Secular Trend and Increase in Women in Sciences at Colleges

[James Michael Howard]

The Secular Trend, Women, Intelligence, Aggressive, Males, and the Future: A Current Sign of Human Evolution?

Copyright 2006, James Michael Howard, Fayetteville, Arkansas, U.S.A.

Re: “The Condition of Education”

The Associated Press reported findings of the study, “The Condition of Education,” June, 2006. The basic thrust of the report is that women are gaining in education in “male” areas. Some of the findings are: “Women now earn the majority of diplomas in fields men used to dominate – from biology to business – and have caught up in pursuit of law, medicine and other advanced degrees.” “Federal statistics released Thursday [June 1] show that in many ways, the sex gap in college enrollment is widening. Women earn the majority of bachelor’ degrees in business, biological sciences, social sciences and history.” “In undergraduate and graduate disciplines where women trail men, they are gaining ground, earning larger numbers of degrees in math, physical sciences and agriculture.” “Women now account for about half the enrollment in professional programs such as law, medicine and optometry. That is up from 22 percent a generation ago.” “The number of women enrolled in undergraduate classes has grown more than twice as fast as it has for men on campus by at least 2 million, and the gap is growing.” “The enrollment of men in professional degree programs is declining.”

Some people who try to explain the foregoing have attributed this major change to girls receiving more attention than boys, for various reasons. I suggest this phenomenon is due to biological changes in our population that are the basis of human evolution.

It is my hypothesis that human evolution is driven by increases in testosterone (“Androgens in Human Evolution,” Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum 2001; 94: 345-362). The mechanism involves differential reproduction, that is, some women reproduce faster than others. Women of higher testosterone reproduce faster than women of lower testosterone. Women of higher testosterone have increased sex drive and are more aggressive.

I suggest this mechanism is visible within our society as the “secular trend,” the increase in size and earlier puberty in children. (Yes, human evolution is clearly visible now and in the past.) The trend is real and robust in the U.S.A. (" Secular trends in height among children during 2 decades," Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 2000; 154: 155-161). I suggest the trend is caused by differential reproduction, that is, women of higher testosterone reproduce faster than women of lower testosterone and their percentage increases faster within the population over time. With each generation, the percentage of women of higher testosterone increases.

This also increases the percentage of fetuses exposed to increased testosterone within the population over time. Exposure of the fetal brain to increased testosterone may produce differential effects, depending upon total testosterone levels, that is, maternal testosterone and fetal testosterone. Too much testosterone is not a good thing for learning. Male fetuses are exposed to both maternal testosterone and their own testosterone.

It is known that excessive testosterone is significantly connected to learning disabilities: “Salivary testosterone levels in 264 children without learning disabilities (133 males, 131 females) were measured and compared to that in 32 children with learning disabilities (25 males, 7 females). The presence of learning disabilities was significantly associated with higher salivary testosterone.” (Physiology & Behavior 1993; 53: 583-6). Another study, with the caveat that the subjects were 47,XXY males, found a relationship quite similar to the findings of the literacy section of the Arkansas Benchmark Exams: “The findings indicated that verbal IQs measured prior to puberty, during puberty and at mid-adolescence were strongly related to relatively early pubertal onset and testosterone levels.” (Clinical Genetics 1992; 42: 31-4).

Studies in normal populations indicate the effect of testosterone levels on men and women. The cognitive performance of normal men and women was studied, grouped according to whether the subjects had relatively high or low salivary testosterone (T) concentrations. Men with lower T performed better than other groups on measures of spatial/mathematical ability, tasks at which men normally excel. Women with high T scored higher than low-T women on these same measures. T concentrations did not relate significantly to scores on tests that usually favor women or that do not typically show a sex difference. These results support suggestions of a nonlinear relationship between T concentrations and spatial ability, and demonstrate some task specificity in this respect. (Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1991; 16: 323-34)

I suggest the preceding two paragraphs combine to explain what is happening to men and women and learning in our population. Too much testosterone reduces learning ability while too little also reduces learning ability. This plus the secular trend may explain what is occurring in our educational institutions.

