Re: Would you get castrated so you could live longer?
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:23 pm
I think your final question is the most important here. I have always suspected that most of any health benefits of castration that may exist (including the extended lifespan) apply mostly to eunuchs who were castrated before puberty. My thought is that once the body becomes dependent on sex hormones, depriving the body of those hormones can only negatively impact health.
Looking at this issue from a different perspective, one might want to consider the difference between low T and no T. Many studies out there indicate that men with low testosterone have a greater risk of various health problems. However, my guess is that most of the men in these studies had levels of T that were below normal but still well above that of a typical eunuch. Could it be that low T (but still above what a eunuch would have) increases health problems but no T (or the very little a eunuch would have) offers health protections? Might the body of an individual with low T still rely on T to maintain health, but the body of someone with no T find other means to stay healthy?
Looking at this issue from a different perspective, one might want to consider the difference between low T and no T. Many studies out there indicate that men with low testosterone have a greater risk of various health problems. However, my guess is that most of the men in these studies had levels of T that were below normal but still well above that of a typical eunuch. Could it be that low T (but still above what a eunuch would have) increases health problems but no T (or the very little a eunuch would have) offers health protections? Might the body of an individual with low T still rely on T to maintain health, but the body of someone with no T find other means to stay healthy?