A 2015 FDA rule left millions of American men with low testosterone shut out of approved treatment. The agency is finally moving to expand access — here's what's changing and why it matters.
Absolutely Chris! There ARE effective behavioral and lifestyle interventions for many! The panel’s emphasis on metabolic causes reinforces that. One of the biggest risks of forcing patients into the wild wild West of online T clinics is that they’re more likely to be prescribed testosterone and not fully informed of alternatives. It’s a much better situation to have men communicating with their primary care doctor or urologist who can present the best and least invasive options - especially since even a small amount of supplemental testosterone can cause fertility issues.
OK, we know that our primary care physician and urologist don’t know the least invasive interventions. They should but, they don’t. Time for some Protocols to be released for initial lifestyle interventions before seeking pharmaceuticals for many issues. These lifestyle interventions should be part of continuing education for our medical professionals and insurance companies should reward Dr’s and patients for saving money and improving health with these interventions.
That's a great point. PCPs and urologists are certainly a huge step up from an online pill mill, but will never be as good as information on early intervention before a doctor even comes into question. I love your solution-oriented proposal of publishing a protocol with initial/ongoing lifestyle interventions (based on evidence) and agree many would benefit. Would be interesting to see this promoted by official sources, although given the low level of trust after Covid (hard to look to the CDC website for any real advice), not sure how much it would move the needle. Who do you think people would listen to? It's a forward thinking approach that would serve many.
This is a great start. My husband has benefited tremendously from TRT, and not just for libido--his mood, energy, cognition and overall wellbeing and fitness have all improved. But to the FDA, I urge you: OK, now do this for women! Women make and need T too, and it declines precipitously with age, becoming most problematic during perimenopause and menopause. Low T in women causes low mood, fatigue, poor cognitive function and muscle loss. Yet there is NO FDA-approved testosterone product for women, and the only FDA-approved indication is low sexual desire (why is it only just about libido?!), so most doctors refuse to prescribe it (even though they Rx antidepressants for hot flashes and all other manner of drugs off-label for a variety of ailments). Many don't even know women make T (despite it being our most abundant hormone -- as much as 4X our estrogen levels throughout our reproductive years). I hope this move by the FDA to help men is the first step and that women will be next. And not with some proprietary, expensive "pink tax" dosing system. Just smaller dosing guidelines and more physician education.
I hear you Kathy! Patients often ask me why we need hormone supplementation in men or in women and while I am NOT a fan of overmedicalization, we do find ourselves in a toxic environment that does not always support a properly functioning endocrine system - even when the patient is doing everything right. I hope we can change that, but until we can, hormone supplementation may be necessary for some portion of the population. We should make it easier for them to get proper care from their doctors.
Great column, but this is wrong! “That means that men needing hormone replacement therapy have long been discriminated against compared to women, for whom HRT is becoming the near-universal standard of care..." The "near-universal standard of care" for women is synthetic female hormones created in a lab, hormones that are not bio-identical to what women produce naturally, fake hormones that can have nasty side effects. In order to get hormone treatment paid for by insurance, women are only allowed to have the synthetic products that the pharmaceutical industry can patent. Women who want bio-identical hormone treatment must pay for it themselves. The pharmaceutical industry convinced the FDA to make that the rule years ago to protect their substandard patented products. Most women give up if they can't tolerate the synthetics. So it is not just men that are getting screwed by the current rules. And of course the insurance companies love this.
This is a really interesting nuance regarding insurance coverage (synthetic vs bioidentical)! Thank you for bringing it up Lydia. Perhaps Talento will weigh in. And of course you are correct that historically FDA has screwed both sexes - although I'm encouraged by what's going on in Makary's FDA for sure!
Thank you. And I didn't go into my parallel rant about how synthetic estrogen is produced from mares' urine, that is, from the urine of female horses who spend their entire existence tied down and catheterized so their urine can be collected. It is appalling.
Oh my goodness! I knew it came from female horses but never did I consider that they were catheterized (though I should have). Thank you so much for bringing THAT to my attention.
Thanks for the comment, Phil! Non pharmaceutical interventions should ALWAYS be carefully considered. The unfortunate truth is improper regulation drives patients to online, pill mill clinics that don’t consider the whole human where they will definitely be prescribed. Sometimes the drugs are necessary. Reasonable FDA policy allows doctors to do their job and patients to get the care they need without having to jump through regulatory hoops.
