Body fat doesn't absorb testosterone. It contains an enzyme (aromatase) that converts an androgen (androstenedione) into an estrogen (estrone). There have been many studies on the relationship between obesity in men and femininization, as well as between obesity in women and its moderating effects on menopause.
S. KIRCHENGAST, Interaction between sex hormone levels and body dimensions in postmenopausal women, Human Biology 66:481-494, 1994.
M.A. KIRSCHNER., G. Schneider, N.H. Ertel and E. Worton, Obesity, androgens, estrogens, and cancer risk, Cancer Research (suppl.) 42:3281-3285, 1982.
H.K. KLEY, T. Deselaers, H. Peerenboom and H.L. Krüskemper, Enhanced conversion of androstenedione to estrogens in obese males, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 51:1128-1132, 1980.
H.K. KLEY, P. Edelmann and H.L. Krüskemper, Relationship of plasma sex hormones to different parameters of obesity in male subjects, Metabolism 29:1041-1045, 1980.
A. VERMEULEN and L. Verdonck, Factors affecting sex hormone levels in postmenopausal women, Journal of Steroid Biochemistry 11:899-904, 1979.
_____ and _____Sex hormone concentrations in post-menopausal women, Clinical Endocrinology 9: 59-66, 1978.
B. ZUMOFF, Relationship of obesity to blood estrogens, Cancer Research 42:3289-3294, 1982.
Adiposity has adaptive roots: it is a store of energy reserves, and it would aid reproduction in times of famine. Not only that, but the increasing BMI is a trend alongside many other adaptive traits trending globally across the 20th century, including such trends as increasing height, increasing longevity, increasing age at menopause, decreasing age at menarche, decreasing juvenile mortality, decreasing fertility, increasing intelligence, and increasing skull and brain sizes. This set of temporal trends also matches the cross-sectional direction from less-advantaged to more-advantaged countries. So, I think we should make sense of BMI more as an adaptive trait, less as a disease (though it is certainly a disease at the increasingly-common extremes), less as an unfortunate side effect.
BMI is a bit unusual among those adaptive traits because the temporal and country-level direction of covariance does not match the individual-level of covariance (age at menarche is another discrepancy). Among individuals in more-developed countries, the less-advantaged individuals have the greater BMI. In the least-developed countries, the covariance is in the expected direction, with the more-advantaged individuals having a greater BMI. This tells me what we already knew: apidosity is a calorie-overflow trait, in which calories are first allocated to the more important traits, and adiposity gets the leftovers.
I built a structural equation model and path diagram of such country-level traits. The model has excellent fit indices, and I found that BMI is caused by both juvenile survival and GDP per capita. So, those are the two most likely ultimate causes of both the country-level differences and the temporal differences.
Yes, my cousins have heritable height and weight where the increased nutrition profile in the West gives them more inches than their Eastern raised counterparts, although they are skinny still. The maximum genetic potential is achieved at certain points of coinciding maxima, beyond that it is detrimental. Also high lean mass doesn’t match well with a high BMI = problematic profile anyways (exceptional cases). Increased GDP just means more cognitive work, thus less physical labour and less non-exercise activity thermogenesis and a propensity for using automobile transport. I don’t believe 22-23 BMI to be causal in a decline of testosterone though certain populations like Asians just have a higher body fat percentile and lower threshold for bodily fitness.
Juvenile survival is just a proxy of non-technological development (less tech=higher mortality and poorer general health). I still think it’s more than just excess calories causing higher fat percents causing less testosterone with other confounding environmental factors given countries like Japan still have people walking/biking and eating smaller portions. A masculinity index needs to be established independent of variation between populations for things such as propensity to engage in dominance behaviours (whether expressed in video games, online, or real life) given the suppression factors (i.e. Prussian education + women system forcing obedient students). Males attempt to win status games, demonstrate resourcefulness, engage in competitive behaviours physically and cognitively. Whether these behaviours declined or not within populations is unknown, but men imagining themselves to be submissive women seems to be a fetish-thing. That said men becoming gay and having higher pitch voices, and being less systematic in their reasoning process would demonstrate declines in masculinity. I don’t think more men are becoming gay in China or Middle Eastern countries and they have strong patrichial norms so any decreases in fertility and not fecundity would have to be environmentally induced. Intelligence creates technology which increases the insensitivity of the environment with respect to individuals which makes selection less strong which increases the diversity of traits that are not necessarily positive in the long run with respect to civilizational attainment depending on the socioeconomic structure/stratification of society and arrangement of populations with differential reproductive dynamics.
