Studies have shown a drop in testosterone in each generation. There are multiple factors that could be contributing to the decline (obesity, lack of exercise, stress, chemicals). Has anyone really nailed it down yet as the most likely culprit, or is it all of these things?
Also, could the rapid changes in technology and society play a role in this? I know there are many men who just seem to be getting softer mentally (more depressed and anxious), and it might have to do with the increasing complexity of the world that leaves them scratching their heads thinking it’s all hopeless. Lack of community, learned helplessness, and social isolation may be legitimate reasons too.
So, if we don’t know if lower T is a problem, then how can we know how much T is optimal? Just because something is average doesn’t mean it’s healthy.
There is no such thing as a generalizable “optimal” testosterone level. There is a rather broad physiologically normal range, and variation within this range tends to not be particularly meaningful or predictive of better/worse outcomes.
Better or worse outcomes for what? For strength and hypertrophy, you probably want more T, for example. For more assertiveness/risk-taking, extra T might be part of it (though I haven’t looked at the studies concerning the relationship between pro-social behavior and testosterone).
Would you? This question is absolutely not as clear as you seem to think. The idea that having a testosterone level of, for example, 600 vs. 400 (i.e., two levels within the generally normal range) necessarily produces better gains is something that does not have much supporting evidence.
I’d recommend Sapolsky’s work for a good synopsis of this topic.
Bryce Lewis , who is a top ranked world championship caliber powerlifer has shared his hormonal tests before , revealing that he was on the lower end in regards to his testosterone. And on top of being strong as hell hes also pretty jacked , just an example that supports what Austin is saying that it probably doesn’t mean a ton.
Would you mind summarizing the study you linked to in layman’s terms? What are the contents inside an androgen receptor, and why do steroids work so well?
I think you should read the study, which is open access, and see if you can come up with some hypotheses first. The learning process tends to work better this way
I have the theory that low serum T (at least in cases where the production end is not the underlying cause) is actually a sign of it being utilized effectively in the muscles due to having an increased amount of receptors available.
Ecclesiastes 7:10 “Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these?” For it is not wise to ask such questions.”
Jordan was a Bible major, so he digs it.
Also like men with “low” levels of testosterone are able to do just fine, nothing to worry about. I think there’s a great deal of cultural worry about what makes men “men” or women “women,” so this is just another instance of people worrying about that, but with scientific language. We exist within that culture, and at times might share those worries, but the scientific language or “scientism” is not the same as science, and in terms of scientific evidence, the evidence just isn’t there.
Also there is a tendency to assume that things we can measure (like free testosterone in the blood) have meaning. Similar to VO2 Max, it was one of the first things in exercise science that people could measure, so there are decades of assuming that it’s important somehow - when it likely isn’t (Science of Running, Steve Magness)
Jordan: It seems that the study is saying that androgen receptor content, rather than circulating testosterone in the blood or muscles, is responsible for hypertrophy. I googled androgen receptors, and came up with this: “The androgen receptor (AR), also known as NR3C4 (nuclear receptor subfamily 3, group C, member 4), is a type of nuclear receptor that is activated by binding any of the androgenic hormones, including testosterone and dihydrotestosterone in the cytoplasm and then translocating into the nucleus.”
The study itself said, “The function of an androgen receptor is, when bound with an androgen, to translocate to the nucleus and modify expression of target genes [reviewed elsewhere (Beato and Klug, 2000)], many of which are known targets involved in skeletal muscle growth and development (Wyce et al., 2010). Indeed, when androgen receptors are knocked out in male mice there is a significant reduction in muscle mass and strength (MacLean et al., 2008).”
So, it’s about the binding of testosterone and other androgenic hormones. I suppose steroids go straight into the androgen receptors. The study refers to high responders vs. low responders. I guess some people are just better at binding T.
Is there anything one can do to increase delivery of hormones into the androgen receptor, rather than take steroids? Does a low-responder just have to work harder for better delivery?
So, some people have a higher level of intrinsic androgen concentration? What happens when steroids are injected? Aren’t they “delivered” into the receptor for use? I’m confused about the terms because I’m trying to imagine it, but don’t have a visual.
Anabolic steroids are thought to exert their actions by several different mechanisms. These mechanisms include modulating androgen receptor expression as a consequence of (i) intracellular metabolism and by (ii) directly affecting the topology of the androgen receptor and thus subsequent interaction with co-activators and transcriptional activity. Other mechanisms include (iii) an anticatabolic effect by interfering with glucocorticoid receptor expression; and (iv) by non-genomic, as well as by genomic pathways, in the CNS resulting in behavioural changes.
Flooding the system with exogenous hormones is a markedly different scenario than the “normal”, physiologic production. There are some complex feedback mechanisms at play that alter the expression (and thus, concentration) and behavior of androgen receptors – and this scenario doesn’t really generalize neatly to individuals not using steroids.
Just to be clear: When you say androgen receptor “concentration,” what exactly does this mean? Does it mean that a person has more receptors (quantity) or that those receptors are saturated with more androgens?