Dr. Makary and Admiral Christine are truly serving men here. The last thing we should be doing is making it harder for people to get legitimate care. People should be able to go to their regular doctor without being harassed. Certainly not everyone needs supplementation, but the people who do shouldn’t have to feel like a criminal or resort to acquiring help through less than credible means.
The portion of your article that struck me the most was the 85% of testerone deficiency happens because of an imbalance in the brain. That is very interesting.
My question to you is does that mean we have to go back to square 1 in terms of men’t mental healthcare?
Heh! There are so many things we think we "know" in medicine (that should obviously be reevaluated), I'm not sure where to even start! It is interesting that once you start peeling the onion on your assumptions, there is always more to peel - not just in medicine but in life of course!
Other drugs prescribed for men deplete testosterone as a side effect. I knew someone who took painkillers for broken ribs and was prescribed testosterone. Availability was scarce and very expensive. Of course insurance didn’t cover it.
Testosterone treatment in men is indicated in cases of hypogonadism.
Potential downsides and risks include Acne and oily skin, Enlarged breasts (gynecomastia), Fluid retention, Reduced fertility and testicular shrinkage because external testosterone suppresses sperm production, Elevated red blood cell count (erythrocytosis/polycythemia), which Increases CLOTTING risk, Worsening sleep apnea.
Also - Possible increase in cardiovascular events in some populations, Prostate enlargement symptoms (urinary frequency, weak stream).
Ingoing monitoring and repeat labs are necessary.
Stopping can leave testosterone levels lower than pretreatment for months.
Transfer risk with gels (to partners or children through skin contact)
PROSTATE CANCER
Testosterone therapy does not appear to clearly “cause," but it can stimulate growth of existing prostate tissue and tumors, so monitoring PSA and symptoms is necessary. Men with known prostate cancer are generally not treated.
Thank you for your comment Mary! The panel extensively addressed many of the issues you mentioned here and it is clear that while, of course, TRT is not needed or even safe for everyone with low T, many of the repeated statements regarding cardiovascular risks and prostate cancer risks have been overstated or not aligned with the newer/larger trials. A proper risk/benefit discussion and evaluation are the *exact* reason why regulations should make treatment of low T (pharmacological or not) easier to obtain at your primary care or urologist when appropriate instead of driving patients to online pop-up T clinics. Here's the link to the full discussion which I think you will appreciate! https://signalandnoise.online/p/the-fdas-full-expert-panel-on-testosterone
This is more hypocritical pandering to "maha" rubes, on behalf of certain pet causes and therapeutics. You know who you're really pitching this to and why (if you're anything like Lyons, Garrie, Klar, Conte, etc.). MAHA evidentiary standards are beyond fluid; they're logically inconsistent.
And none of you ever corrects any of the many batsh-t crazy comments with every article. "Viruses aren't real," "The pandemic was because they want us dead," "All vaccines cause more harm than good," graphene nanobot, spike detox, turbo cancer, massive clots, died suddenly, all of the best thoughts and delusions.
The fact that you believe (and wrote) that anything positive came out of trump's White House "announcements" about vaccines/Tylenol/autism demonstrates that you can't be taken seriously.
Primary care providers can and do test for and prescribe testosterone. What do you mean by "easier to obtain?"
I have no conflicts of interest and no interest in pandering to anyone at all! As a clinician, I see patients with legitimate needs being treated like drug-seeking criminals or resorting to Twitter bros for advice and they get hurt in the process. It makes me extremely sad to see it, and I'm earnestly excited to see the government (FDA) doing something reasonable that aligns with current evidentiary standards.
You don't seems as bad as some, more factually based, but you wouldn't be pumping out that sort of slop - much less trying to charge for it.
Bobby and Marty and Batty are big in these dog and pony show press conferences and roundtables, and social media. The only actual testosterone regulatory change was the Feb. 2025 boxed warning removal. Which is more than usual for your new, improved FDA's big announcements (other than the vaccine f-ckery).
DEA's proposed rule to permit a special telemedicine prescribing/ registration pathway for C-III has been percolating forever.
Offit and Hotez have engaged with your heroes - especially in writing. You know the answer to your disingenuous question.
Would love to be proven wrong! Please feel free to leave a link to any good faith discussion with any of our agency leaders. I'd be happy to promote such discussion in my writing.
Wireless radiation interferes with the production of hormones including testosterone. The cause of low testosterone is not idiopathic or unknown. It is environmental and well described in the medical literature.
