Reverse T negative feedback

[Jtay]

FYI,

I will also cancel my MRI on Monday as I don't want any negative effect on my labs during my Bac/T trial. Also, have been off of all supplements/meds now for one month until my Bac/T trial is complete.

[Jtay]

Interesting and, IMO, true post regarding FSH. It looks as though you can apply this same post/logic to LH tests as both are pulsating hormones as many other hormones are.

"......absent some reasonable pathological indications, it serves only as an office profit center. "

http://www.geocities.com/menobeyond/fshworthless.html

How could it be that the labs and docs surely know that the LH single sample serum test is virtually worthless, yet they continue to offer the test and continue to render diagnoses from same?

Is it profit and the expense of your health?

Go Figure!

[Jtay]

"A blood sample is taken by needle from a vein in the arm. Sometimes, a random urine sample is used. A 24-hour collection of urine may be requested if your doctor wants to measure LH levels produced over a 24-hour period. LH is released intermittently throughout the day and a 24-hour urine collection eliminates problems due to that variation. A random sample might not show the actual activity of the hormone."

http://labtestsonline.org/understand...lh/sample.html

Looks like labtestsonline.org says it all. I'm still waiting on directlabs.com to give me a quote.

Also, LabCorp via Esoterix is thinking about discontinuing this very important test as it is not very popular....can you believe it? They are the only major lab to offer the test. Demand that your doctor quit wasting your money on the LH serum test and that he utilize the LH 24 hr test instead or a combo of both.

If you are a health professional please call Esoterix @ 1-818-880-8040 and ask that they do not discontinue the LH 24 hr urine test# 500238. Tell them you will spread the word about this important test.

[Jtay]

And for those counting on your Prolactin results to make decsions.......Ditto for Prolactin and FSH. which are both pulsating hormones. The random serum sample is virtually useless in all three LH, FSH, and Prolactin unless you get sequintial serum sampling of a min of 3 tests, 30 minutes apart .. .
As is the case with LH, there is also a 24 hr urine test for FSH. However, I have not been able to locate a 24 hr urine Prolactiri test.

Again, demand that your health care professional remove you from the revolving door of profits because you want/deserve REAL/TRUE answers with your tests results, paid for by your hard earned dollars. This is one of many travesties in the medical field and as always the little guy pays the price.

LabCorp test numbers

LH 24 hr urine = test #500407
FSH 24 hr urine = test # 500221
Prolactin serum 3 specimens = test # 028472
However, 3 individual Prolactin serum tests may actually be cheaper = test # 004465 x 3

[Jtay]

Great news...just got off of the phone with the scientist over at Esoterix. We are in agreement that the LH 24-hr urine test should yield more reliable results as compared to a random, single, LH serum sample..

Also, more great news......at my request directlabs.com will now offer the LH 24hr urine test to their clients and for only $69

www.directlabs.com

Ask for Leigh

Now we are making progress.

[zumper]

I wish seeing your exams on LH before going vacations, on the following week

[Jtay]

Originally Posted by zumper

I wish seeing your exams on LH before going vacations, on the following week

It's not going to happen that quick I assure you but my trial will commence soon. As I realize that my bac/T trail will be monitored by many, I'm sure all will appreciate my prudence in making sure that my testing protocol will yield reliable results.

Can you imagine if I were to jump into it quickly and utilize the same, questionable, testing protocol that most anti-aging doctors subscribe to? I would be publishing possible misleading information on which you and others may make decisions.

As it stands now.....I believe that I will complete most of my research this weekend and complete my baseline testing the first part of next week at which time I will begin taking Bac and more testing to follow.

Other than my extensive research on testing methods, here is one more example of the amount of thought/time/planning that has to go into a responsible personal trial as I am about to undertake.......

I still have slight reservation as to whether or not to begin T first and drive my LH into the ground then begin Bac to see if it reverses the LH decline, or begin Bac first and possible increase my LH then begin T to see if my LH declines or remains stable.

The first testing protocol would yield whether or not Bac reverses T negative feedback , whereas the other would yield whether or not Bac stops T negative feedback. While I realize there is only a fine line between the two, in science sometimes it is the fine line that makes the difference.

Still the same, as it stands now, I will begin Bac first and T second as I don't want to put the little ones through any unnecessary pain and suffering and I will keep my fingers crossed that the aforesaid fine line makes no difference as, IMO, it is logical to assume if Bac stops LH decline then it would reverse it and vice versa.

[Jtay]

Also here is an interesting article entitled "Clinical value of 24-hour urine hormone evaluations" that touches on what we have been talking about. Although they fail to mention LH, FSH, Prolactin, and many others, what they say can be applied to same based on my research. Also, this article was first published early 2004 thus LH and FSH 24 hr urine tests were not widely available back then and to my knowledge Prolactin and many others still aren't.

