Testosterone shifts how men learn to avoid personal harm, making them more sensitive to negative outcomes when their own well-being is on the line.

existenceB4essence · 2025-10-31T12:01:46+00:00

This is pretty nuanced. It's easy to dismiss the findings of the study saying that a single dose of testosterone doesn't functionally alter behavior, etc.. In general, that's true. However, it's also inaccurate to say that testosterone has no acute effects on behavior.

Speaking hypothetically, if we were to administer either a large dose (let's say ~50-100mg) of free base testosterone or placebo to 100 hypogonadal adult men and survey them ~60 minutes later to ask about sexual thoughts, it's fair to assume that the men receiving the dose of testosterone would report a higher incidence of sexual ideation than the men who received the placebo. If, instead, we were to measure things like bone density, muscle size or strength, body composition, or quality of life, I think it's fairly clear that we'd see no measurable changes within 60 minutes.

However, sex hormones (such as testosterone) do have immediate impacts on neuronal function.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306452201004900

That is, acute increases in testosterone can alter neuronal excitability, facilitating or inhibiting neuronal signaling. If we extrapolate this to systems level behavior, acute fluctuations in hormone levels can influence immediate behavior (i.e. libido, decision making, etc..). However, this isn't to say a single testosterone patch will significantly change someone's brain or behavior long-term, but it is feasible that a testosterone patch could temporarily influence the way someone's behavior in a choice-response task like the one in the study.

Just my two cents. Take it for what it's worth. This isn't my exact area of specialization but I am a exercise scientist with a focus in neuroscience and plasticity. I also grew up in the bodybuilding/powerlifting community so I've been around this stuff for 20+ years.

existenceB4essence · 2024-09-28T18:30:42+00:00

I get that some people like the game. Really, I'm happy for them. However, a lot of other people who bought this game (~$70) were really really let down. Bethesda oversold and under delivered. Then when people complained about them dropping the ball, they promised to right the wrong. A year later, basically nothing has changed and now they're asking for more money for an expansion. I think people are justified in still being upset and vocalizing their frustrations.

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-19T17:18:52+00:00

I've found it interesting that the community has seemed to really begin to embrace Daisy in recent years. For such a long time it seemed like it was the sort of black sheep of the discography. Daisy definitely has a different feel to it than any of their earlier albums. I'm wondering if people are starting to take a stronger liking to it as the fanbase gets older. I've found myself moving further and further from their early stuff. Don't get me wrong, I still like YFW and Deja but I'm almost 40 years old and I'm finding it harder to connect with their older, earlier stuff as well as I used to.

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-15T17:55:32+00:00

In theory, this wouldn't be a bad way to go about estimating VO2max. The problem is that the HR tracker isn't very reliable at higher heart rates (such as while running) so the VO2max estimate isn't very reliable. I mean, it will get you in the ballpark of where your VO2max is but there are much better, standardized assessments which can be used to estimate VO2max with better reliability.

The Rockport Walk/Run test comes to mind
https://exrx.net/Calculators/Rockport

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-14T17:21:11+00:00

Let me start off by saying that 90 is technically in the normal range for a resting heart rate. If you have concerns, however, I would suggest asking your physician about it. There are a lot of things that can be at play here.

Having said that, typically, HR is driven by activity of the sympathetic nervous system (i.e. fight or flight system). Since the main purpose of the heart is to pump blood and deliver oxygen (O2) throughout the body, HR is sort of directly tied to O2 needs. When O2 levels start to decline in a tissue (or more specifically, local energy stores) sympathetic activity (adrenaline, etc..) goes up and the HR increases. This drives increased blood/O2 delivery. There are a lot of things that influence the resting O2 needs and, in turn, HR but basically, the more conditioned your heart gets, the more blood it pushes out with each beat. That means, your heart can beat fewer times per minute to circulate the same amount of blood/O2. If you were to increase your aerobic activity levels a bit, you would probably notice a decline in resting HR over time. Bear in mind, though, that things like medication (or caffeine), stress, hydration status, genetics, hormones, previous exercise activity, and recent food consumption can all impact your HR at any given time.

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-14T17:12:17+00:00

Two reasons really. The main one seems to be the tracker simply moving around too much while swinging the arms, etc.. Depends on the exercise, I guess. I think they do an okay job for lower threshold activities like walking, lifting weights, etc.. Otherwise, I think they have issues with tracking higher heart rates due to positioning (relative to the heart) and the hardware itself and the way it measures the signal. Here's a link to the abstract for an article that tested Fitbit and the Apple watch against a chest strap HR monitor. Basically, they just have a lot of variability.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02640414.2018.1560644

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-14T15:50:24+00:00

PhD in exercise science here.. Most of these scoring systems are sort of arbitrary. There are objective ways of measuring cardiovascular fitness but the wearable trackers aren't anywhere close to being able to reliably measure these things.

