Posts made by insufferable

@risingfire said in Epitestosterone, premature balding, and "male PCOS":

@insufferable have you ever tried spironolactone? It's used for women with PCOS. It's much easier to acquire compared to epiT

I'm not familiar with it, what does it do?

Good post thank you!

One thing though - my Dasung Paperlike monitor (a black and white one) is somehow fast enough to watch videos without any problem. I think it may just be Dasung that can do that. And people do say videos will wear out e-ink devices faster.

@saturnuscv said in Epitestosterone, premature balding, and "male PCOS":

I remember on RPF there was a thread where a guy got lab work after being on 6-Ketoprogesterone for a few weeks and his T:EpiT ratio shot up to 9:1

I receded a bunch when I experimented with 6keto, despite it being anti-cortisol so this theory does make a lot of sense IMO.

Anyone have a source for pine pollen with a positive EpiT:T ratio?

Very interesting, thank you!

Found the thread I think: https://raypeatforum.com/community/threads/test-results-before-after-using-6-keto-p4.29137

@Hearthfire said in Epitestosterone, premature balding, and "male PCOS":

@saturnuscv

Found this article which linked a study.

https://musclemonsters.com/blogs/blog/natures-newfound-anabolic-steroid-pine-pollen

"According to a pine pollen study conducted by The U.S. National Library of Medicine, one variety of Pine pollen known as Pinus Sylvestris contains 80ng/g of testosterone, 110ng/g of epitestosterone, and 590 ng/g of androstenedione…"

The study linked:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5549221/

That's a good ratio, no? You want more epitestosterone than testosterone?

Looks like there's some supplements with Pinus sylvestris on Amazon/Google if you search "Pine pollen Pinus sylvestris".

You're telling me I can make muscle gains AND hair gains from one natural supplement? I am definitely gonna try this.

I was thinking about pine pollen for epitestosterone. It would be interesting to apply it topically to a bald scalp. I'm not sure what would happen from taking it orally.

My concern with pine pollen for epiT is the high androstenedione content. This is the precursor to both testosterone and epitestosterone. If I remember correctly I saw some study on urine levels that sounded like exogenous androstenedione would raise testosterone more than epitestosterone.

When I read studies my main reaction is disgust and anger at what they are doing to these furry little beasts.

So much science is built on the back of torture, mutilation, and psychological abuse of animals.

Like a sort of mafia ritual killing, all professional scientists in these fields have been forced to participate. To become a scientist you had to suppress your strong, natural revulsion to treating animals like this. You have to become hardened to animal suffering and to the instinctive feeling of the natural, beautiful, noble place of a creature in the world (as opposed to its place serving as a bile bear for Man's disgusting tower-of-babel scheming).

What does it do to your mind? Once you've crushed that side of yourself, what will you do next? You've blinded yourself to your natural perception of what is good and right in life. CS Lewis said that the worst thing about purposefully trying to blind yourself is that you will eventually succeed.

Anything built on viciousness will always go wrong. Science is built on the back of animal abuse, and so it has gone wrong.

I don't totally understand this guy's work. He's one of the few talking about epiT.

"Flowers for Algernon: steroid dysgenesis,
epigenetics and brain disorders
Bryan K. Sanders"
http://if-pan.krakow.pl/pjp/pdf/2012/6_1285.pdf

He seems to be proposing something like this: Early life SSRI exposure causes autism because it inhibits epitestosterone in the brain.

"the role of epiT in brain development remains a long neglected area of research. [...] It is herein proposed that epiT deficiency disrupts the action of sex steroids and other hormones (e.g., glucocorticoids) at their target sites, and may trigger the expression, overexpression or downregulation of the myriad genes implicated in several brain disorders."

"inhibition of epiT synthesis in rats by either VPA exposure or a citalopram-induced increase in serum T or 17b-E2 during a critical period in brain development raises the question of whether epiT is the central mediator of the epigenetic regulation of gene expression. If so, endocrine disrupting agents that impair epiT synthesis may be the most important factors contributing to pervasive developmental disorders."

He also wrote this little thing about epiT:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17382481/
He conjectures there that androsterone and epitestosterone are very important. And that epiT may be lowered by stuff like ibuprofen or opiods and raised by "antimycotics that do not impair testosterone biosynthesis" (So salicylic acid - aspirin? Not sure how he comes to this conclusion as I can only see the abstract.)

