“The solution that’s being promoted is that we give you testosterone,” he said. “But if you give a man testosterone, you switch off his sperm production. I’ve seen that in the clinic.”
... Wait, what would the mechanism of action be there?!
Like, if the choice of explanations is (a) obesity, and maybe some pesticide stuff, who knows, or (b) _witchcraft_, Occam's razor points a particular way.
America found the solution, put everyone on enhanced TRT and cash a shit load of bucks in the process :)
Others are trying to regulate pesticide, junk food (obesity, diabete). For instance nutriscore in Europe, also the recent change on pesticide allowed.
I'm not sure it will be enough, but at least they are attacking to the root cause. You're not just adding even more problem, like the increased cardiovascular event or erectile dysfunction with overdosed TRT.
Same for the semaglutides that everyone and their mother take in the usa, people wouldn't need them so much if they didn't eat absolute crap all the time.
We know that semaglutides have also side effects, and that rebound happen when you stop, but I guess it's better than just fixing the food lobby ?
“Obesity and diabetes could easily account for all of this,”
Wither Ozempic? I've seen several friends and family members use it to great effect and thought it might sweep the nation. But I imagine most of the same barriers that keep people from eating better or moving more are also in play when trying to engage with any new habit.
Before the reactions to the headline get too out of hand, the article says the study couldn’t rule out that obesity and diabetes might drive this change. Occam’s Razor leads me to lean on this more than any other exotic explanation.
Of course, PFAS and microplastics aren’t great for sperm health, but neither were leaded gasoline and DDT before they were curtailed.
I wonder how this correlates to Prostate Cancer. From what I heard, high testosterone can be one of the causes of Prostate Cancer. But that is over a long time.
So if levels are falling, is prostate cancer lowering a little bit ? But that will be hard to determine due to the advancement of Medical Treatment over the past 50 years.
> Rising levels of obesity and diabetes
Plastic Bottles also replaced glass starting in the early 70s too. I remember reading some type of plastic can leak estrogen into the food. So seems a lot of things happened of the past 50/60 years that will impact ones health negatively.
Lift weights. Nobody lifts weights or does labor like they used to.
Endocrine function can still be normal despite obesity. There are plenty of fat guys with solid testosterone levels because they work with their hands all day.
I'm not saying that's all there is to health, far from it, but what kind of bubble does one have to live in to not see this counterexample? Do we just casually ignore them because they fit undesirable stereotypes of "toxic masculinity" or what? You don't have to become that guy just to lift weights.
> Nobody lifts weights or does labor like they used to.
I'm fairly sure _vastly_ more people lift weights today than in the 70s. At that point it was, well, not niche exactly, but you didn't have anything _remotely_ like the number of gyms around. Can't offhand find figures for back to then, but apparently it's up ~60% in just the last two decades.
One class of doctors thinks roughly 250 is enough for a middle aged guy - anything over shouldn’t be medically treated. Of course, the “men’s clinics” don’t rest until it’s over 1000...
With the standard range so wide (even after age adjustment), why isn’t it measured annually, like the CBC and others?
Sure, it’s easy to point at obesity, but statistical ranges completely fail the individual.
The effect is so variable that the reference range is nigh meaningless. Some people feel great at 300ng/dL. Some people experience genuine low-T symptoms at 650 that are fixed by bumping it to 1000. Some people are naturally over 1000 and have otherwise average hormonal profile (hair growth, muscle growth).
Also, the reference range is defined by an age span that is too wide to be useful, something like 21-59. The reference range is completely meaningless for a 25 year old man. Also the level varies drastically throughout days and weeks, so that one test is not a useful indicator of anything unless it's off the charts.
Basically, if you have low-T symptoms you should probably just get on T regardless of what number the test says. Find a doctor who agrees.
soy, cortisol, plastics, birth control remnants in the water and food supply, adipose tissue accelerating conversion of testosterone into estradiol, and compounds acting to keep free testosterone levels low and bound testosterone levels high. combine that with sedentary lifestyle, the demonization of red meat healthy fats and cholesterols (cholesterol is extremely close to testosterone and converts easily) and the systematic promotion of a plant based heavily processed diet can easily lead to this. the traditional diets of slaves and serfs was low meat & high grain to keep them weaker dumber and shorter in general. the lowered testosterone and will to fight and resist oppression was also a "feature, not a bug" as my llm likes to say every chance it gets.
the industrial revolution has been a disaster for the human race.
33 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 52.5 ms ] threadInteresting…
Like, if the choice of explanations is (a) obesity, and maybe some pesticide stuff, who knows, or (b) _witchcraft_, Occam's razor points a particular way.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Others are trying to regulate pesticide, junk food (obesity, diabete). For instance nutriscore in Europe, also the recent change on pesticide allowed.
I'm not sure it will be enough, but at least they are attacking to the root cause. You're not just adding even more problem, like the increased cardiovascular event or erectile dysfunction with overdosed TRT.
Same for the semaglutides that everyone and their mother take in the usa, people wouldn't need them so much if they didn't eat absolute crap all the time.
We know that semaglutides have also side effects, and that rebound happen when you stop, but I guess it's better than just fixing the food lobby ?
You should be highly skeptical of any claims of drastic variance in human biology over short time periods.
Wither Ozempic? I've seen several friends and family members use it to great effect and thought it might sweep the nation. But I imagine most of the same barriers that keep people from eating better or moving more are also in play when trying to engage with any new habit.
Of course, PFAS and microplastics aren’t great for sperm health, but neither were leaded gasoline and DDT before they were curtailed.
So if levels are falling, is prostate cancer lowering a little bit ? But that will be hard to determine due to the advancement of Medical Treatment over the past 50 years.
> Rising levels of obesity and diabetes
Plastic Bottles also replaced glass starting in the early 70s too. I remember reading some type of plastic can leak estrogen into the food. So seems a lot of things happened of the past 50/60 years that will impact ones health negatively.
It’s the one problem you can see in plain sight at any gathering of people.
Endocrine function can still be normal despite obesity. There are plenty of fat guys with solid testosterone levels because they work with their hands all day.
I'm not saying that's all there is to health, far from it, but what kind of bubble does one have to live in to not see this counterexample? Do we just casually ignore them because they fit undesirable stereotypes of "toxic masculinity" or what? You don't have to become that guy just to lift weights.
I'm fairly sure _vastly_ more people lift weights today than in the 70s. At that point it was, well, not niche exactly, but you didn't have anything _remotely_ like the number of gyms around. Can't offhand find figures for back to then, but apparently it's up ~60% in just the last two decades.
One class of doctors thinks roughly 250 is enough for a middle aged guy - anything over shouldn’t be medically treated. Of course, the “men’s clinics” don’t rest until it’s over 1000...
With the standard range so wide (even after age adjustment), why isn’t it measured annually, like the CBC and others?
Sure, it’s easy to point at obesity, but statistical ranges completely fail the individual.
Also, the reference range is defined by an age span that is too wide to be useful, something like 21-59. The reference range is completely meaningless for a 25 year old man. Also the level varies drastically throughout days and weeks, so that one test is not a useful indicator of anything unless it's off the charts.
Basically, if you have low-T symptoms you should probably just get on T regardless of what number the test says. Find a doctor who agrees.
the industrial revolution has been a disaster for the human race.
I wonder if men nowadays don't move around or lift things as much.