5 ms·
>It appears most studies widely agree the discrepancy is due primarily and simply to body weight / muscle mass; this is all mostly a simple byproduct of women b
by 542354234235 1y ago
>It appears most studies widely agree the discrepancy is due primarily and simply to body weight / muscle mass; this is all mostly a simple byproduct of women being smaller than men on average.
But muscle is closely tied to testosterone, something men have much more of. It makes me think of the iconic study [1] where men were compared with/without testosterone injections, and with/without exercise. The men given testosterone that did nothing grew more muscle mass than men strength training in the gym. So it isn’t women being smaller, it is that most men build more muscle laying on the couch than women going to the gym.
[1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101
- dahart 1y agoYes, testosterone and other parts of male physiology are what lead to men having more muscle mass on average. Men and women have different average sizes, so we don’t need to debate whether men are larger or women are smaller, both are true. The main takeaway from the muscle mass point for me is just that there’s very little difference in strength between men and women per kilo, when normalizing against lean body mass. It’s just a good thing to keep in mind when taking about these sex differences, since there’s a lot of misleading framing and wrong impressions, right?