GLP-1 Forum

Basic strength training plan

hexagonal said:
We have good studies comparing men vs. women and they are pretty conclusive that women and men respond the same to training. Men make larger gains in absolute terms, but the relative improvement from baseline to finish is very similar.

Sex differences in absolute and relative changes in muscle size following resistance training in healthy adults: a systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis - PMC

Muscle hypertrophy may be influenced by biological differences between males and females. This meta-analysis investigated absolute and relative changes in muscle size following resistance training (RT) between males and females and whether measures ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Sex Differences in Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis - PubMed

Roberts, BM, Nuckols, G, and Krieger, JW. Sex differences in resistance training: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1448-1460, 2020-The purpose of this study was to determine whether there are different responses to resistance training for strength or hypertrophy...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I suspect a lot of this is that fitness and lifting in particular for women has been focused on very light weights for a nonsense number of reps where you are exercising but never really taxing your muscles. If you are getting 10-20 hard sets in a week at a weight that you take close to failure (muscle failure! Not your overall fatigue, cardio, nervous system fatigue, etc.) you will grow. I personally really like the 8-12 rep range. Some people go a bit lower. Some people go a bit higher.

The issue with high rep ranges is that it gets very difficult for people to tell when they're getting close to failure. People doing 30 to 50 rep sets just get their reps in reserve at way higher rates than people working at lower rep ranges. You just get tired, bored, uncomfortable from the repetitive motion, etc.

So moving to a lower rep range with heavier weights just makes it way likelier that you're going to end up working closer to failure than you were at high rep ranges.

HIIT in general just provides benefits that zone 2 cardio doesn't. Once you have built up a base of aerobic fitness that lets you start focusing more on HIIT, everyone should. But HIIT is also harder on the body and can interfere with other workouts - I perform worse on lifting days if I do HIIT, so when I'm being good about my cardio it's zone 2 on lifting days and HIIT on "rest" days. My understanding is the general science these days is very supportive of the idea that HIIT should be a tentpole portion of your aerobic exercise, and then ideally you fill in additional zone 2 so that you are getting more aerobic exercise in general.
Click to expand...
What I said, was about older women specifically which I doubt are referenced in these studies? I havent read them yet. I assume That dr Sims who has spent her life studying it would know..
 
PeppyMTB said:
Looking for help. I’m a 48 year old male. Been on tirz for a few months and I’m down 30 lbs. Feeling a lot better, but now I want to get back into the gym.

I used to do a lot of cardio, but for the past 3 years I’ve honestly been really lazy. As an adult I have never really done much resistance training. I have a chance to kind of start from scratch now and I want to build my exercise foundation around weight training instead of cardio.

How do I start? Can someone give me the basic lifts, rep counts, set counts, and how to combine it all? I feel really lost right now. Thanks for any input.
Click to expand...
So, I'm 52. What you need is old guy weekly training plan. Forget the young guy hours in the gym every day plan.

And for old guys like us that only need the exercise for health reasons, 30 - 60 minutes per session is plenty. First you decide if you want 3x or 4x.

If 3x, that's MWF with rest days in between. And then you will probably need to exercise all your muscle groups. Use the heaviest weight you can complete a set.
  1. Start with calf exercises - 1 set of 20, 30, 40 reps calf raises
  2. thighs - 1 set of 20 reps squats
  3. abdomen - 1 set of 30 reps crunches
  4. chest - 1 or 2 sets of either 10 reps bench press or inclined bench press or dumbbell chest fly
  5. back - 1 or 2 sets of either 10 reps rowing machine or lateral pull down
  6. deltoids - 1 or 2 sets of military press or dumbbell shoulder press
  7. trapezius - shrugs
  8. biceps
  9. triceps
  10. done go home
If 4x a week, that's Mon, Tues, Thurs, Fri. Just divide into two groups, the muscle groups above and add more sets. Usually I pair chest and legs and then back with upper body exercises the next day. If you feel getting strong, just increase the weight that you were using.

