25-05-2012, 11:14 AM
(25-05-2012, 09:09 AM)Isabelle Wrote: It would suggest that weaning to a more sensible dose is a safer way to get out of a stall than breaking. Safer meaning that the risk of deflation would be less.
I hadn't thought about that but it sure does make sense. I think the hard part is knowing when you've gotten below that feedback point "enough" to allow LH to start coming back ... without some sort of "testing" ... blood, saliva, or what. Maybe you could cut back by maybe 1/3 or 1/2 ... that would sort of ensure you were low enough (as long as you didn't keep increasing everything to get past your stall and when you decided to cut back you were WAY over)
(25-05-2012, 09:09 AM)Isabelle Wrote: The idea that it takes months to restore Luteinizing Hormone after a year of Testosterone Replacement Therapy is a bit discouraging though.
It was something that I wasn't aware of at all until I stopped using Testim as a test ... around the 5th day or so after stopping the crash began. At that point without Testim and LH lower than .2 your body actually creates NADA. I "HAD" to start using it again .... and now understand that when if/when I stop it HAS to be a weaning.
I have to add something here too Isabelle. You're a sweetheart. There are times that people have sort of viewpoints that are different than yours ... I know there are a couple of times that I felt "uneasy" about a reply or two that I made. But you are ALWAYS so open and so gentle when you reply. And as much as you KNOW about this stuff you always listen AND consider something new .... and always "kind" when you reply. You are always willing to share "without preaching" .... THANK YOU ... people like you help make this place work.
Karen