News items constantly appear that attribute longevity to all kinds of causal factors. Broccoli, cumquat and Acai berry diet, anybody? Here is one factor that can stir up the hornet’s nest. A recent research study indicates that polygamist men live on average seven years longer than their monogamist counterparts. The study is based on population statistics, looking at men aged over 60. Carefully adjusting for socioeconomic differences, men from 140 countries that practice polygamy to varying degrees live on average 12% longer than men from 49 mostly monogamous nations(also see ref). Why this difference in male longevity exists is not clear. One possibility is subtle pheromonal communications with younger women that enliven older men, another is the challenge multiple wives pose requiring constant physical and mental activity, another yet is evolutionary advantage to those who have many grandchildren to take care of, another-yet is simply eating better due to having more cooks. As of this moment pending further research, I do not dare to suggest adding another wife as part of my anti-aging firewalls for men.
Search
Calendar
Categories
- Uncategorized (399)
- Weekly Posts (2)
-
Recent Posts
- The pivotal role of Nrf2. Part 2 – foods, phyto-substances and other substances that turn on Nrf2
- The pivotal role of Nrf2. Part 1 – a new view on the control of oxidative damage and generation of hormetic effects
- Circadian Regulation, NMN, Preventing Diabetes, and Longevity
- Alternate-day Fasting – a better alternative
- Dietary factors and dementia – Part 3: plant-derived substances that can make a difference
- Dietary factors and dementia Part 2: possible interventions
- Dietary factors and dementia – Part 1: important recent research
- Focus on phytosubstances – Danshen root – amazing properties of salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge
- History and future directions for this blog – invitation for associate researchers/writers
- More about Klotho – spinner of the thread of life
Archives
- February 2012 (2)
- January 2012 (5)
- December 2011 (3)
- November 2011 (4)
- October 2011 (3)
- September 2011 (4)
- August 2011 (3)
- July 2011 (4)
- June 2011 (9)
- May 2011 (9)
- April 2011 (6)
- March 2011 (7)
- February 2011 (6)
- January 2011 (7)
- December 2010 (4)
- November 2010 (9)
- October 2010 (8)
- September 2010 (7)
- August 2010 (6)
- July 2010 (7)
- June 2010 (9)
- May 2010 (7)
- April 2010 (14)
- March 2010 (13)
- February 2010 (14)
- January 2010 (15)
- December 2009 (16)
- November 2009 (14)
- October 2009 (20)
- September 2009 (16)
- August 2009 (19)
- July 2009 (22)
- June 2009 (24)
- May 2009 (22)
- April 2009 (18)
- March 2009 (20)
- February 2009 (19)
- January 2009 (6)
Meta
How can they be sure the monogamous men were truly monogamous? This group might have only been married to one woman, but involved with many.
True, true. This is a large-populations study looking at averages over large numbers of individuals. No doubt there were many men in the societies that practie monogamy who had many sexual partners. And there were also many men in the societies that practice polygamy who had only one partner or no partner at all.
I think there was also a study some years ago that administered a general “life satisfaction” or “happiness” test to a large number of people. When they looked at the subjects’ sex and marital status, they found that married men in general were significantly happier than the other three groups. The least happy group overall were the married women. That says something right there, doesn’t it? I wonder what polygamy does to the women…
Ginger: I don’t know any statistis about happiness and longevity of women who live in polygamous relationships, or in polyandry for that matter. There does seem to be some scholarly history of writing about polygamy and longevity, however, such as this 1979 item http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/439954. I think the author was saying that human evolution and longevity were on the increase as long as we had tribalism and polygamy, but when civilization and monogamy came along that wrecked the progress. “The general thesis is that a very greatly accelerated rate of incorporation of favorable genes or gene combinations can be achieved in surprisingly few generations among social animals provided that dominant males become the patriarchs of many descendents by virtue of their partial or complete monopoly on available females.” That argument may or may not have scientific validity but would surely get a professor picketed today if not thrown out of the university. In any event he is patently wrong since human lifespan over the last few thousand of years has gone ip from something like 28 years to 79 years.