Maybe I can speculate about decreasing masculinity, and maybe I can fit it into my own general theory (I tried), but the metrics are too unreliable. We simply don't know if people have been getting more homosexual or if it is only a matter of people becoming more willing to admit it. Even sperm concentration, which you may expect to be a hard medical thing to measure, is vastly unreliable, such that we don't know if the negative trend really is a trend in sperm concentration or if we are just shifting ways of measurements.
What is your opinion of the Icelandic and Danish studies that found a peak in fertility for couples who were third or fourth cousins? Fertility progressively decreased in couples who were either less related (greater than fourth cousins) or more related (less than third cousins).
Helgason, A., S. Pálsson, D.F. Guðbjartsson, þ. Kristjánsson, K. Stefánsson. (2008). An association between the kinship and fertility of human couples. Science 319(5864): 813-816. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1150232
Labouriau, R., and A. Amorim. (2008). Comment on "An Association Between the Kinship and Fertility of Human Couples." Science 322(5908): 1634. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1161907
Coupling of third or fourth cousins is something I would expect of rural peoples, whose communities are small and whose fertility is high. If the inbreeding is too much, then fertility drops for a genetic reason. So, I expect it is not so much a trade-off between inbreeding and outbreeding so much as a fertility balance between rurality and inbreeding.
The Icelandic study did not control for rural/urban differences, but the authors seem to discount this factor:
"Our results, drawn from all known couples of the Icelandic population born between 1800 and 1965, show a significant positive association between kinship and fertility, with the greatest reproductive success observed for couples related at the level of third and fourth cousins. Owing to the relative socioeconomic homogeneity of Icelanders, and the observation of highly significant differences in the fertility of couples separated by very fine intervals of kinship, we conclude that this association is likely to have a biological basis."
To be sure; however, the question of optimal endogamy (or exogamy) for birth outcomes suggests considering imprinting (or more broadly paternal / maternal conflict). Also maybe some mechanism like preeclampsia (see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987713002041 )
His natural testosterone level is likely very low. Testosterone levels seem to have a much stronger inverse correlation with bodyfat than they have a positive correlation with muscle mass.
IAAF did a study of world elite Track & Field athletes a few years ago Among the men, the sprinters had the highest T-levels, shot putters (fattest and strongest) the lowest. Javelin throwers had highest levels among the throwers but still lower than runners and jumpers.
Skinny long distance runners, had considerably higher T-levels than the throwers. Sprinters, who probably have the lowest BF% among T&F athletes, had higher levels still (though race may also be a factor here).
The observed low T concentration in male throwers is an unexpected result. This trend is observed in all throwing events: mean T concentrations were 14.1 nmol/L, 12.6 nmol/L, 11.2 nmol/L, and 14.5 nmol/L in discus, hammer throw, shot put, and javelin, respectively. All these results are below the T concentration measured in male race walkers and marathon runners which are athletic events where hypoandrogenism is a commonly reported condition.22 Male throwers not only showed low T but also low SHBG concentrations. These differences are not explained by age or ethnic background in our subgroup of male throwers
True, but in the study, throwers were still the group with the lowest free T and sprinters the group with the highest free T. The difference was, however, smaller than for the levels for total T.
Environmental chemicals impact dog semen quality in vitro and may be associated with a temporal decline in sperm motility and increased cryptorchidism - https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31281
If dogs suffer from some of the same problems as humans, you have to look for a common denominator, such as certain chemicals.
How does one define "Manliness Decline?" Based on the behavior of middle-class males of my lineage, transmitted by historical data and family stories from 1780-1948, their acceptance of the necessity of occasional violence would mark them as felons in today's America. How much of the Manliness Decline is due to a more repressive legal system?
Do thighs becoming fatter raise the ambient temperature of the testes and does body fat increasing also correlate with a cumulative increase in fat in the nether region? I somehow doubt it, although even if it is true there must be other reasons why the sex gonads is producing less testosterone such as the hypothalamus not signalling properly.
