-whammy.

T production decreases *and* SHBG increases, which further reduces free T.

I'm not sure yet why SHBG increases. Maybe to decrease estrogen? I hear that that can increase in men with age, especially if your liver is underperforming and things like that.

It's possible. Of course, these things have a habit of going deeper and deeper.

I guess it's all pretty much moot thought if my theory about free T being the key factor in hair loss is incorrect.

SHBG increases with age (also estrogen), correct. That said, this is protective.

What we are doing here is only focusing on a small part of the overall issue.

Low oxygen in tissue is often because of inflammation. Inflammation lowers T. T increases the toxicity.

An analogy here. You'll notice that autism (basically non-existent) when I was born, maybe except
for one in 10,000 or more. Nonetheless, boys will have it more severe usually (because of the androgens).

High estrogen in women upregulates glutathione (GSH), which is protective. Hence, if we put birth control
pills on our heads, we will not lose much hair, but we will also grow breasts and develop female characteristics.

Where testosterone is concerned looking at how stress hormones deplete the T to cortisol ratio, just another factor.

All that said and this is going to seem like a contradiction. Men with loads of testosterone usually have full heads of hair versus balding. The exception would be steroid use or men with plenty of T, but it being bound to globulin (to protect against toxicity). The moment we take an external source, we are doomed.

CausticSymmetry wrote:SHBG increases with age (also estrogen), correct. That said, this is protective.

What we are doing here is only focusing on a small part of the overall issue.

Low oxygen in tissue is often because of inflammation. Inflammation lowers T. T increases the toxicity.

An analogy here. You'll notice that autism (basically non-existent) when I was born, maybe except
for one in 10,000 or more. Nonetheless, boys will have it more severe usually (because of the androgens).

High estrogen in women upregulates glutathione (GSH), which is protective. Hence, if we put birth control
pills on our heads, we will not lose much hair, but we will also grow breasts and develop female characteristics.

Where testosterone is concerned looking at how stress hormones deplete the T to cortisol ratio, just another factor.

All that said and this is going to seem like a contradiction. Men with loads of testosterone usually have full heads of hair versus balding. The exception would be steroid use or men with plenty of T, but it being bound to globulin (to protect against toxicity). The moment we take an external source, we are doomed.

Are we sure those little receptors can tell the difference though? Maybe the reason that taking external T doesn't seem to work is that people usually go overboard.

Also if this theory is correct (for argument's sake) and free T has to be kept fairly high to keep the receptors happy, then SHBG wouldn't really be protective surely because it's reducing it.

Focusing on cell surface receptors is what the pharmaceutical cartel put 60% of the petro-chemical drug targets on.

The problem with that approach is like turning off the "check engine" light on. The health problem still remains.

In short, improving hair is how well your body can clean out its garbage. This is not always the case, but it is a large
part of it.

The body will not allow high testosterone if the body is too undermined with junk.

How good liver and kidneys are has a lot to do with this. How well we sleep is enormous.
No adequate sleep, forget about testosterone.

Many people who losing hair are running on adrenaline or inadequate sleep or have a high level of
detox burden not capable of dumping.

CausticSymmetry wrote:Focusing on cell surface receptors is what the pharmaceutical cartel put 60% of the petro-chemical drug targets on.

The problem with that approach is like turning off the "check engine" light on. The health problem still remains.

In short, improving hair is how well your body can clean out its garbage. This is not always the case, but it is a large
part of it.

The body will not allow high testosterone if the body is too undermined with junk.

How good liver and kidneys are has a lot to do with this. How well we sleep is enormous.
No adequate sleep, forget about testosterone.

Many people who losing hair are running on adrenaline or inadequate sleep or have a high level of
detox burden not capable of dumping.

I agree that fixing health is important. I recently bought an inversion table to try to fix my scoliosis!

But... I still think it would be fantastic to be able to fix MPB at more of a symptom level.

I mean, if one could monitor their T levels and supplement with it to keep it within the range their body wanted - for example - and this stopped MPB... then that would be great and at least would be one less thing to worry about while they then worked on fixing their health.

I used saw palmetto 2 years ago and I saw some positive results(less shedding thicker hair) and then had kind of a shedding period after I dropped it. This year I started using it again, I'm around 7 months in and I haven't seen any results. On the contrary I seem to be losing my hair on the crown at a more rapid pace. Should I give it more time or drop it?  Does saw palmetto have effect on T levels?

Nuada wrote:I used saw palmetto 2 years ago and I saw some positive results(less shedding thicker hair) and then had kind of a shedding period after I dropped it. This year I started using it again, I'm around 7 months in and I haven't seen any results. On the contrary I seem to be losing my hair on the crown at a more rapid pace. Should I give it more time or drop it?  Does saw palmetto have effect on T levels?

Bottom line on Saw Palmetto, what does it really do?

Reduces 5-AR and in turn will reduce the breakdown of IGF-1, but.....let's look into the why of refractory response
(In physiology, a refractory period is a period of time during which an organ or cell is incapable of repeating a particular action, or (more precisely) the amount of time it takes for an excitable membrane to be ready for a second stimulus once it returns to its resting state following an excitation).

There's just better "stuff" out there. I haven't touched saw palmetto since 2004.