His idea about autism and epiT was tested just recently in this study. But it didn't find much. There wasn't much difference in urinary excretion of epitestosterone between normal kids and autistic kids.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7931062/

I think these researchers like the idea that epiT could be involved because they're trying to reconcile the "extreme male brain" theory of autism with the conflicting fact that male autistics aren't in any way high testosterone, and in fact the males show decreased masculinization. But epitestosterone could help explain that contradiction. I think that must be where these researchers are coming from.

I wouldn't draw any conclusions from urinary hormone excretion studies though. Does an increase in hormone excretion mean that tissue levels have increased, or does it mean that tissue levels are decreasing? As I understand it, either one can be true.

Here is a recent epitestosterone study.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28870779/
The abstract (all I can access) says that in rats, epiT by itself (without testosterone being present) is able to restore the proper masculinization of testicle weight and AGD (an important measure of physical masculinization) just like testosterone does. This is so interesting because epiT is an "anti-androgen" in other ways.

I remembered another way to fix youtube.
https://invidious.io/

@risingfire They are indeed found together in the "male PCOS" condition.

@Chud Good list! I just installed onetab, I've been looking for this for years! I love it

Here's Danny Roddy's view on the high DHEA premature balders (no mention of epiT though)

https://www.facebook.com/thedannyroddyweblog/photos/a.166254416730223.33414.160367813985550/1265571730131814/?type=3&theater

Basically he says stress provokes prolactin which makes the adrenal glands produce more DHEA. The young bald men had 340-730 mcg/dl DHEAS, while the non-bald young men had 124-300 mcg/dl.

Epitestosterone isn't even present on most charts of hormone production haha.

It appears that this is its main production pathway. (source)

DHEA is converted by 3 beta-HSD to androstenedione. (same pathway as testosterone's production from DHEA so far)

Then the enzyme 17alpha-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (17α-HSD) converts androstenedione to epitestosterone. (while testosterone's production pathway is that 17beta-HSD converts androstenedione to testosterone)

So whether your body makes testosterone or epitestosterone from androstenedione depends on which enzyme is used, 17alpha-HSD or 17beta-HSD.

17alpha-HSD is "inhibited by synthetic estrogens and 17beta-estradiol" (source)

According to the first study, 17alpha-HSD makes several other epimers too, including epiDHT, which seems to be even less known than epiT! Isn't it a big deal that such a hormone even exists? There seems to be a whole other half of hormone production going on? Perhaps there are even more that are completely unknown right now.

Like aromatase converts testosterone to estradiol (also known as 17beta-estradiol), there is a corresponding phenomenon with epitestosterone. Aromatase converts epitestosterone (also known as 17alpha-testosterone) to 17alpha-estradiol. (which I assume could be called epi-estradiol if you wanted)

According to the wikipedia article, 17alpha-estradiol has good effects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17α-Estradiol - 17alpha-estradiol is 100x weaker than "regular" estradiol. Perhaps its good effects are because it displaces estradiol?

17α-Estradiol "antagonizes the hypertrophic response of 17β-estradiol, probably by acting as an antiestrogen by virtue of its very low activity."

"Supplementation with 17α-Estradiol increases the median lifespan of male mice by 19%, while not affecting female lifespan. This treatment does not lead to feminization of male mice."

High testosterone production leads to a certain amount aromatizing to estradiol. But the body naturally produces epitestosterone too and this aromatizes to 17alpha-estradiol instead. So when the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone production is imbalanced in favor of testosterone, I predict you would also imbalance the ratio of estradiol to 17alpha-estradiol in favor of estradiol. Probably has big effects.

Maybe this is why epitestosterone has been seen to have strong anti estrogen effects, despite not being an aromatase inhibitor.

I would expect that endocrine disruption does just as much damage to epitestosterone as to testosterone. A bit of evidence for that: Cadmium is a well known endocrine disruptor, and it's been seen in mice to suppress 17alpha-HSD. (source)

As a thought experiment, imagine four men. What would each type look like?

• High test, high epiT (this would have been the norm before endocrine disruption. Look at old pictures to see this type.)
• High test, low epiT (this is what TRT does to you since injecting increases testosterone without increasing epitestosterone. So you get high levels of test while still having hypogonadal levels of epitestosterone. So imagine the stereotypical TRT user here. Red face, bald, something weird going on.)
• Low test, high epiT (I'm not sure if this happens much. It wouldn't be a good thing, but I think it would be a different kind of dysfunction than we're used to seeing.)
• Low test, low epiT (this is a known type, it has been called "male PCOS" - he has insulin resistance and premature balding. I think he's the disastrous standard millennial male of today)

@metabolicmilk said in Defanging your computer:

@insufferable I ordered one. So I’ll let you know an honest review when I get it around May

Nice! I look forward to that!