"AI Overview
Yes, evidence suggests that long-term, high-level exposure to wireless radiation—specifically radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from mobile phones and Wi-Fi devices—can interfere with the production of testosterone and reduce its serum levels. This occurs mainly through increased oxidative stress, which harms the Leydig cells in the testes responsible for creating testosterone."
"Exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from various wireless devices has increased dramatically with the advancement of technology. One of the most vulnerable organs to the RF-EMR is the testes. This is due to the fact that testicular tissues are more susceptible to oxidative stress due to a high rate of cell division and mitochondrial oxygen consumption. As a result of extensive cell proliferation, replication errors occur, resulting in DNA fragmentation in the sperm. While high oxygen consumption increases the level of oxidative phosphorylation by-products (free radicals) in the mitochondria. Furthermore, due to its inability to effectively dissipate excess heat, testes are also susceptible to thermal effects from RF-EMR exposure. As a result, people are concerned about its impact on male reproductive function. The aim of this article was to conduct a review of literature on the effects of RF-EMR emitted by wireless devices on male reproductive hormones in experimental animals and humans. According to the findings of the studies, RF-EMR emitted by mobile phones and Wi-Fi devices can cause testosterone reduction. However, the effect on gonadotrophic hormones (follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone) is inconclusive. These findings were influenced by several factors, which can influence energy absorption and the biological effect of RF-EMR. The effect of RF-EMR in the majority of animal and human studies appeared to be related to the duration of mobile phone use. Thus, limiting the use of wireless devices is recommended."
Tell the public to disconnect wifi, stop using cell phones, avoid smart tech including smart utility meters and appliances, get rid of cell towers and make it public policy and law to mandate the preservation of radiation free land line infrastructure.
Do not push more drugs on the public. Prevent the problem.
Linda - Thank you for taking time to share! There are so many variables that have changed in the last hundred years it’s often hard to tease out the individual effects, but clearly there is an advantage to living more like our ancestors in many, many ways. To assume out of hand that high exposure to wireless radiation has no biological effect (as many allege) seems utterly foolish.
Great factual article. The information is anything but new. Those in the know have been supplementing with T for several decades. There are bio conversion issues that require monitoring however the dangers are vastly overblown especially concerning PSA levels.
Finding a knowledgable doc is worse than asking if Vaxs are safe and effective.
The fact that declining T titers are part and parcel of infertility crisis is noteworthy.
Gender bending hormone mimicers that bioaccumlate in PPM amounts have been implicated
Starting by getting the plastic, which contains xenoestrogens, and Ultra-processed Foods, which contain soy-based phytoestrogens, out of our bodies, homes, and lives, are a great start. Any time we introduce outside hormones into the body, the downstream unintended consequences are compounded.
Getting more grass-fed meats and upping protein intake is also helpful. Taking maca root powder is an excellent way to adaptogenically clear out excess foreign estrogens and increase testosterone.
Lastly, which could easily be a good FIRST important intervention, fasting regularly increases human growth hormone, balances the body's hormones naturally, and aids the liver in detoxing from these foreign estrogens.
Thank you for taking the time to comment here Tania! Endocrine disruption is a legitimate problem! I love Dr. Jason Fung's many books for anyone interested in learning more about fasting.
How does the FDA know who has low Testosterone if patients don't go to Doctors anymore. Our Ins companies are not funding our Doctors, Rx opiates are gone... So the patients moved to the streets of America for pain medicine called fentanyl. The FDA took away the Rx Opiates and our Doctors. So how does the FDA know if patients have a low Testosterone level....if we don't go to our Doctors anymore?
One data set the panel mentioned was the VA/military population. I imagine since TRT is a controlled substance, there's a decent handle on at least what's being prescribed legally. I'm not an expert though! Here's the link to the full panel discussion. https://signalandnoise.online/p/the-fdas-full-expert-panel-on-testosterone
There are so many natural interventions before looking to pharmaceuticals.
Absolutely Chris! There ARE effective behavioral and lifestyle interventions for many! The panel’s emphasis on metabolic causes reinforces that. One of the biggest risks of forcing patients into the wild wild West of online T clinics is that they’re more likely to be prescribed testosterone and not fully informed of alternatives. It’s a much better situation to have men communicating with their primary care doctor or urologist who can present the best and least invasive options - especially since even a small amount of supplemental testosterone can cause fertility issues.