No need to spend too much time in the gym, avoid injuring yourself, you're old. Wolverine stack is also phenomenal.
 
desinr-gal said:
What I said, was about older women specifically which I doubt are referenced in these studies? I havent read them yet. I assume That dr Sims who has spent her life studying it would know..
Click to expand...
What biological mechanism do you believe happens with older women that causes them to stop responding to muscle growth stimulus the same way everyone else does at all stages of their life? We don't see other significant hormone changes resulting in different muscle growth stimulus being required - we just see it have less absolute effect vs. when they are more optimal.

Plenty of older women compete in natural bodybuilding and follow these same training methodologies and get results that put them at competition level. Enhanced, too, but we'll ignore them since the hypothesis seems to be some vague hormone related shift and they're using exogenous hormones.

You shouldn't trust me, but you also shouldn't trust social media influencers or people with a bunch of book deals just because they have a Dr. before their name, be it MD or PhD. Questioning scientific consensus is fine, and a key part of science in general, but that involves doing more science to find out the answer, not just stating other opinions. Is she doing studies for these claims? What do they say? How do they stack up to peer review? (For the record, she is a listed author on quite a few studies, and lead author on several.) She has direct financial incentive to promote an idea that stands out from the crowd - it's how she sells books, gets social media engagement, gets media spots, etc. Taking a quick perusal through ROAR, it looks like she provides no references for her claims - why doesn't she reference her studies?

But in regards to the studies, yes, one of the meta-analysis does cover older women in 31 separate studies.

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/strength-training-women/ he breaks down a lot of the details in this blog post.

There is one study included that relates to the 'high load' vs 'low load' training in men vs. women, but it is one study, which is more a signal of 'more research needed' - single study results often fail to replicate. And, as noted in the article / a linked article off of that, there's really no reason anyone, men included, should be training at the rep ranges that are considered low load. 6-15 is the range most people live around for general muscle building, often a bit narrow like the 8-12 I tend to like. People with more strength/powerlifting focus often stay in 3-8.

Edit: For a bit of a additional context, other things that impact women's hormones including monthly cycles and birth control do not seem to significantly impact exercise performance in other meta-analysis either - any differences found were trivial.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Effects of Menstrual Cycle Phase on Exercise Performance in Eumenorrheic Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis - PubMed

The results from this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that exercise performance might be trivially reduced during the early follicular phase of the MC, compared to all other phases. Due to the trivial effect size, the large between-study variation and the number of poor-quality...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Effects of Oral Contraceptives on Exercise Performance in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - PubMed

OCP use might result in slightly inferior exercise performance on average when compared to naturally menstruating women, although any group-level effect is most likely to be trivial. Practically, as effects tended to be trivial and variable across studies, the current evidence does not warrant...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Edit2: Another social media influencer PhD with stuff to sell you, and is also a PhD that actively works in research in this specific area https://www.instagram.com/drlaurencs1/

She seems to pretty actively take aim at a bunch of the claims Simms makes. Here's one with a bunch of referenced studies around rep range in peri/post-menopausal women:

View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DPjpapZCWSW/?hl=en
 
Last edited:
hexagonal said:
What biological mechanism do you believe happens with older women that causes them to stop responding to muscle growth stimulus the same way everyone else does at all stages of their life? We don't see other significant hormone changes resulting in different muscle growth stimulus being required - we just see it have less absolute effect vs. when they are more optimal.

Plenty of older women compete in natural bodybuilding and follow these same training methodologies and get results that put them at competition level. Enhanced, too, but we'll ignore them since the hypothesis seems to be some vague hormone related shift and they're using exogenous hormones.

You shouldn't trust me, but you also shouldn't trust social media influencers or people with a bunch of book deals just because they have a Dr. before their name, but it MD or PhD. What studies is she basing her recommendations on - if they don't exist, how does anyone know that what she is saying is anything more than anecdotes? She has direct financial incentive to promote an idea that stands out from the crowd - it's how she sells books, gets social media engagement, gets media spots, etc. Taking a quick perusal through ROAR, it looks like she provides no references for her claims.