In the past, the majority of girls were not exposed to sufficient testosterone to activate their brains with increased androgen receptors, the sites where testosterone affects the brain. In the past, the majority of boys were exposed to sufficient levels of testosterone to activate their brains with increased androgen receptors. Approaching puberty, and after, testosterone levels in both sexes increase and exert their effects via androgen receptors. This activates the brain. In the past, a lot of boys and men produced sufficient levels of testosterone that did not produce learning disabilities early in life and produced increased stimulation from puberty forward. Girls did not produce these levels. The educational institutions were populated by a majority of men in fields in which testosterone produced an advantage in learning in the sciences.

As the secular trend continues, the percentage of female fetuses exposed to higher maternal testosterone increases. This increases the effectiveness of their testosterone on learning ability. Remember from above that women of higher testosterone scored higher in “male” tasks. As the secular trend continues, the educational institutions are increasingly populated by women in fields in which testosterone produces an advantage. As the secular trend continues, an increasing percentage of male fetuses are exposed to increased maternal testosterone and their own testosterone. This causes a slight increase in learning problems for an increasing percentage of males. These males do not attend, or do not succeed at, college. Black males are the group with the highest percentages of problems in education. Black mothers produce more testosterone than white mothers (Cancer Causes Control. 2003; 14: 347-55). Blacks males produce significantly more testosterone than while males, (J Natl Cancer Inst 1986; 76: 45), and black females produce more testosterone than white females, (J Clin Endocrin Metab 1996; 81: 1108). Black male fetuses are exposed to more testosterone in utero and at puberty than other groups.


I think this phenomenon has been occurring throughout prehistory and recorded history. I suggest this is why civilization develops, then declines. That is, as testosterone increases with a population, the learning abilities increased by testosterone increase. These abilities are often in the sciences so the populations advance. As the level of testosterone increases too much, these same abilities decline so the populations decline.

I have just explained that these abilities of women are increasing now and I think they increased in the same manner in past civilizations. The problem is that as men increase in testosterone and begin the decline in thinking abilities, men, as a group, become less intelligent and more aggressive. I think this increase in aggression and reduced thinking ability forces women into submission so their increasing thinking abilities are lost to the civilizations. I suggest that subjugation of women by “dumb, aggressive” men is often characteristic of the living remnants of past, vibrant civilizations.

The article in which I read about 2006 “Condition of Education” also pointed out that women in the United States earn less for their degrees than men. I suggest this may be part of our subjugation of women and it may portend a very negative trend in our population that may be a repeat of the decline of other civilizations. If we do not let our women, who are increasingly brighter than our men, take control of this country, we may regret it. The rise of “anti-science” religions which subjugate women is rising in the U.S.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

The samples are much too small to draw conclusions re: testosterone and intelligence or even testosterone and increased size, early puberty, or differential reproduction - and especially to assign testosterone as the driving factor in evolution. Also, all of this data was drawn from the U.S., which in toto is something like 3% of world population. If this hypothesis were correct, the same phenomena would be seen elsewhere.

Increasing size and early puberty have been linked (no, I don't have the citations) to the increased hormones/steroids in commercial feedstock for food animals (as have resistant strains of bacteria and viruses to the drugs in those same commercial feedstocks - there's evolution for you). Increase in testoterone could be associated with this as well, making it a marker, without being causal. Much more testing is needed to isolate and confirm causation.

As to women and education - women have always done well in education when not forbidden (overtly or coverty) to do so. In a society like ours, where the stigma of "reading is for sissies/real men don't read" is currently being carried into the secondary and even post-secondary levels, it is not surprising that, presently lacking laws and customs to stop it, women are "catching up" and even surpassing men in degree programs. Considering that women have to work harder and have more credentials to receive "equal" pay with men, women have a greater drive to achieve degrees than men from a purely economic point of view. Therefore, you have two causes (fewer men but more women enrolling) for the current "condition of education".

Howard, your hypothesis could be considered a sign of cultural evolution, but not species evolution. The rise and fall of societies is frequently associated with an increase in "freedoms" and education for women, followed by "subjugation of women by 'dumb, aggressive' men", but that has not changed (or even accompanied a change in) the number of chromosone pairs - or the protein coding within those pairs - one bit.

