Running and/or high intensity training lowers testosterone

Interesting.

Do we know how accomplished/trained/fit (for lack of a better word) the ET groups were?

Could body/dietary fat play a role as well or instead of the cardio training? We know fat levels can impact hormone production...

One of the studies stated that the men were "sedentary".

Right, 1 study says it took 40 sedentary people and had them pedal. That's not a study on endurance trained athletes, that's a study on cardio exercise. 3 looked specifically at endurance trained athletes, and at least one of them compared them to a sedentary group. I'm wondering what "endurance trained" means. Are they talking about elite level athletes (competitive ironmen, for example), or are they looking at more "regular" people (like me) who enjoy endurance activities in their spare time, around full time jobs, kids/families, etc.?

Good questions, all. However, there is only one study group that I'm really concerned with. Me. And I know that this study group is working just fine.

I have no idea why the OP even felt the need post this unless he's just totally narcissistic. *shrug*

I just want to know why carbs are making me fat!

I have to wonder if the lowered testosterone is associated or confounded by the decreased body weight in endurance trained athletes. Typically endurance athletes (or at least endurance athletes that are professionally trained or are serious about speed) tend to be on the very lean side with little muscle mass. I would think that the difference in muscle mass between ET and SED men would seriously confound the relationship between testosterone and ET vs SED.

Maybe I missed it, but I'd also like to see studies for inbetween (not ET but not SED) to see if there is a dose response effect. I would still venture a guess that the lowered T has to do with less body weight and the leanness of the ET athletes.

The first abstract cited said that the testosterone levels were lower but still within the normal clinical range.

I don't know why that would be so hard to believe.

I'm a long distance runner and I'm not losing any sleep over it.

I'd think you'd have to be a serious hardcore runner to have it affect your tesosterone levels that much

You're taking it personal bud. It's not a bash against runners.

No, not at all. Here is what I take issue with. With this statement, it's clear that you don't particularly care for endurance type of training. If you did, you wouldn't have stated "This is to show you why doing TOO MUCH...", which is clearly directed at those people who do endurance train. Then you go on to make a dismissive statement about how people are training for races. Read that sentence again and tell me how it doesn't sound dismissive. Lastly, you state that "There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week." yet offer no explanation about what this difference is, in your opinion.

The entire tone of your post reads like "endurance training is dangerous and your might not be able to get it up if you don't stop".

This is to show you why doing TOO MUCH running, high intensity/volume cardio, and/or high intensity/volume endurance training isn't necessarily a good thing. All the time I see people on MFP talking about how they train 6 or 7 days a week running 20 miles and/or 2 hours a day getting ready for their next 5k, 10k or whatever. There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week.

Sorry, way too many big words to read & I couldn't get past the ET men. It made me want to reeses pieces & phone home.

Everyone's version of fit is different. For some they want the bobybuilder look and have no neck, some view fit as their ability to perform a given activity (running, biking, soccer, hockey etc). There is no wrong, just what you prefer.

I don't think it's rocket science to anyone on here that endurance athletes are on the smaller side and don't have bulky muscles. This is due to how they train and the activity they participate in. If a runner was the size of Lou Ferrigno he would be a highly inefficient runner. Conversely, if you are a body builder having a lean frame will not get you any first place ribbons.

To each their own. There is no wrong. If you love lifting weights and the look it gives you continue. If you enjoy pushing your body to it's limits and the amazing feeling of finishing a endurance event then don't stop.

This study only proves the value of testosterone in muscle building. Testosterone, protein, and strength training is required to put on bulk. This is why women don't need to worrry about lifting weights and bulking up (missing 1/3 of the formula) and why men who are edurance athletes have small and lean frames.

This study only proves the value of testosterone in muscle building. Testosterone, protein, and strength training is required to put on bulk. This is why women don't need to worrry about lifting weights and bulking up (missing 1/3 of the formula) and why men who are edurance athletes have small and lean frames.

This statement was the OP's point in the first place.

You're taking it personal bud. It's not a bash against runners.

No, not at all. Here is what I take issue with. With this statement, it's clear that you don't particularly care for endurance type of training. If you did, you wouldn't have stated "This is to show you why doing TOO MUCH...", which is clearly directed at those people who do endurance train. Then you go on to make a dismissive statement about how people are training for races. Read that sentence again and tell me how it doesn't sound dismissive. Lastly, you state that "There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week." yet offer no explanation about what this difference is, in your opinion.

The entire tone of your post reads like "endurance training is dangerous and your might not be able to get it up if you don't stop".

This is to show you why doing TOO MUCH running, high intensity/volume cardio, and/or high intensity/volume endurance training isn't necessarily a good thing. All the time I see people on MFP talking about how they train 6 or 7 days a week running 20 miles and/or 2 hours a day getting ready for their next 5k, 10k or whatever. There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week.

THIS
:drinker:

There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week.

There is no difference if you want to win.

I wonder if it's more the stress levels from training that hard

Testosterone lowering or not....

To me, in regards to sexiness:

Runners' bodies > bodybuilders' bodies

::drool::

I may be biased though, since I am in fact a runnin' fool.

You're taking it personal bud. It's not a bash against runners.

No, not at all. Here is what I take issue with. With this statement, it's clear that you don't particularly care for endurance type of training. If you did, you wouldn't have stated "This is to show you why doing TOO MUCH...", which is clearly directed at those people who do endurance train. Then you go on to make a dismissive statement about how people are training for races. Read that sentence again and tell me how it doesn't sound dismissive. Lastly, you state that "There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week." yet offer no explanation about what this difference is, in your opinion.

The entire tone of your post reads like "endurance training is dangerous and your might not be able to get it up if you don't stop".

This is to show you why doing TOO MUCH running, high intensity/volume cardio, and/or high intensity/volume endurance training isn't necessarily a good thing. All the time I see people on MFP talking about how they train 6 or 7 days a week running 20 miles and/or 2 hours a day getting ready for their next 5k, 10k or whatever. There's a difference between practicing or training for a race, and running your *kitten* off 6-7 days a week.

THIS
:drinker:

Even so, he has an opinion and then went and found well established published scientific studies to assist him in explaining why he has that opinion. One of his main points not being that if you run a lot you may have ED but that if you run a lot you may never get the look of the British runner on page 1 of this thread (showing the difference in structure of a sprinter vs a long distance runner) because that musculature requires testosterone that may be depleated with long distance runners. There is nothing wrong with disputing his point and asking great questions, but having studies on the other side of the argument goes a lot further than simply saying "you hate long distance running so your biased so I'm not listening." *plugs ears and hums.*

I never disputed his point, I take exception with his delivery and the condescending undertones. I've never seen a world class distance runner look like a sprinter and I fully expect that I never will. I also take no exception with someones choice to pursue a more chiseled, defined body type. To each, his own. For me, I want to run fast. To do that, I have to accept that this physique is what is going to be required to do so, and I am at peace with that.

I just wanted to add one thing... The OP mentioned running 2 hours a day to train for a 5k or 10k....He knows nothing about running but he does know other stuff. OP if you run 2 hours a day then your likely training for a much longer race.