But in regards to the studies, yes, one of the meta-analysis does cover older women in 31 separate studies.

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/strength-training-women/ he breaks down a lot of the details in this blog post.

There is one study included that relates to the 'high load' vs 'low load' training in men vs. women, but it is one study, which is more a signal of 'more research needed' - single study results often fail to replicate. And, as noted in the article / a linked article off of that, there's really no reason anyone, men included, should be training at the rep ranges that are considered low load. 6-15 is the range most people live around for general muscle building, often a bit narrow like the 8-12 I tend to like. People with more strength/powerlifting focus often stay in 3-8.
Click to expand...
Watch a Stacy Sims Ted talk or video, there is a good one with Andrew Huberman.
I cant be trusted to remember everything she goes into in detail correctly. Basically The decline in estrogen and other hormone disruptions leads to an over excretion of cortisol. A lack of *adequate protein consumption, combined with longer cardio sessions or too many reps while strength training leads to a catabolism of muscles. So when pre, meno, and post meno women follow established norms in workouts i.e. long zone 2 cardio, and lots of weight reps, they trigger cortisol and catabolism, so these women lose muscle mass, gain more fat and are more fatigued.
She says only short light cardio, and very short bursts or sprints at 90-100% max will drive fat loss, If combined with well timed and adeqaute protein consumption, as well as strength training with heavy weight. Heavy being fatigue at 3-7 reps. She also recommends Plyo exercises with jumps, to strengthen bones.
*adequate is a Lot. like 40g per meal starting within 1/2 hour of waking to stave off am cortisol surge.
 
desinr-gal said:
Watch a Stacy Sims Ted talk or video, there is a good one with Andrew Huberman.
I cant be trusted to remember everything she goes into in detail correctly. Basically The decline in estrogen and other hormone disruptions leads to an over excretion of cortisol. A lack of *adequate protein consumption, combined with longer cardio sessions or too many reps while strength training leads to a catabolism of muscles. So when pre, meno, and post meno women follow established norms in workouts i.e. long zone 2 cardio, and lots of weight reps, they trigger cortisol and catabolism, so these women lose muscle mass, gain more fat and are more fatigued.
She says only short light cardio, and very short bursts or sprints at 90-100% max will drive fat loss, If combined with well timed and adeqaute protein consumption, as well as strength training with heavy weight. Heavy being fatigue at 3-7 reps. She also recommends Plyo exercises with jumps, to strengthen bones.
*adequate is a Lot. like 40g per meal starting within 1/2 hour of waking to stave off am cortisol surge.
Click to expand...
None of us should be interested in podcast appearances and similar for anything more than entertainment value and to potentially point us towards things to learn about - we want actual science. People go on Huberman and say all sorts of nonsense all the time, same thing with Attia, etc.

Random controlled trials on humans are how we figure out what actually happens, with large scale observational studies helping us shore things up when an RCT isn't appropriate.

We also need to define terms - what are "long" zone 2 cardio sessions? HIIT itself is a significant spike in cortisol - is the claim that 30 minutes of zone 2 is going to cause more cortisol than that? 60? 90? Cortisol increases for weight lifting are transient in much the same way that they are for HIIT - why is it fine there and not for lifting?

I'll confess I'm skeptical of this idea that cortisol is such a bugbear to begin with - it's important to quite a few bodily functions and these spikes and dips serve a purpose. It's not like men don't also have cortisol spikes in the morning - that's the natural rhythm here. And between-person spread differences in cortisol levels dwarf the differences at an individual level going through menopause.

Cortisol Levels during the Menopausal Transition and Early Postmenopause: Observations from the Seattle Midlife Women’s Health Study - PMC

Cortisol levels rise among some women during the late stage of the menopausal transition, but we know little about changes in cortisol levels in relation to menopause-related factors (menopausal transition (MT) stage, urinary estrone glucuronide, ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Standard deviation for participants was larger than the between late reproductive to postmenopausal level differences.


