Re: Testosterone again, this time, Paleofeces... (fwd)
Phillip Bigelow (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 15 Oct 1996 19:26:38 -0700
Ralph L Holloway wrote:
> Unless I am very mistaken, this should be of considerable interest to this
WHY? Is that some back-handed scatology insult? :-)
> Chromatography and radioimmunoassay were used to measure levels of
> testosterone and estradiol in both modern fecal reference samples and in
> ancient feces. Results indicate that all 12 paleofeces were probably
> deposited by males whose diet included a variety of native crops and wild
> The authors are KD Sobolik, KJ Gremillion, PL Whitten, and PJ Watson
> in AJPA (1996) 101:283-290.
I wonder what the chemical stability differences are (temporal-wise,
pH-wise, temperature-wise, etc.) between estrogen and testosterone?
If estrogen degrades proportionally faster than testosterone does
well, the researchers may come to the conclusion that *all* of our
(very regular) ancestors were male!
Does THAT fit with the Republican Party's idea of a wholesome and
stable nuclear family? I think not...
> All we need now is better sampling..
Dino-doo is sort of neat to find. I won't get a thrill with