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
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.
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.
That face when high testosterone turns out to be caused by lead in petrol.
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.
Me with high T still able to enjoy colours and musicals 🥰
Masculinity is on the verge of facing extinction
Why isn’t this getting more attention?
Perhaps because masculinity itself isn’t a moral good or requirement for survival? 🤔
I have many questions, which I’m sure won’t be answered because conservative thinking doesn’t allow that. But mostly I wonder who are they testing and why?
Obese men from usa.
Whoever drew that wavy line has no idea what a regression is
You are right it just looks like they used Excel + curve fitting.
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!
It’s when your T levels regress, duh
if you ever feel down and redundant look at the degrees of freedom in this fit and feel better
The only crime I see here is the use of SI units! What’s a ng/dl? ::: spoiler /s :::
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.
Nice to meet you. I’m a 6-balled bearded footman.
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.
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.
Time to assemble the Femboy army
Wtf is happening with that fit?
It’s bullshit. I assume the data are bullshit, too.
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)
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.
200ng/dl? Is that nanograms per decalitre?
It’s decilitre, 0.1L. Decalitre is daL.
Ah, thank you for the correction. I still feel like it’s a weird way to write measurements
