• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
ddd
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
Anabolic Hormones Store Banner
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
LandmarkChem Email Banner
Medtech Store Banner
Bruce Labs Store banner
advertise on professional muscle millions of hits per month
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Training partner had PSA test

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
My training partner had his blood work doen including a PSA test. His total PSA was 6.1 and his % of free PSA was 15%. He is concerned however he did have sex about 2 hours before the test which may have slightly elevated his PSA. I told him to get abstain from sex for 72 hours and get another test and if still high go see a urologist. Any thoughts ? thanks for any input.
 

bigNsmall

Active member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
1,110
He had sex 2 hours before taking the test? Interesting.
 

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
He had sex 2 hours before taking the test? Interesting.
Test was mid morning and have had sex with his wife that morning

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
 

thebigbus

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
195
how old is he? Definitely needs repeat, and with abstinence 48-72hrs. The % free is a little concerning but is in the "grey zone".
 

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
how old is he? Definitely needs repeat, and with abstinence 48-72hrs. The % free is a little concerning but is in the "grey zone".
He is 51

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
 

DOGGCRAPP

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Messages
4,380
Ive put the PSA studies up on this board before showing you must not ejaculate for up to 72 hours previously to a PSA test along with a whole bunch of other PSA stuff (im too lazy to look them up).....if his doctor wants to send him to get a biopsy...he really might want to study up on that and look into advanced MRI imaging of the prostate....there is a large theory by many people that if cancer is encapsulated by the prostate the very last thing you want to do is to poke 12 holes in the prostate.

I would venture to say every man in this forum who is over the age of 40 who is using some pretty heavy androgens will be kind of taken aback of where their PSA is....<----and by no means do I say that insinuating they are on their way with cancer but PSA's for people who are completely natural and are assumed to be not taking androgens....are much different than what alot of guys in this genre are doing.

The PSA test has pretty much been debunked and even the man who pioneered it is sickened by how it is used for biopsies. Its a "lets look into this more closely test" and instead doctors use it as a "Oh no..lets start poking holes into you" test.
 
Last edited:

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
Ive put the PSA studies up on this board before showing you must not ejaculate for up to 72 hours previously to a PSA test along with a whole bunch of other PSA stuff (im too lazy to look them up).....if his doctor wants to send him to get a biopsy...he really might want to study up on that and look into advanced MRI imaging of the prostate....there is a large theory by many people that if cancer is encapsulated by the prostate the very last thing you want to do is to poke 12 holes in the prostate.

I would venture to say every man in this forum who is over the age of 40 who is using some pretty heavy androgens will be kind of taken aback of where their PSA is....<----and by no means do I say that insinuating they are on their way with cancer but PSA's for people who are completely natural and are assumed to be not taking androgens....are much different than what alot of guys in this genre are doing.

The PSA test has pretty much been debunked and even the man who pioneered it is sickened by how it is used for biopsies. Its a "lets look into this more closely test" and instead doctors use it as a "Oh no..lets start poking holes into you" test.
What typically is the increase in PSA value as a result of having sex prior to the test?
 

stintman

New member
Newbies
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
11
What typically is the increase in PSA value as a result of having sex prior to the test?
A small jump but not that far out of range. Mine went from 1.4 to 2.1 in 6
months and my urologist recommended a biopsy. Turned out tren was the
culprit (100mg tren enanthate/ 100mg test enanthate weekly TRT). Dropped
the tren and retested at 1.4.
 

DOGGCRAPP

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Messages
4,380
What typically is the increase in PSA value as a result of having sex prior to the test?
If i remember right (im going by memory) someone would have to look it up....i remember up to double
 

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
A small jump but not that far out of range. Mine went from 1.4 to 2.1 in 6
months and my urologist recommended a biopsy. Turned out tren was the
culprit (100mg tren enanthate/ 100mg test enanthate weekly TRT). Dropped
the tren and retested at 1.4.
Was the biopsy as a result of the velocity of the increase cause 2.1 is well within normal range?

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
 

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
If i remember right (im going by memory) someone would have to look it up....i remember up to double
Wow, that is huge.

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
 

thebigbus

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
195
Well, as a urologist I can say PSA isn't "useless". I find plenty of cancers in guys with normal rectal exams who have "abnormal" PSA's. I'm pretty liberal with it as well based on a patient's age, meaning If you're in your 50's and PSA is >3, repeated more than once, you're prob getting a biopsy.

MRI is awesome. Unfortunately insurance won't cover it as an INITIAL test, only if you've had previous biopsies that were either negative, or were positive and you're under active surveillance.

But yes, PSA can do crazy things based on activity. Or even at random. hence the need for always repeating it. And i *always* repeat the test, and then discuss it with the patient and give them their options. Most men want the biopsy.

And i'm finding a TON of prostate cancer lately.
 

DOGGCRAPP

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Messages
4,380
Well, as a urologist I can say PSA isn't "useless". I find plenty of cancers in guys with normal rectal exams who have "abnormal" PSA's. I'm pretty liberal with it as well based on a patient's age, meaning If you're in your 50's and PSA is >3, repeated more than once, you're prob getting a biopsy.

MRI is awesome. Unfortunately insurance won't cover it as an INITIAL test, only if you've had previous biopsies that were either negative, or were positive and you're under active surveillance.

