114 replies to this topic

[Florian Xavier]

Any ideas ?

I bet on intersexual competition, because of the stress they get from the "hard to get" woman's attitude.

[niner]

Higher iron content in blood because they don't menstruate. More IGF-1? Probably some other stuff too.

[Florian Xavier]

they menstruate actually...

[niner]

they menstruate actually...

Men do?

[1kgcoffee]

-testosterone can depress the immune system
-leftover stem cells from a pregnancy can be used by used by the mother
-I have an unproven hunch that frequent enough male ejaculation over time takes some essence out of a man. Is it spermidine, zinc, or something else?

[okok]

-leftover stem cells from a pregnancy can be used by used by the mother

That should be testable - women with pregnancies vs. whithout....?

Plus the allelic x-chromosome theory.

[Danail Bulgaria]

I asked the same question a fellow gerontologist one year ago, and started to explain him simmilar explanations. He stopped me and said: The old people, who die today are from the generation, when the males have been drinking alot, smoking and working hard jobs, that are dangerous for the health, and were not taking care for their health. Now after the fact, that the females drink and smoke equally with the men and since they work the same jobs, and now after the men started to look after their health, the women will no longer live longer.

[MrHappy]

I asked my dad once why men die before women.

His answer: they want to, son, they want to.

[PWAIN]

Seivtcho, it is not just in humans so that theory does not hold water. It would be interesting to find out if never pregnant females also live longer. A study in mice where an equivalent amount of blood as lost by female mice when menstrating extracted from male mice should clear that one up. similarly, injecting female hormones into male mice should eliminate that idea. I'd be surprised if this has not already been done.

[rwac]

According to Ray Peat, it's the Progesterone that allows women to live longer. Plus losing iron every month via menstruation.

[Thorsten3]

So, give blood regularly and get rid of that rusty iron guys

Or maybe, becoming a veggie/raw foodist would decrease iron substantially

Edited by Thorsten2, 07 September 2012 - 09:52 PM.

[Nootropic Cat]

So we have the iron thing, but otherwise it seems rather obvious to me that the statistics are largely skewed by a) dying in wars and b) generally 'macho'-driven risky behaviour. Obvious to me, but apparently not obvious to anyone else in these threads, so I feel like I must be way off for reasons I don't understand :/

Edit: missed seivtcho's post - what he said

Double edit: PWAIN - 'it is not just in humans so that theory does not hold water' - actually, 'generally 'macho'-driven risky behaviour' probably does apply in other species

Edited by TripleHelix, 07 September 2012 - 11:37 PM.

[hivemind]

Women are caretakers. They take care of men and children. They also take better care of themselves than men do. Men are competitors. They compete with other men. Competition is not a very healthy attitude towards life if you think in terms of maximum lifespan.

So, give blood regularly and get rid of that rusty iron guys

Or maybe, becoming a veggie/raw foodist would decrease iron substantially

Yes , it is the heme iron in read meat.

[Thorsten3]

Plus, eliminating cooked meat (or just cooked food in general) can always be a good thing for life extension.

Since giving up meat especially I have noticed far better digestion, better energy and more vibrant skin (this does depend on how much you eliminate cooked foods though).

It's interesting because I do buy the theory that eating sufficient protein with fat and eliminating carbs can keep your insulin receptors sensitised (also good for health, life extension), but people do that here tend to base their lifestyle on cooked meat. Food that has been chemically altered through high levels of heat. Just think when you fry a piece of bacon and it goes hard and crusty. Is that entering your body in a state where's it going to be useful for your body to process it and use it? I would even speculate that it's nutritionally worthless. All your ingesting is burnt protein with a charcoal coating. ALL cooking (even if it's gentle) is going to have this effect to some degree. Ingesting cooked, lifeless foods will pretty much turn you into a lifeless person.

When you go raw there is limited energy directed towards digestion so all other energy goes to improving most other aspects of your life, especially mental wellbeing, spiritual insight and (surprisingly) confidence. Only downside is lowered libido but this is down to the reduction in calories you'd be getting. I personally mix cooked veg (mostly potatoes) with lots of raw food. This bumps up my calories and eliminates the libido problem.

Apologies for this post, I've had a few to drink and am just rambling general shit.

[niner]

So we have the iron thing, but otherwise it seems rather obvious to me that the statistics are largely skewed by a) dying in wars and b) generally 'macho'-driven risky behaviour. Obvious to me, but apparently not obvious to anyone else in these threads, so I feel like I must be way off for reasons I don't understand :/

If you look at expected lifespan at age 65, women still outlive men. By the time men are 65, I think they're pretty much done with wars and the usual crazy behavior that knocks off so many guys in their teens and twenties. The higher rate of death from accidents and homicide can partially explain the difference in expected lifespan at birth, but there's something else at work here.

