What I meant to say was back when Ashley was being monitored blood wise daily (on a drip) and then weekly, they would have been looking more at 17 OHP levels to tune his doses than say androstenedione--because it is more sensitive and that is exactly why it is a useful tool to analyse.  because babies grow so rapidly as a newborn in height and weight in the first few weeks, as long as they see weight gain, and note the levels of 17 OHP carefully, they would have had more of an idea what they need dose wise.  They can also adjust the levels more accurately due to using suspension than they can tablets.  My thoughts are that children are no different and in a sense their growth slows after toddler hood and therefore their doses should be even more miniscule to match that growth rate, but all of a suddent they are weaned to tablets and of course the incremetal dose rises jump from 1ml to something like 2.50mg or 1.25mg if the child is lucky, but nvertheless when their growth is slower they start giving them chunkier dose rises?  I think that that action alone is responsible for slowing of growth beyone what it should be and to me, a child’s growth should be as carefully monitored and doses tweaked as they were as a baby if anything.  

As a baby when first tuning their doses androstenendione would not have been useful at that point as it would simply be too high after diagnosis to assess I feel.  After a substantial period of under suppression, those anobolic levels climb very high and are not really good to use as a tuning tool as what say 17 OHP would be because 17 OHP would be seen as the first hormone that is changeable to dramatic degrees just over a 24 hour period and therefore far more useful for tuning the doses over a 24 hour priod.  Which means they can tune "each" dose better. 

Whereas androstenedione ---well what I guess I am trying to say is the ranges are not as sensitive to change over a 24 hour period and therefore for 24 hour profiling they are pretty much useless...I am just saying what I would take as a Doctor to help me determine what a childs doses should be over a day.  In that respect androstenedione would come back not much changed over a 24 hour period enough to determine what a dose should be I feel.    Very hard to explain...but I feel that both tests are important to take in conjuction with eachother and that 17OHP is more of a 24 hour profile tool than androstenedione---wherease it is the reverse when checking levels over three monthly periods and I would pay more attention to the androstendione levels three monthly than 17 OHP?  :)