On 04/08/2008 05:49 AM, Williams, Deane G HS wrote:
> Paul Wakfer wrote:
>
>> A post on sci.life-extension of the abstract http://pmid.us/18294626
>> was of great interest to me because of my fairly low testosterone -
>> the result of having only one testicle since the occurrence of
>> accidental torsion at age 31 - albeit without any major symptoms of
>> low testosterone. The referenced paper is a review of thymic
>> involutions particularly as affected and reversed by sex steroids and,
>> respectively, their elimination. Notably, I have been able to maintain
>> a high level of immunity into my 70s, possibly aided by my lower
>> level of testosterone reducing my rate of thymic involution.
>>
>> Since I was able to obtain the full paper, I replied to the posting
>> of the abstract with some elucidating quotes from the paper at the
>> link: http://tinyurl.com/5nvuzl
>>
>> Any additional comments or questions should be posted to
>> sci.life-extension since that is where the thread began.
>> This note is merely for those people who may be interested,
>> but don't regularly read sci.life-extension as I and Kitty do.
>>
>
> It seems that low T has it's own set of problems though:
>
> Urology. 2006 Dec;68(6):1263-7.
> Prevalence of prostate cancer among hypogonadal men
> with prostate-specific antigen levels of
> 4.0 ng/mL or less.
> Morgentaler A, Rhoden EL.
> Division of Urology, Department of Surgery,
> Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center,
> Harvard Medical School,
> Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
> amorgent@...
>
> OBJECTIVES:
> To determine the prevalence of prostate cancer in
> hypogonadal men with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA)
> level of 4.0 ng/mL or less.
>
> METHODS:
> A total of 345 consecutive hypogonadal men with a
> PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL or less underwent evaluation
> with digital rectal examination and prostate biopsy
> before initiating a program of testosterone replacement
> therapy. All men had low serum levels of total or
> free testosterone, defined as less than 300 and 1.5 ng/dL,
> respectively.
>
> RESULTS:
> Cancer was identified in 15.1%. The cancer detection
> rate was 5.6%, 17.5%, 26.4%, and 36.4% for a PSA level
> of 1.0 or less, 1.1 to 2.0, 2.1 to 3.0, and 3.1
> to 4.0 ng/mL, respectively (P < 0.05). Cancer was
> detected in 26 (30.2%) of 86 men with a PSA level of
> 2.0 to 4.0 ng/mL. Cancer was detected in 21% of men
> with a testosterone level of 250 ng/dL or less compared
> with 12% of men with a testosterone level greater
> than 250 ng/dL (P = 0.04). Men with free testosterone
> levels of 1.0 ng/dL or less had a cancer rate of
> 20% compared with 12% for men with greater values
> (P = 0.04). The odds ratio of cancer detection
> for men in the lowest tertile compared with the
> highest tertile was 2.15 (95% confidence interval
> 1.01 to 4.55) for total testosterone and 2.26
> (95% confidence interval 1.07 to 4.78) for
> free testosterone.
>
> CONCLUSIONS:
> Prostate cancer was present in more than 1 of 7
> hypogonadal men with PSA of 4.0 ng/mL or less.
> An increased risk of prostate cancer was associated
> with more severe reductions in
> testosterone.
>
> PMID: 17169647
>
> [Note: This abstract was the subject of an initiating thread message
> posted on sci.life-extension in December 2007 -
> http://tinyurl.com/6fsjry Google Groups does not permit reply to
> messages beyond 60 days (to the hour!) - this one is "over the
> limit". **Kitty]

My original post was not meant to suggest that low testosterone was
beneficial in all ways. There are a whole litany of negative effects
of low testosterone, particularly in aged men including: loss of sex
drive, erectile dysfunction, bone loss or fracture, sleep disturbance,
depressed mood, lethargy, loss of lean muscle, fat accumulation and
diminished physical performance. However, it appears that less than
half of men with low testosterone actually experience any of these
symptoms, which occur in only 18.4% of men over 70. See the article
at: http://men.webmd.com/news/20070912/low-testosterone-symptoms-rare
In addition, IMO, all the above symptoms are preventable or reversible
by means other than supplementing testosterone or even increasing it
if levels are not too low.

The second message in the sle thread linked in Kitty's note above
contains an excellent explanation, by the author of paper about it,
of how different testosterone levels affect prostate cancer. I would
add to that the observation that such low values of testosterone are
likely also markers of disease, dysfunction or poor health in some
manner and hence may merely be correlational markers relating to
general susceptibility to cancer.

I now remember reading the thread, but since I was not much interested
in either such low testosterone cases OR in prostate cancer itself (I
am so well guarded in so many ways that I have no concern about it), I
did not reply. I also did not reply because of the remarks of "jc101"
(whose identity I know), which I consider to be wrong and had already
stated why on at least one other thread. But jc101 apparently refuses
to give credence to or acknowledge the sense or validity of anything
that I write (I think this is partly because our relationship outside
of sle apparently makes him think he knows more about everything than
I do).

I will state it once more. I do not think it is wise to use aromatase
inhibitors to either raise free testosterone or to prevent prostate
cancer because they work systemically and the conversion of testosterone
to estradiol in the brain is particularly beneficial. If someone already
*had* prostate cancer, then an aromatase inhibitor might well be
beneficial.

--Paul