[1kgcoffee]

I (partially) agree with you, Thorsten. It's painful to watch people eating crispy strips of bacon. They know that it's bad for them, but they blame saturated fat instead of the real culprits- AGEs and ALEs.

While the process of cooking creates nasty byproducts, it also destroy anti-nutrients and pathogens and increase bioavailability of nutrients. Fermentation too. Its possible to cook food in a way that maximizes bioavailability while minizing harmful byproducts. As for heme iron concern, that can be partially avoided by eating meats that are pre-drained of blood, ie kosher.


okok,

-leftover stem cells from a pregnancy can be used by used by the mother

That should be testable - women with pregnancies vs. whithout....?

Plus the allelic x-chromosome theory.

http://www.lifesiten...ve-longer-study
http://www.standard....er-6943704.html

Edited by 1kgcoffee, 08 September 2012 - 01:54 AM.

[hivemind]

Plus, eliminating cooked meat (or just cooked food in general) can always be a good thing for life extension.

High heat cooking is unhealthy. I am not eliminating boiling and steaming.

ie kosher.

That shit I am definitely eliminating.

[Nootropic Cat]

So we have the iron thing, but otherwise it seems rather obvious to me that the statistics are largely skewed by a) dying in wars and b) generally 'macho'-driven risky behaviour. Obvious to me, but apparently not obvious to anyone else in these threads, so I feel like I must be way off for reasons I don't understand :/

If you look at expected lifespan at age 65, women still outlive men. By the time men are 65, I think they're pretty much done with wars and the usual crazy behavior that knocks off so many guys in their teens and twenties. The higher rate of death from accidents and homicide can partially explain the difference in expected lifespan at birth, but there's something else at work here.

Don't you think stress factors are still at work though? As well as physical wear and tear from sports and physical confrontations. It only takes a minority who are strongly affected by strongly affective life events, to skew the statistics. I can't help feeling this is an example of where most people's intuitions aren't really dialled in to how statistics work.

Edited by TripleHelix, 08 September 2012 - 02:53 AM.

[hivemind]

I (partially) agree with you, Thorsten. It's painful to watch people eating crispy strips of bacon. They know that it's bad for them, but they blame saturated fat instead of the real culprits- AGEs and ALEs.

Saturated fat is a real culprit.

[1kgcoffee]

We could argue saturated fat for ages, but I'd rather not hijack the thread. As for 'kosher' meats, I mean salt-wise, not religious.

[okok]

http://www.lifesiten...ve-longer-study
http://www.standard....er-6943704.html

Fantastic, thanks. And it's known for some time, the second one is from '04.

[niner]

So we have the iron thing, but otherwise it seems rather obvious to me that the statistics are largely skewed by a) dying in wars and b) generally 'macho'-driven risky behaviour. Obvious to me, but apparently not obvious to anyone else in these threads, so I feel like I must be way off for reasons I don't understand :/

If you look at expected lifespan at age 65, women still outlive men. By the time men are 65, I think they're pretty much done with wars and the usual crazy behavior that knocks off so many guys in their teens and twenties. The higher rate of death from accidents and homicide can partially explain the difference in expected lifespan at birth, but there's something else at work here.

Don't you think stress factors are still at work though? As well as physical wear and tear from sports and physical confrontations. It only takes a minority who are strongly affected by strongly affective life events, to skew the statistics. I can't help feeling this is an example of where most people's intuitions aren't really dialled in to how statistics work.

I think that by the age of 65, the stress factors due to things like fighting and sports have pretty much subsided. You could make a good argument that the damage done by those things earlier in life affects lifespan later. As for how the statistics work, be aware that life expectancy at birth takes into account all the deaths from age 0 on, while LE at age 65 only applies to people who have already made it to 65.

[Marios Kyriazis]

The difference between life expectancy of men vs women is statistically significant but not practically significant.

Whatever the cause is for women outliving men, it is likely that it will not be relevant to longevity research (here I take the word 'longevity' to mean a difference of at least several decades, if not centuries, and not just a few years).

[Danail Bulgaria]

This topic made me wondering why women live longer than men and I decided to compare the women/men behaviour in accordance with the theories of aging. I found, that the women cope better than the men in accordance with the majority of the aging theories, that I know of. For example:

The cholesterol theory of aging - the women unatentiously avoid cholesterol containing food in order to have good shape of their bodies. They eat mostly green vegetables, fresh fruits, avoid certain types of meat, etc.
The inactivity theory of aging - females sport more often than men and more often do cardio exercises.
The free radicals theory of aging - very often the food, that is good for the shape has no cholesterol, but also contains natural antioxidants such as Vitamin C and Vitamin E.
The stress theory of aging - the way of which the females think and the fact, that they laugth more often is enough to be supposed, that they cope better with the emotional stress. Furthermore females more often participate in group anti stress therapies.
The metabolite rate and the calories theory - The fact itself, that females do diets for their bodies, shows, that they do some sort of calories restriction.
The insulin theory of aging - females much more often watch and treat their diabetes and sugar levels than the men (statistical fact known from the internal diseases).

