Homicide Statistics by Race & Gender

[Nereid]

What is 'homicide'?

DarkVision began this thread with data on 'homicide', and later mentioned that it refers to the US only. DarkVision later seemed to talk (inconsistently) about crime, incarceration, and homicide.

So I'm wondering, to what extent is 'homicide' itself a sociological phenomenon? I mean, when a US Marine kills an Iraqi 'soldier' or an Afghan 'terrorist', is he committing 'homicide'? What about the people who executed Timothy McVeigh, did they commit 'homicide'? How about doctors whose sloppiness or inattention results in the death of the patient? The drunk whose car he is driving kills a cyclist? And what are we to call the senior managers of tobacco companies who continued to enrich themselves by 'extending the market' for their products, knowing full well that their activities would inevitably result in the deaths of millions?

 

[selfAdjoint]

And does "homocide" mean killing homosexuals, as it seems to? Homicide, on the other hand is defined (slightly differently) in the laws of every state of the US and the Federal code, and in the codes of all the nation states. When they report homicides, they are presumably using the definitions in their codes. This means a slightly various population of course, since what is a homicide over here might not be over there and vice versa.

 

[Nereid]

Good points selfAdjoint. IIRC, there was a case in the US a few years ago ... some mine (or company) owner (or manager) was convicted of murder ... he (it was a 'he', don't know if white, black, or purple) was responsible for allowing (forcing?) some of his employees to work in conditions that he knew were unsafe (deadly?), and at least one died. Analogous 'industrial accidents' in the UK apparently result in mere loss of employment (I recall a particularly nasty case a few years ago involving a malfunctioning industrial oven), not even jail time.

Similarly, in China some time ago, there was a horrifying case of babies being killed through the inattention of their carers ... those responsible who didn't commit suicide were executed ... for murder. If there were such a case in the UK, or anywhere in Europe, I doubt that murder charges would even be laid, let alone proven in a court of law.

And we haven't even started to look at infanticide, 'honour killing', the death of young wives in all-to-frequent 'kitchen accidents' (look up 'dowry'), ...

 

[Moonbear]

In this article:

Gapstur SM, Gann PH, Kopp P, Colangelo L, Longcope C, Liu K. Serum androgen concentrations in young men: a longitudinal analysis of associations with age, obesity, and race. The CARDIA male hormone study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Oct;11(10 Pt 1):1041-7.

The authors conclude:

"Challenging the concept of differences in testosterone levels between black and white men, our results also indicate no differences in serum testosterone or SHBG concentrations after adjustment for age, BMI, and waist circumference."

Also, when I was asking about population density, I didn't mean the whole city, I meant in the "neighborhoods" where the homicides are being committed. Every city has diversity of neighborhoods and different population densities associated with those neighborhoods. I happen to live in a more suburban part of a city with about a 50/50 black/white ratio (not to many other races or ethnicities represented in my neighborhood...a few, but negligible), and it's a VERY safe neighborhood. On the other hand, there is a section of the city where there are lots of apartments, no backyards for the kids to play in, if you looked at the number of people/acre (or some other convenient measure of property size), it would be much higher than my neighborhood. There also happens to be much higher crime rates in that area...the sort of place I wouldn't walk alone at night, and maybe not in the daylight either. Even in the part of the city where I live, there is an apartment complex fairly close to my neighborhood, similar black/white ratio there, yet much higher crime rates. Now, this could be a socioeconomic issue, that poorer people live in apartments and the relative poverty contributes toward tendencies to commit crimes, or it could be a population density issue...too many neighbors, no place to go to get some space, more likely to run into someone you're not going to get along with.

BlackVision, it's interesting that you don't understand the statistics you are using to support your claims. Just two posts after my first one, I pointed out that I realized my error in understanding the crime rates, yet your post introduces a whole new set of errors. You can't take the rate for men and the rate for women and average them together to get the rate for the population!

Nereid, while I have my suspicions of BlackVision's agenda in presenting these statistics, I'm not opposed to him/her limiting the discussion to racial differences in the U.S., for the very reasons you're pointing out...there are different societal definitions of homicide in every country, as well as different cultural pressures. I don't believe that the higher rate of homicide convictions for blacks is just because they are black, but due to problems in our own society in the environment in which blacks live and the way they are treated. If we are going to identify and address these problems, we need to first acknowledge they exist. The data are not in question, the interpretation is.

 

[BlackVision]

DarkVision began this thread with data on 'homicide', and later mentioned that it refers to the US only. DarkVision later seemed to talk (inconsistently) about crime, incarceration, and homicide.