Here, across nearly 20k participants, they found that after early childhood women actually have higher cortisol levels than men, equalizing in the 30s, and men pulling ahead in the 40s and beyond. If older men are at a higher baseline cortisol level, and cortisol is one of the primary drivers here, wouldn't it be even more important for them to manage cortisol? But again, individual variability is larger than these factors.

Jumping does not seem to have robust science supporting it for older women increasing bone density. Another PhD researcher with her own incentives for you to listen to her, so trust as you will:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DPZ6i2UCUc1/?hl=en


All of these people have stuff they want to sell you, but some specific counterpoints to Sims from another PhD researcher in this area:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DPHsC3PEwXX/?img_index=1


Studies in women over 40 seem to strongly suggest women grow the same regardless of low rep vs high rep when proximity to failure equated:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DMqW1eXSLtI/?hl=en

In more disparate cohorts, no age detected difference either:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DH6JW2bAXsQ/?hl=en&img_index=1


Mechanistic studies are great to point us in directions of things and help us build a hypothesis, or as a potential explanation for results in an RCT or observational study. But when those mechanistic studies in animals just do not match the reality in human RCTs, personally, I worry a lot more about the RCT results than I do looking at what happened in rodents.

I'm just some asshole on an internet forum with google scholar and an inflated opinion of my own intelligence and ability to comprehend studies - but Sims seems like a grifter to me.
 
Last edited:
Dr. Stacy Sims holds the following credentials:



  • PhD in Environmental Exercise Physiology: University of Otago, New Zealand
  • MS in Exercise Physiology and Metabolism: Springfield College
  • BA in Movement and Sport Sciences: Purdue University
Just curious; what are yours?
 
Very interesting stuff, thanks @hexagonal.

The biggest lesson for me was the concept of working up to a few Reps In Reserve (I had to look up RIR). In the past I had always been taught that "to failure" was the standard.

The discussion about what kind of exercises, weights vs machines etc. is interesting but also not very relevant to me -- I have a machine and either I use that machine, or I don't lift at all. I've done free weights in the past and I just don't like it, and even if I did I don't want to carve out the extra time to go to a gym. Using a machine is the right compromise for me at this point.
 
Morbius said:
Very interesting stuff, thanks @hexagonal.

The biggest lesson for me was the concept of working up to a few Reps In Reserve (I had to look up RIR). In the past I had always been taught that "to failure" was the standard.

The discussion about what kind of exercises, weights vs machines etc. is interesting but also not very relevant to me -- I have a machine and either I use that machine, or I don't lift at all. I've done free weights in the past and I just don't like it, and even if I did I don't want to carve out the extra time to go to a gym. Using a machine is the right compromise for me at this point.
Click to expand...
The good news is, you're probably not missing out on anything, re: Machines!
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effect of free-weight vs. machine-based strength training on maximal strength, hypertrophy and jump performance - a systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed

No differences were detected in the direct comparison of strength, jump performance and muscle hypertrophy. Current body of evidence indicates that strength changes are specific to the training modality, and the choice between free-weights and machines are down to individual preferences and goals.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Going to failure is still beneficial in that some studies have looked at how good we are at estimating how close to failure we are, and while the answer is "better than you would probably expect," we still do better when we calibrate periodically, particularly outside of controlled settings. There's some exercises I take to failure regularly just because they're very safe to do so, others I only take to failure once every few weeks to re-calibrate my RIR, and some that I just don't feel safe taking to failure without a spotter and thus don't get taken to failure regularly. I lift with friends most days, but we're all trying to get in and out of the workout and I don't want to regularly impose.

desinr-gal said:
Dr. Stacy Sims holds the following credentials:

  • PhD in Environmental Exercise Physiology: University of Otago, New Zealand
  • MS in Exercise Physiology and Metabolism: Springfield College
  • BA in Movement and Sport Sciences: Purdue University
Just curious; what are yours?
Click to expand...
As I explicitly stated: I'm just an asshole on an internet forum.

