5 ms·

> and went ahead with a treatment against scientific evidence Despite a lack of scientific evidence not against. Don't think this has been tested and disproved

> and went ahead with a treatment against scientific evidence Despite a lack of scientific evidence not against. Don't think this has been tested and disproved in a scientific manner. And for ethical reasons probably won't be. A relationship between male hormones and aggressive behavior while sometimes questioned is generally well supported. Yes that's not ODD but one can easily see the train of thought here. What the doctor did is obviously very unethical and wrong (if the story is true) But it certainly doesn't seem like a random out-of-nowhere idea to me. Seems equally likely to me that the doctor was unethically treating based off own untested hunches as it is that it was a purely sadistic action.

belorn 6y ago
> A relationship between male hormones and aggressive behavior while sometimes questioned is generally well supported. That a relationship exist is well supported. The cause and effect, as per more modern research, however is one that more recent (ie > last 30 years) has found to be quite different than previous assumptions. Throw in a random number of test subjects in a room, observe aggressiveness, and then measure testosterone and you get a clear pattern. Now change the test by first measuring the testosterone and then observe aggressiveness, and the data is all over the place. The part that more modern research is questioning is not that the relationship does not exist, but rather in what direction the arrow points. Can behavior effect hormone secretion? More and more data seem to support that very theory.
- collyw 6y ago
  Aggressive dogs get their balls cut off and it seems to work. Would there be a reason to assume that it doesn't work in humans in a similar way?
  - belorn 6y ago
    Yes, because they tried that in the past on violent criminals back in the less ethical days. They also tried cutting out the Amygdala and nearby parts of the brain. The result was not great for either. The more aggressive an individual were the smaller the effect is. Testosterone also get secreted by other areas of the body so you also need to add suppressive drugs for that. Biggest effect was measured by chemically removing testosterone for women as they have the smallest amount to begin with. Going from above average testosterone in men to below average gave no results. Castrating the most violent criminal, usually against their will, has some studies showing minor results while others no results. There is something called the challenge hypothesis. The theory is that testosterone acts as a modulating effect for managing social status. When an individual suddenly gain status the body reacts by secreting testosterone. Testosterone in turn regulate how much energy an individual will spend on behavior to retain that status. For animals that gain and maintain status by exclusively aggression, this then correlate nicely with testosterone. Reducing a male dogs testosterone would reduce the amount of effort they will spend to defend their status against other male dogs, and since dogs are very territorial, there is ample of opportunities where such behavior occurs. However for very aggressive dogs the effect will be much smaller, so its not a solution in those cases and the solution instead tend to be euthanasia. Social status for humans is massively more complex, and the relation to violent crime even more so.
- auganov 6y ago
  That high testosterone levels are a poor predictor of aggressiveness but almost universally present in violent criminals doesn't tell us much. That behavior affects hormones, again, is interesting but doesn't tell us much. What we're really discussing here is whether significantly cutting off testosterone would reduce aggressive behavior over time. That the relationship between testosterone levels and aggression isn't perfect is a nuisance. For example reducing testosterone would reduce bodily strength significantly. Would that reduce aggression? Perhaps. Reducing testosterone is sometimes shown to increase empathy. Could empathy help reduce aggression? Perhaps. You could then argue that it's "not testosterone" and one should refrain from physical exercise and attend psychological empathy training to get the same effect. Logically it's a valid argument but practically speaking it misses the point. The data we have from chemical castration of sex offenders is very solid. There are people criticizing it saying that something else is at play[0]. But nonetheless it's very effective in practice. The data from animal experiments is strong too. There's definitely a profound change in behavior. Again, it's sometimes called into question over some oddly specific behaviors but it seems rather uninteresting to me. In your later comment you mention some experiments from a long time ago on violent criminals but I have a hard time finding anything that isn't about sex offenders or animals. So I'd appreciate a link. As far as theoretical arguments against it go, I'd say the strongest is that high levels are simply a proxy for some irreversible virilization that happened earlier in life. Which would much better explain why both criminal male and females are relatively high T. [0] say that people who accept the treatment are naturally predisposed to have lower recidivism
  - belorn 6y ago
    If you want to do the work I can recommend a book called The Trouble With Testosterone that takes a meta perspective on the different research on the topic. It is a fun evening/day going through it cited studies. > The data we have from chemical castration of sex offenders is very solid The data show same result for female chemical castration of sex offenders. Usually the study goes something like this: a self selected set of child sex offenders volunteer for chemical castration, and later they report a diminished desire for sex. The problem with linking this to aggression is on several layers. It self selected for individuals that want to reduce their desire for sex. It is self reported. And it is about diminished desire for sex. Will reducing bodily strength cause a reduction in aggressiveness? If we leave the topic of sex offenders and look at aggressiveness as a whole, bodily strength might very well effect social status and thus fit the challenge hypothesis. Crippling a high social status individual and they will likely spend less energy on defending their status, through the result is going to vary depending on the culture. The empathy studies are interesting (the book above list a few of those). According to one such study, giving men increased testosterone does not decrease their ability to read emotion in an eye test, but giving it to women does reduce their ability. Again this show a repeating pattern of those studies where within normal range, high or low testosterone levels can not predict behavior. You need to give people testosterone so that they are outside human levels to get any significant effect, and then the result is often minor unless taken to a very extreme level. > As far as theoretical arguments against it go, I'd say the strongest is that high levels are simply a proxy for some irreversible virilization that happened earlier in life. Which would much better explain why both criminal male and females are relatively high T. What is your source for that? Criminals have higer rate of violence, and if violence causes testosterone secretion, then the higher level can be explain by the increase violence. male-male competition in prison is also likely a bit more intense than outside which would also explain a higher level of testosterone.

