Alt Text: post that says dripping testosterone levels in men since 1980s is the biggest crime of the century.
I can’t think of a more reliable source than testosteronedecline.com
From the website:
The truth is that [the] whole project is (most of the time) quite inaccurate and error-prone, and often involves way too little data to really make a judgment, despite my best efforts. It also involves my amateur method of “age-adjusting” the results to be comparable. So this whole project is quite inaccurate and shouldn’t be used for serious conclusions. But if you understand the inaccuracies involved, you still may find it interesting.
“Listen, we know we’re full of shit, but that won’t stop your anti-trans uncle from posting our nonsense on Facebook.”
yeah, notably, estrogenincrease.com
The real crime is that fit line hahahahah
A useful approximation of normal T levels in humans can be seen in present day hunter gatherers in Africa. The Hadza tribe was shown to have an average level of 151pmol/l, well below that of what we see in societies such as America. We can, therefore, argue that the reduction of T levels in modern man over the last few years is a shift back towards the norm.
That face when high testosterone turns out to be caused by lead in petrol.
However, both populations experience suboptimal access to energy, and consequently maintain minimal levels of body fat and low BMI
You are citing a malnourished population.
Previous studies of non-western populations have revealed inconsistent associations between men’s testosterone levels and paternal or marital status. | Twenty-seven Hadza participants | Eighty Datoga participants
This is a comparitively small study, and one which contradicts other bodies of research.
As with male birds, it seems likely that testosterone facilitates reproductive effort in the form of male–male competition and mate-seeking behaviour, both of which interfere with effective paternal care.
Given the increasing social atomisation of the west (see:average age of fatherhood, number of children had, divorce rates), the hypothesis proposed by this paper implies testosterone levels in the west should be increasing not decreasing.
Look, I get the desire to debunk redpillers, but when we’re talking about a worldwide trendline in basic biology you’re going to need more research than this to do so. The Male infertility crisis is a genuine problem field experts are extremely worried about, hence the need for research and coverage by the mainstream (to stop snake oil salesmen being the main point of contact for this issue).
The Male infertility
i think male infertility is probably less of an issue when we consider that most people born now, do not want to have kids, based on the pure fact that it’s too expensive, time consuming, and grueling in the modern era.
Unless that’s what you mean by male infertility. But last i checked that’s not what that means. Perhaps even male infertility is going up because people want less children? Sign of the times sort of a deal, who knows, science is fucked! Or actually, it might be a result of better medical services, allowing people with worse fertility to have children now, when they previously wouldn’t have been as likely to have children. Perhaps a result of decreasing infant mortality. Though i frankly doubt that’s a significant factor.
Most people born now do still want to have kids. Even in my famously childless country (UK) 50% of women will have a child by the age of 30 (and a great many more afterwards.). Antinatalism remains a fringe belief.
What people do want is fewer children later. This actually makes the fertility crisis (which is very much more than a behavioural phenominon, you can jizz onto a microscope slide to get hard empirical data) a more significant issue. Since fertility decreases with age, changes that might’ve gone unnoticed when people had kids at 25 become catastrophic when people instead chose 35.
Perhaps you don’t want kids, that’s fine, I respect your choice. Most people actually still do! If this health effect is the result of (as some experts suspect) micro-plastic leached EDC’s (an environmental pollutant we have no suitable method of removing, which has a significant lag from production to release, and whose associated industry continues to expand) then saying “it’s no big issue we don’t need to worry about it” is (in essence) endorsing the forced sterilisation of many hundreds of millions, without their consent.
That is still a maybe, the evidence is far from conclusive, but do we really want another global-warming scale crisis on our hands just to dunk on Ben Shapiro?
i mean yeah, this is true, but one thing that you have to be careful of as a society, especially when you have a significant population, is keeping your general population swing balanced. If 80% of one generation has kids, and then 50% of those kids have kids, That original generation is going to be a significant burden on society, purely because they outnumber the working class of the society.
Fewer children would definitely have that knock on effect, but what i still see being a significant problem is the social incentive for people to have kids. And when you have a society that is generally not conducive to having children, people are going to be less likely to have children. That’s not a bad thing i suppose, but i don’t think it’s safe to rely on people who do want to have children, regardless.
Just to be clear here, anti-natalism is the belief that humanity as a whole, should collectively stop having children, as the lack of suffering would outweigh gained positive experience. It has almost nothing to do with this conversation, other than being an extreme side, much like forcing women to get pregnant and have children, would also be an extreme.
And i also never said that infertility wasn’t an issue, i just think it’s probably less pressing than building a society that people want to have children in.
most people born now, do not want to have kids, based on the pure fact that it’s too expensive, time consuming, and grueling in the modern era.
These people need to open a history book.
that’s just what happens when you become a highly educated society. They have less children, and since they have less children, there is less productivity.
They love to pretend that they’re experts at biology but fail to grasp that it’s fucking complicated. More isn’t always better with hormones.
But an enormous shift in hormone levels in an entire population is worthy of attention.
absolutely, there’s no guarantee that it’s a good thing, but there’s also no guarantee it’s a bad thing either. Shits weird sometimes.
No! Me more man juice, me more man! Mightiest man!
I can only infer the meaning of the graph but it seems to me that the sampling has increased which could shift the line as well.
Whoever drew that wavy line has no idea what a regression is
You are right it just looks like they used Excel + curve fitting.
It’s when your T levels regress, duh
No it’s just R^7 regression! Testosterone levels will be negative by next week!