@insufferable said in whats the cure to hair loss?:

Consider epitestosterone, the body's endogenous anti-androgen. Produced alongside testosterone (99% of it is not a test derivative), it is mildly neuroprotective and strongly anti-estrogen.

Unfortunately it is also one of the most understudied hormones in existence.

Maybe this can explain how follicle DHT can be the cause of balding and yet balding is worse in low testosterone men (premature balding at least), and many men who clearly have high testosterone don't go bald.

The body makes epiT alongside T so a naturally high test man would also be naturally high in epiT, thus having plenty of ability to block androgens by means of the body's natural and healthy process of doing so, in the places where the body doesn't want androgens to be high. While keeping androgens high in places where they should be high.

The low test man is also going to be low in epiT, I would think.

I think it's big news that the body even has this endogenous capacity - producing a natural and healthy anti-androgen, and not as a test derivative either. Apparently this is part of your body's system. I think there are a lot of implications of that.

I made an epitestosterone thread earlier:
https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/575/epitestosterone-premature-balding-and-male-pcos

Consider epitestosterone, the body's endogenous anti-androgen. Produced alongside testosterone (99% of it is not a test derivative), it is mildly neuroprotective and strongly anti-estrogen.

Unfortunately it is also one of the most understudied hormones in existence.

@AstralPMP said in Defanging your computer:

@insufferable Have you tried using a small grounding mat while you are on the computer?

Theoretically, it would be a great way to get some grounding time in but I am concerned about how it might interact with multiple electronics nearby.

I don't know much about that, sorry.

@basebolt said in Defanging your computer:

@insufferable said in Defanging your computer:

My iphone screen actually feels less harmful to the eye than my laptop screen. Maybe it doesn't flicker so much. But I'm sure it's very bad too. I really only need a small amount of iphone time sprinkled through the day. It takes 5 seconds to text, maybe you send 50 texts, that's like 4 minutes total per day, broken into very brief exposures.

You can use programs like scrcpy to control your phone with the computer.

Great tip thank you!

My Dasung e-ink screen actually says I can plug my iphone into it. I just haven't bothered to do it yet.

@basebolt said in Defanging your computer:

@insufferable said in Defanging your computer:

Light and the dopamine it does or doesn't stimulate is also responsible for near-sightedness. Outdoor light stimulates dopamine in the eye, which for some reason is what prevents the elongation of the eyeball which is the reason for near-sightedness. (myopia)

Also do you have a source for this, dopamine preventing elongation of the eye? We need to test out dopamanergic eyedrops

If you google "dopamine eyeball elongation," there's many different studies. Here's a pop sci article about it: https://www.wired.com/story/taiwan-epicenter-of-world-myopia-epidemic/

@TheSir said in Defanging your computer:

@insufferable said in Defanging your computer:

I don't want to get pinned down to just "it's the blue light that's bad." There's just something incredibly Wrong with these unnatural lights, beyond the red/blue thing. Very sensitive people on the ledstrain forum talk about how they wear red glasses, deal with the light flicker problem, and still they get terrible migraines and so on from their screens and modern lights

On the old forum there is a thread called "nothing in life comes free", it might interest you. From what I remember, it's not just light but EMF that will enter your eyes, and since your eyes are an extension of your brain, the EMF will easily enter your brain. The harmful effects happen all the way to quantum level where the spin of electrons is affected, meaning that you can't really completely mitigate it in any way other than stopping exposure to it.

Anyway, great thread. I'm probably going to buy an e ink screen soon too.

Thanks, I'll check that out. That makes a lot of sense.

@metabolicmilk said in Defanging your computer:

Reply to this comment with some of your favourite browser extensions to make social media intentional , your favourite ergonomic chairs and just general tools to improve technology use

Here's what youtube looks like using the extension I mentioned earlier. I really like it.

Homepage - blank screen. I don't use the side buttons, theyre just there.

Then I search for what I want. (I also have the extension set so I never see any youtube shorts cause they're garbage.)

And here's a video page - see how it shows no recommendations? Only shows the video I wanted. If I want something else, I have to think of it myself and go get it.

Decapitate the youtube algorithm!

