I was entertained by this interview. Broderick is a bit over the top at times, and way too amused by his own humor, but I agree with a lot of what he has to say.
As
@LATS has said, and some older members might agree with, lower test was the way things were in the late 80s and early 90s and IMO (just mine, not looking to convince others) these were the best physiques. I didn't know
anyone who ran high test in that period. The biggest beast around at the time, Paul DeMayo loved EQ, and I know that from experience.
This lower test & higher anabolic approach was how I started out, then tried the higher test method in the late 2000s+, and have come back around again.
I personally feel I look better and feel better this way. A lot of people tell me test is safer, but it certainly isn't when you must take AIs, SERMS, and finasteride to manage sides at higher doses. I'd much rather use the drugs that were engineered specifically to promote anabolism and minimize androgenic sides that extend far beyond better neurological signaling for strength and some cosmetic hardness.
Everyone will need to find what works for them personally. I think there is too much variation in individual response to AAS to say anything is dramatically better - or worse - for everyone. This of course excludes outright abuse, like gymrats on 1G or trenbolone.
NOTE - I also came across a study on bodyfat distribution and androgen therapy. Visceral fat decreases then rebounds over long term administration. It reminds me of the effect of testosterone on collagen. I found this interesting in light of the abdominal distention that appears in the same era as mega-dosing test. Probably just coincidence, but interesting anyway. I can't find the study now for the life of me unfortunately....