Women compared to foreign men

woodwater wrote:Hi
The link below,on figure 10 seems to show women from Jamaica,Finland and Germany have higher testosterone than Polish or Spanish males.Is this true or did I misunderstand the article?

Thanks

http://hera.ugr.es/doi/15009579.pdf

Hello woodwater,

First of all, welcome at this forum!

Regarding your question, I think you have made an ssociation that is not supported by the article, because the 2D:4D digit ratio actually varies between populations around the world (genetics appear to be involved).

So, the 2D:4D digit ratio is certainly not a direct measure for testosterone because it is important to be aware of the population differences! And thus one can basically only compare males and females from the same population (country) in order to recognize the link between 2D:4D digit ratio and testosterone - see table 1 and figure 10 in the article (the figures are always grouped by country!)

It is also important to be aware that 2D:4D digit ratio tends to vary in individuals with other individual factors. For example, if both parents of an individual have a low digit ratio then it is much more likely  that this individual will also have a relatively low digit ratio... this applies both to males AND females!

(Therefore it always requires to study large groups of people to identify correlation factors with 2D:4D digit ratio & testosterone/oestrogen, etc.)

I hope the article now makes more sense for you?

 

Martijn (admin) wrote:

woodwater wrote:Hi
The link below,on figure 10 seems to show women from Jamaica,Finland and Germany have higher testosterone than Polish or Spanish males.Is this true or did I misunderstand the article?

Thanks

http://hera.ugr.es/doi/15009579.pdf

Hello woodwater,

First of all, welcome at this forum!

Regarding your question, I think you have made an ssociation that is not supported by the article, because the 2D:4D digit ratio actually varies between populations around the world (genetics appear to be involved).

So, the 2D:4D digit ratio is certainly not a direct measure for testosterone because it is important to be aware of the population differences! And thus one can basically only compare males and females from the same population (country) in order to recognize the link between 2D:4D digit ratio and testosterone - see table 1 and figure 10 in the article (the figures are always grouped by country!)

It is also important to be aware that 2D:4D digit ratio tends to vary in individuals with other individual factors. For example, if both parents of an individual have a low digit ratio then it is much more likely  that this individual will also have a relatively low digit ratio... this applies both to males AND females!

(Therefore it always requires to study large groups of people to identify correlation factors with 2D:4D digit ratio & testosterone/oestrogen, etc.)

I hope the article now makes more sense for you?

 

woodwater wrote:
Thanks Martijn
But if the ratio varies from nation to nation doesnt that mean some populations have higher testosterone?~And since height appears to be related to T why arent the Dutch and Montenegrin at the top?
On minute 8,30 Manning shows the rates in western nations.Mexico is at the top
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sMc4uUGklQ

woodwater wrote:thanks it helped a lot

Martijn (admin) wrote:

woodwater wrote:thanks it helped a lot

 

woodwater wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

woodwater wrote:thanks it helped a lot

 

~

By the way I noticed that 4 countries share 3rd place with 986 points, Iceland,Portugal,Australia,Belgium and I wonder if there are small diferences betwen them. Manning only talks about México and NZ

thanks

Martijn (admin) wrote:

woodwater wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

woodwater wrote:thanks it helped a lot

 

~

By the way I noticed that 4 countries share 3rd place with 986 points, Iceland,Portugal,Australia,Belgium and I wonder if there are small diferences betwen them. Manning only talks about México and NZ

thanks

Woodwater, the data that you are looking at comes from the digit ratio internet study... which implicates that those numbers are based on self-measurements (the measurements have not been made by digit ratio experts).

Therefore I would like to recommend not to attribute too much value to the exact details reported in that table (the small difference are likely irrelevant) + I think it really would require to check whether other studies have reported likewise figures for those countries,  etc.

 

woodwater wrote:
Oh i wouldnt trust self measurements no.
Do you know which countries were measured by experts?
Were they the ones in the original article-Germany,Hungary,UK,poland,Spain,Jamaica,Zulu?

Martijn (admin) wrote:

woodwater wrote:
Thanks Martijn
But if the ratio varies from nation to nation doesnt that mean some populations have higher testosterone?~And since height appears to be related to T why arent the Dutch and Montenegrin at the top?
On minute 8,30 Manning shows the rates in western nations.Mexico is at the top
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sMc4uUGklQ

Yes woodwater, sure, some nations have higher testosterone.

Regarding the new issue that you brought up here: height - 2D:4D studies have indicated that height indeed correlates negative with digit ratio WITHIN national populations, see for example:
http://fingerlengthdigitratio.wordpress.com/2008/12/09/how-your-finger-length-relates-to-your-body-height/

However, regarding the body height differences between nations... there are many other factors which play a role here (such as: food quality, genetics, etc).

And even though digit ratio correlates with testosterone & height... this does not mean that high testosterone countries should also represent highest body height, simply because other factors are involved as well.

So, high tendencies/probabilities may often be true for groups in one nation... but at the same time these tendencies/probabilities may often not turn out be true in a comparison between 2 arbitrary nations... such as Mexico & The Netherlands.

Things are likely a little bit more complex than what you may have assumed; because 2D:4D digit ratio studies tend to be focussed on studying the difference between genetically related SUB-populations.

I hope this makes sense as well?

woodwater wrote:
Since the Dutch are currently the tallest people in the world,have you found evidence that they have lower finger ratios than other western peoples?
thanks

Well woodwater, I think I have to recommend you to try see things in a wider perspective than the just the association made behind your question:

For example, beyond 2d:4d digit ratio & body height... in general the body constitution of the Germans & the Fins is slightly more robust than the Dutch & the English populations... which indicates that Germans & Fins probably have more testosterone than the Dutch & the English.
However, in terms of body height the Dutch are taller than the Germans & the Fins (both populations have similar body height)... and the English are the smallest of these four nations.

And on top of this one can say that  2d:4d digit ratio data suggests that the Fins have the smallest 2d:4d ratio, the English have the highest 2d:4d ratio... and the Dutch (see also my PS at the bottom of this post) and Germans have similar ratios in between.

This results in the following perspective:

A - Body constitution: Fins & Germans are more robust (= higher testosterone) than Dutch & English
B - Body height: Dutch > Fins & Germans > English (males > females => height signs testosterone)
C - 2d:4d digit ratio: Fins < Germans & Dutch < English ()

Conclusion:

In this perspective one can only recognize how the English have obviously the highest 'feminine' factor, since their are 'less robust', they have 'smaller body height' and they have the smallest 2d:4d digit ratio.

However, things are more complex for the other 3 populations... because for example: body constitution & body height does not explains why Fins have smaller 2d:4d digit ratios than Germans - which indicates that probably (many) other factors beyond factor A, B & C need to be taken in consideration!

And thus I am inclined to say that your question results from an (indirect) assumption... because actually the reports that describe a negative relationship between body height & 2d:4d digit ratio are the result of studies INSIDE a single nationality! And thus inside your question things are putten in a different more complex context which involves differences BETWEEN national populations.

I hope this all makes sense now?  


PS. Here are a few studies which indicate that 2d:4d digit ratios in Dutch populations are often reported to be close to 0.96 (typical for Dutch males) and 0.97 (typical for Dutch females):
http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?pid=S0213-61632011000100006&script=sci_arttext#t1
http://www.martijnwieling.nl/files/2d4d.pdf (see page 6)