Thus, I will try not to be so hard on the anti-aging docs who still ignorantly subscribe to the random sample serum test because the 24hr urine tests are generally still in their infancy and as with any emerging technology it takes time for the transition to take place. However, if I were a doc, I would feel an obligation to my patients to stay up on the latest and greatest testing methods and incorporate same into my protocol ASAP as I don't understand how anyone with good conscience can base diagnoses off of often unreliable, random sample, serum test results.

Although the 24hr urine tests for the majority of anti-aging hormones are slow in developing, there have been several such tests available for years of which, the majority of docs seem to be ignoring as is the case with LH, FS , GH etc., etc., and for that.... IMO, there is simply no excuse, as the docs have available to them the same, or more, info that is available to us in addition to an oath to practice medicine in the best interest of their patients.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...112728018/pg_1

[Jtay]

IMPORTANT!!!! For clarification purposes......

"often unreliable, random sample, serum test results" or similar subject matter, in the above posts refers only to random sample, serum test results relative to pulsating hormones where scientific studies have shown 24 hr urine testing to be a more reliable measure.

Of course, random sample, serum test results, do in many cases, provide reliable results for an intended purpose and I, in know way, desire to undermine the importance of same.

[Jtay]

Another lab leading the field in 24hr urine hormone testing:

http://www.aruplab.com/index.jsp

This lab typically only works through hospitals, government, and other large institutions and does not work directly with doctors. Therefore, if your doctor has hospital privileges then he/she will probably have access to this lab and tests via the hospital. If your insurance is covering labs then all is well. However, if not, don't expect the deep discounts offered by directlabs.com as you will pay hospital and doctor mark-ups via this lab.

Here are some examples of their tests:

LH 24-hr urine
http://www.aruplab.com/guides/ug/tests/0081113.htm

FSH 24-hr urine
http://www.aruplab.com/guides/ug/tests/0081115.htm

Testosterone 24-hr urine
http://www.aruplab.com/guides/ug/tests/0070716.htm

[Jtay]

Also, here are some 24-hr urine tests I will probably use in my Bac/T trial provided by directlabs.com, via LabCorp, via Esoterix (top 3), are:

LabCorp - LH 24-hr Urine test number 500407 (Esoterix # 500238)
LabCorp - FSH 24-hr Urine test number 500221 (Esoterix # 500196)
LabCorp - GH 24-hr Urine test number 500330 (Esoterix # 500211)
LabCorp - Cortisol 24-hr Urinary Free, ICMA test number 143222

To my knowledge, LabCorp currently does not offer a 24-hr Urine test for testosterone (T&F) and estrogens therefore, I will use the typical serum tests for these two categories.

http://www.labcorp.com/dos/index.html

[zumper]

You should check for LH first and then for your T levels.Don't even think about taking exogenous T and see if your LH is being suppressed or not,I don' think would work with Bac IMO.
Please think seriously my suggestion-your bet with Bac is to be able inducing LH,FSH and kick the Fucking SERMS off,if it works though

[Jtay]

Originally Posted by zumper

You should check for LH first and then for your T levels.Don't even think about taking exogenous T and see if your LH is being suppressed or not,I don' think would work with Bac IMO.
Please think seriously my suggestion-your bet with Bac is to be able inducing LH,FSH and kick the Fucking SERMS off,if it works though

First let me remind you of the animal study (see link below) in 2000 that showed Bac to reverse T negative feedback:

http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/con...ll/141/11/3940

"These results show that 1) baclofen greatly increased LH concentrations in T-treated castrated, and intact male sheep; 2) this effect was mediated by increased release of GnRH; and 3) the rapid increases in GnRH and LH were not accompanied by changes in FSH concentrations." Note: although FSH did not increase, it did not decrease either with Bac/T which is a major advantage because T alone has been known to have a similar suppressive effect on FSH as it does on LH.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable for me to hypothesize that Bac "may" reverse T negative feedback in humans which is why T first and Bac second was a testing protocol consideration in my upcoming personal trial. I say "was" because as it stands now, I will begin Bac first and T second mainly because I don't want to put my gonads through the unnecessary stress of shrinkage followed by growth, when no shrinkage and hopefully some growth is a more desirable option for obvious reasons. .

Furthermore, as I pointed out before, because low doses of oral Bac have been proven to substantially increase growth hormone in many scientific studies, Bac obviously effectively crosses the blood brain barrier at least at the hypothalamus/anterior pituitary which is also where the stimulation of GnRH occurs to release LH. Therefore, I'm inclined to believe that the animal study herewith may also be duplicated in humans using oral Bac for this and other reasons of which, one more reason I present below.

I find it odd that such a ground breaking experiment was never proven or dis proven in a follow up human study. You will note that this study is a University study of which, some are sponsored by private or government grants (as I believe the case to be with this one) in contrast to private studies which are many times funded by Big Pharma.