Ok why do certain people consistently try to misinterpret what I'm saying. Yes it originally started out with homicide but it's crime in general. Notice right after that post, I quoted an article, which lists rape and robbery statistics that correspend to the homicide rate of blacks.

And here is my one and ONLY point. The asian, white, and black gaps are consistent WITHIN any country that has enough of each of these populations in order to conduct a study. Now if you feel I am wrong about this, you may name a country in this world where this does not hold true. Again you need to pick a country that actually has these populations and not a homogeneous one.

 

[BlackVision]

In this article:

Gapstur SM, Gann PH, Kopp P, Colangelo L, Longcope C, Liu K. Serum androgen concentrations in young men: a longitudinal analysis of associations with age, obesity, and race. The CARDIA male hormone study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Oct;11(10 Pt 1):1041-7.

The authors conclude:

"Challenging the concept of differences in testosterone levels between black and white men, our results also indicate no differences in serum testosterone or SHBG concentrations after adjustment for age, BMI, and waist circumference."

This is flawed. Age, I can understand. How can you balance for waist circumference. I mean the higher testosterone level is probably RESPONSIBLE for the waist circumference. This is like saying, "there are no height differences in between men and women after adjusting for hand sizes, feet sizes, and waist sizes" An example of how one manipulates statistics.

Also, when I was asking about population density, I didn't mean the whole city, I meant in the "neighborhoods" where the homicides are being committed. Every city has diversity of neighborhoods and different population densities associated with those neighborhoods. I happen to live in a more suburban part of a city with about a 50/50 black/white ratio (not to many other races or ethnicities represented in my neighborhood...a few, but negligible), and it's a VERY safe neighborhood. On the other hand, there is a section of the city where there are lots of apartments, no backyards for the kids to play in, if you looked at the number of people/acre (or some other convenient measure of property size), it would be much higher than my neighborhood. There also happens to be much higher crime rates in that area...the sort of place I wouldn't walk alone at night, and maybe not in the daylight either. Even in the part of the city where I live, there is an apartment complex fairly close to my neighborhood, similar black/white ratio there, yet much higher crime rates. Now, this could be a socioeconomic issue, that poorer people live in apartments and the relative poverty contributes toward tendencies to commit crimes, or it could be a population density issue...too many neighbors, no place to go to get some space, more likely to run into someone you're not going to get along with.

Ok but the overall population density of these cities are equal is it not? So in the end shouldn't it balance out? Also New York probably has more apartments than any city in America, most people in New York live in apartments but New York doesn't have the crime rate that DC does. Not even close. Wouldn't you agree that New York is more packed than DC is?

BlackVision, it's interesting that you don't understand the statistics you are using to support your claims. Just two posts after my first one, I pointed out that I realized my error in understanding the crime rates, yet your post introduces a whole new set of errors. You can't take the rate for men and the rate for women and average them together to get the rate for the population!

Ok you didn't click on my link did you? If you did, you would have found this:

Men: 16.7 per 100,000
Women: 2.2 per 100,000
ALL: 9.2 per 100,000

Notice that the total homicide rate is pretty much right in between men and women.

Here you can check it again.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/hmrt.htm#longterm

The data are not in question, the interpretation is.

A common consensus. That's a start.

 

[hitssquad]

How to calculate overall rates from rates among subpopulations

Men: 16.7 per 100,000
Women: 2.2 per 100,000
ALL: 9.2 per 100,000

Notice that the total homicide rate is pretty much right in between men and women.

I would have said it was almost the average, or arithmetic mean, of the two subpopulation rates. But in order to calculate a total rate from among multiple population categories with varying size proportions within a total population, accountance must be made for those size variances. Since females typically generally constitute slight majorities of national populations, that might just account for the difference between the 9.2 per 100,000 figure above and the 9.45 per 100,000 figure one would arrive at by calculating the arithmetic mean with the assumption that the two subpopulations are evenly represented relative to each other in the total population.

 

[Nereid]

Ok why do certain people consistently try to misinterpret what I'm saying. Yes it originally started out with homicide but it's crime in general. Notice right after that post, I quoted an article, which lists rape and robbery statistics that correspend to the homicide rate of blacks.

And here is my one and ONLY point. The asian, white, and black gaps are consistent WITHIN any country that has enough of each of these populations in order to conduct a study. Now if you feel I am wrong about this, you may name a country in this world where this does not hold true. Again you need to pick a country that actually has these populations and not a homogeneous one.

Thank you for the clarification.

You've provided some data for the US, and I'd like to return to discuss that later, in terms of your assertion.