These are only several examples, however I found better coping of the females with all of the theories of aging, that I know of, except for theories from the group of the genetic theories of aging. Since the genetic factors for the aging, that I know, are not located in the X - chromosome, the genetic predisposition to aging could be spread equally between the men and the women?

My discovery, that females behave better in accordance with the majority of the aging theories may explain to some extent the oppinion, that I cited earlier, that the old people, who die today are from the generation, in which the males have been living "unhealtier" life.

I don't know what is the situation with the difference of the lifespan between males/females in the other mamal species except humans, however leading better life seems to be more plausable after all, at least in humans. Maybe people from this forum may show comparisment researches of the average lifespan between males and females of different mamals species.

[pleb]

I had read that oestrogen has a positive effect on telomere length and women have a higher amount,
perhaps that is enough so that over their lifespan it makes a few years difference,

[tham]

-testosterone can depress the immune system
-leftover stem cells from a pregnancy can be used by used by the mother
-I have an unproven hunch that frequent enough male ejaculation over time takes some essence out of a man. Is it spermidine, zinc, or something else?

The principles of traditional Chinese medicine are centered upon the kidneys.

The kidneys are referred to as "the door to life".

Qi, or Chi, the Life Force, is stored in the kidneys. Each time you ejaculate,
you drain away your Chi.

Do that several times a day for a week, and you would feel the consequences.


http://harmonyhealin...rong-kidney-qi/

[MrHappy]

http://www.theregist...tion_long_life/

...
The results, published in the journal Current Biology, show that eunuchs lived to an average age of 70, up to 19 years longer than their intact counterparts. Three of the eunuchs made it into triple figures, reaching 100, 101, and 109 years old - although it probably felt much longer. That's 130 times the rate of centenarians you'd expect to finds in a sample of humans today, and the team concludes that male sex hormones do have an effect on male longevity.

[dear mrclock]

i read this today as well; http://abcnews.go.co...20#.UGD-nq6rG6E

but i doubt its male hormones doing this. because as a male ages, he has less and less until none testosterone production. i believe eunuchs live longer because they never follow their sex hormones (cuz none) from the very get go. and a man to follow his sex hormones means OBEY WOMEN, BE SLAVE = low life expectency, more stress, fragile psychology (emotional intelligence superiority from females), and various other factors co factors relating EVERYTHING THAT FEMALES ENCOURAGE IN MALES BASED ON THEIR FRAGILE Y CHROMOSOME AKA TESTOSTERONE.

i just got banned recently for actually posting this on a forum. http://www.bluelight...ence-by-suicide

http://chartsbin.com/view/kv2

http://www.afsp.org/....9C65C381BAAEC0

[Brett Black]

Men may have been more "expendable/disposable" from an evolutionary/genetic perspective, and this may have resulted in reduced lifespan compared to women.

It is thought that extrinsic causes of mortality are related to intrinsic rates of ageing/mortality in many animals. Animals that have a high probability of death due to external causes may have evolved to live shorter lives. This could be partly because there is little selective pressure for developing the intrinsic biological capabilities necessary for longer lives in such animals. It is possible that throughout evolutionary history male humans have generally experienced higher/earlier deaths by extrinsic causes(e.g. due to hunting, fighting etc) compared to female humans, and thus these particular forces could apply to humans too.

Males are also arguably more disposable in the sense that each one is often potentially capable of a much higher rate of reproduction than females. So favoring survival of individual females may provides more of a broad-scale reproductive advantage than survival of individual males. The tribe could be be fully repopulated by a minimal number of males so long as there are sufficiently numerous females, but the reverse scenario would be less likely to succeed. In addition, females may have played a more important role post-birth(ie nurturing) in the successful survival of offspring to reproductive age, further boosting the evolutionary importance of female survival(and lifespan) compared to males.

[trance]

http://www.theregist...tion_long_life/

...
The results, published in the journal Current Biology, show that eunuchs lived to an average age of 70, up to 19 years longer than their intact counterparts. Three of the eunuchs made it into triple figures, reaching 100, 101, and 109 years old - although it probably felt much longer. That's 130 times the rate of centenarians you'd expect to finds in a sample of humans today, and the team concludes that male sex hormones do have an effect on male longevity.

Searching for one's own physical gratification, companionship, or love, has its own varied intrinsic associated risks & stress ...