Does anyone here think that a virtually safe muscle relaxer available for pennies a pill (because patents have expired) would benefit Big Pharma or for that matter anti-aging docs if it were to be shown to prevent T negative feedback, increase LH, increase GH, prevent FSH decrease as a result of T, etc., etc? Bac would revolutionize ant-aging and body-building medicine as we know it today and at the expense of prescription meds such as SERMS, HCG, a slew of supplements and many more meds and supplements in the pipeline.

Keeping that in mind, as I reviewed numerous studies subsequent to the one herewith, I believe a picture began to develop (I could be wrong) almost as if there were a consorted effort to prove Bac actually lowered LH. However, most of those studies I believe to be biased (possibly funded by big pharma) as many were utilizing another GnRH synthesizing drug to first increase LH then adding Bac after the fact of which reduced LH. The problem here as that it is not uncommon for two positives to equal a negative thus, while Bac may reduce LH when combined with another GnRH synthesizing med, when used on its own it may have the complete opposite effect which may in fact raise LH.

The aforesaid combined, with my study of GHB, GABA B opioid antagonists, and other extensive research, gave me enough reason to believe that Bac stands a better chance than not of working which is why we are discussing it today.

The next couple of months will be interesting.

IMPORTANT!!!!! PLEASE NOTE: I obtained my Baclofen and Testosterone via a legal prescription due to my confirmed muscle atrophy and less than optimal testosterone levels and not for the purpose of my upcoming published personal trial with Bac/T. I am not a medical doctor and I am not commissioned in any way to conduct a scientific study. Therefore, my upcoming personal trial with Bac/T, is not a public or scientific study, but rather a personal study shared with this forum for information purposes only. Prescription medications should only be obtained, and used, under the guidance of a licensed medical doctor.

[Jtay]

Exciting information!!!!

More scientific evidence that Baclofen may be the "Magic Pill":

Read the following two Wikipedia definitions about GnRH and Growth Hormone carefully.

"Gonadotropin-releasing hormone 1 (GNRH1), also known as Luteinising-hormone releasing hormone (LHRH), is a peptide hormone responsible for the release of FSH and LH from the anterior pituitary. GNRH1 is synthesized and released by the hypothalamus."

"Growth hormone (GH) or somatotropin (STH) is a protein hormone which stimulates growth and cell reproduction in humans and other animals. It is a 191-amino acid, single chain polypeptide hormone which is synthesized, stored, and secreted by the somatotroph cells within the lateral wings of the anterior pituitary gland."

Because the two are so closely related in regards to the hypothalamus and specifically the anterior pituitary gland, I began looking for proof that LH secretion was somehow tied to GH secretion. If I could link the two, then maybe I could prove that GH increase could not occur without LH increase and thereby, substantiate that Baclofen does indeed increase LH because Bac is a known, confirmed, growth hormone synthesizer.

Needless to say, I was ecstatic to find several scientific studies confirming my hypothesis of which the following study says it best:

"In summary, using grass carp pituitary cells as a model, we have demonstrated for the first time that LH can act in a paracrine manner at the pituitary level to regulate basal GH secretion, GH gene expression, and somatotroph responsiveness to GH-releasing factors. The paracrine actions of LH on GH mRNA expression are mediated by a concurrent increase in GH gene transcription and GH transcript turnover. Furthermore, we also speculate that (i) the JAK2/MAPK cascades secondary coupled to the cAMP-dependent pathway and (ii) the PI3K cascade independent of cAMP-mediated mechanisms may be the key elements in the signal transduction for LH-induced GH gene expression. The present study not only provides new insights into the paracrine regulation of GH synthesis and secretion at the pituitary level, but also sheds light on a novel mechanism for functional interactions between the gonadotrophic and somatotrophic axes. The phenomenon described in the present study may also explain the evolution of a close anatomical relationship between gonadotrophs and somatotrophs in teleosts and accounts for the parallel changes in LH and GH secretion in fish during sexual recrudescence and the spawning season."

http://jme.endocrinology-journals.or.../full/34/2/415

In summary....Evidence shows that it's not likely that low doses of oral Bac will "substantially" increase growth hormone without increasing LH as well.

[Jtay]

Two very interesting scientific studies that support Baclofen reverses negative feedback but has no effect on LH otherwise:

http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/con...e2=tf_ipsecsha

http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/con...e2=tf_ipsecsha


You will note that in both studies, Baclofen had no effect on LH until LH was suppressed at which time Baclofen increased LH. Therefore, if these studies are correct, one is left to assume, that Baclofen may not increase LH but may indeed prevent the LH decline as a result of exogenous T.

Therefore, In order not to set my self up for disappointment in regards to Bac's possible benefits, I am not going into this study with the premise that Bac alone will raise my LH and possibly T as there are too many conflicting studies regarding same. However, a very reasonable expectation based on the majority of studies is that Bac will prevent my LH decline as a result of my use of exogenous T while at the same time providing me with ample supply of GH.

Either way Bac will be revolutionary to BB and anti-aging medicine, if indeed, at the very least, it prevents, or reverses, T negative feedback.