But the people I've referenced have PhD's as well!

Tony Boutagy, PhD in Exercise and Sports Science from Charles Darwin University, Australia
Lauren Colenso-Semply, PhD in Muscle Physiology & Endocrinology, McMaster University, Canada
Eric Trexler, PhD in Human Movement Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

If we're in an argument from authority standoff, it seems that Sims has quite a few PhDs that specialize in this area that disagree with her so I can name a bunch more.

www.flippingfifty.com/truth-about-muscle-and-menopause
Stuart Phillips, PhD in Physiology, University of Waterloo, Canada
Boutagy in specific seems to have made it a bit of a crusade to gather up experts in this area to fight back on Sims' claims. Some of the previously mentioned PhDs here, some ones:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLqIToKBJk9/?img_index=1


Tommy Lundberg, PhD in Sports and Exercise, Mid Sweden University, Sweden is another interesting one - he's a full time researcher and professor at the Karolinska Institutet, which you might know as the institution that awards the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. He also spoke with Boutagy about this specific subject:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLk-usthsFg/


During the interview he speaks about research the Karolinska Institutet studying both men and women from age 16 to 68.

Sims whole thing seems to be suggesting that exercise science just isn't done on peri and post menopausal women, and while it is certainly smaller in volume, this claim just doesn't seem to be true. I referenced multiple dozens of studies already via meta-analysis, multiple large RCTs and observational studies, etc. that all directly contradict her claims. I linked quite a few references with interpretations from PhDs in the prior post - but no engagement on them from you besides asking for my qualifications. If I need qualifications to reference experts and studies, what about you? Should we both just stop posting until we have PhDs ourselves?
 
Airborne Daddy said:
Same. I just lift bruh. Doesn't hafta be fancy. Sometimes I only get 20 minutes in. Sometimes I make it 3 or 4 times a week and sometimes once.
Click to expand...
I think this is actually a really important point.

Doing any amount of regular exercise - even if it's just half an hour a week - when you were previously doing none? That's an improvement. It will make you healthier.

Waiting on a perfect program and doing nothing is just a recipe for staying stagnant where you are.
 
hexagonal said:
I think this is actually a really important point.

Doing any amount of regular exercise - even if it's just half an hour a week - when you were previously doing none? That's an improvement. It will make you healthier.

Waiting on a perfect program and doing nothing is just a recipe for staying stagnant where you are.
Click to expand...
I did comprehend about 80% of the earlier post
 
andreigl said:
So, I'm 52. What you need is old guy weekly training plan. Forget the young guy hours in the gym every day plan.

And for old guys like us that only need the exercise for health reasons, 30 - 60 minutes per session is plenty. First you decide if you want 3x or 4x.

If 3x, that's MWF with rest days in between. And then you will probably need to exercise all your muscle groups. Use the heaviest weight you can complete a set.
  1. Start with calf exercises - 1 set of 20, 30, 40 reps calf raises
  2. thighs - 1 set of 20 reps squats
  3. abdomen - 1 set of 30 reps crunches
  4. chest - 1 or 2 sets of either 10 reps bench press or inclined bench press or dumbbell chest fly
  5. back - 1 or 2 sets of either 10 reps rowing machine or lateral pull down
  6. deltoids - 1 or 2 sets of military press or dumbbell shoulder press
  7. trapezius - shrugs
  8. biceps
  9. triceps
  10. done go home
If 4x a week, that's Mon, Tues, Thurs, Fri. Just divide into two groups, the muscle groups above and add more sets. Usually I pair chest and legs and then back with upper body exercises the next day. If you feel getting strong, just increase the weight that you were using.

No need to spend too much time in the gym, avoid injuring yourself, you're old. Wolverine stack is also phenomenal.
Click to expand...
54 and thats how I roll... in and out in 35 minutes. 3 sets 10-15 reps of shoulders, chest, traps, lats, bicep and tricep... I don't do legs cuz I have thick gladiator legs and I'm a lazy bastard.
 