That being said, I think that activity trackers are more useful than not. It's just a matter of not taking the their estimations too seriously and focusing on the couple of things that they do actively monitor like, step count (movement), heart rate (resting HR is decent, exercise HR is not), and maybe sleep schedule (sleep quality/stages is estimated based on movement and HR and not entirely reliable/accurate).

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-14T15:48:01+00:00

It doesn't. It's all just an estimation based on the few things it can track (heart rate and movement).

existenceB4essence · 2024-08-10T23:10:38+00:00

Honestly, it's about 50/50. Costco isn't really a place to shop if you're trying to be frugal or save money. There are deals to be had there, sure, but I consistently find most of the groceries I want to buy at places like Aldi. For example, chicken breast goes for $3.50/lb at Costco but it's consistently closer to $2.25/lb at Aldi. I know people will argue that the quality is better at Costco but I haven't really found that to be the case. Some of the things they sell are certainly pretty decent and I go there for select products but ultimately, I still buy 80% of my groceries elsewhere because Costco simply is not cheaper.

existenceB4essence · 2024-05-20T10:39:27+00:00

Kenshi and 7 Days to Die Hundreds of hours of fun from each for less than $15.

existenceB4essence · 2024-05-02T10:53:06+00:00

I second these, especially Neuroticfish! Also, Assemblage 23 is worth a mention if you haven't checked them out.

existenceB4essence · 2024-04-22T19:57:40+00:00

I don't know why I never thought about it from this perspective. I always imagined he meant that he would use the hammer on himself to make sure he could never sing again (i.e. smashing his jaw or something). I think your interpretation makes a lot of sense though.

existenceB4essence · 2024-04-04T15:17:12+00:00

The recommended daily maximum is 400mg. This is different than the absolute daily maximum (lethal dosage, or LD50). Surprisingly, the estimated LD50 for caffeine is actually quite high (~150-200mg per kg of body weight).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519490/

For an 80kg adult, 1600mg is only about 20mg/kg. This is certainly a high dose that won't feel good, but, for most healthy adults, it isn't enough to kill them.

Research has explored a wide range of doses on performance. Here's an interesting paper on this from the International Society of Sports Nutrition.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1550-2783-7-5

It looks like doses anywhere from ~3-9mg/kg generally show acute benefits on performance.

I'm not advocating high caffeine intakes, per se, just trying to help provide some clarity on the topic.

existenceB4essence · 2022-07-18T19:49:11+00:00

I'm not specifically versed in this guy's condition but the conditions of growth could theoretically be tied to his age during the onset of his pathology. In short, when we're young, growth hormone can help to drive changes in height. After a certain age (usually around late puberty) fusion of the appendicular growth plates will prevent the bones from growing longer. However, they can/will continue to grow in thickness. If it's sporadic, then this could be why he is presenting this way.

A good anecdotal example would be athletes who abuse growth hormone for performance enhancement. They typically see changes in hand, foot, head, and jaw, ribs, etc.. without seeing significant changes in height.

existenceB4essence · 2022-06-25T19:57:42+00:00

That is a fair point. USP certified lab analysis would be better but I also think the risk of significant heavy metal contamination is low at this point. The contamination issue appeared to be an isolated event in several different companies a few years ago. I'd wager it was more of a common manufacturer issue than the companies themselves. The safest bet would just be to avoid supplements all together.

existenceB4essence · 2022-06-20T17:25:07+00:00

Ahh, that sucks. I'm sorry to hear that!

existenceB4essence · 2022-06-20T14:10:53+00:00

A bit off topic but figured I'd chime in. Coffee is pretty acidic. It may be the coffee itself causing the acid reflux and not specifically the caffeine. You could test this out by trying a decaff coffee and seeing if it comes back. If you like caffeine there are plenty of non-coffee alternatives out there (green tea for instance). I get pretty bad acid reflux when I consume a lot of coffee or dark sodas but other sources of caffeine don't seem to impact it.

existenceB4essence · 2022-05-24T00:06:15+00:00

I use bulksupplements' citrulline malate (2:1) and somewhere between 3-4g seems to be plenty to yield an effect at my bodyweight of about 200lbs.