[James Michael Howard]

Barbara Fitzpatrick, thank you for your critique. I will try to respond. Assigning testosterone as the driving force of human evolution is the main "hypothesis" of my paper. I tried to make it clear that I think testosterone rises in populations, increasing brain activity stimulated by testosterone (science and math?), which starts civilizations, and as testosterone increases to excessive amounts it causes the decline of civilizations. The U.S. may be the last place on earth where this occurred and may be in decline. Therefore, one cannot "see" it identically elsewhere. Every population on earth is older than ours. One need look at the various civilizations and their ages and, perhaps, "see" the end results of these civilizations. For example, some African populations may have experienced this effect on civilization very long ago but actually show lower levels of testosterone than those of the U.S. Their civilizations did not progress significantly before excess testosterone levels stopped progression.

I have heard of the hypothesis that food additives are causing a lot of the current increases in different kinds of human problems. A lot of these problems occur more in lower socioeconomic levels where access to animal protein is limited. (At least I would think that.) If these effects are caused by food additives in animals, I would expect to see more problems in the affluent. I support my hypothesis. Testosterone exerts powerful effects on every aspect of human female sexuality. I happen to think women of higher testosterone will engage in sexual activity more than those of lower. I really do think women of higher testosterone will produce more offspring and this is sufficient to change their percentage within a population, especially if the effects are identified as health problems. This "epidemiology" would magnify the effects of this percentage of the population. That is, the health model identifies this much quicker than looking at the population as a whole. (I think testosterone levels are involved in obesity, diabetes, etc., as well as breast cancer and HIV infections. Groups that produce more testosterone also exhibit higher rates / worse outcomes in these.) You are absolutely right, more testing is needed.

I have no comment on your third paragraph.

I think human evolution is due mainly to differences in hormone levels with time, along with some genetic changes. These differences in hormone levels will, on average, produce populations, the fossils of which, differ from each other as this process occurs. I think the various "species" of humans in the fossil record could be produced by differences in the amounts of testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone. Support for this may be found in the close similarity of chimpanzee and human genomes and the short period of time available for the rapid "speciation" in the human line. Changes in hormones could also produce all of the characteristics that differentiate humans from chimpanzees as well as the multitude of fossil "species" that have been found.

(The following citation is simply to provide some support. I also think the obesity epidemic is due to the rise in testosterone.)


J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Feb 21; [Epub ahead of print]


The association of obesity and hyperandrogenemia during the pubertal transition in girls: obesity as a potential factor in the genesis of postpubertal hyperandrogenism *

McCartney CR, Prendergast KA, Chhabra S, Eagleson CA, Yoo R, Chang RJ, Foster CM, Marshall JC.

The Center for Research in Reproduction; Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine; University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Reproductive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, California 92103. Division of Endocrinology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109.

Context: Adolescent hyperandrogenemia is considered a forerunner of adult PCOS, but its etiology remains uncertain. Objective: To explore the hypothesis that peripubertal obesity is associated with hyperandrogenemia. Design: Cross-sectional analysis. Setting: General Clinical Research Centers. Subjects: 41 obese (BMI-for-age >/= 95%) and 35 normal weight (BMI-for-age < 95%) peripubertal girls. Intervention: Pooled blood samples (circa 0500-0700 h; n = 64) while fasting or single morning (fasting) samples (n = 12). Main outcome measures: Adiposity and androgen concentrations. Results: BMI correlated with total testosterone (T) (rs = 0.59), SHBG (rs = -0.69), and free T (rs = 0.69); free T was 3 times as great in obese girls compared with normal weight girls (P < 0.0001 for all). BMI correlated with insulin (rs = 0.52); both insulin and LH correlated with free T (rs = 0.45 and 0.44, respectively; P < 0.001 for all). When analyzing early pubertal girls (pubertal stages 1-3; n = 36) alone, BMI correlated with total T (rs = 0.65), SHBG (rs = -0.74), and free T (rs = 0.75); free T was 5 times as great in obese early pubertal girls (P < 0.001 for all). BMI correlated with insulin (rs = 0.65), and insulin with free T (rs = 0.63, P < 0.01 for both). BMI correlated with free T while simultaneously adjusting for age, pubertal stage, insulin, LH, and DHEAS. Conclusion: Peripubertal obesity is associated with marked hyperandrogenemia, which is especially pronounced in early puberty.

