Author Topic: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis  (Read 2316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 71,613
  • Gender: Female
http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2013/06/17/192670490/why-men-die-younger-than-women-the-guys-are-fragile-thesis?ft=1&f=1001


Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis

by
June 17, 201310:39 AM

The 19th century just lost its last living man.

Jiroemon Kimura, of Kyotango, Japan, was born in April 1897, lived right through the 20th century and died last Wednesday. He was 116. According to Guinness World Records (which searches for these things), he was the last surviving male born in the 1800s. All the other boys from that century, as best we know, are dead.

The ladies, however, are still ticking. Misao Okawa of Osaka is now officially the oldest person on the planet. She was born in 1898. There are four others — two in Britain, one in the USA, and another in Japan — all 19th century-born, all female, all still alive.

Once again, the ladies have outlasted the gentlemen. Not that that's a big surprise.
They Might Be Giants - Older

Women, on average, seem to take a little longer to die. But here's what I didn't know: Women, it turns out, don't just win in the end. It seems that women consistently outlive men in every age cohort. Fetal boys die more often than fetal girls. Baby boys die more often than baby girls. Little boys die more often than little girls. Teenage boys, 20-something boys, 30-something boys — in every age group, the rate of death for guys is higher than for women. The difference widens when we hit our 50s and 60s. Men gallop ahead, then the dying differential narrows, but death keeps favoring males right to the end.

After that, everybody's dead.

So Death, it turns out, is not an equal opportunity avenger. It seems to consistently favor males. Why? What is it about maleness that brings Death knocking?

The Fetal Difference

First off, whatever we males are doing wrong, nature seems to know about it. Because when human babies are conceived, says , "the ratio of males to females ... has been estimated to be from 107 to 170 males per 100 females." The storks, it seems, drop extra boy babies into wombs, almost as if they know what's coming. But even with a boost at conception, male fetuses don't make it out of the uterus as often as female fetuses. The death differential, says the study, "has been estimated to be from 111 to 160 males per hundred females." So miscarriages are mostly male.

The Baby Difference

Then come birthdays. More boy babies get born than girl babies. This is true all over the world. In America, it's 105 males for every 100 females. But as soon as they're out, the boys start to go. Male babies born prematurely die more often than females. Birth weight is not as strong a predictor as gender. You can be born impossibly small, and if you're a girl you are still slightly more likely to make it through.

The Adolescent Difference

The male disadvantage spikes during the teens and early 20s. This is the time when young men fight, go to war, dare and don't wear motorcycle helmets. Their deaths here are increasingly accidental, suicidal, homicidal or war related. "If deaths from violence are excluded," says , the spike in the early 20s disappears completely, though the female advantage remains. Not too long ago, young women got pregnant and many died having babies during their 20s, but in the modern era, childbirth mortality is down; male derring-do less so.

The Middle Years Difference

Here the gender difference narrows and holds steady, but if you look across the years, men are more likely to die from injuries, and (at least in the USA) from suicide, respiratory cancer, cirrhosis of the liver, emphysema and coronary heart disease. Leading female diseases — breast cancer and cervical cancer — do damage, but not as much as the male diseases.

The Oldies Difference

Somewhere in our 50s, the men begin to accelerate their dying, and that difference peaks in our 60s and early 70s, and then narrows. In the last lap, among the oldest of the oldies — people 110 and over — women are lopsidedly the survivors. In America, 9 out of 10 of the "supercentenarians" are female. Jiroemon Kimura, the farmer/mailman who died last week in Japan — was a double exception; he was not only super-old, he was a super-old male. That's very rare.

They Might Be Giants - Older

But Why The Difference?

Which brings us back to the deeper question (again, we're talking not about you in particular; we are making a statistical argument based on averages): Is there something about being male that, all by itself, shortens a lifespan? And if so, is it correctible or built in? The most famous paper on this subject "," comes from an actuary (naturally) working in Seattle, Barbara Blatt Kalben. In 2002, she wrote that being a guy is definitely more dangerous, but she has a bevy of reasons why that might be, and she doesn't choose a winner.

Blame Testosterone?

There are obvious behavioral differences between men and women, she writes. Some of them might be cultural. Men are more violent, which puts them in harm's way more often. They consistently consume more tobacco, alcohol and drugs, which makes them sicker (then deader) later on. The explanations for this difference could be chromosomal or hormonal (more testosterone) and therefore hard to change; or they could be learned.

Blame Size?

Other explanations seem hard-wired and not fixable. Men, she notes, are generally bigger, which reflects a general rule in biology, seen in most species, which says (quoting from ) "that larger (size) individuals (within a species) tend on average to have shorter lives." This has proved true for animals in the wild, showing up in worms, fish, insects, mammals and, of course, our group, the primates. The bigger among us (again, on average) die earlier. (I've noticed this among dogs, but birds, she says, are a notable exception — Big Bird, if he existed, would likely last longer than your average garden robin.)

But now comes the explanation that made me wince.

Blame Male Weakness

Barbara Kalben mentions it, quoting E.V. Allen of the Mayo Clinic, who in 1934 wrote an essay that said "mere maleness" is a predictor of greater mortality. Something about being male "influences unfavorably the resistance ... to disease at all ages." He called it "male weakness."

