I find the following article interesting in that the situation described applies to me: more is not always better when it comes to NDT, and I ended up having serious trouble as a result of excessive FT3 levels after doing the exact thing he tells us to avoid: that is, to keep raising the dosage resulting only in short-term improvement, but problems further down the road.
I also find what he says about normal vs optimal ranges interesting as I find normal ranges too broad.
However, if I understand him correctly, he is basically saying that you should always have an in-range TSH (not below 0.36) even on NDT, and that a suppressed TSH causes problems (unlike what other doctors prescribing NDT argue):
For me, it's impossible to taken any amount of T3 without suppressing my TSH. Ten years ago, before switching to NDT, I took Thyroplex Women along with T4. The tiny amount of bovine thyroid in that product (the equivalent of 1/4 grain) was enough to suppress my TSH below 0. My FTs remained in range.
Have I misunderstood something in this article? Has someone else read more by this doctor and knows more about his way of thinking? He advocates NDT, but like I said, it seems he considers the TSH to be just as - if not more - important than the free Ts...and my understanding is that many users of NDT only feel well once they reach TSH-suppressive doses.