Other stuff:

• https://graphhopper.com/maps
• Brown noise somehow improves ability to focus if you're in a noisy environment.
• A good idea I picked up from jujimufu's website years ago is to power your computer off after you're done using it. Then when you have something to do on the computer, before you power it on, take a moment to prepare and think out what exactly you're going to do on the computer. Make a list on paper. Then power on the computer focused on doing these clear tasks! Then once you've done it, power the computer off.
• Other good advice from juji: https://jujimufu.com/blogs/other/tricks-to-maximize-computer-time

@metabolicmilk said in Defanging your computer:

Has anyone seen daylight computer co?

They look quite interesting. There is also an interview with the CEO on YT which was great.

https://daylightcomputer.com
https://twitter.com/daylightco

I did see that. Looks cool. I'd like to know more about how it works.

I don't really understand the details but I feel intuitively that Weird Light vs Real Light is one of the most important things.

LED lights, computer screens, and flourescent lights are all shooting into your head, most vulnerably through your eyes, and directly destroying dopamine stuff.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32142863/

Sunlight, incandescent bulbs, firelight all bathe your neurons in a revitalizing glow.

I think looking into a bright screen is the biggest disaster of all, second is having flourescent light in your eyes, third is having LED light in your eyes, and the fourth worst would be having your head, neck, or other sensitive areas exposed to these lights, independent from eye exposure.

I don't want to get pinned down to just "it's the blue light that's bad." There's just something incredibly Wrong with these unnatural lights, beyond the red/blue thing. Very sensitive people on the ledstrain forum talk about how they wear red glasses, deal with the light flicker problem, and still they get terrible migraines and so on from their screens and modern lights. Then they step outside into daylight and look at the sky and it's an immediate calming cure. I don't want to get hung up on what the technical differences are between looking at the sky and looking at a screen or an LED. They're vastly different objects, of course they have very different effects. I believe you could have a blue-blocked, red-dominant, truly flicker-free LED light and you would still be messed up by staring into it or even lighting your house with it. (I'm sure it would be an improvement over flickering blue LED's though, I won't deny that)

I have only incandescent lights over my head and an e-ink screen. I get only a few minutes per day on average of looking into an LCD. I had to put a cardboard shield in front of the stupid LCD screen in my car to accomplish this.

My iphone screen actually feels less harmful to the eye than my laptop screen. Maybe it doesn't flicker so much. But I'm sure it's very bad too. I really only need a small amount of iphone time sprinkled through the day. It takes 5 seconds to text, maybe you send 50 texts, that's like 4 minutes total per day, broken into very brief exposures.

I try to look at the world outside as much as possible (hours). Sit at a window and you have daylight and naturally lit real objects in your peripheral vision all day. By propping my e-ink screen next to the window I can get the outside scene to be 80% of what's in my eyes.

I also think it would be wise to have a candle, fire, sunset, or similar glowing orange "real" object (not glaringly bright or unpleasant in any way though) in your eyes for hours in the evening. I think this revitalizes the brain. It certainly feels good.

Maybe even a natural textured object like wood or wool, lit by incandescent light above it, would have a similar effect. The wool absorbs and glows with the warm real light hitting it and you look at that. I'm thinking intuitively of how I feel looking at different things. Warm textured wood with a halogen light over it is extremely pleasing and calming to look at.

I think that light (even incandescent) bouncing off shiny plastic into your eyes may be slightly harmful. I think that looking into light in any way is probably not good. Lampshades make a glowing object rather than a shining glaring thing. I don't think bare bulbs should be in your field of view too much.

I think you should follow your instinct whether you want to look at incandescent lit scenes or the blue sky. I feel inclined towards one or the other at different times. I'd think we should mostly be looking at the cooler outdoor scenes in the day, with a few hours of the warm scenes at night.

Since implementing these Light Protocols (the e-ink screen was the kingpin) I've felt a huge change across my life. Huge decrease in procrastination, huge increase in energy, mood, mental quickness, and physical resilience. There appears to be a metabolism boost and even gum sensitivity and digestion are improved. My sleep quality is excellent and I seem to need a bit less sleep. I bet I now have 1/10 the risk of getting dementia compared to the norm.

I've had huge benefits from this kind of thing. I found that it appears to be the LED backlight of your screen thats hurting you even more than the social media algorithm kind of stuff. That stuff's bad too, but the LED light is inescapable with a normal screen and appears to be directly damaging your dopamine somehow.

I'd say you have to work with your psychology though - simply "fasting" will be hard to sustain. You probably have lots of things you need to do on the computer. So instead, I got an e-ink screen that emits no light and this has made such a big transformation in my brain, and all kinds of physical things outside the brain too. (Dopamine is upstream of tons of stuff biologically)

You can also use some browser extensions to make social media non-addictive too.