Last edited:
hexagonal said:
The good news is, you're probably not missing out on anything, re: Machines!
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effect of free-weight vs. machine-based strength training on maximal strength, hypertrophy and jump performance - a systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed

No differences were detected in the direct comparison of strength, jump performance and muscle hypertrophy. Current body of evidence indicates that strength changes are specific to the training modality, and the choice between free-weights and machines are down to individual preferences and goals.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Going to failure is still beneficial in that some studies have looked at how good we are at estimating how close to failure we are, and while the answer is "better than you would probably expect," we still do better when we calibrate periodically, particularly outside of controlled settings. There's some exercises I take to failure regularly just because they're very safe to do so, others I only take to failure once every few weeks to re-calibrate my RIR, and some that I just don't feel safe taking to failure without a spotter and thus don't get taken to failure regularly. I lift with friends most days, but we're all trying to get in and out of the workout and I don't want to regularly impose.


As I explicitly stated: I'm just an asshole on an internet forum.

But the people I've referenced have PhD's as well!

Tony Boutagy, PhD in Exercise and Sports Science from Charles Darwin University, Australia
Lauren Colenso-Semply, PhD in Muscle Physiology & Endocrinology, McMaster University, Canada
Eric Trexler, PhD in Human Movement Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

If we're in an argument from authority standoff, it seems that Sims has quite a few PhDs that specialize in this area that disagree with her so I can name a bunch more.

www.flippingfifty.com/truth-about-muscle-and-menopause
Stuart Phillips, PhD in Physiology, University of Waterloo, Canada
Boutagy in specific seems to have made it a bit of a crusade to gather up experts in this area to fight back on Sims' claims. Some of the previously mentioned PhDs here, some ones:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLqIToKBJk9/?img_index=1


Tommy Lundberg, PhD in Sports and Exercise, Mid Sweden University, Sweden is another interesting one - he's a full time researcher and professor at the Karolinska Institutet, which you might know as the institution that awards the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. He also spoke with Boutagy about this specific subject:
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLk-usthsFg/


During the interview he speaks about research the Karolinska Institutet studying both men and women from age 16 to 68.

Sims whole thing seems to be suggesting that exercise science just isn't done on peri and post menopausal women, and while it is certainly smaller in volume, this claim just doesn't seem to be true. I referenced multiple dozens of studies already via meta-analysis, multiple large RCTs and observational studies, etc. that all directly contradict her claims. I linked quite a few references with interpretations from PhDs in the prior post - but no engagement on them from you besides asking for my qualifications. If I need qualifications to reference experts and studies, what about you? Should we both just stop posting until we have PhDs ourselves?
Click to expand...
I will read these. I felt yelled at with the long loud article list, which in truth I didnt look at as I was busy being mad. I dont like being proved wrong.. And I just thought I'd found the secret to overcoming my challenges. The commonly prescribed ones weren't working anymore.
I build muscle just to watch it disappear.. Her philosophy seems to explain that. I want it to work! and then you go dump all over that.
I'll thank you someday when I'm less frustrated.
 
desinr-gal said:
I will read these. I felt yelled at with the long loud article list, which in truth I didnt look at as I was busy being mad. I dont like being proved wrong.. And I just thought I'd found the secret to overcoming my challenges. The commonly prescribed ones weren't working anymore.
I build muscle just to watch it disappear.. Her philosophy seems to explain that. I want it to work! and then you go dump all over that.
I'll thank you someday when I'm less frustrated.
Click to expand...
No one likes being proved wrong 🙂. And I'm just some asshole on the internet - I might not be right! I will say honestly my intention is not to dump on people or win internet points - I just want to make sure we're all looking at all the best information we can so that we have the best chance at succeeding on our goals.