In principle, if your IGF-1 levels have sank, no amount of 5-AR inhibition will make any difference, because lowering 5-AR will not rescue an already low IGF-1.

Ironically, lowering 5-AR can be counterproductive, especially if you using the nuclear equivalent (like Do-Trash-Your-Ride) or (Finished-with-Your-Ride), both Russian roulette from an endocrinology perspective. So Saw Palmetto is less of a blow, but still reducing 5-AR systemically will reduce circulating progesterone and allopregenanlone, which means more sensitivity to stress.

Made a recent post on the latest info on stress impacts on hair.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8501069/

CausticSymmetry wrote:

Nuada wrote:I used saw palmetto 2 years ago and I saw some positive results(less shedding thicker hair) and then had kind of a shedding period after I dropped it. This year I started using it again, I'm around 7 months in and I haven't seen any results. On the contrary I seem to be losing my hair on the crown at a more rapid pace. Should I give it more time or drop it?  Does saw palmetto have effect on T levels?

Bottom line on Saw Palmetto, what does it really do?

Reduces 5-AR and in turn will reduce the breakdown of IGF-1, but.....let's look into the why of refractory response
(In physiology, a refractory period is a period of time during which an organ or cell is incapable of repeating a particular action, or (more precisely) the amount of time it takes for an excitable membrane to be ready for a second stimulus once it returns to its resting state following an excitation).

There's just better "stuff" out there. I haven't touched saw palmetto since 2004.

In principle, if your IGF-1 levels have sank, no amount of 5-AR inhibition will make any difference, because lowering 5-AR will not rescue an already low IGF-1.

Ironically, lowering 5-AR can be counterproductive, especially if you using the nuclear equivalent (like Do-Trash-Your-Ride) or (Finished-with-Your-Ride), both Russian roulette from an endocrinology perspective. So Saw Palmetto is less of a blow, but still reducing 5-AR systemically will reduce circulating progesterone and allopregenanlone, which means more sensitivity to stress.

Made a recent post on the latest info on stress impacts on hair.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8501069/

That fits the description because I suspect that I have chronic stress, I always have. I also heard that the diffuse thining is associated more with stress related hair loss. In my case my hair line is more or less intact, it just feels like my hair is thinning out, especially in the crown area. I mean regrowth would be nice but if I could just revitalize the remaining hair that would be enough in my case.

Nuada: Have you done some kind of adrenal testing, FT3, Reverse T3?

Hoppi: Do you still have candida?

Cat with a Hat wrote:Hoppi: Do you still have candida?

I don't think I ever had it. I've had a lot of theories over the years.

The only thing I've ever actually found wrong with me (other than symptoms) is scoliosis. So I'm trying to fix that currently.

Hopefully I'll have some success and that will benefit my health

Cat with a Hat wrote:Nuada: Have you done some kind of adrenal testing, FT3, Reverse T3?

Hoppi: Do you still have candida?

I had an endocrinology test done back in 2008 and the doctor told me everything was nominal. Not sure what that entails to though. I haven't done adrenal testing recently.

Hoppipolla wrote:

Cat with a Hat wrote:Hoppi: Do you still have candida?

I don't think I ever had it. I've had a lot of theories over the years.

The only thing I've ever actually found wrong with me (other than symptoms) is scoliosis. So I'm trying to fix that currently.

Hopefully I'll have some success and that will benefit my health

Is scoliosis detectable without an MRI or examination ? Just by looking at how your back looks from the outside?
And what is the treatment for it(heard it is uncurable).

Nuada wrote:I had an endocrinology test done back in 2008 and the doctor told me everything was nominal. Not sure what that entails to though. I haven't done adrenal testing recently.

I think they generally tell you within quite broad ranges though.

Nuada wrote:Is scoliosis detectable without an MRI or examination ? Just by looking at how your back looks from the outside?
And what is the treatment for it(heard it is uncurable).

Mine was found on an x-ray I think.

I'll try an inversion table to fix it.

I figure that if my spine can slowly worsen, then it can slowly improve too!

There are easy ways to boost testosterone if you know what you're doing.

Keeping it in a range?

Could you clarify what that entails

CausticSymmetry wrote:There are easy ways to boost testosterone if you know what you're doing.

Keeping it in a range?

Could you clarify what that entails

Hi again

lol

Sorry. My life has been crazy of late and... I dunno. Anyway, I'm back on now!

I guess what I meant was... the correct range for the individual. Not too high or too low.

However more recently I have been thinking skull expansion is probably true and this is what stretches the skin of the galea. I dunno for sure but I definitely think there's something like that going on.

Hope you're well anyways

Personally, I really believe that the more endogenous T, the better (for hair, I believe it's better because less DHT)

And not only for hair but for cognition, confidence... (and of course muscle and sex, but we all know that).

If you have to reach 1000ng/dl, I think it's nice. But it will not be enough to stop hair loss.

For that, I do :
- Lot of sport (work out and Running with HIIT)
- Try to improved my diet, at least when I am on my routine.
- I improved my sleep :night mask, earbuds, blue light blocking glasses 1h before going to bed.
- Vit D, magnesium (glycinate), boron
- Cistanche, Shilajit and Pine pollen tincture (all are believed to help with T AND hair).
- RLT and ice on balls (not sure about those haha)

BTW, I notice that my hair is quite thick at the very moment I workout.

Hope it can help.