The impression I have gotten from several posts, is that, when some of the archive members had elective orchiectomies, one of the reasons they chose to have the surgery, was that they thought there would be positive health effects from the operation. And I've read in a couple of places on the message board, that there has been research which indicates that the reduction of testosterone in the body, does increase lifespan.

Obviously, someone who has had an orchiectomy, can't get testicular cancer, and lowering testosterone levels in the body has been shown to slow or stop the progress of prostate cancer. These effects would unquestionably tend to increase lifespan, but I don't think it could account for some of the claims for increased lifespan. I have seen statements to the effect that individuals who have had orchiectomies live an average of more than six years longer than those who haven't had the surgery. Because testicular cancer is relatively rare, and because prostate cancer is a slow-developing condition which usually isn't the cause of death of those who have the disease, I would tend to think that reduction of those two cancers in the sex organs, couldn't account for more than a fraction of the reported longevity increase.

So, has anyone researched what the specific physical benefits of reduction in testosterone levels are? Do men using drugs to reduce testosterone levels, show increases in lifespan as well as those who have had the surgery? And are there long-term statistical records which support the claims for lifespan increases?

Since men are more likely to suffer from heart disease than women are, I would tend to suspect that, if there are substantial increases in lifespan for males whose gonads have been excised, the reason is largely because of a reduction in cardiovascular disease. However, it seems possible that there are other things involved. For one thing, I have read that removal of the gonads in both men and women, causes a decrease in the basal metabolism rate. This also happens to people on restricted-calorie diets, and appears to be associated with increased lifespan for people on those diets--perhaps the reduction in metabolic rate might have a similar effect of enhancing longevity for individuals who have had the testes removed. Also, the idea of the "eunuch calm" would suggest that there are psychological factors which might provide a more positive mental outlook, and therefore increase the likelihood of survival to a greater age. Research on supercentenarians (those who live to be over 110 years old) seems to indicate that mental outlook had an effect on their longevity.

At the same time, there are some effects of low testosterone levels which would seem to have some possible deleterious effects on both general health and longevity. The greater tendency of those without gonads to gain weight seems to be well substantiated, and obesity is clearly associated with shorter lifespans. Loss of bone density leading to osteoporosis also seems to be an effect of low hormone levels, and, in some cases, that would seem likely to be associated with shorter lifespans. And, of course, in the first couple of years after hormone levels are lowered, it appears that chronic depression can lead to suicide.

Another issue on this topic might be the possibility that there is an optimum level of testosterone, somewhere between the average for men with gonads, and the low levels for those without the organs, at which there would be an optimum lifespan and the best level of general health. I think that some of those who are using drugs to reduce testosterone levels, have reported that they have found certain levels of the hormone which seem best for them individually.

I can't speak for everyone else, but I did not have my nuts removed to live a few more years. That's just crazy. 1:There are those that had sexual issues they thought castration would help with and I suppose it does if they can live with the side effects. 2:You have those that are on a mission to bigger and better things, like becoming a women. 3:I think a large percentage don't like the look or feel of their equipment and want it all or partly removed. I wanted #2, but settled for #3. 4:We also have many here with health issues; cancer, chronic pain and chronic infections that hope would be helped by castration. 5:Then you have the fetish folks. Did I miss any body? I think that anyone who has the health benefits listed as reasons for castration, other than those listed in #4 are reaching for straws. My doctor is mad at me for having lower cholesterol than him. We are both on vytorin, but mine has gone down more since castration. Maybe it's just a coincidence. I don't think there will be any extensive studies done on the health benefits of castration. It's not like all the guys in the world would have their nuts removed to be healthier. You can't get guys to loose 20 lbs. to be healthier. I still take testosterone to keep from having to be miserable. It's not worth living a few more years if you have to be miserable doing it.

As far as I am aware (could easily be wrong), the only study reported relative to longevity of castrates vs. intact males, was done about 80 years ago. It reviewed the typical lifespan of mental patients who had been routinely castrated as part of the enlightened approach to treatment back then. If I remember correctly it was done in Ohio, USA; again, could be wrong. Been a long time since I read about it. Aside from this report, the only reports I am aware of are in relation to prostate cancer survivors.

Relative to cardiac health issues, there are a number of studies recently published (in the last 10 years) which suggest (suggest) a relationship between lower testosterone levels and increases in certain types of heart disease. I am not sure that a clear-cut conclusion has yet been reached. There is a similar state of affairs relative to Type II diabetes.

There is associated with lowered levels of testosterone a corresponding decline in basal metabolic rates. This reduction can definitely be associated with increased levels of obesity, and associated risks - heart disease, diabetes, etc.

The "eunuch calm," as most folks seem to understand it, I am largely convinced, is a myth. From what I have observed around here and in person, is that the calm comes via the relief of the obsession for most folks and the attainment of a long sought goal. That is not "calm," but relief of a stressor, which is definitely not the same thing, although a calm sense may ensue.

Bluntly, there has not been a great deal of research done about castrates save as it relates to victims of testicular or prostate cancer, and then much of it is sparse and/or inadequate. More has to be done. More is being done on the social, psychological, and anthropological level (particularly here, in relation to voluntary eunuchs), as opposed to the physical level. Hopefully, one will lead to more of the other.

Some of the past research (if it can be called that) of Ottoman eunuchs and of Imperial Chinese eunuchs reported what seemed to be longer lifespans for eunuchs. In my opinion that was an error based upon the age of the Imperial eunuchs still alive at that time. The reports were made at the very end of the era of eunuchs so of course the survivors were likely to be of an advanced age. --FLO--