A very interesting point was brought up by Riverwind in another post: He'd been on Androcur for a year and thought he new what castration would be like, but then got depressed after the surgery. I'd like to hear more from those who've followed chemical castration with surgery. How did the "real thing" differ from the chemical version? I've had a pretty good experience with Androcur over shorter periods of time, and now plan to do it for a year before making a final decision on surgery (although both my fiancee and I believe it will be for the best). But I've suffered from mild depression for YEARS, and was astounded by how much worse it got at the beginning of my Androcur regimen. But it did pass. Will it be even worse after surgery?

I think this is something that should really be explored here, because the first piece of advice to newcomers is almost always to try chemical before going to surgery.

I don't have any personal experience with surgical castration, but theoretically, I think the following factors may be involved:

Chemical castration suppresses all testosterone in the body. On the other hand, surgical castration only suppresses about 90-95% of the testosterone; while surgical castration removes the testicles, the adrenal glands still produce a little testosterone.

Since surgical castration involves removing part of the body, there may be some poorly understood psychological sense of loss involved, perhaps even if the subject disliked his testicles.

Yes, but don't the testicles produce more than just Testosterone?

Also, is there anyone here with experience with using Testosterone HRT at low levels after surgery to ward off depression, osteoperosis, breast enlargement, etc. while still keep sex drive at zero or very low?

happousai (imported) wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:42 am I don't have any personal experience with surgical castration, but theoretically, I think the following factors may be involved:

Chemical castration suppresses all testosterone in the body. On the other hand, surgical castration only suppresses about 90-95% of the testosterone; while surgical castration removes the testicles, the adrenal glands still produce a little testosterone.

Since surgical castration involves removing part of the body, there may be some poorly understood psychological sense of loss involved, perhaps even if the subject disliked his testicles.

I suspect that there is more to surgical removal than just the cessation of testosterone and its effects. The human body tries to adjust to the new condition.

We should look for the answer in depression after other medical procedures. Maybe Post Partem in women, maybe depression after a limb loss, maybe depression after transplant, ....

try those areas and see what is similar.

Androcur works mainly as an antigonadotropin, meaning that it stops the pituitary's production of LH and FSH, which means that the testes shut down (no longer produce T or sperm). It does not alter the secretion of androgens from the adrenal glands. In short, you do not have functioning testes, and is therefore very much like surgical castration.

But Androcur is also a progestin as well as an androgen receptor blocker, which goes further than surgical castration does. Thus, Androcur is a stroger castration method.

Androcur can (and did in me) completely remove the libido and render oneself completely impotent. Surgical castration often does not lead to total impotence or complete suppression of a libido. Indeed, after I was snipped and stopped Androcur, my libido came back.

Hugs,

Kelly