I wrote a big post about all this here:
https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/925/defanging-your-computer

You can get red wraparound safety glasses for very cheap.

I know it's pricey but I love my e-ink screen. Totally solves this problem, which is indeed a very bad problem in my experience. It's not just the eyes but the brain that's getting hurt, at least that's the way it feels to me!

My guess is that the testosterone decline is heavily prenatal in origin.

Anogenital distance (AGD) is a mammilian measurement under the control of prenatal testosterone (higher distance = more masculinized = more prenatal testosterone)

Infant AGD is high in countries with currently high testosterone in adults, and low in countries with low adult test. For example, Nigeria adult testosterone is about double Mexico adult testosterone, and Nigeria infant AGD is about double Mexico infant AGD. (don't forget that Mexico used to have high testosterone too though, and I would predict that they used to have high AGD as well. Furthermore, test in Nigeria is in fact beginning to drop now in connection with urbanization.) AGD has dropped in concert with test levels in these countries (in the few instances where I have historical AGD data)

In several areas, mostly in Asia, I saw data where the old men had the same and even higher testosterone than the young men, despite the fact that testosterone is supposed to decline with age. These old men are exposed to the same endocrine disruptors in adulthood that the young men are. But I think the old men were born BEFORE there was so much prenatal endocrine disruptor exposure. That means that for the rest of their life, their baseline of testosterone is higher: even as it falls with old age, it is still higher than the young man's, whose baseline testosterone was damaged before he was even born. There is a Danish study showing a generational effect like this. At every age from 20 to 80, the previous generation's testosterone was higher than men of the next generation at that same age. They showed that effect going back to their earliest generation, men born in the 1920's. A study on old rural men in Finland in the 70's showed very high testosterone despite their old age. (in the 700s or 800s if I remember correctly) and I saw similar very high results from old men in 1960's Australia (which now has low test), and 70's/80's Texas and New Mexico. What testosterone levels would these men have had as young men? Perhaps 900-1000, which is just what hunter-gatherers have, and what anatomical data from the past suggests as well. These men were a different breed due to less (maybe none at all) PRENATAL exposure to endocrine disruptors.

There is a Danish study that discovered the major effect on human infant AGD of one EDC (an antifungal if I remember correctly) applied to the pregnant mother at a specific highly vulnerable point of the pregnancy.

Here's a chart showing low testosterone in high pesticide use countries and high testosterone in low pesticide use countries.
https://testosteronedecline.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Testosterone-vs-agricultural-chemical-use-in-various-countries.png

There's a similar relationship with US locations but my chart of that is out of date and now inaccurate. But testosterone in the Midwest (heavy corn growing region sprayed with atrazine) used to be some of the highest in the country (high 600's) around 1990, and is now about the lowest in the country (in the 300's)
More discussion of that here, with some maps and charts: https://testosteronedecline.com/what-us-state-has-the-highest-testosterone/

Studies in Latin America (which mostly has atrocious testosterone levels now, although like everywhere it didn't used to be low) show unbelievably low testosterone in pesticide exposed rural men - levels in the 200's. Same with a study on Egyptian farmers. However studies on Thai farmers don't show as big a drop, and studies in the USA on pesticide exposure typically don't show the drop to be that massive either.

I can't explain the Thais, but otherwise this lines up with the prenatal exposure story. These Latin Americans and Egyptians live right in the agricultural sprayed area and I bet it's in their food and drinking water much more, so the pregnant mother is exposed to the pesticide heavily. The fetus is highly sensitive to it, takes major damage, and so goes on to be a very low testosterone adult.

But the pesticide sprayers in the USA were not exposed to such a crazy amount of pesticide before they were born, as their mothers didn't live right among the farm fields. So even though their adult pesticide use drops their testosterone, it isn't quite as bad.

There is a confounding factor though, which is 3rd world conditions - a South African study showed a U-shaped testosterone response to living condition. Tribal testosterone was high, testosterone in favela conditions was low, and testosterone in wealthy suburbs was high again.

Youre welcome!

And heres parkinsons by occupation (1985-2011)
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/pdfs/mm6627a2.pdf
Education, computers, scienctists, lawyers, social services = higher risk of parkinsons
Extraction (oil & mining), construction, transportation = lower risk

Fits well with that map showing East Asia has highest parkinson's, and north america is rising fast.

And has some similarity to the testosterone by occupation chart (2013-2014)
https://testosteronedecline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Occupations-2013-to-2014-testosterone.png

https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/776847/fpubh-09-776847-HTML/image_m/fpubh-09-776847-g002.jpg