Your reasoning is flawed since you've no warrant to say that femboys need explaining to account for all the factors you listed in your last post. That is, you could have the trans craze independent of all those things (I think there are strong grounds to think it's sociocultural). In terms on causal networks, though, note that the same media saturation that people substitute for physical activity also transmits both messages about obesogenic cheap food and gay and trans propaganda.
Take people out of it and just look at the difference between wolves and dogs aka domesticated wolves. Feeding a wolf a shit diet filled with microplastics and making them fat isn't going to tame them to the level of a dog. On the other side, feeding your typical dog a clean diet and keeping him lean isn't going to make him as ferocious as a wolf.
Men have been selected to be more docile and agreeable over generations by the government, empires, kingdoms, whoever's in charge.
Also, just look at the difference between the British and the Australians. Australians are clearly higher testosterone, and these are the people the British royalty didn't want to deal with. Russia is another great example. In comparison to all of Europe, Russians are significantly more masculine because they were exposed to different selective pressures.
Is this really bad? Perhaps, Testosterone levels have been declining since the neolithic era. Because civilization creates selection pressure in favor of kind men. Sub-saharan Africa is a big proof.
A low-T society would lack innovation (due to high conformity and aversion to competition), honesty and generosity. In my experience low-T men are pusillanimous bullies, though I wouldn't want to be surrounded by (high-T) psychopaths either.
Is it bad that one of the greatest drivers of civilizational progress is declining? Yes. Testosterone in tandem with intelligence produces great outcomes. The world is a harsh place and testosterone gives men the energy and persistence to deal with this chaotic world.
Adipose tissue does not absorb testosterone. No idea where you came up with that idea. Aromatase, an enzyme that converts testosterone to estrogen, is found in adipose tissue. The more adipose tissue a man has, the more of his testosterone is converted to estrogen, and it's easy as pie to find references to aromatase on the internet. This is a good example of Gell-Mann Amnesia:
I agree that aromatase is likely the main mechanism, but testosterone is fat-soluble and thus can be stored in fat tissue. Seems likely that would be a factor too.
Finally, something positive about skinny guys, and just as I am working out! We are testosterone reservoirs which need to be refilled to regain our masculinity levels. It's interesting that underweight or borderline underweight men have a lot of testosterone. We need fat camps for so many reasons!
Bro, based on the way you write, you definitely have low testosterone. I can tell whether someone is high or low T based on how they strings words together.
"basedonmynebulagenomicpolygenicsscore . . . " shut up, just know that we ever met in real life you would be bent over real quick and I would leave that bussy leakin'.
On the other hand, caloric surplus boost seem to boost testosterone. But of course caloric surplus will eventually lead to increased fat storage, which reduces testosterone. So eating a lot is only beneficial while you are growing naturally (height and muscle tissue and other tissue except fat) as a child and especially as a teen.
Body fat doesn't absorb testosterone. It contains an enzyme (aromatase) that converts an androgen (androstenedione) into an estrogen (estrone). There have been many studies on the relationship between obesity in men and femininization, as well as between obesity in women and its moderating effects on menopause.
S. KIRCHENGAST, Interaction between sex hormone levels and body dimensions in postmenopausal women, Human Biology 66:481-494, 1994.
M.A. KIRSCHNER., G. Schneider, N.H. Ertel and E. Worton, Obesity, androgens, estrogens, and cancer risk, Cancer Research (suppl.) 42:3281-3285, 1982.
H.K. KLEY, T. Deselaers, H. Peerenboom and H.L. Krüskemper, Enhanced conversion of androstenedione to estrogens in obese males, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 51:1128-1132, 1980.
H.K. KLEY, P. Edelmann and H.L. Krüskemper, Relationship of plasma sex hormones to different parameters of obesity in male subjects, Metabolism 29:1041-1045, 1980.
A. VERMEULEN and L. Verdonck, Factors affecting sex hormone levels in postmenopausal women, Journal of Steroid Biochemistry 11:899-904, 1979.