One thing I have seen a lot of discussion around recently is actually TRT for peri/post-menopausal women. The TRT clinic I was using actually focused a lot on this as well, though I stopped using 'em because the price was just so much higher than I could get from other sources. Being your own doc and pharmacist for self-managed TRT as a woman is a lot tougher though, not many sources provide it in concentrations suitable for use. No idea if it is relevant for you, but might be worth a look..

Decent amount of personal anecdotes from people on reddit, e.g.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1d3cw21/highly_recommend_testosterone_replacement
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1d3cw21/highly_recommend_testosterone_replacement/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1h83mf2/testosterone_and_exercise
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1h83mf2/testosterone_and_exercise/

Lots of discussion on them about helping with muscle loss, too.


Unfortunately, research is pretty thin and not a ton of discussion of what is out there

Should we be prescribing testosterone to perimenopausal and menopausal women? A guide to prescribing testosterone for women in primary care - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
hexagonal said:
No one likes being proved wrong 🙂. And I'm just some asshole on the internet - I might not be right! I will say honestly my intention is not to dump on people or win internet points - I just want to make sure we're all looking at all the best information we can so that we have the best chance at succeeding on our goals.

One thing I have seen a lot of discussion around recently is actually TRT for peri/post-menopausal women. The TRT clinic I was using actually focused a lot on this as well, though I stopped using 'em because the price was just so much higher than I could get from other sources. Being your own doc and pharmacist for self-managed TRT as a woman is a lot tougher though, not many sources provide it in concentrations suitable for use. No idea if it is relevant for you, but might be worth a look..

Decent amount of personal anecdotes from people on reddit, e.g.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1d3cw21/highly_recommend_testosterone_replacement
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1d3cw21/highly_recommend_testosterone_replacement/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1h83mf2/testosterone_and_exercise
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Menopause/comments/1h83mf2/testosterone_and_exercise/

Lots of discussion on them about helping with muscle loss, too.


Unfortunately, research is pretty thin and not a ton of discussion of what is out there

Should we be prescribing testosterone to perimenopausal and menopausal women? A guide to prescribing testosterone for women in primary care - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Click to expand...
I have been wondering about that. I get HRT through Winona, with almost zero follow up, they gave me DHEA and I take it sometimes. But I heard on their forum about many issues it caused other women, like hair falling out, I mostly stopped trying it.
My drs wont even prescribe HRT for me so..I do what I need to do. I bet in the right doses Trt would be helpful.
Thank you btw
 
desinr-gal said:
I have been wondering about that. I get HRT through Winona, with almost zero follow up, they gave me DHEA and I take it sometimes. But I heard on their forum about many issues it caused other women, like hair falling out, I mostly stopped trying it.
My drs wont even prescribe HRT for me so..I do what I need to do. I bet in the right doses Trt would be helpful.
Thank you btw
Click to expand...
I know someone using iamhrt for it. Think there are some subreddits dedicated to female trt that probably know a lot more than I do.

SteroidSourceTalk and MesoRX both have some sources that sell lower concentration injectables for women.

Lots more to juggle with this side of things, though - blood tests to dial in your dosage, keeping an eye on lipids, etc. While I was getting my TRT/cruise dose dialed in I was getting lab work done every 3 weeks for a few months. Also have to worry about what ester the molecule is bound to to figure out your schedule - cypionate seems to be the common choice here and it's generally considered good for a once-weekly injection schedule, though I like cypionate and enanthate at every 3 days, personally, and just adjust dosage to hit the same weekly amount.

Just like with peptides, clinic pricing is absurd compared to what we can get... but there is the added legal risk without an rx, having to go your own way on managing your dosing and labs vs. being able to stick more or less to the trial data, etc.

Ideally you could find a doctor that could work with you to figure out if it does make sense to help with your symptoms, get your dosing dialed in, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending Topics

Latest Posts

Members Online

Total: 191 (39 Members & 152 Guests)

Forum Statistics

Threads
6,199
Posts
78,603
Members
18,059
Newest
pyknical

Share This Page!

Top Bottom