OK, we know that our primary care physician and urologist don’t know the least invasive interventions. They should but, they don’t. Time for some Protocols to be released for initial lifestyle interventions before seeking pharmaceuticals for many issues. These lifestyle interventions should be part of continuing education for our medical professionals and insurance companies should reward Dr’s and patients for saving money and improving health with these interventions.
That's a great point. PCPs and urologists are certainly a huge step up from an online pill mill, but will never be as good as information on early intervention before a doctor even comes into question. I love your solution-oriented proposal of publishing a protocol with initial/ongoing lifestyle interventions (based on evidence) and agree many would benefit. Would be interesting to see this promoted by official sources, although given the low level of trust after Covid (hard to look to the CDC website for any real advice), not sure how much it would move the needle. Who do you think people would listen to? It's a forward thinking approach that would serve many.
MahaMovie.com
https://mahadailybrief.substack.com/p/daily-brief-5726
https://www.mahaaction.org/
This is a great start. My husband has benefited tremendously from TRT, and not just for libido--his mood, energy, cognition and overall wellbeing and fitness have all improved. But to the FDA, I urge you: OK, now do this for women! Women make and need T too, and it declines precipitously with age, becoming most problematic during perimenopause and menopause. Low T in women causes low mood, fatigue, poor cognitive function and muscle loss. Yet there is NO FDA-approved testosterone product for women, and the only FDA-approved indication is low sexual desire (why is it only just about libido?!), so most doctors refuse to prescribe it (even though they Rx antidepressants for hot flashes and all other manner of drugs off-label for a variety of ailments). Many don't even know women make T (despite it being our most abundant hormone -- as much as 4X our estrogen levels throughout our reproductive years). I hope this move by the FDA to help men is the first step and that women will be next. And not with some proprietary, expensive "pink tax" dosing system. Just smaller dosing guidelines and more physician education.
Kara - this is exactly the point! Testosterone is not just about sex! I wrote about it here if you would enjoy. I too would love to see FDA address testosterone in women! https://signalandnoise.online/p/testosterone-isnt-about-sex-its-about
We are on the same page! :) https://graymatterbykara.substack.com/p/testosterone-for-women-101
Ha! Excited to read!
We are being poisoned from every side. Chemtrails, pesticides, scented toxic products such as air fresheners and scented laundry products etc.
And pathogens released intentionally from laboratories
I hear you Kathy! Patients often ask me why we need hormone supplementation in men or in women and while I am NOT a fan of overmedicalization, we do find ourselves in a toxic environment that does not always support a properly functioning endocrine system - even when the patient is doing everything right. I hope we can change that, but until we can, hormone supplementation may be necessary for some portion of the population. We should make it easier for them to get proper care from their doctors.
Great column, but this is wrong! “That means that men needing hormone replacement therapy have long been discriminated against compared to women, for whom HRT is becoming the near-universal standard of care..." The "near-universal standard of care" for women is synthetic female hormones created in a lab, hormones that are not bio-identical to what women produce naturally, fake hormones that can have nasty side effects. In order to get hormone treatment paid for by insurance, women are only allowed to have the synthetic products that the pharmaceutical industry can patent. Women who want bio-identical hormone treatment must pay for it themselves. The pharmaceutical industry convinced the FDA to make that the rule years ago to protect their substandard patented products. Most women give up if they can't tolerate the synthetics. So it is not just men that are getting screwed by the current rules. And of course the insurance companies love this.
This is a really interesting nuance regarding insurance coverage (synthetic vs bioidentical)! Thank you for bringing it up Lydia. Perhaps Talento will weigh in. And of course you are correct that historically FDA has screwed both sexes - although I'm encouraged by what's going on in Makary's FDA for sure!
Thank you. And I didn't go into my parallel rant about how synthetic estrogen is produced from mares' urine, that is, from the urine of female horses who spend their entire existence tied down and catheterized so their urine can be collected. It is appalling.
Oh my goodness! I knew it came from female horses but never did I consider that they were catheterized (though I should have). Thank you so much for bringing THAT to my attention.
Same old medicine...give drugs!
How about they discuss what caused low T??!!
Thanks for the comment, Phil! Non pharmaceutical interventions should ALWAYS be carefully considered. The unfortunate truth is improper regulation drives patients to online, pill mill clinics that don’t consider the whole human where they will definitely be prescribed. Sometimes the drugs are necessary. Reasonable FDA policy allows doctors to do their job and patients to get the care they need without having to jump through regulatory hoops.