_____ and _____Sex hormone concentrations in post-menopausal women, Clinical Endocrinology 9: 59-66, 1978.
B. ZUMOFF, Relationship of obesity to blood estrogens, Cancer Research 42:3289-3294, 1982.
Adiposity has adaptive roots: it is a store of energy reserves, and it would aid reproduction in times of famine. Not only that, but the increasing BMI is a trend alongside many other adaptive traits trending globally across the 20th century, including such trends as increasing height, increasing longevity, increasing age at menopause, decreasing age at menarche, decreasing juvenile mortality, decreasing fertility, increasing intelligence, and increasing skull and brain sizes. This set of temporal trends also matches the cross-sectional direction from less-advantaged to more-advantaged countries. So, I think we should make sense of BMI more as an adaptive trait, less as a disease (though it is certainly a disease at the increasingly-common extremes), less as an unfortunate side effect.
BMI is a bit unusual among those adaptive traits because the temporal and country-level direction of covariance does not match the individual-level of covariance (age at menarche is another discrepancy). Among individuals in more-developed countries, the less-advantaged individuals have the greater BMI. In the least-developed countries, the covariance is in the expected direction, with the more-advantaged individuals having a greater BMI. This tells me what we already knew: apidosity is a calorie-overflow trait, in which calories are first allocated to the more important traits, and adiposity gets the leftovers.
I built a structural equation model and path diagram of such country-level traits. The model has excellent fit indices, and I found that BMI is caused by both juvenile survival and GDP per capita. So, those are the two most likely ultimate causes of both the country-level differences and the temporal differences.
Yes, my cousins have heritable height and weight where the increased nutrition profile in the West gives them more inches than their Eastern raised counterparts, although they are skinny still. The maximum genetic potential is achieved at certain points of coinciding maxima, beyond that it is detrimental. Also high lean mass doesn’t match well with a high BMI = problematic profile anyways (exceptional cases). Increased GDP just means more cognitive work, thus less physical labour and less non-exercise activity thermogenesis and a propensity for using automobile transport. I don’t believe 22-23 BMI to be causal in a decline of testosterone though certain populations like Asians just have a higher body fat percentile and lower threshold for bodily fitness.
Juvenile survival is just a proxy of non-technological development (less tech=higher mortality and poorer general health). I still think it’s more than just excess calories causing higher fat percents causing less testosterone with other confounding environmental factors given countries like Japan still have people walking/biking and eating smaller portions. A masculinity index needs to be established independent of variation between populations for things such as propensity to engage in dominance behaviours (whether expressed in video games, online, or real life) given the suppression factors (i.e. Prussian education + women system forcing obedient students). Males attempt to win status games, demonstrate resourcefulness, engage in competitive behaviours physically and cognitively. Whether these behaviours declined or not within populations is unknown, but men imagining themselves to be submissive women seems to be a fetish-thing. That said men becoming gay and having higher pitch voices, and being less systematic in their reasoning process would demonstrate declines in masculinity. I don’t think more men are becoming gay in China or Middle Eastern countries and they have strong patrichial norms so any decreases in fertility and not fecundity would have to be environmentally induced. Intelligence creates technology which increases the insensitivity of the environment with respect to individuals which makes selection less strong which increases the diversity of traits that are not necessarily positive in the long run with respect to civilizational attainment depending on the socioeconomic structure/stratification of society and arrangement of populations with differential reproductive dynamics.
Maybe I can speculate about decreasing masculinity, and maybe I can fit it into my own general theory (I tried), but the metrics are too unreliable. We simply don't know if people have been getting more homosexual or if it is only a matter of people becoming more willing to admit it. Even sperm concentration, which you may expect to be a hard medical thing to measure, is vastly unreliable, such that we don't know if the negative trend really is a trend in sperm concentration or if we are just shifting ways of measurements.
What is your opinion of the Icelandic and Danish studies that found a peak in fertility for couples who were third or fourth cousins? Fertility progressively decreased in couples who were either less related (greater than fourth cousins) or more related (less than third cousins).
Helgason, A., S. Pálsson, D.F. Guðbjartsson, þ. Kristjánsson, K. Stefánsson. (2008). An association between the kinship and fertility of human couples. Science 319(5864): 813-816. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1150232
Labouriau, R., and A. Amorim. (2008). Comment on "An Association Between the Kinship and Fertility of Human Couples." Science 322(5908): 1634. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1161907
Coupling of third or fourth cousins is something I would expect of rural peoples, whose communities are small and whose fertility is high. If the inbreeding is too much, then fertility drops for a genetic reason. So, I expect it is not so much a trade-off between inbreeding and outbreeding so much as a fertility balance between rurality and inbreeding.
