Vively reports different age patterns for total testosterone, free testosterone and SHBG. Understand the findings, limitations and clinical context.
On October 21, 2026, Vively published an observational analysis of members’ blood-test results comparing hormone measurements across age groups. The report used members’ first results collected from January 2024 to October 2026.
This article is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice. Individual testing and treatment decisions belong with a qualified clinician.
Vively’s report showed different age patterns for total testosterone, free testosterone and the binding protein SHBG. Median total testosterone was relatively similar across age groups. Median free testosterone was lower in older groups while median SHBG was higher.
The distinction matters because the report’s main finding is not a uniform downward pattern across every testosterone-related measurement. Its results instead highlight why a discussion about testosterone needs to identify which measurement is being discussed.
Vively reported median total testosterone between 16.6 and 18.8 nmol/L across its age groups. In the company’s comparison, this measure showed a relatively stable pattern.
The wording matters here. Vively reported similar group medians rather than identical results across all ages. The range describes the medians in its dataset and should be read alongside the separate findings for free testosterone and SHBG.
For someone reading coverage of this report, the useful starting point is the name of the measurement. A headline about “testosterone” alone would leave out the main contrast that Vively reported.
Vively reported median free testosterone of 397 pmol/L among members in their 20s. The corresponding median was 292 pmol/L among members aged 60 and over. The company described the older group’s median as about a quarter lower.
That pattern differed from the relatively similar total testosterone medians. In other words, the report’s total testosterone finding did not describe the pattern seen in free testosterone.
This is the practical value of presenting the measurements separately. Reporting only the total testosterone results would miss the lower free testosterone median in the older group. Reporting only the free testosterone results would leave out the different pattern in total testosterone.
Vively reported median SHBG of 31 nmol/L among men in their 20s and 40 nmol/L among men aged 60 and over.
The company explains that SHBG binds testosterone. It presents higher SHBG in older groups as an explanation for the difference between its total and free testosterone patterns.
For background on the terminology, Testostra’s explanation of how binding relates to testosterone measurements provides a companion to these findings. The key reading task in this report is to keep the three measurements distinct while considering the relationship Vively proposes between them.
The findings are company-reported member data rather than a treatment trial or a new clinical guideline. Their value depends on keeping the study design and the reported numbers together.
Vively’s overview refers to about 2,300 men in its broader analysis. Its testosterone tables used smaller subsets. Depending on the measurement, the individual age groups contained 62 to 251 men.
Those are different descriptions of the sample. The broader membership figure should not be presented as though every man contributed to every testosterone comparison. When judging a particular hormone finding, the relevant group is the one used for that measurement.
Vively also says its members chose to test. It explicitly cautions that these results describe its membership rather than all Australian men. That limits how broadly the age patterns should be applied.
Vively used each member’s first blood-test result. It did not repeatedly measure the same men as they grew older.
This design compares age groups at the time of testing. It does not establish how much an individual man’s free testosterone will change over time. The difference between the younger and older groups is therefore not a personal forecast.
A useful way to read the report is as a snapshot of the members tested. A personal trend would be a different question from the age-group comparison Vively published.
A median describes the center of a group. It does not identify an appropriate personal target or define the point at which treatment is needed.
The reported medians also do not show every member’s result. Two groups can have different central values without those values describing every person in either group.
The practical distinction is between a descriptive statistic and a clinical decision. Vively’s age-group figures belong in the first category. A reader should not treat the median for his age group as a result he needs to match.
Vively compared results with the reference range on each member’s own laboratory report. The company notes that those ranges differed between laboratories.
As a result, the report’s classifications of results as below range were not based on one shared cutoff. Those classifications need to be understood in relation to the laboratory ranges used.
This is separate from the question of how the group medians differed. Readers who want more context can review the distinction between laboratory ranges and clinical thresholds before discussing a report with a clinician.
Vively’s proposed SHBG explanation is an interpretation of its observational findings. The comparison does not establish that SHBG alone caused the difference in free testosterone between age groups.
It also does not establish that SHBG caused an individual member’s symptoms or that treatment would improve them. The report did not test a treatment. Its proposed explanation should therefore remain separate from any claim about a treatment benefit.
The report’s practical role is to support more precise questions about hormone results. It does not introduce a new testing schedule or a new treatment recommendation.
Vively explicitly says that a low free testosterone result is not a diagnosis. It advises repeating a low result on another morning before action is taken.
The company also advises medical review for persistent symptoms such as low sex drive, erectile problems or tiredness that does not go away. Its message is therefore not simply to compare a number with an age-group median. It connects a concerning result with confirmation and clinical assessment.
A clinic’s summary of Endocrine Society guidance describes diagnosis as requiring compatible symptoms or signs and consistently low testosterone. It also describes repeat early-morning testing. This is a secondary explanation of the guidance rather than the guideline itself.
That summary identifies free testosterone as relevant when total testosterone is borderline or SHBG may be altered. For readers preparing for an appointment, understanding when free testosterone may clarify an uncertain total result can help make the terminology easier to follow.
The findings support a discussion about how the measurements fit together. Questions grounded in the report and the guidance summary include:
These are questions for a qualified clinician rather than a self-directed testing or treatment plan. They keep the discussion focused on the actual report and the reason it is being reviewed.
The Endocrine Society’s public statement says evidence is insufficient to support population-level screening for hypogonadism in asymptomatic men.
That provides an important boundary for interpreting Vively’s analysis. Publishing age-group hormone figures is not evidence that every man without symptoms should be tested. Screening a population is a different decision from assessing a person who has persistent symptoms or a result needing review.
Bottom line: Vively’s report should not by itself change current medical practice. It offers an example of total testosterone, free testosterone and SHBG showing different patterns across age groups. Its immediate value is educational: clearer questions about the measurements rather than a new basis for diagnosis or TRT.
Reading age-group findings alongside an individual hormone panel requires context, and Testostra addresses that gap through evidence-led education. Its coverage helps men make sense of total testosterone, free testosterone and SHBG while keeping emerging research separate from established guidance and avoiding personalised hormone recommendations.
Testostra follows testosterone research, clinical guidance and emerging evidence without turning general information into personal treatment advice.
Send us a question, research idea or topic suggestion. Reader questions help shape future Testostra content.
Contact Testostra