[Savonarola]

I suggest the trend is caused by differential reproduction, that is, women of higher testosterone reproduce faster than women of lower testosterone and their percentage increases faster within the population over time. With each generation, the percentage of women of higher testosterone increases.

What about other factors? If a female with below average testosterone levels chooses to have four kids, whereas a female with above average testosterone levels chooses to have only two kids, testosterone levels would certainly not be the major factor in determining the spread of genetically high levels of testosterone.
Does the "rate" at which females reproduce, according to you, take into account the number of offspring? "Rate" can refer to a number of things, so what exactly do you mean by it?

[James Michael Howard]

Thank you, too, Savonarola, for your response. That is a good question, if women reproduced according to their decisions. However, real life does not support that women do as they say. This is just out:

Am J Public Health. 2006 Jun;96(6):1098-103. Epub 2006 May 2

Reborn a virgin: adolescents' retracting of virginity pledges and sexual histories.

Rosenbaum JE.

Harvard Statistics Department, 1 Oxford St, Cambridge, MA 02138

“OBJECTIVES: We examined retractions of virginity pledges and of sexual histories among adolescents taking part in waves 1 and 2 of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. METHODS: Logistic regression analyses were used to compare respondents' reports of virginity pledges and sexual histories at waves 1 and 2.Results. Among wave 1 virginity pledgers, 53% denied having made a pledge at wave 2; after control for confounders, pledgers who subsequently initiated sexual activity were 3 times as likely to deny having made a pledge as those who did not initiate sexual activity (odds ratio [OR] = 3.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04, 5.04). Among wave 1 nonvirgins who subsequently took virginity pledges, 28% retracted their sexual histories at wave 2; respondents who took virginity pledges were almost 4 times as likely as those who did not to retract reports of sexual experience (OR=3.88; 95% CI=1.87, 8.07). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents who initiate sexual activity are likely to recant virginity pledges, whereas those who take pledges are likely to recant their sexual histories. Thus, evaluations of sexual abstinence programs are vulnerable to unreliable data. In addition, virginity pledgers may incorrectly assess the sexually transmitted disease risks associated with their prepledge sexual behavior.”


So, nubile, fertile women are saying one thing but having sex anyway, even when they “pledge” it. When millions of women are doing this, including the many who do not even pretend to control sexual activity, I suggest that your hypothetical does not fit. However, I do know there are women who control their reproduction, but I think women of high testosterone are more likely to experience birth control failures because of high activity.

I do not wish to debate semantics.

(Here is a citation demonstrating the powerful effect of testosterone on women.)


Menopause. 2006 May 25; [Epub ahead of print]


Efficacy and safety of a testosterone patch for the treatment of hypoactive sexual desire disorder in surgically menopausal women: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Davis SR, van der Mooren MJ, van Lunsen RH, Lopes P, Ribot J, Rees M, Moufarege A, Rodenberg C, Buch A, Purdie DW.

From 1The Jean Hailes Foundation, Clayton, Australia, and the Department of Medicine, CECS, Monash University, Prahran, Victoria, Australia; 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 3Department of Sexology & Psychosomatic Obstetrics/Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 4Hopital Mere et Enfants, Service de Gynecologie Obstetrique, Nantes Cedex, France; 5Endocrinology Department, CHU Rangueil, Toulouse, France; 6John Radcliffe Hospital, Women's Centre, Headington, Oxford, UK; 7Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Egham, Surrey, UK; 8Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Health Care Research Center, Mason, OH; and 10Edinburgh Osteoporosis Centre, Edinburgh, Scotland.

