8 comments

  • tyleo 46 minutes ago
    I don’t know much about this except that I know perfectly normal or even jacked men with lower than expected testosterone. I suspect messing with hormones based on the results of a test and no actual problems can unnecessarily alter mood.

    So my theory—based mostly on conjecture—is that these tests selected people they didn’t expect and the treatments would do more harm than good.

    • noir_lord 42 minutes ago
      I think it's simpler than that, I think Hanlon's Razor applies here.

      Not sure there has been a less capable Secretary of Defence in my lifetime than who they currently have in the role.

      Note: not saying less objectionable, I'd put Rumsfeld right alongside for that but as much as I didn't like the man, it was hard to argue he was incapable.

      • Jgrubb 27 minutes ago
        Rumsfeld put in the work and was very smart. His natural disposition was such that, when given the ring of power, things went badly.

        The current head of DoD is basically a manosphere influencer that bumbled into this job.

        Now, I'm not an endocrinologist, just an aging guy, but from my current vantage point it appears that over the course of my life, many stupid decisions have been made that I have lived to tell about. I can't help but feel that my "wisdom of age" might just be testosterone getting out of the way.

        This is all to say that our current "situation" just kinda looks like one insecure guys roid rage when you take a big step back.

        • lokar 16 minutes ago
          Trump was pretty clear he chose him because he looked good in TV.
          • budman1 3 minutes ago
            plus, he could hold his liquor.

            and does not take no for an answer.

          • ceejayoz 12 minutes ago
            And keeps him because he's good at the number one priority, being a fluffer.
      • tyleo 8 minutes ago
        I think we're saying the same thing. I suspect there were a lot of people saying, "this probably won't work," but the Secretary of Defense pursued it anyways until real problems materialized.
      • amelius 39 minutes ago
        Both can be true. Incompetence AND malice.
        • schiffern 34 minutes ago
          Troublingly, I think he actually does think these ideas are helpful. Is a True Believer any less dangerous?

          "Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."

          • noir_lord 31 minutes ago
            They are generally dangerous but they are truly dangerous when what they believe is itself dangerous.
          • jjgreen 26 minutes ago
            I'll be using that
      • bryancoxwell 30 minutes ago
        Or simpler still, although related. Maybe we just can’t afford it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/07/21/...
  • bob1029 31 minutes ago
    > “Taking testosterone is not going to make you more manly, more strong, or a more robust individual. That’s just not how it works,”

    It will make you stronger. Perhaps not at certain therapeutic ranges, but there is a reason this would get you kicked out of the Olympic Games.

    • roncesvalles 15 minutes ago
      I think it still depends. More test can also result in more estrogen. There is selection bias in athletes who dope because they're the ones who happen to respond positively to it.

      There must be a graveyard of athletes who tried doping and it made them worse lol.

    • radial_symmetry 6 minutes ago
      it absolutely does make you stronger, I was training for powerlifting when I started it and my lifts went up a LOT with no change in my routine or diet, both of which I was tracking.
    • nba456_ 21 minutes ago
      Crazy that a doctor would say taking testosterone would not make you stronger. Remind me to never listen to the American College of Physicians.
      • lokar 15 minutes ago
        IMO he obviously meant boosting someone who was low back into the normal range.
    • petesergeant 13 minutes ago
      Yeah, it's weird, isn't it? That's exactly what testosterone does, including the "more manly" part. Literally the reason it's gender-affirming care for female-to-male transitioners and aging men. "Robust" is the only word there that's questionable, and even then, I'd say science says "probably". You can give it to a horse, and it will make the horse notably stronger and more “manly”.
  • ungreased0675 38 minutes ago
    I was very curious what the results were going to show.
  • add-sub-mul-div 9 minutes ago
    Stupid ideas is all they have yet they won't even stick with them?
  • badgersnake 16 minutes ago
    If we explained how dumb this was somebody would have to resign, so we’ll just sweep it under the carpet.
  • greggsy 21 minutes ago
    I had no idea this was a thing.

    It seems to edge us closer to the dystopian ‘super soldier gone wrong’ trope.

  • bflesch 36 minutes ago
    Is there even a US-based testosterone supply chain? Or was the idea to inject all their service members with a product from overseas that could have supply problems or subtle strategic "impurities"?
    • petcat 31 minutes ago
      The US produces an enormous amount of pharmaceutical testosterone
  • jrm4 30 minutes ago
    "Without explanation"

    I mean, sure, it would probably be embarrassing to have to say "because this was extremely stupid and nonsensical and entirely due to the weird hangups of the present guy in charge."

    • diydsp 12 minutes ago
      Perhaps the explanation is: to make space for other incoherent self-defeating policies like threatening the Fed that they'll increase tariffs if rates aren't lowered?
    • ilaksh 10 minutes ago
      They're not weird at all given his worldview. It's Nazism. From his book to his public statements and actions, he consistently expresses this. The only thing he does not do is use the literal language that is not accepted. But the meaning and actions are the same. People are in denial.