However, I'd first like more clarification of "The asian, white, and black gaps are consistent WITHIN any country that has enough of each of these populations in order to conduct a study[/color]" You stated earlier that your interest was in 'melting pot countries', and you gave the US, Canada, and Australia as such; later you also included the UK, and indicated that there were more. You also provide some statistics on incarceration rates in the UK. You defined what you meant by the terms 'asian', 'black', and 'white'.

I asked you to further clarify your definitions of asian (etc), and to provide data on the numbers (or proportions) of each of these groups in Canada and Australia (and any other countries you feel are 'melting pot countries'). I am still waiting for answers.

Now I would like to ask you: how do you intend to interpret the data from each of the countries? In particular, are you looking to draw conclusions across countries, or only within countries?

 

[Moonbear]

This is flawed. Age, I can understand. How can you balance for waist circumference. I mean the higher testosterone level is probably RESPONSIBLE for the waist circumference. This is like saying, "there are no height differences in between men and women after adjusting for hand sizes, feet sizes, and waist sizes" An example of how one manipulates statistics.

Actually, that's not correct. Testosterone in males increases lean muscle mass, not fat (that's the reason body builders take anabolic steroids...if it increased fat, that wouldn't be very useful). Also, it's a valid assertion that having a higher body fat content (that's what waist circumference reflects) would lead to higher circulating testosterone concentrations. Testosterone, as well as other steroid hormones, is stored in fat, so obese subjects (same for other animals, not just humans) would have a "reservoir" of testosterone that is metabolized more slowly than lean subjects. The other reason I chose that particular study is that it is a neutral study, not focused on testosterone for some racist agenda, but instead had assumed testosterone would be different and was testing whether it was as risk factor for prostate cancer in African-Americans. This finding actually disproved the authors' hypothesis. If the authors wanted to manipulate statistics, they'd have ignored this relationship because it would have better fit their hypothesis.

Regardless, I had pasted in their conclusions, but here is the section of the results dealing with the UNADJUSTED results rather than the adjusted results. This is from the same study I cited previously, Gapstur et al., 2002.

"Unadjusted mean total testosterone, SHBG, and free-testosterone concentrations were not statistically significantly different between blacks and whites at any examination (Table 1) , except at Year 10, blacks had slightly higher levels (0.0063 ng/ml; P = 0.05) of free testosterone than whites. From the Year 2 to the Year 10 examinations, the concentrations of total and free testosterone were reduced by a similar magnitude for both black and white men."

I should point out that this difference detected only in year 10 of the study is not a biologically meaningful difference. I was actually surprised it came up significant because that amount of variation can often be accounted for simply by inter-assay variation (the means were 0.16 vs 0.15 ng/ml for blacks vs whites; in year 2 of the study, both groups had means of 0.17, so a mean concentration of 0.16 is not different from the amount found in whites during their lifetime either). They must have had a fantastic tech running their assays for such a small difference to be detected as significant. There is a difference between statistical significance and biological relevance. This is also only for free testosterone, not total testosterone (which means testosterone not bound by sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG)). It would take a lot more testosterone than that to cause a difference in aggression. Keep in mind these are circulating concentrations (what's found in the blood), not the amount that gets past the blood-brain barrier where behavior is affected.

 

[BlackVision]

The other reason I chose that particular study is that it is a neutral study

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to disagree with you here. It is a politically correct study. With an agenda to give "happy results" not accurate results. Like I said, if I wanted to create "happy results" to say men and women have the same height, I would say "after balancing for hand sizes, feet sizes, waist circumference, there is no height differences between men and women" Which if done, I promise you, will close the gap to near nil, if not nil.

Actually, that's not correct. Testosterone in males increases lean muscle mass, not fat (that's the reason body builders take anabolic steroids...if it increased fat, that wouldn't be very useful). Also, it's a valid assertion that having a higher body fat content (that's what waist circumference reflects) would lead to higher circulating testosterone concentrations. Testosterone, as well as other steroid hormones, is stored in fat, so obese subjects (same for other animals, not just humans) would have a "reservoir" of testosterone that is metabolized more slowly than lean subjects. The other reason I chose that particular study is that it is a neutral study, not focused on testosterone for some racist agenda, but instead had assumed testosterone would be different and was testing whether it was as risk factor for prostate cancer in African-Americans. This finding actually disproved the authors' hypothesis. If the authors wanted to manipulate statistics, they'd have ignored this relationship because it would have better fit their hypothesis.