belorn 6y ago

> A relationship between male hormones and aggressive behavior while sometimes questioned is generally well supported. That a relationship exist is well supported. The cause and effect, as per more modern research, however is one that more recent (ie > last 30 years) has found to be quite different than previous assumptions. Throw in a random number of test subjects in a room, observe aggressiveness, and then measure testosterone and you get a clear pattern. Now change the test by first measuring the testosterone and then observe aggressiveness, and the data is all over the place. The part that more modern research is questioning is not that the relationship does not exist, but rather in what direction the arrow points. Can behavior effect hormone secretion? More and more data seem to support that very theory.

collyw 6y ago
Aggressive dogs get their balls cut off and it seems to work. Would there be a reason to assume that it doesn't work in humans in a similar way?
- belorn 6y ago
  Yes, because they tried that in the past on violent criminals back in the less ethical days. They also tried cutting out the Amygdala and nearby parts of the brain. The result was not great for either. The more aggressive an individual were the smaller the effect is. Testosterone also get secreted by other areas of the body so you also need to add suppressive drugs for that. Biggest effect was measured by chemically removing testosterone for women as they have the smallest amount to begin with. Going from above average testosterone in men to below average gave no results. Castrating the most violent criminal, usually against their will, has some studies showing minor results while others no results. There is something called the challenge hypothesis. The theory is that testosterone acts as a modulating effect for managing social status. When an individual suddenly gain status the body reacts by secreting testosterone. Testosterone in turn regulate how much energy an individual will spend on behavior to retain that status. For animals that gain and maintain status by exclusively aggression, this then correlate nicely with testosterone. Reducing a male dogs testosterone would reduce the amount of effort they will spend to defend their status against other male dogs, and since dogs are very territorial, there is ample of opportunities where such behavior occurs. However for very aggressive dogs the effect will be much smaller, so its not a solution in those cases and the solution instead tend to be euthanasia. Social status for humans is massively more complex, and the relation to violent crime even more so.
auganov 6y ago
That high testosterone levels are a poor predictor of aggressiveness but almost universally present in violent criminals doesn't tell us much. That behavior affects hormones, again, is interesting but doesn't tell us much. What we're really discussing here is whether significantly cutting off testosterone would reduce aggressive behavior over time. That the relationship between testosterone levels and aggression isn't perfect is a nuisance. For example reducing testosterone would reduce bodily strength significantly. Would that reduce aggression? Perhaps. Reducing testosterone is sometimes shown to increase empathy. Could empathy help reduce aggression? Perhaps. You could then argue that it's "not testosterone" and one should refrain from physical exercise and attend psychological empathy training to get the same effect. Logically it's a valid argument but practically speaking it misses the point. The data we have from chemical castration of sex offenders is very solid. There are people criticizing it saying that something else is at play[0]. But nonetheless it's very effective in practice. The data from animal experiments is strong too. There's definitely a profound change in behavior. Again, it's sometimes called into question over some oddly specific behaviors but it seems rather uninteresting to me. In your later comment you mention some experiments from a long time ago on violent criminals but I have a hard time finding anything that isn't about sex offenders or animals. So I'd appreciate a link. As far as theoretical arguments against it go, I'd say the strongest is that high levels are simply a proxy for some irreversible virilization that happened earlier in life. Which would much better explain why both criminal male and females are relatively high T. [0] say that people who accept the treatment are naturally predisposed to have lower recidivism
- belorn 6y ago
  If you want to do the work I can recommend a book called The Trouble With Testosterone that takes a meta perspective on the different research on the topic. It is a fun evening/day going through it cited studies. > The data we have from chemical castration of sex offenders is very solid The data show same result for female chemical castration of sex offenders. Usually the study goes something like this: a self selected set of child sex offenders volunteer for chemical castration, and later they report a diminished desire for sex. The problem with linking this to aggression is on several layers. It self selected for individuals that want to reduce their desire for sex. It is self reported. And it is about diminished desire for sex. Will reducing bodily strength cause a reduction in aggressiveness? If we leave the topic of sex offenders and look at aggressiveness as a whole, bodily strength might very well effect social status and thus fit the challenge hypothesis. Crippling a high social status individual and they will likely spend less energy on defending their status, through the result is going to vary depending on the culture. The empathy studies are interesting (the book above list a few of those). According to one such study, giving men increased testosterone does not decrease their ability to read emotion in an eye test, but giving it to women does reduce their ability. Again this show a repeating pattern of those studies where within normal range, high or low testosterone levels can not predict behavior. You need to give people testosterone so that they are outside human levels to get any significant effect, and then the result is often minor unless taken to a very extreme level. > As far as theoretical arguments against it go, I'd say the strongest is that high levels are simply a proxy for some irreversible virilization that happened earlier in life. Which would much better explain why both criminal male and females are relatively high T. What is your source for that? Criminals have higer rate of violence, and if violence causes testosterone secretion, then the higher level can be explain by the increase violence. male-male competition in prison is also likely a bit more intense than outside which would also explain a higher level of testosterone.