In case you ' re curious , I found a fix for thisChrome was blocking 3 rd party cookies for me , and their store uses the URL blackbox . cool on the backend . Allow cookies from blackbox . cool and you can use the store properly . <| sep |> Hey urostislav 0409 , you are posting here too often ! We currently allow 3 TradeStore posts per day and this is your 4 th TradeStore post . You can read the rules . <| sep |> So the study you ' re referencing is the transdermal 7 ketoDHEA application one . There ' s a few reasons I don ' t draw any broader points from that . The first is that no other study showing oral administration of 7 ketoDHEA has shown any change in epitestosterone . The second is that study had no control group , meaning we have no way of comparing the change in epitestosterone in the small sample to people who didn ' t take 7 ketoDHEA . Third , the study had some really odd readings for epitestosterone in the first place that make me queston the validity of the results . The study shows that before taking any 7 ketoDHEA , the men had epitestosterone levels of around 1 . 25 nmolL , and testosterone levels of 19 nmolL . That means these mean had a TE ratio of around 151 before the test even began , where a normal ratio is between 14 and 41 , so I can ' t draw any reliable evidence from the epitestosterone readings . The fact no other study finds the same results makes me think it ' s a problem with how this study was conducted . For perspective , a normal epitestosterone reading is 1230 nmolL . That means while the study shows a significant increase of up to 55 %, it actually only shows a change of around 0 . 5 . 0 . 75 nmolL , which is nothing in a normal range of 1230 nmolL . Unfortunately finding really high quality studies is difficult to impossible , so I try to aggregate the information from all of them in my articles and present the information that appears consistent throughout most studies . Edit Great question , by the way . I hope my answer done it justice .