The Danish study controlled for "urbanicity" (as well as education, family income, and mother’s age at first birth). You can access it at: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=41c10b262edfd2151a492cb2a5e813de6ad381b6
The Icelandic study did not control for rural/urban differences, but the authors seem to discount this factor:
"Our results, drawn from all known couples of the Icelandic population born between 1800 and 1965, show a significant positive association between kinship and fertility, with the greatest reproductive success observed for couples related at the level of third and fourth cousins. Owing to the relative socioeconomic homogeneity of Icelanders, and the observation of highly significant differences in the fertility of couples separated by very fine intervals of kinship, we conclude that this association is likely to have a biological basis."
https://facelab.org/debruine/Teaching/EvPsych/files/Helgason_2008.pdf
Good find; the argument for an inbreeding/outbreeding fertility optimum is more robust than I expected.
Maybe genomic imprinting https://esj-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1438-390X.12016
You can toss epigenetics into any biological puzzle, but it may only complicate the puzzle, not solve it.
To be sure; however, the question of optimal endogamy (or exogamy) for birth outcomes suggests considering imprinting (or more broadly paternal / maternal conflict). Also maybe some mechanism like preeclampsia (see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987713002041 )
I'm surprised to see that testosterone has such a clear negative association with obesity, as strongmen are often quite fat. Eddie Hall – who until recently held the deadlift world record – looked like this when he was at his strongest: https://yt3.googleusercontent.com/pSF9Umuv9Uc4z1yMOe9PcLAp6nwt9JfEXRvdziFY_OpqcUqSr93TPEqywouRaFt66I0Xk0r8tw=s900-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj
Maybe his testosterone would be lower if not for steroids.
His natural testosterone level is likely very low. Testosterone levels seem to have a much stronger inverse correlation with bodyfat than they have a positive correlation with muscle mass.
IAAF did a study of world elite Track & Field athletes a few years ago Among the men, the sprinters had the highest T-levels, shot putters (fattest and strongest) the lowest. Javelin throwers had highest levels among the throwers but still lower than runners and jumpers.
Skinny long distance runners, had considerably higher T-levels than the throwers. Sprinters, who probably have the lowest BF% among T&F athletes, had higher levels still (though race may also be a factor here).
Could you link the study?
Here is a cite:
The observed low T concentration in male throwers is an unexpected result. This trend is observed in all throwing events: mean T concentrations were 14.1 nmol/L, 12.6 nmol/L, 11.2 nmol/L, and 14.5 nmol/L in discus, hammer throw, shot put, and javelin, respectively. All these results are below the T concentration measured in male race walkers and marathon runners which are athletic events where hypoandrogenism is a commonly reported condition.22 Male throwers not only showed low T but also low SHBG concentrations. These differences are not explained by age or ethnic background in our subgroup of male throwers
Low SHBG means that a higher proportion of T is actually free/bioavailable. This is typical for people with high body fat.
Skinny people on the other hand tend to have higher T, but also higher SHBG, which leads to a smaller proportion free/bioavailable T.
True, but in the study, throwers were still the group with the lowest free T and sprinters the group with the highest free T. The difference was, however, smaller than for the levels for total T.
http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/51/17/1309
You may find this study interesting:
Environmental chemicals in dog testes reflect their geographical source and may be associated with altered pathology - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86805-y
And this:
Environmental chemicals impact dog semen quality in vitro and may be associated with a temporal decline in sperm motility and increased cryptorchidism - https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31281
If dogs suffer from some of the same problems as humans, you have to look for a common denominator, such as certain chemicals.
How does one define "Manliness Decline?" Based on the behavior of middle-class males of my lineage, transmitted by historical data and family stories from 1780-1948, their acceptance of the necessity of occasional violence would mark them as felons in today's America. How much of the Manliness Decline is due to a more repressive legal system?
Increase in fatness may raise the temperature of the testes, impairing sperm production.