But yes, PSA can do crazy things based on activity. Or even at random. hence the need for always repeating it. And i *always* repeat the test, and then discuss it with the patient and give them their options. Most men want the biopsy.

And i'm finding a TON of prostate cancer lately.
I dont think i said the word "useless"....My problem is there are a great many physicians who say "time for a biopsy" without a second thought based on the PSA. And I personally feel like I said in the above post that it should be the first step with the thought "ok lets see whats going on here and take a closer look" instead of the thought "PSA is 4.1 lets start poking holes in you"....does the guy have BPH? prostatitis? did he just have sex like in the above case? Is he on 100mg of tren EOD?....I just dont agree with that thought process and think the PSA should be the first step in a thorough approach.


MP-MRI Could Help Avoid Unnecessary Prostate Biopsies | Cancer Network
 

thebigbus

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
195
I dont think i said the word "useless"....My problem is there are a great many physicians who say "time for a biopsy" without a second thought based on the PSA. And I personally feel like I said in the above post that it should be the first step with the thought "ok lets see whats going on here and take a closer look" instead of the thought "PSA is 4.1 lets start poking holes in you"....does the guy have BPH? prostatitis? did he just have sex like in the above case? Is he on 100mg of tren EOD?....I just dont agree with that thought process and think the PSA should be the first step in a thorough approach.


MP-MRI Could Help Avoid Unnecessary Prostate Biopsies | Cancer Network

agreed. Fully agreed.

I will say I think the bump in PSA from hormones is more negligible than we'd like to believe, unless one is genetically susceptible to DHT and therefore they're going to get BPH anyway.

There was a study done on PSA bump with TRT, and it was quite small.

Thankfully the men I see...well, zero are on supraphysiologic hormones. LoL. So that eliminates one possibility.

I'm hoping one day the MRI will be able to be used first, and that we'll get some better screening tests. But until then....DRE+PSA is kinda the best we have.

And with young PCP's hardly SCREENING for prostate cancer anymore...well, let's just say things have already switched back to the "old days" where men are showing up with higher and higher grade prostate cancer, and even showing up with bone mets. Not a good situation.
 

Getnbiggger

Featured Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
821
So it's fair to say that he should get retested. How long after first test should he wait and what issues other than sex should he be aware of to ensure an accurate test?

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
 

thebigbus

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
195
So it's fair to say that he should get retested. How long after first test should he wait and what issues other than sex should he be aware of to ensure an accurate test?

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
half life 2-3 days, so after 5 half lives, give or take. I just say minimum 2 weeks, most guys i recheck in 1 month.
 

3rdocagt

New member
Registered
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
55
PSA tests

Had a PSA on Dec 17th that came in at 6.6. Had sex the morning of testing.

Typically my PSA is 3.5-4.0 with abstinence of 48 hrs. Re-tested 3 wks later with a 48 hr abstinence and it came back in the usual range at 3.96.

Urologist had some interesting things to say. Having sex before test can result in small or large changes in test results depending on the individual. Even though the PSA is the gold standard its really not that reliable as an indicator of getting prostate cancer. In his 15+ yrs of practice he has seen patients with very low and very high PSA scores both get prostate cancer and also not get cancer. He almost went as far as saying (but didn't) that the PSA test is a useless one ...but it's all they have to work with.
 

LK3

Verified Sponsor
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Sponsors
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
6,458
agreed. Fully agreed.

I will say I think the bump in PSA from hormones is more negligible than we'd like to believe, unless one is genetically susceptible to DHT and therefore they're going to get BPH anyway.

There was a study done on PSA bump with TRT, and it was quite small.

Thankfully the men I see...well, zero are on supraphysiologic hormones. LoL. So that eliminates one possibility.

I'm hoping one day the MRI will be able to be used first, and that we'll get some better screening tests. But until then....DRE+PSA is kinda the best we have.

And with young PCP's hardly SCREENING for prostate cancer anymore...well, let's just say things have already switched back to the "old days" where men are showing up with higher and higher grade prostate cancer, and even showing up with bone mets. Not a good situation.
ummm
maybe trt...
maybe

i have seen even small doses of primo make a big difference.
tren...
 

metalmicky

Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
56
Ive put the PSA studies up on this board before showing you must not ejaculate for up to 72 hours previously to a PSA test along with a whole bunch of other PSA stuff (im too lazy to look them up).....if his doctor wants to send him to get a biopsy...he really might want to study up on that and look into advanced MRI imaging of the prostate....there is a large theory by many people that if cancer is encapsulated by the prostate the very last thing you want to do is to poke 12 holes in the prostate.

I would venture to say every man in this forum who is over the age of 40 who is using some pretty heavy androgens will be kind of taken aback of where their PSA is....<----and by no means do I say that insinuating they are on their way with cancer but PSA's for people who are completely natural and are assumed to be not taking androgens....are much different than what alot of guys in this genre are doing.

The PSA test has pretty much been debunked and even the man who pioneered it is sickened by how it is used for biopsies. Its a "lets look into this more closely test" and instead doctors use it as a "Oh no..lets start poking holes into you" test.
This was on the news a week or so ago U.K cancer doc stated psa test causes unnessary biopsies and prostate ops and is basically useless
 

Staff online

  • rAJJIN
    Moderator / FOUNDING Member

Forum statistics

Total page views
500,193,148
Threads
123,044
Messages
2,334,844
Members
154,904
Latest member
Primo_criuse
Top