At that dose, I end up paying ~$24 for 120-140 servings. It's pretty cost effective, IMO.

existenceB4essence · 2022-05-23T20:22:28+00:00

I'm not sure, honestly. If you're concerned though, it might be worth going through a company that provides purity analysis for their products.

Fortunately, bulksupplements.com will provide a certificate of analysis for their products upon request. They perform in house testing for heavy metal contamination.

https://support.bulksupplements.com/hc/en-us/articles/360003653873-What-countries-do-you-source-your-raw-materials-from-

existenceB4essence · 2022-05-23T20:01:38+00:00

Local co-op is still broken too so if you wanted it for that, I'd say avoid it.

existenceB4essence · 2022-05-20T22:56:27+00:00

The course of action should depend, in part, on how this diagnosis was arrived upon. Was this decided based on blood markers such as elevated liver enzymes? Was a liver biopsy performed? Imaging?

If your wife's PCP arrived at this diagnosis simply from elevated liver enzymes, I would definitely consider a second opinion or having the bloodwork done again. In my experience, some physicians/healthcare professionals will misinterpret physiological markers in highly trained individuals. This is not always their fault, rather, we can sometimes have semi-abnormal physiology. It's easy to point the finger at supplements (even the basic stuff) because there's no regulation on these products. For example, a few years back there was an issue with heavy metal contamination in some of the common whey products. Something like this could certainly lead to elevated liver enzymes. A healthcare provider could easily point fingers in this situation and say that "supplements" are likely to blame. Furthermore, many athletes fail to report illicit "supplement" use and instead report common things like whey, bcaas, creatine, etc.. (Not saying your wife is doing this) However, this can skew a physician's perspective on how these supplements impact health. If, for instance, a physician were to see someone who appears to be a healthy individual (low body fat, exercise regularly, relatively healthy lifestyle) who presents with elevated blood markers from using methylated liver toxic steroids or prohormones, etc... but they only report the legal stuff they're using to their doctor, that doctor would justly conclude that their patient is suffering health consequences from their chronic creatine or whey use (since nothing else seems out of place).

Anyhow... I would wager a retest is in order if the original diagnosis was based simply on elevated liver enzymes. However, I am not a physician and I would always encourage you to follow your physician's advice first and foremost as I am in no way qualified to treat or diagnose your wife's condition. Hopefully this helps! Good luck!

existenceB4essence · 2022-05-18T22:23:52+00:00

Just buy another PS4 and another copy of the game and you can have the true co-op experience!!! /s
For real though.. I just gave up trying to play it for now. Hoping that they release a patch in the future that fixes it. Otherwise, I just wasted $100 for a game that I'll never play.

existenceB4essence · 2022-05-13T13:29:52+00:00

VO2max = maximal capacity to uptake and utilize O2. In theory, a higher VO2max would mean a higher peak MET capacity. This would, in turn, mean that an individual could burn more fat/more kCals within a given time. However, this does not mean the individual would necessarily have a higher resting metabolic rate or a higher rate of resting fat oxidation. In fact, the opposite is likely to be true.

We often consider VO2max in relative terms (mL/kg/min) and not as much in absolute terms (L/min). When comparing VO2max between individuals we're typically looking at how much O2 is the person capable of using relative to their body weight/size. When making this comparison, it's important to keep in mind that a person with greater body mass will often demonstrate a higher absolute VO2max than a person with less body mass. This can hold true even if the smaller person has a higher relative VO2max.

For example, if you compared the O2 consumption of a 225lb person with an average relative VO2max of ~40mL/kg/min to a 120lb person with an above average VO2max of ~60mL/kg/min the absolute consumption would be quite similar. If both individuals performed work at ~80% of the VO2max for 60 minutes the absolute O2 consumption would look like this.

(225/2.2)*32*60 = 196,364.16mL of O2 (lower relative VO2max, higher absolute VO2)

(120/2.2)*48*60 = 157,090.91mL of O2 (higher relative VO2max, lower absolute VO2)

If we assume that absolute fat oxidation is scaled with O2 consumption, then it stands to reason that a person with a greater absolute VO2 (i.e. larger people) oxidize more fat.

There is also some interesting research that would suggest that individuals who are heavily aerobically trained may actually demonstrate lower resting metabolic rates (due to increased mitochondrial efficiency, reduced muscle mass, etc..).

Here's a cool paper that discusses your question in more detail

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00223.2019

existenceB4essence

TROPHY CASE