Do thighs becoming fatter raise the ambient temperature of the testes and does body fat increasing also correlate with a cumulative increase in fat in the nether region? I somehow doubt it, although even if it is true there must be other reasons why the sex gonads is producing less testosterone such as the hypothalamus not signalling properly.
Your reasoning is flawed since you've no warrant to say that femboys need explaining to account for all the factors you listed in your last post. That is, you could have the trans craze independent of all those things (I think there are strong grounds to think it's sociocultural). In terms on causal networks, though, note that the same media saturation that people substitute for physical activity also transmits both messages about obesogenic cheap food and gay and trans propaganda.
Hey Emil, I saw some of your books you read and would recommend a couple I liked recently.
https://www.amazon.com/Biology-Longevity-Aging-Pathways-Prospects/dp/0199387966/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?crid=16M6H00P1E80K&keywords=robert+arking&qid=1677508025&sprefix=robert+arking%2Caps%2C91&sr=8-2
This is a very good overview of the biology of aging imho.
https://www.amazon.com/Dynamics-Cancer-Incidence-Inheritance-Evolutionary-ebook/dp/B07DMVZ5C1/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=X42GO13T7UC6&keywords=dynamics+of+cancer&qid=1677508112&sprefix=dyanmics+of+cance%2Caps%2C90&sr=8-1
And this is great for cancer stuff
Take people out of it and just look at the difference between wolves and dogs aka domesticated wolves. Feeding a wolf a shit diet filled with microplastics and making them fat isn't going to tame them to the level of a dog. On the other side, feeding your typical dog a clean diet and keeping him lean isn't going to make him as ferocious as a wolf.
Men have been selected to be more docile and agreeable over generations by the government, empires, kingdoms, whoever's in charge.
https://soundcloud.com/leafsfall/crystal-castles-doe-deer-leafs
A good litmus for whether or not you have high testosterone is if this sounds good. If it sounds good you probably have high testosterone.
Also, just look at the difference between the British and the Australians. Australians are clearly higher testosterone, and these are the people the British royalty didn't want to deal with. Russia is another great example. In comparison to all of Europe, Russians are significantly more masculine because they were exposed to different selective pressures.
Yes!
You can put more cultural stuff like socialism etc in between.
But
technology -> social decline
is also what I arrived at when thinking about long-term trends.
Is this really bad? Perhaps, Testosterone levels have been declining since the neolithic era. Because civilization creates selection pressure in favor of kind men. Sub-saharan Africa is a big proof.
A low-T society would lack innovation (due to high conformity and aversion to competition), honesty and generosity. In my experience low-T men are pusillanimous bullies, though I wouldn't want to be surrounded by (high-T) psychopaths either.
Is it bad that one of the greatest drivers of civilizational progress is declining? Yes. Testosterone in tandem with intelligence produces great outcomes. The world is a harsh place and testosterone gives men the energy and persistence to deal with this chaotic world.
Adipose tissue does not absorb testosterone. No idea where you came up with that idea. Aromatase, an enzyme that converts testosterone to estrogen, is found in adipose tissue. The more adipose tissue a man has, the more of his testosterone is converted to estrogen, and it's easy as pie to find references to aromatase on the internet. This is a good example of Gell-Mann Amnesia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromatase
I agree that aromatase is likely the main mechanism, but testosterone is fat-soluble and thus can be stored in fat tissue. Seems likely that would be a factor too.
Finally, something positive about skinny guys, and just as I am working out! We are testosterone reservoirs which need to be refilled to regain our masculinity levels. It's interesting that underweight or borderline underweight men have a lot of testosterone. We need fat camps for so many reasons!
Bro, based on the way you write, you definitely have low testosterone. I can tell whether someone is high or low T based on how they strings words together.
Based on my Nebula Genomics WGS polygenic score and my medical records, it is above average. I am not on the "bro" level, though.
"basedonmynebulagenomicpolygenicsscore . . . " shut up, just know that we ever met in real life you would be bent over real quick and I would leave that bussy leakin'.
Relax, man.
Just a bit of banter.
On the other hand, caloric surplus boost seem to boost testosterone. But of course caloric surplus will eventually lead to increased fat storage, which reduces testosterone. So eating a lot is only beneficial while you are growing naturally (height and muscle tissue and other tissue except fat) as a child and especially as a teen.