Regardless, I had pasted in their conclusions, but here is the section of the results dealing with the UNADJUSTED results rather than the adjusted results. This is from the same study I cited previously, Gapstur et al., 2002.

"Unadjusted mean total testosterone, SHBG, and free-testosterone concentrations were not statistically significantly different between blacks and whites at any examination (Table 1) , except at Year 10, blacks had slightly higher levels (0.0063 ng/ml; P = 0.05) of free testosterone than whites. From the Year 2 to the Year 10 examinations, the concentrations of total and free testosterone were reduced by a similar magnitude for both black and white men."

I should point out that this difference detected only in year 10 of the study is not a biologically meaningful difference. I was actually surprised it came up significant because that amount of variation can often be accounted for simply by inter-assay variation (the means were 0.16 vs 0.15 ng/ml for blacks vs whites; in year 2 of the study, both groups had means of 0.17, so a mean concentration of 0.16 is not different from the amount found in whites during their lifetime either). They must have had a fantastic tech running their assays for such a small difference to be detected as significant. There is a difference between statistical significance and biological relevance. This is also only for free testosterone, not total testosterone (which means testosterone not bound by sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG)). It would take a lot more testosterone than that to cause a difference in aggression. Keep in mind these are circulating concentrations (what's found in the blood), not the amount that gets past the blood-brain barrier where behavior is affected.

And yet all the signs of higher testostereone level is present in blacks. Higher level of athletic ability. Bigger dicks. More aggression. Faster body development.

But there are always politically correct people that manipulates things here and there to try to create "happy results" instead of using proper science and giving accurate ones.

J Rushton has wrote a good study on this in his book. Although you probably will think it as a "racist" agenda while others will say it's politically incorrect yet correct information.

 

[Nereid]

First, a comment or three on this 'testosterone level':
- if it does have a relationship to anything significant to this discussion on the relative proportions of 'white', 'black', and 'asian' people (men, actually) who are convicted of 'crimes' in the US, then there are surely some easy answers from that field of science known as 'medicine'
- aren't there disorders (conditions, whatever) which give rise to either an absence of testosterone, or massively elevated levels? If so, are the wretched folk so afflicted glaringly lacking in all tendency to violence, or utterly uncontrollable? If not, then the testosterone-violence relationship can only be quite subtle
- do young men (whatever 'race') have massively elevated levels of testosterone (compared to children and older men)? If not, the apparent substantially increased levels of 'criminality' in young men cannot be directly attributable to testosterone
- if any testosterone-violence link can be demonstrated, but is quite weak, then that serves, at best, to play only a minor role in any 'race' differences in 'criminality.

Next: (see next post)

 

[Nereid]

what is 'criminality'?

DarkVision began this thread talking about the incidence of 'homicide' in the US, but quickly clarified his (her?) intent as 'criminality' (my word) and 'race', specifically, 'white', 'black', and 'asian'.

To have a decent discussion, surely we should first have a common understanding of the key terms?

DarkVision (since these are your assertions that we are discussing): what do you mean by 'white', 'black', and 'asian', first in the context of the US? What is your measure of the 'criminality' (or whatever term you wish to use) that you are seeking to determine for each 'race'?

 

[BlackVision]

Ok first, why are you keep calling me DarkVision?

Second, for the US, these are the definitions of race as used by the US Census Bureau and other government agencies.

Race Definition:[/color]

The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups.

The racial classifications used by the Census Bureau adhere to the October 30,1997, Federal Register Notice entitled,"Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity" issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro," or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.

American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment.

Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. It includes "Asian Indian," "Chinese," "Filipino," "Korean," "Japanese," "Vietnamese," and "Other Asian."

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. It includes people who indicate their race as "Native Hawaiian," "Guamanian or Chamorro," "Samoan," and "Other Pacific Islander."

Some other race. Includes all other responses not included in the "White", "Black or African American", "American Indian and Alaska Native", "Asian" and "Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander" race categories described above. Respondents providing write-in entries such as multiracial, mixed, interracial, Wesort, or a Hispanic/Latino group (for example, Mexican, Puerto Rican, or Cuban) in the "Some other race" category are included here.

Two or more races. People may have chosen to provide two or more races either by checking two or more race response check boxes, by providing multiple write-in responses, or by some combination of check boxes and write-in responses.

 

[BlackVision]

- do young men (whatever 'race') have massively elevated levels of testosterone (compared to children and older men)? If not, the apparent substantially increased levels of 'criminality' in young men cannot be directly attributable to testosterone

Yes young men have higher testosterone levels than children and older men. The period of your highest testosterone level is also the period of your highest sex drive. Most likely from your teens and throughout your 20s.

