“New research suggests that women’s brains stay energized well into old age, making their brains appear about three years younger than men’s of the same chronological age.”
Linked in first:
Men didn’t evolve to live long, so it isn’t so much remarkable that women live longer with healthier brains but men, to be competitive with other men in youth and war, age terribly simply because so few would survive there’s no evolutionary pressure.
Some tough choices ahead for the cooties crowd.
Stick to imaginary phantasms of 20th century masculine superiority solely intended to run up credit debt or actually be healthier.
Here comes the academese:
“Researchers remain uncertain why such metabolic differences exist”
“It’s not that women’s brains seem to age slower than men’s,”
Watch the twist.
“Rather, it seems that women’s brains start off at a younger age when they reach adulthood, and they keep that throughout the remainder of their adulthood, basically buying them a few extra years.”
Not how it works. At all.
It’s like saying you start a race at the finish line, words have meanings.
If they’ve reached adulthood, they’ve reached adulthood. You can’t change the meaning to be quantum. Women mature faster (partially from earlier puberty and slower, longer sum development time because of that) and go on to metabolically age better because testosterone is known to burn out the system.
Gradual puberty + lower T = good for long-term brain health.
aka Not women’s fault. Help your fellow men. Maybe that explains why celibates like Tesla (who, let’s face it, probably didn’t masturbate), who kept their T-levels low as a result, lived longer and stayed lucid. Maybe that’s why monks live longer too, staying sharp. Male chastity has observable benefits.
The autobiographies of genius seem to evidence longer average puberty, too. The sensitive kid who’s a later bloomer?
The Victorians called masturbation self-abuse because the compulsion/addiction would tend to be co-morbid with other mental problems, including depression. How many porn addicts are depressed?
And what do they do to self-soothe because (someone) tells them it’s unanimously ‘good for you’?
Even nuns tend to live longer which does point to lower testosterone being a pre-requisite for a long life, neatly explaining why male levels gradually lower. It isn’t like evolution is picking on men. Aggressive animals have shorter lifespans across species. This is the price of being the protector/provider sex.
“Overall, men with circulating testosterone levels between 9.8 to 15.8 nmol/L range tended to live the longest.”
Men are entitled to know what their healthy levels should be, study them!
Men age faster cognitively, he’s like a magician trying to switch your attention onto women when there’s a medical problem with men.
Assuming they want to live long and prosper.
Like, sorry, if that’s a sexist assumption.
“Previous studies have found that aging women often exhibit stronger reasoning, memory and problem-solving skills than males of the same age. But it’s unclear whether this trend is related specifically to metabolism or to a different aspect of brain function.”
“This might mean women are a little bit more resilient to certain aspects of brain aging in general, but it could also introduce certain vulnerabilities,”
Lying liar. Not even one example? How can you try to spin a youthful brain as a bad thing?
Women aren’t so much MORE resilient (although oestrogen helps) but men are MORE fragile.
“Having a younger brain for longer could make the brain more vulnerable to certain things as well.”
Still no mention of men? This isn’t a woman’s issue, there’s nothing new here as stated, women already perform better as a known overall finding*, he totally ignores what men need because it involves admitting they aren’t the best at something….
These arrogant men are sex traitors. Their ego won’t let them admit men need help. So have fun with higher neurodegeneration risk because one guy won’t admit he’s not #1 at everything.
Men are not the control group, it’s the mean between both groups.
Basic category error and erroneous maths.
Hubris is a deadly sin. Treating male ill-health like it’s normal will literally kill men.
OT but relevant:
If we took men as the control, the shorter male lifespan is not only normal but hinted at being desirable, you don’t want to change the norm, with women being unusually longer-lived (greater distance from norm). Actually, the average is between the groups, again. The difference from the norm is smaller, easier to broach and bring those below it up to speed.
*Because unlike IQ studies, they can’t conveniently ‘exclude’ the left-side of the male bell curve to skew their findings dishonestly. This happens after they sample from middle-class academia pupils largely from suburban populations, a huge bias/filter itself.
Sure, throw other men under the bus and blame women for biology. Sexism both ways!