Can someone explain the difference between hormone antagonism and lowering plasma level?

[Stella123]

"However, receptor antagonists (e.g. cyproheptadine) typically do not decrease plasma levels of the hormone/substance they are antagonizing."- Georgi

I get it in the sense that the effects of hormones can be diminished by an antagonist. And some substances can actually lower the hormones.

But how is this distinguished? Which avenue is better?

Just looking for some more info on what this means?

For example, does progesterone antagonize estrogen or lower it?

It sounds like vitamin E does both. Is there a list of substances that do both or have just one action?

 

[Blaze]

"However, receptor antagonists (e.g. cyproheptadine) typically do not decrease plasma levels of the hormone/substance they are antagonizing."- Georgi

I get it in the sense that the effects of hormones can be diminished by an antagonist. And some substances can actually lower the hormones.

But how is this distinguished? Which avenue is better?

Just looking for some more info on what this means?

For example, does progesterone antagonize estrogen or lower it?

It sounds like vitamin E does both. Is there a list of substances that do both or have just one action?

Georgi's quote probably is referring to the action a receptor agonist has inhibiting the function a hormone has on blocking the action or limiting the effect or response a hormone normally has at the "receptor". Levels of the hormone do not decrease in this specific example. Just it's effect.
This is, in contrast, very different than substances that actually interfere with or reduce endocrine production.

I hate to put words in his mouth though. Hopefully he will clarify for you what he meant.

 

[Stella123]

Georgi's quote probably is referring to the action a receptor agonist has inhibiting the function a hormone has on blocking the action or limiting the effect or response a hormone normally has at the "receptor". Levels of the hormone do not decrease in this specific example. Just it's effect.
This is, in contrast, very different than substances that actually interfere with or reduce endocrine production.

I hate to put words in his mouth though. Hopefully he will clarify for you what he meant.

Yeah I feel you! I wonder if progesterone antagonizes but not lowers estrogen? Haven't seen much on this distinction.

 

[Blaze]

Yeah I feel you! I wonder if progesterone antagonizes but not lowers estrogen? Haven't seen much on this distinction.

Anything helps, lowering the effect by blocking receptors is beneficial. Measures that help the body to bind and excrete it and measures to block some of it's generation.
All of the above, a multipronged attack on it is required but not so much that you get too a ridiculously unhealthy low level. This is a cycle, and a very important one at that. You do need some estrogen and levels are not static, and the cycle of healthy highs and lows is often ignored here in favor of estrogen is the "Devil".
Consistently elevated estrogen and deficient progesterone is very detrimental. Peat is not mistaken on that. If you've ever talked to a breast cancer patient, you will find that most good Doctors will not supplement estrogen and take measures to monitor estrogen levels and keep it low with Serms like tamoxifen. They already know that excess estrogen can contribute to carcinogenesis.

Here on this forum, that true statement makes people afraid of estrogen, when normal levels and a regular cycle should not be feared, quite the opposite. It should not be elevated, nor low. And the progesterone at appropriate levels should be able to balance it perfectly.