Regulation regularly gotta people to make decisions and take actions that are not in their own best interest and often cause harm.
It's nice to see people noticing and taking action!
I'm a 40 yr old man, and I approve this message.
Dr. Makary and Admiral Christine are truly serving men here. The last thing we should be doing is making it harder for people to get legitimate care. People should be able to go to their regular doctor without being harassed. Certainly not everyone needs supplementation, but the people who do shouldn’t have to feel like a criminal or resort to acquiring help through less than credible means.
The portion of your article that struck me the most was the 85% of testerone deficiency happens because of an imbalance in the brain. That is very interesting.
My question to you is does that mean we have to go back to square 1 in terms of men’t mental healthcare?
Heh! There are so many things we think we "know" in medicine (that should obviously be reevaluated), I'm not sure where to even start! It is interesting that once you start peeling the onion on your assumptions, there is always more to peel - not just in medicine but in life of course!
Other drugs prescribed for men deplete testosterone as a side effect. I knew someone who took painkillers for broken ribs and was prescribed testosterone. Availability was scarce and very expensive. Of course insurance didn’t cover it.
Polypharmacy is a real concern!
Testosterone treatment in men is indicated in cases of hypogonadism.
Potential downsides and risks include Acne and oily skin, Enlarged breasts (gynecomastia), Fluid retention, Reduced fertility and testicular shrinkage because external testosterone suppresses sperm production, Elevated red blood cell count (erythrocytosis/polycythemia), which Increases CLOTTING risk, Worsening sleep apnea.
Also - Possible increase in cardiovascular events in some populations, Prostate enlargement symptoms (urinary frequency, weak stream).
Ingoing monitoring and repeat labs are necessary.
Stopping can leave testosterone levels lower than pretreatment for months.
Transfer risk with gels (to partners or children through skin contact)
PROSTATE CANCER
Testosterone therapy does not appear to clearly “cause," but it can stimulate growth of existing prostate tissue and tumors, so monitoring PSA and symptoms is necessary. Men with known prostate cancer are generally not treated.
Thank you for your comment Mary! The panel extensively addressed many of the issues you mentioned here and it is clear that while, of course, TRT is not needed or even safe for everyone with low T, many of the repeated statements regarding cardiovascular risks and prostate cancer risks have been overstated or not aligned with the newer/larger trials. A proper risk/benefit discussion and evaluation are the *exact* reason why regulations should make treatment of low T (pharmacological or not) easier to obtain at your primary care or urologist when appropriate instead of driving patients to online pop-up T clinics. Here's the link to the full discussion which I think you will appreciate! https://signalandnoise.online/p/the-fdas-full-expert-panel-on-testosterone
This is more hypocritical pandering to "maha" rubes, on behalf of certain pet causes and therapeutics. You know who you're really pitching this to and why (if you're anything like Lyons, Garrie, Klar, Conte, etc.). MAHA evidentiary standards are beyond fluid; they're logically inconsistent.
And none of you ever corrects any of the many batsh-t crazy comments with every article. "Viruses aren't real," "The pandemic was because they want us dead," "All vaccines cause more harm than good," graphene nanobot, spike detox, turbo cancer, massive clots, died suddenly, all of the best thoughts and delusions.
The fact that you believe (and wrote) that anything positive came out of trump's White House "announcements" about vaccines/Tylenol/autism demonstrates that you can't be taken seriously.
Primary care providers can and do test for and prescribe testosterone. What do you mean by "easier to obtain?"
I have no conflicts of interest and no interest in pandering to anyone at all! As a clinician, I see patients with legitimate needs being treated like drug-seeking criminals or resorting to Twitter bros for advice and they get hurt in the process. It makes me extremely sad to see it, and I'm earnestly excited to see the government (FDA) doing something reasonable that aligns with current evidentiary standards.
Pandering is your purpose;
https://tiffanyryder.substack.com/p/why-wont-americas-top-vaccine-experts?r=4r5o4f&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
You don't seems as bad as some, more factually based, but you wouldn't be pumping out that sort of slop - much less trying to charge for it.
Bobby and Marty and Batty are big in these dog and pony show press conferences and roundtables, and social media. The only actual testosterone regulatory change was the Feb. 2025 boxed warning removal. Which is more than usual for your new, improved FDA's big announcements (other than the vaccine f-ckery).