    "The factors which are usually set down in explanation of the greater mortality in males are overwork, alcoholism, venery [I looked it up, it means lots of sex and also hunting] tobaccoism, exposure to the elements, industrial hazards, and irregular habits of eating and sleeping. ...

    "For each explanation of the lack of inherent vitality of the male there are objections, but these do not influence the fact; the male is, by comparison with the female, a weakling at all periods of life from conception to death. Venery, alcoholism, exposure, overwork, and various other factors may influence the susceptibility to disease and the greater mortality of the adult male, but they are only straws placed on the greater burden of his sex-linked weakness.

    "There seems to be no doubt that, speaking comparatively, the price of maleness is weakness."


So, for many reasons, because of our hormones, our chromosomes, our lifestyle, the stresses of being a guy, we become (or are born) more fragile. This is not exactly my image of maleness, which runs more to Achilles or to Muhammad Ali, but the data suggests that in the long run, when it comes to just surviving, it's the ladies who pack steel.

A bunch of years ago on ABC News, in a series I did with Ted Koppel called Brave New World, I touched on the theme of time with two friends of mine, John Lennell and John Flansburgh, better known as They Might Be Giants. They made a music video to illustrate our hourlong essay, which included this refrain: "You're older than you were before, and now you're even older ..." lines that make me smile to this day. Both the Johns and the three musicians they hired (all named Dan) and I (I introduce the song) are older than we were before ... and, as sometimes happens, now we're even older. Notice, there are no women in the video. If we'd included any, chances are they'd have gone on and on and on and, in a gender-embarrassing way, outlasted us.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2013, 06:53:14 am by Rapunzel »
�The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.� G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 71,613
  • Gender: Female
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2013, 06:51:29 am »
Both babies my mother had still-born were boys and my middle sister had a still-born boy baby.
�The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.� G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,967
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2013, 12:44:48 pm »
Why do men die first?

They want to.

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2013, 01:00:51 pm »
Why do men die first?

They want to.

Ah, you beat me to it!    :silly:


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2013, 12:39:01 am »
Occupational hazard!

Offline jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,326
  • Gender: Male
  • Realistic nihilist
    • Fullervision
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2013, 10:30:31 am »
This is malarkey.

It has nothing to do with being fragile or weak. Feminists might want to think that, but it's totally false-- in fact, it's almost the exact opposite. On the whole, men are stronger, faster and physically superior to women in almost every aspect (flexibility, a trait necessary for childbirth, being a very important exception). That's why you will probably never see a woman in the NFL, let alone women reaching parity with men in any pro sport. (I'll use the NFL as an example because it is a sport that puts a massive strain on the body, is highly selective, and is well-known.)

Because men are capable of doing more, they usually do end up doing more physical, manual labor, which wears down the body over many years. This extends beyond sex and into race. Black men, for instance, make up about 60% of NFL players, far above the statistical mean. Yet they are well-documented to have much shorter lifespans than their white counterparts. The number of Asians, on the other hand, who play in the NFL can be counted on one hand, yet their lives are typically longer than whites'.

Note that the article admits the gap closes in the physical peaks of a man's and woman's life. The only reason any gap exists at all in those years is "death by stupidity" and the declines in death during childbirth.

One other thing: basic genetics states that men and women should be created at equal rates, so if they're determining more men are supposedly being conceived than women... that can only mean women are not even making it to implantation.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 10:31:26 am by jmyrlefuller »
New profile picture in honor of Public Domain Day 2024

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,804
  • Gender: Male
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #6 on: June 20, 2013, 10:40:12 am »
How about women's bodies are simply more efficient. They have to be.
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline PzLdr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,421
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2013, 12:58:29 pm »
Why? Because women don't live with women.  :seeya:
Hillary's Self-announced Qualifications: She Stood Up To Putin...She Sits to Pee

Offline Lipstick on a Hillary

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,014
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2013, 01:15:26 pm »
This is malarkey.

It has nothing to do with being fragile or weak. Feminists might want to think that, but it's totally false-- in fact, it's almost the exact opposite. On the whole, men are stronger, faster and physically superior to women in almost every aspect (flexibility, a trait necessary for childbirth, being a very important exception). That's why you will probably never see a woman in the NFL, let alone women reaching parity with men in any pro sport. (I'll use the NFL as an example because it is a sport that puts a massive strain on the body, is highly selective, and is well-known.)

Because men are capable of doing more, they usually do end up doing more physical, manual labor, which wears down the body over many years. This extends beyond sex and into race. Black men, for instance, make up about 60% of NFL players, far above the statistical mean. Yet they are well-documented to have much shorter lifespans than their white counterparts. The number of Asians, on the other hand, who play in the NFL can be counted on one hand, yet their lives are typically longer than whites'.


I agree with you in part.  Men also endure more prolonged stress in the workplace, although that is probably changing.  Pre menopausal women also have their estrogen to protect them from cardiovascular disease.

Oceander

  • Guest
Re: Why Men Die Younger Than Women: The 'Guys Are Fragile' Thesis
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2013, 12:37:59 am »
Men put a lot more unnecessary stress on themselves - mostly just for the fun of it.