Is there some deep flaw in this assumption? Does the removal of the testicles result in a longer life expectancy fairly consistently?
Asked
Active
Viewed 218 times
2
-
Similar question – William Aug 17 '18 at 02:18
-
A proposal for a double blind test has been rejected by the ethical committee. – Count Iblis Aug 21 '18 at 14:37
-
@CountIblis do you have a source for this? I find it interesting sterilization is okay(transgender is okay with female hormones) but removing testicles is well considering not allowed. – William Aug 21 '18 at 14:58
-
Data from such studies won't be as good as from properly conducted double blind studies :) . – Count Iblis Aug 21 '18 at 15:03
1 Answers
3
To answer this question properly is going to need a prospect double blinded controlled trial. That is not going to happen in a normal world.
You can try looking at historical data, like the one referred to in this Huff Post article but that type of restrospective data is highly flawed.
their average non-eunuch contemporaries, who tended to live between 50.9 and 55.6 years.
So, the intact men were living short lives, much shorter than contemporary men suggesting that there was something in that ancient era that affected their health then. But what's the relevance to modern society?
Graham Chiu
- 13,257
- 1
- 21
- 64
-
Animals trails show longer life expectancy. With the transgender there could be an interesting argument made I think l. – William Aug 17 '18 at 23:24
-
Dogs are prone to perianal tumors unless you castrate them. Doesn't really help in providing definitive human data which is what this site is about. – Graham Chiu Aug 17 '18 at 23:26
-
Isn't there also a link with violence and crime leading to premature deaths? The vast majority of all violent crime incidents are committed by men. If a society would castrate all men before puberty, would that make crime rates plummet? And would the subsequent savings on the police and judicial infrastructure allow more money to be allocated for healthcare? – Count Iblis Aug 21 '18 at 15:11