DEA's proposed rule to permit a special telemedicine prescribing/ registration pathway for C-III has been percolating forever.
Offit and Hotez have engaged with your heroes - especially in writing. You know the answer to your disingenuous question.
Would love to be proven wrong! Please feel free to leave a link to any good faith discussion with any of our agency leaders. I'd be happy to promote such discussion in my writing.
Wireless radiation interferes with the production of hormones including testosterone. The cause of low testosterone is not idiopathic or unknown. It is environmental and well described in the medical literature.
"AI Overview
Yes, evidence suggests that long-term, high-level exposure to wireless radiation—specifically radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from mobile phones and Wi-Fi devices—can interfere with the production of testosterone and reduce its serum levels. This occurs mainly through increased oxidative stress, which harms the Leydig cells in the testes responsible for creating testosterone."
"Exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from various wireless devices has increased dramatically with the advancement of technology. One of the most vulnerable organs to the RF-EMR is the testes. This is due to the fact that testicular tissues are more susceptible to oxidative stress due to a high rate of cell division and mitochondrial oxygen consumption. As a result of extensive cell proliferation, replication errors occur, resulting in DNA fragmentation in the sperm. While high oxygen consumption increases the level of oxidative phosphorylation by-products (free radicals) in the mitochondria. Furthermore, due to its inability to effectively dissipate excess heat, testes are also susceptible to thermal effects from RF-EMR exposure. As a result, people are concerned about its impact on male reproductive function. The aim of this article was to conduct a review of literature on the effects of RF-EMR emitted by wireless devices on male reproductive hormones in experimental animals and humans. According to the findings of the studies, RF-EMR emitted by mobile phones and Wi-Fi devices can cause testosterone reduction. However, the effect on gonadotrophic hormones (follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone) is inconclusive. These findings were influenced by several factors, which can influence energy absorption and the biological effect of RF-EMR. The effect of RF-EMR in the majority of animal and human studies appeared to be related to the duration of mobile phone use. Thus, limiting the use of wireless devices is recommended."
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8497974/
Tell the public to disconnect wifi, stop using cell phones, avoid smart tech including smart utility meters and appliances, get rid of cell towers and make it public policy and law to mandate the preservation of radiation free land line infrastructure.
Do not push more drugs on the public. Prevent the problem.
Linda - Thank you for taking time to share! There are so many variables that have changed in the last hundred years it’s often hard to tease out the individual effects, but clearly there is an advantage to living more like our ancestors in many, many ways. To assume out of hand that high exposure to wireless radiation has no biological effect (as many allege) seems utterly foolish.
Great factual article. The information is anything but new. Those in the know have been supplementing with T for several decades. There are bio conversion issues that require monitoring however the dangers are vastly overblown especially concerning PSA levels.
Finding a knowledgable doc is worse than asking if Vaxs are safe and effective.
The fact that declining T titers are part and parcel of infertility crisis is noteworthy.
Gender bending hormone mimicers that bioaccumlate in PPM amounts have been implicated
by the brightest bulbs in the room
Starting by getting the plastic, which contains xenoestrogens, and Ultra-processed Foods, which contain soy-based phytoestrogens, out of our bodies, homes, and lives, are a great start. Any time we introduce outside hormones into the body, the downstream unintended consequences are compounded.
Getting more grass-fed meats and upping protein intake is also helpful. Taking maca root powder is an excellent way to adaptogenically clear out excess foreign estrogens and increase testosterone.
Lastly, which could easily be a good FIRST important intervention, fasting regularly increases human growth hormone, balances the body's hormones naturally, and aids the liver in detoxing from these foreign estrogens.
Thank you for taking the time to comment here Tania! Endocrine disruption is a legitimate problem! I love Dr. Jason Fung's many books for anyone interested in learning more about fasting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H6-syR_iLg
How does the FDA know who has low Testosterone if patients don't go to Doctors anymore. Our Ins companies are not funding our Doctors, Rx opiates are gone... So the patients moved to the streets of America for pain medicine called fentanyl. The FDA took away the Rx Opiates and our Doctors. So how does the FDA know if patients have a low Testosterone level....if we don't go to our Doctors anymore?
One data set the panel mentioned was the VA/military population. I imagine since TRT is a controlled substance, there's a decent handle on at least what's being prescribed legally. I'm not an expert though! Here's the link to the full panel discussion. https://signalandnoise.online/p/the-fdas-full-expert-panel-on-testosterone