Edit: and male bodies were approximately 2000% testosterone in the 1940s!
if you ever feel down and redundant look at the degrees of freedom in this fit and feel better
It’s babbies’ First Excel Sheet 😂
I remember fucking around with the same functionality and not understanding it, some 10 years ago. I guess this dood just found out about it too.
How much do you want to bet that the source is somebody trying to sell some sort of snake oil claiming to boost testosterone.
His tag says he beat testicular cancer and now he help
Def selling something
Well that’s interesting as testicular cancer will be closely linked to having testosterone.
Yeah I just hate those people who beat cancer then go on to share their findings with the world 🙄
It’s a terrible graph anyway. The outliers haven’t been removed and I completely don’t understand the line of best fit that’s been drawn because it appears to be squiggly. How can it be squiggly, it’s a line of best fit, it’s an approximation. Oh and making some of the points green does not increase their validity.
You grok there are ways to fit data other than lines right?
I must be unaware of the arbitrary wiggly line of best fit.
Ask your doctor if anabolic steroids are right for you
It’s clearly sexual selection; high testosterone results in early baldness, which in turn is deemed unattractive.
Thus, in order to save western society as we know it, we need to start worshipping bald men as the virile hotties we all know they truly are.
Nice try Larry David
I will put my hand up as the symbol of bald sexiness…
I’m a bald bearded 6 foot man.
Do you work in or near some chemical or nuclear industries or why do have 6 feet? /j
Nice to meet you. I’m a 6-balled bearded footman.
Wtf is happening with that fit?
Well you see, testosterone levels rose when Regan was elected, 9/11 happened, and The Apprentice launched.
It’s basically science.
(this post was satire, and I’m sorry if it made anyone vomit)
I need you to add these labels to the graph, for science.
It’s bullshit. I assume the data are bullshit, too.
That’s the real crime
I love how redundant the degrees of freedom in that curve is “lets make it look like stience”
Yeah, it would have looked better with just a straight line fit. And 2020 does seem “statistically different” than 1970.
Edit: to be clear though, if lower testosterone means I live longer and with more hair, I’m all for it! My kids seem to be normal enough.
Low testosterone can be a real issue. It’ll reduce energy levels and limit bone and muscle strength. The right wing nonsense around it is obscuring some actual issues.
My guess is that they want to show a bump after 9/11 when “men went to war for freedom” or some shit.
Boa constrictor of best fit.
Almost as if we don’t live in a world where we need to have murder boners 247
Time to assemble the Femboy army
I’m doing my part!
I’m sorry sir, we just call it “the army”
Isn’t that good for alphas? Who’s complaining?
Oh come on, everyone in normal countries knows that gun and tiny-penis truck ownership is directly correlated to miniscule genitalia, there’s not really a surprise here
Why isn’t this getting more attention?
Um, cause it’s not that big of news and you’re hyping shit just to get clicks.
I’ve been hording it. Sorry.
A crime, no, concerning sure.
What is causing the drop?
Lots of stuff.
Tld;r:
Obesity, Microplastics, Fewer smokers, Stress and mental health problems, Tighter underwear, Diabetes, Higher indoor temperatures
More sedentary lifestyle/not exercising
As someone who has severely low testosterone and goes to the gym 4-5 times a week, that’s just one of many potential factors.
It is, I was adding into the list the other guy had started.
Fewer smokers
Why aren’t we making men smoke more?! Why isn’t the media talking about this?!
Disclaimer: This is a pointless comment.
I watched “My Dinner with Andre” this morning and there’s a line where Wallace Shawn says “… when I was ten years old, […] Now, I’m 36, …“
This guy, 36?I rewound the scene so my wife could watch it when she flitted through the room because I thought the line was so funny.
But then I looked it up. Wallace Shawn was born in 1943, and the movie was released in 1981. Probably filmed the year before release.
I feel mildly bad for thinking it was a humorous line.I don’t know if he smoked, but I’ve heard high testosterone can cause male pattern balding. That aside, the changes to humanity in just a few decades, for whatever reason, are pretty shocking. It’s likely that we have less pollution (that impacts humans, anyway), better understanding of things that harm us, and better access to preventative healthcare, that helps to ‘slow down’ aging.
That sort of makes me feel a little less cynical about folks who keep adjusting life milestones upwards. 30 is the new 20!, 40 isn’t middle aged, etc. I had just figured those folks were vain and delusional. But I do look way better than my dad did at this age, so maybe there’s something to it.I worked with dudes that smoked like it was a job requirement that looked haggard AF at 30. I didn’t recognize one of them 10 years later because he had stopped smoking and dropped a ton of weight - he looked 10 years younger than when I met him.
Smoking is bad, kids. And no, Vaping probably isn’t much better.
Regarding your balding comment, many transmen go bald after starting on testosterone so that makes sense.
Wait do people not wear boxer shorts anymore? Did I miss something?
As I’ve gotten older my balls have started to sag a bit or I’ve gained some weight and get into a weird and uncomfortable position. Been thinking about getting something with more support.
Let the boys hang free
I think boxers are best, but boxer briefs have seemingly taken over.
Having grown up wearing tighty whities, boxer briefs are much looser. I’ve worn boxers as well. In my opinion, there’s not much difference. My boys have plenty of freedom in either.
An aging population.
Worse health in general it seems. And it’s not as low as the graph the person shared
https://health.clevelandclinic.org/declining-testosterone-levels
Are you implying that societal trends aren’t evidence of crimes?
