Derek from More Plates More Dates is one of the most data-driven content creators in the fitness pharmacology space, and his testosterone booster ranking video reached millions of viewers. But his analysis contained critical framework errors that led to conclusions I fundamentally disagree with based on my coaching experience and the data I have tracked across many clients. Here is where he went wrong and what a more accurate ranking looks like.
The Framework Error
Derek’s ranking evaluated testosterone boosters primarily on their ability to raise total serum testosterone numbers. This seems logical on the surface, but it misses the fact that total testosterone is only one piece of the puzzle. A compound that raises total testosterone by 200 points while simultaneously raising SHBG by 40 percent may produce worse real-world results than a compound that raises testosterone by 100 points while lowering SHBG and improving the free testosterone ratio.
The other framework issue is that Derek evaluated each compound in isolation rather than considering how they perform in stacks. Many testosterone-boosting compounds work through different mechanisms and produce synergistic effects when combined. Evaluating them individually understates the potential of a well-designed multi-compound protocol.
Where Specific Rankings Were Off
Derek ranked tongkat ali lower than the data from my client base supports. His critique focused on the variability in study results, which is a fair point. But the variability is largely explained by dosing inconsistency and extract quality variation across studies. When clients use standardized tongkat ali extracts at 400 to 600mg daily, the free testosterone improvement is consistently meaningful, even if the total testosterone increase is modest.
His ranking of enclomiphene acknowledged its potency but framed it as essentially diet TRT, which mischaracterizes the fundamental mechanism. Enclomiphene stimulates your own production. TRT replaces it. These are not equivalent from a natty plus perspective, and the downstream implications for fertility, testicular function, and long-term dependency are completely different.
What a Better Ranking Considers
A comprehensive testosterone booster ranking should consider total testosterone elevation, free testosterone elevation, SHBG effects, impact on other hormones like estrogen and DHT, sustainability of use, side effect profile, cost, and whether the compound suppresses endogenous production. When you add these dimensions, the rankings shift significantly from a pure total testosterone comparison.
In my ranking, the compounds that provide the best overall testosterone optimization when all factors are considered include enclomiphene for raw potency without suppression, tongkat ali for free testosterone and SHBG management, boron for SHBG reduction and aromatase modulation, ashwagandha for cortisol management and indirect testosterone support, and vitamin D plus zinc for foundational micronutrient support. These are not the most dramatic individual movers of total testosterone, but they are the most reliable improvers of functional testosterone status across the broadest range of users. This holistic evaluation is a direct application of the Tony Huge Laws of Biochemistry Physics, which prioritize the net functional outcome of a compound or stack over any single biomarker in isolation.
The Bigger Picture
Derek’s content is valuable because he brings pharmacological rigor to a space dominated by marketing. My disagreement is not with his analytical approach but with the metrics he optimized for. When you rank testosterone boosters solely by total testosterone elevation, you create a leaderboard that favors compounds with the most dramatic effect on one number at the expense of the comprehensive hormonal picture. The natty plus approach values the comprehensive picture because that is what determines how you actually feel and perform.
Interesting Perspectives
While the core debate centers on ranking methodology, there are broader, unconventional perspectives on testosterone optimization worth considering. Some biohackers are exploring the role of mitochondrial function and cellular energy production as a primary upstream regulator of steroidogenesis, suggesting that compounds supporting ATP output may have underrated effects on hormone production. Others point to the gut-hormone axis, where modulating the microbiome with specific prebiotics or postbiotics could influence systemic inflammation and SHBG levels, indirectly freeing up more active testosterone. A contrarian take from some longevity circles argues for a focus on androgen receptor sensitivity over serum levels, proposing that receptor upregulation through compounds like icaritin or specific training modalities could yield better anabolic returns than simply pushing more hormone. Finally, an emerging angle looks at pulsatility and circadian rhythm—the idea that restoring the natural diurnal rhythm of testosterone secretion, potentially through sleep optimization and timed light exposure, may be more impactful for well-being than achieving a higher flat-line serum level.
Citations & References
This analysis is based on clinical coaching data, mechanistic pharmacology, and established endocrinology principles. For foundational research on the compounds discussed, refer to studies on their primary mechanisms.