“OBJECTIVE:: Evaluation of the use of testosterone therapy for hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) after oophorectomy has mostly involved women treated with oral estrogen preparations. We investigated the efficacy and safety of a testosterone patch in surgically menopausal women receiving concurrent transdermal estrogen. DESIGN:: Women with HSDD after oophorectomy, for whom this was a concern, who were using transdermal estrogen, were recruited to a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Europe and Australia. Patients were randomly allocated to placebo (n = 40) or testosterone 300 mug/day (n = 37) treatment. Primary endpoints were changes in sexual desire measured by the sexual desire domain of the Profile of Female Sexual Function and the frequency of satisfying sexual activity at 24 weeks. RESULTS:: Sixty-one women (79%) completed the trial. All subjects who received at least one application of study medication were included in analysis. The testosterone-treated group experienced a significantly greater change from baseline in the domain sexual desire score compared with placebo (change from baseline, 16.43 versus 5.98; P = 0.02). The domain scores for arousal, orgasm, decreased sexual concerns, responsiveness, and self-image as well as decreased distress were also significantly greater with testosterone therapy than placebo. The frequency of satisfactory sexual events increased but was not statistically different between treatment groups (P = 0.06) Adverse events occurred with similar frequency in both groups, and no serious risks of therapy were observed CONCLUSIONS:: In this study, transdermal testosterone therapy via a skin patch improved sexual desire and other sexual function domains. It was well tolerated in these oophorectomized women with HSDD receiving concomitant transdermal estrogen.”

[Savonarola]

I do not wish to debate semantics.

If I start making claims about glognorks and how great/beneficial/amazing they are, one should expect me to explain what glognorks are. Likewise, when you say, "The mechanism involves differential reproduction, that is, some women reproduce faster than others," I expect you to explain what you mean by "faster." For example, is gestation for these mothers typically shorter than other mothers? Do they have a shorter recovery time? Are they able to conceive more quickly than others? Based only on your vague wording, any of these things could be what you mean; yet I insist that -- if you mean one of these things -- none of them have as much to do with changing allelic frequencies as does having more offspring per mother.

However, real life does not support that women do as they say.

The issue is not whether women "do as they say," the issue is the effect of women doing as they do. I am not taking issue with whether people of either sex stick to their pledges of abstinence. See this thread with yet another example of failed abstinence-only approaches.

When millions of women are doing this, including the many who do not even pretend to control sexual activity, I suggest that your hypothetical does not fit.

My hypothetical serves a purpose as an illustration: If there is a citable correlation between number of offspring and level of testosterone in females, then it certainly relates to your apparent research. If the correlation is negative, then it counters your hypothesis. If, on the other hand, the correlation is positive, then it supports your hypothesis. One would think that thorough research would have already revealed this information, as it is certainly pertinent.

However, I do know there are women who control their reproduction, but I think women of high testosterone are more likely to experience birth control failures because of high activity.

I suggest that you start supporting your assertions. I could make several seemingly sensical assertions contrary to your main hypothesis:

• More active women are more likely to experience miscarriages or other pregnancy problems due to their lifestyles' effects on the fetuses.
• More aggressive women are more likely to go to lengths to prevent unwanted pregnancies, be it through diligent birth control or surgery.
• More aggressive women are less likely to desire having their active lifestyles hindered by a pregnancy or a child for whom to care.

I know of no scientific support for any of these assertions, yet they are sensical and believable, and they would affect the statistics in a manner that weakens your hypothesis. This is why mere talk is cheap. Show us some facts if you're going to make the positive claims, and be ready to back them up.

I also note that, despite my specifically asking, and despite even your mentioning my question regarding "rate," you failed to provide any explanation.


(And on a moderator's note: Your current practice is acceptable, but if the journal articles you cite are available online, please include the URLs for each so that other readers may visit the pages.)

[James Michael Howard]

Savonarola, you raise a lot of questions. I will try to answer. However, first, are you implying that I am violating your rules when I list a citation without a url?

[Savonarola]

Savonarola, you raise a lot of questions.

I do, because I loathe junk science. (I've been dealing with it for years.) I ask these questions because I am skeptical of your claims, mainly because you haven't provided much support for many of your claims. My questions are intended not to discredit you but rather to further analyze the issue. (Consider it a loose form of "peer review.") I see the questions as very pertinent, and I would have thought that you could answer these questions easily as the answers strongly impact your hypothesis. In other words, I want you to convince me that your endeavour is not junk science at all.

However, first, are you implying that I am violating your rules when I list a citation without a url?

