moi621 (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2011 1:31 pm Too much is when your TSH is lower then physiological.

What do you consider to be physiological? What is the lowest a person's TSH should be brought to by medication?

Read your lab slip. The normal/physiologic numbers are to the right in parenthesis.

Wow,

Thanks for all the replies.

I am going to redo the test after a 16 hour fast.

I got another 100mgs injection today. I will do another one next week, then switch to a 10 day cycle.

After a month I will retest levles

moi621 (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2011 1:31 pm The cost is accelerated aging the same as any BMR raising drug like Amphetamine or Nicotine.

Has this been proven by experiments on mice or rats? Are there any statistical studies that have found that people with lower TSH levels age more quickly than people with higher TSH levels?

curious_guy (imported) wrote: Tue Nov 08, 2011 1:37 pm Has this been proven by experiments on mice or rats? Are there any statistical studies that have found that people with lower TSH levels age more quickly than people with higher TSH levels?

Dear Curious. If curious, Google "hyperthyroidism".

Then the effects of cigarettes and amphetamine. When you filter out the specific cancers, you have lots of "overlap" of deleterious effects. Then read up on aging and realize the above mentioned that raise the BMR demonstrate pathology of advanced aging.

The Ball is forever in Curious' court. A long road of study awaits.

I just pablumized it for you. Now go prove it wrong. Study hard!

Moi

moi621 (imported) wrote: Tue Nov 08, 2011 6:50 pm Dear Curious. If curious, Google "hyperthyroidism".

Moi

You never said what TSH level is too low or what level is too high. Do people in the low end of the normal range of TSH levels age faster than people at the high end of the normal range?

moi621 (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:38 pm Read your lab slip. The normal/physiologic numbers are to the right in parenthesis.

Curious wrote (copy paste from above.)

"

curious_guy (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:35 pm What do you consider to be physiological? What is the lowest a person's TSH should be brought to by medication?

"

Again the answer is physiologic. Not suppressed totally where most like to be. Feels good.

Please, pretty please. I am not excessively wordful. READ!

Now go do your homework. You might have even Googled normal TSH. But y'see labs techniques can vary so I like the normals in the parenthesis on the lab slip.

Moi

No more answered questions until study is demonstrated.

moi621 (imported) wrote: Wed Nov 09, 2011 12:19 pm But y'see labs techniques can vary so I like the normals in the parenthesis on the lab slip.

Allopaths claim to be scientific doctors. Allowing labs to pick their own norms does not sound very scientific to me. I do not think labs should be able to just make up their own normals. I think they should be REQUIRED to use a standard reference range established by the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) or some other official body.

In 2002 or 2003 the Society of Endocrinologists recommended that the normal TSH range should be between 0.3 and 3.0. I think that most physicians and most labs use the older "norms". I have very high levels of thyroid auto-antibodies. In 2009 my TSH was 3.55. The physician I was going to at the time refused to prescribe T4 because the lab said normal was 0.4 to 4.5. Everything I have read about the treatment of Hashimoto's Thyroiditis says that the TSH should be kept much lower than 3.55.

I found this on Wikipedia:

The The NACB also stated that it expected the normal (95%) range for adults to be reduced to 0.4–2.5 µIU/mL, because research had shown that adults with an initially measured TSH level of over 2.0 µIU/mL had "an increased odds ratio of developing hypothyroidism over the [following] 20 years, especially if thyroid antibodies were elevated".[7]

Do you think labs and physicians should be allowed to make up normals or pick the normals they like, even if the normals are years out of date? Do you think physicians should be allowed to under-treat Hashimoto's Thyroiditis if they want to?

curious_guy (imported) wrote: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:03 pm Do you think labs and physicians should be allowed to make up normals or pick the normals they like, even if the normals are years out of date? Do you think physicians should be allowed to under-treat Hashimoto's Thyroiditis if they want to?

I decline to comment further to you. I find YOU very selective in your research even in other threads.

Like others have expressed in so many words, your goal seems as if you choose to be a burr under the saddle and not the exchange of ideas and sincere discussion resulting in "communication".

Have a splash, now! I won't respond but be warned, "burrs", "thorns" and similar personalities don't seem to last long at EA.