I’ve heard this used for a variety of arguments and I’m beginning to wonder how many reputable studies have proven this conclusively. If that is the case, is the margin large enough to be have tangible effects?
Um, what tangible effects? Less fertility? That would certainly explain the incredible underpopulation that exists in China, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, etc.
I was thinking more along the lines of less muscle formation or aggressive behavior. Just for the record I’m asian, so I don’t have any racist agenda against them. Us.
Ok, then . . . have you, yourself, noticed “less muscle formation or aggressive behavior” among Asian men? I haven’t.
I do know they produce dry ear wax as opposed to other races who have moist ear wax.
If they do, it could be an artifact of dietary differences among cultures. I seem to recall that the combination of protein and saturated fat that you get in most red meat can raise testosterone levels, and the average southeast Asian diet is definitely lower in red meat than the average American diet.
The normal range for testosterone is very wide indeed; anywhere from 3 to 8 nano-grams per milliliter. Each person has his own natural level.
I am not sure that answers your question, but I hope it helps.
I don’t think the question is silly. If by Asian, you mean the stereotypical Chinese or Japanese man, they have less body hair than other groups. A derivative of testosterone, dihydrotestosterone, is a large factor for body hair growth and baldness in males. My observations lead me to believe that there are fewer Asians at the upper ends of muscle development than others. I can’t say if that is all dietary.
Just because genetics has refuted the idea of clean racial divisions doesn’t mean that all populations have equal chances for every trait. There are differences even if you just note the obvious such as hair and eye design. The things we are talking about are a matter of appearance as well.
BTW, I read about the ear wax thing too. It is governed by a gene and represents a large-scale population divide.
You seem to be implying that “asian” men are less aggressive than “white/black” men, how do you arrive at that premise?
I actually implied that high testosterone is associated with aggression. But maybe you think asian men are less aggressive. :dubious:
does this mean what I think it means? :eek:
Umm, read your own post, you brought it up not I.
If these generalizations are true (which I don’t grant except for the sake of argument) it could easily be a cultural artifact rather than a genetic or hormonal one.
I have seen lots of gym rats here in the states, descended from East Asians, who have plenty of muscle formation.
Japanese men (of this I have more personal experience) can be very mild or very very aggressive (often the same person in different circumstances), but their aggression tends to be less physical than psychological. In my experience, at least.
As an (ex-)endocrinologist, I’m unaware of any ethnic or racial differences in testosterone levels. In fact, as an internist, I don’t ever recall seeing a normal range for the blood level of any substance that depends on the ethnicity of the subject (with a very few, “partial” exceptions e.g. more people of African descent have low white blood cell counts than do people of other ancestry).
That being said, however, and with specific reference to testosterone, there are ethnic differences in tissue sensitivity to testosterone. For example, women of Mediterranean background tend to be more sensitive to trace levels of testosterone than women of other backgrounds. In particular, Italian women, say, are more likely to have mild “hirsutism” (i.e. excess, unwanted hair) than many other women. Conversely, the skin of women of Scandanavian ancestry is relatively resistant to the effect of testosterone to promote hair growth.
The phenomenon of differing racial or ethnic sensitivities to different hormones also seems to extend to insulin. Specifically, people of Native American descent, Hispanics, and those from the Indian subcontinent tend to be resistant to the effect of insulin to lower blood sugar. Indeed, in the case of certain Native peoples (e.g. the Pima Indians), virtually the entire population is insulin resistant.
I draw your attention to this review article (pdf). In it, note the following:
Did you even read my last post? Someone asked what tangible effects of testosterone I’m referring to and answered along the lines of muscle formation and aggression. No where did I suggest that asians were more or less agressive. You made that leap. The whole reason I started this thread was because I always hear half-assed explanations for low asian crime rates in which someone mentions low asian testosterone levels. I don’t buy it, but I wanted to see how much data actually supports this.
Anyway, concerning facial hair, I’ve seen plenty of bald asian men with sparse facial hair, and from personal experience, baldness is just as common among asians as whites or blacks. So I’m not completely convinced that’s the reason for less facial hair.
KarlGauss, that is interesting. So if a group is more resistent to testosterone, is that the same as simply having less, for all intents and purposes? Feel free to correct me if I’m understanding wrong.
Read this, your freakin’ post, you implied it, you did, not me, in conjunction with the thread title of your OP, sweet jeebus.
That would explain those high-pitched screams made by Bruce Lee…as he was kicking the shit out of white guys.
IIRC, free testosterone is converted by aromatase into estrogen, and high free estrogen levels are a signal to the body to stop producing testosterone. I wonder if the differences between groups were physically significant.