No; in fact, I explicitly stated that your current practice of posting the citation is acceptable. However, it is not very difficult to provide a URL for other readers, especially if you have already located said URL. Rather than having to start essentially from scratch to research the topic, readers would have a link to the article in question (and presumably therefore to a database of related articles) from which to start.
Violations of our rules/policies are dealt with in private. Anyone violating a policy will be notified via private message. Rest assured that you have not broken any rules.
If you have any more questions, please see the General Information forum or the Help forum. If you cannot find an answer to your questions, you may post them in the Help forum or send me a private message.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Your comment about low socio-economic classes having limited access to animal protein is only partially correct. Most extremely low socio-economic children are on free or reduced lunch programs in school, which always included milk. Also, thanks to more subsidies than I want to think about, junk food in America is extremely cheap - that McDonalds $1 cheeseburger is almost a staple of the lowest socio-economic class children. However, the lower, but not lowest, and the middle socio-economic classes, consume quite a bit of relatively low priced animal protein, both prepared at home and in restaurants. Lower priced animal protein is commercially raised and contain those hormones and other additives. However, even if the lowest classes were not effected by the hormones in animal protein, it would not matter to your thesis, since the lowest classes have no political power and do not tend to get graduate degrees.

Again, you are illustrating evolution of cultures, not evolution of species, when you speak of the US population being younger than every other population on earth (which it isn't). Cultures have risen and fallen on every continent, and the US looks to be just over the top and on its way down at the moment. Other cultures on other continents are on the rise again - India and China are the current "favorites" for the next top culture, but several South American cultures are also on the rise, and that probably won't be determined in our lifetimes. The human species, whether living on the American, EurAsian, or African continents - or the various islands about the world, has very minor differences - none to indicate that any population is, or is becoming, a different species. For one thing, no known population on earth is currently so isolated as to be able to evolve separately from the rest. Interbreeding is too well established. We still all have the same 23 paired chromosomes using the same sequences of amino acids.

Your cited research deals with samples too small to draw any conclusion except more testing is needed. Even more, your cited research shows no evidence that testosterone is causal of the conditions tested. In fact, some of the conditions cited (obesity, for example) could be causal of higher testosterone levels, rather than the reverse.

Savonarola is correct that there are many factors here as far as "differential reproduction" is concerned. Higher testosterone levels may cause women to INTIATE sex more frequently (I say may, because the sample was too small and the test was on women whose sex organs had been surgically removed), but says nothing about whether or not they PARTICIPATE in sex more frequently (it does "take two to tango", you know). Within a range, it doesn't even matter if higher testosterone level women do participate in sex more frequently - it still takes 10 lunar months to carry a fetus to term, and once a woman is pregnant it doesn't matter whether she has sex daily or not at all during that time. A woman could participate in sex once a year and have as many children as a woman who participated in sex on a daily basis.

Your thesis may be correct as far as the evolution of cultures is concerned, although not species (otherwise the descendents of the ancient cultures of Babylon, Songhai, Egypt of the Pharoahs and China of Tang Dynasty, and even Rome would be different species from Americans and they aren't), but you have much more work to support it. Again, at this point, you show a potential link between testosterone levels and intelligence, obesity, and the rise and fall of societies. You do not show whether testosterone levels are the cause, the result, or just concurrent (and thus can be used as a marker for possible levels of intelligence or civilization in the varying species, as well as peoples, of the fossil record).

[James Michael Howard]

I resign and capitulate this argument here. I apologize for taking your time but appreciate your critiques.

[Savonarola]

I resign and capitulate this argument here. I apologize for taking your time but appreciate your critiques.

I'm sorry you feel this is necessary. Although skeptical, I found myself intrigued by your basic idea and hoped to learn more from you. I certainly hope you have not been discouraged from your interests.
There is absolutely no need to apologize; we felt it was worth our time to respond, and (as I said above) I was quite intrigued. In addition, I hope your appreciation is genuine, as you are most welcome to present ideas here to get feedback in the future.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

James, while your thesis had some obvious problems, you have apparently established a link between testosterone levels and several issues - obesity and intelligence (or at least education level) especially. I hope you follow up on these. If testosterone levels are causal, this will open a new field in the treatment of obesity, ditto the educational problems that has the US currently ranked behind Spain (and Vietnam) in math and science. Testosterone "poisoning" has already been shown causal to high violence/confrontational social interaction. Therefore, if higer testosterone levels are the result of obesity, that will open a new field in treatment of "road rage" and other violent responses to stress. Either way, you have some solid stuff to work with here. Again, I hope you do continue the work on this. And I hope you continue to post.