I’ve got a question for the experts. Are certain androgenic features such as hairiness an indicator of androgen levels? What I mean is, does a man with a hairy body necessarily have higher T-levels than a man with less body/facial hair? I ask because I am 24 years old and can still only grow a low, thin beard. I have noticed that my beard has increased and now grows higher since using 4-AD. Should I get my T-levels checked? However, since puberty, I have always had good muscle development. On the other hand, a friend of mine has been able to grow a thick beard up to his eyes since he was 14, but at age 20, he’s still a stick-boy with no muscle development. Who’s more likely to have a low testosterone level, me or him? Is the absence of one testosteronish feature indicative of low T? Look at Mike Tyson. That musclebound, woman-raping, ear-eating, ass-kicking savage has got to have nothing but pure testosterone running through his veins. Yet when we hear him say,“I’m the betht fighter in the world, I’ll kick anybodyth ath in their own back yard,” we notice with shock and amazment that his voice sounds like that of a 5th grade girl. How can that be?
No, it is indicative of high DHT levels, which could be caused by (say) elevated 5-alpha-reductase levels. Testosterone supplementation elevates DHT levels.
Mike, so you are saying that hairy individuals have high DHT levels, whereas non-hairy individuals have low DHT levels? If that’s what you are saying, it does make sense. A lot of times, men with hairy bodies tend to be missing hair on their head.
The Body Hair/Testosterone connection is just a myth made up by insecure hairy white men. My answer to any werewolf boy spewing this nonsense is to simply take off my shirt and say: “wow, If I look like THIS (flex, twitch pecs, etc.) with no Testosterone, you must be a freakin house!.. Let’s see!”
I have noticed that people of Samoan or Filipino descent tend to respond very well to lifting (a disproportunate number of us are mesomorphs), yet have very little bodyhair.
Yes, Jason, that is correct.
Matt, you bring up an interesting point. For example, studies show that the negro race has a higher testosterone level than the Caucasian race. Yet, Caucasians are much hairier than negroes - probably because we Caucasians are descended from colder climates.
Of course then there is the whole Finn-Strongman connection. before test levels (since they can be influenced by so many variables), I’d put characteristic structural build as the main difference in ethnic group’s athletic skills. Icelandic people are tall and have proportunately longer legs (compared to torso), making them known as great deadlifters. Anthony Clark, like many Filipinos, has short limbs and a wide shouldered long torso, making benching very easy (my arms aren’t quite as short as his, but when I reverse grip it is easier than normal benching). Then you get to the blacks and speed thing: Pre-murderer O.J. said something to the effect that many black guys, with their high calves and butts are just built for speed.
Of course this is all semantics, since in 10 years deseigner babies will be available. This will level the playing field and ensure that regardless of ethnicity, the children of the world’s richest people will be the strongest, fastest and smartest.
Response to Matt: “designer babies” would be cool (IMHO),
but it is unlikely to happen in ten years due to all of the
religious and ethical hysteria surrounding it. Maybe in
50 years people will have developed the emotional maturity
to handle it, but until then we’ll remain in the cave man
dark ages. At least, through the “approved” medical
channels. Though it is likely that someone will try to do
it outside of the “approved” medical facilities.
Free, when man tampers with nature in such ways, there will be Hell to pay - quite literally.
Jason, we have been tampering with nature the entire history of the human race – from breeding crops and animals, to advancing medical technology. We are agents of change, steadily advancing toward the ultimate goal of becoming masters of our own genetic destiny. One day soon we will engineer children free of genetic defects and not subject to disease or age-related death. That will be humankind’s ultimate accomplishment, one that will change the course of humanity forever.
The real obstacle, as Free pointed out, is superstitious people like you who have religious or ethical problems with becoming better at what we already do. Evolving cultural views and natural selection will change all that. Until then, there will be underground routes available for those who, like myself, want their children to live the best lives possible (and who themselves want to live long and well).
Ah, yes, Mike, man becoming God. Yes, I do oppose such blasphemy. I also oppose your Hitlerian views regarding genetics.
Jason: This is getting off topic for this forum, but I
have no idea what you are talking about when you use the
Mike: exactly. Again, this is off topic, but since I have no desire to reproduce, I'm less interested in genetic engineering of children. But I am interested in things like using stem cells to grow replacement organs. And it is the same types of people who oppose genetic engineering that oppose stem cell research.
Free, you’ll have an idea when you get there.
Jason: I would continue a discussion with you on this topic
but, it is off topic for this forum, it is probably
pointless because you already seem to have very strong
views, and I don’t have the time because I’m going to be
too busy with work for a while to play on the T-mag forum.
Traits like hairyness and voice are products of genetics. Although androgens can affect them to a certain degree, they can only be changed within a certain range. For example, no matter how much DHT you have in your system you won’t start to grow hair on your palms (insert masturbation joke here), because there’s no coding in the human genome for hair follicles on that part of the human body.
Fragrantly copyed from an extropian disscussion forum
"There is a saying, Captain. Greater ability breeds greater ambition." -- Spock
Kahn (as you recall) was a genetically enhanced and
superior human who perceived normal humans as beneath
him … things to manipulate and control. Kahn and his
kind intended to establish “order” on the planet when
they attempted their coordinated effort to
simultaneously take over dozens of countries. He and
his crew are, of course, bested by those clever and
feisty normal humans.
It's the first time I've watched the character, "Kahn" since being exposed to transhumanist ideas ... and it was interesting to follow the story line with these new perspectives in mind. Spock's words probably represent what the masses will most likely fear though .... Kahn was ambitious and he was able.
I am not entirely sure what is going on here, but I feel a great big T-Man group hug coming on.