[spanky]

Hi Lotus,
I've been reading your posts on an approach for NBE that is based heavily on the aromatization of free T to increase estradiol levels in the body and, presumably, to produce better breast growth.

This is my understanding of the rationale for your idea:

Aromatase Approach

1. Estradiol is produced in the body from free T by the action of the enzyme aromatase.



2. There are herbs, like White Peony, that increase aromatase activity, so that if there is sufficient free T available, much of it will be converted to estradiol which will (along with miroestrol from PM) promote breast growth.

3. Herbs which lower one's free T level should be avoided because less estradiol can be produced (through aromatizaton) which will result in less or slower breast growth.



The Traditional Approach, which many of us have been pursuing, is based on driving down one's free T level with herbs like Spearmint in conjunction with taking sometimes large doses of PM. The lower free T level means that less estradiol is produced via aromatization, relying primarily on miroestral from PM with its ability to mimic estradiol to produce the desired breast growth.

The question is: Which approach is more effective?

The Aromatase Approach produces larger amounts of estradiol which is known to be much more powerful than miroestrol from PM. Therefore, less PM needs to be taken to get the equivalent estrogenic effect of the traditional approach. That's a plus.

On the other hand, the higher free T level in the Aromatase Approach means there will be more available T in the blood to compete at receptor sites, and more free T available to be converted to DHT making it more difficult to achieve other feminizing goals such as eliminating body hair, reducing muscle mass, etc. A strong anti-5ar herb should be included in the program (e.g., Reishi, Pygeum, Chinese Skullcap) to counter the higher DHT levels.

Since the Traditional Approach (attacking free T) has been shown to be effective over the years, I personally would hesitate to spend a year or more on the Aromatase Approach should it prove to be less effective. Again, that my personal opinion, but I'm open to having my mind changed if a strong case can be made.

It would be wonderful if someone would construct a program based on the Aromatase Approach to test its efficacy.

Any volunteers?

Clara

Very nice Clara,

Sometimes moving new ideas forward is controversial, I completely understand conventional thinking on this, I actually did volunteer myself about 2 months ago, so all I can tell you is it worked for me, although individual results will vary imo. It's risky, do I want to abandon what I've been told is successful even though I'm not seeing the results I want?, well that's the $64,000.00 question, only you (members) can decide that question. I ask again what's deemed successful?, imo it's a full C or D-cup, what's the percentage of that based on traditional programs?, (not picking).

Btw, I've been hunting for something stronger then WP to get the job done, unfortunately it's all I've found. So any help on that would be appreciated.

Wow. My head swims. Or does the breast stroke.

Isn't it true that there are adverse health effect of high levels of DHT and estradiol? If so, are these not risk factors for the aromatase approach?