 

[Nereid]

BlackVision (not DarkVision): A mistake, I'll try to be more careful in future.

So if some 'criminal' chooses to say they have (are?) more than one race, is their 'crime' recorded as having been perpetrated under all self-declared races?

 

[BlackVision]

BlackVision (not DarkVision): A mistake, I'll try to be more careful in future.

So if some 'criminal' chooses to say they have (are?) more than one race, is their 'crime' recorded as having been perpetrated under all self-declared races?

There are a number of factors that causes criminal behavior. Testosterone level would be one of them. Certainly not in all aspects a bad hormone. This magical hormone does many things. It gives you a sex drive, it allows you to build muscle mass, as well as other so called "male" characteristics. One of them is aggressive behavior. Aggressive behavior would often even be positive. It allows you to be more competitive which is great as long as you have it under control. But this aggressive behavior often times turns criminal.

80-90% of homicides are commited by men. It's hard to make a case for environment being the main cause of it. Men are much more aggressive than their female counterparts. That magical male hormone testosterone probably responsible for it.

Now do certain races have a higher median level of testosterone than others? If this is the case, the pattern of higher aggressive behavior should be visible.

 

[BlackVision]

And oh yeah to your question, if a person is of mixed races, then it will likely be listed as whatever race that person considers themselves. Kinda like the Census Bureau I suppose.

 

[Moonbear]

There are a number of factors that causes criminal behavior. Testosterone level would be one of them. Certainly not in all aspects a bad hormone. This magical hormone does many things. It gives you a sex drive, it allows you to build muscle mass, as well as other so called "male" characteristics. One of them is aggressive behavior. Aggressive behavior would often even be positive. It allows you to be more competitive which is great as long as you have it under control. But this aggressive behavior often times turns criminal.

80-90% of homicides are commited by men. It's hard to make a case for environment being the main cause of it. Men are much more aggressive than their female counterparts. That magical male hormone testosterone probably responsible for it.

Now do certain races have a higher median level of testosterone than others? If this is the case, the pattern of higher aggressive behavior should be visible.

The differences in testosterone between the blacks and whites in that study I cited (which was only different at one timepoint) are not sufficient to induce differences in aggression. Keep in mind, it wasn't total testosterone that differed, only free testosterone, and only by a very, very small amount.

Here is another reference on male aggression and testosterone (I'm pasting in the abstract, you can read the full article for yourself):

Physiol Behav. 2002 Apr 1;75(4):557-66.
**
Exogenous testosterone, aggression, and mood in eugonadal and hypogonadal men.
O'Connor DB, Archer J, Hair WM, Wu FC.
Department of Endocrinology, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester M13 9WL, UK. daryloc@psychology.leeds.ac.uk
To investigate (1) the effects of exogenous testosterone (T) on self- and partner-reported aggression and mood and (2) the role of trait impulsivity in the T-aggression relationship. Thirty eugonadal men with partners were randomized into two treatment groups to receive: (1) 200 mg I am T enanthate weekly for 8 weeks or (2) 200 mg I am sodium chloride weekly for 8 weeks. Eight hypogonadal men received 200 mg I am T enanthate biweekly for 8 weeks. All groups completed a battery of behavior measures at baseline (Week 0) and at Weeks 4 and 8. Cognitive and motor impulsivity were the only predictors of self-reported total aggression (over and above age and T levels) at Weeks 0, 4, and 8. No significant changes in aggression or mood levels were found in the eugonadal-treated group. Significant reductions in negative mood (tension, anger, and fatigue) followed by an increase in vigor were found in response to T treatment in the hypogonadal group. These results demonstrate that inability to control one's behavior when such control is required by a particular situation (impulsivity) was found to significantly predict levels of aggression over and above age and T level. These data do not support the hypothesis that supraphysiological levels of T (within this range) lead to an increase in self- and partner-reported aggression or mood disturbances. Instead, for the first time, this study has identified the high level of negative affect experienced by hypogonadal patients. These findings have implications for T replacement therapy and male contraception.

Also note that there are disorders in women in which androgen concentrations are elevated. For example, in polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), women have very elevated testosterone concentrations. These women are not more aggressive than other women.

 

[Nereid]

Yes young men have higher testosterone levels than children and older men. The period of your highest testosterone level is also the period of your highest sex drive. Most likely from your teens and throughout your 20s.

I am given to understand that it may be different for me (http://webhome.idirect.com/~donlong/monsters/Html/Nereid.htm : "daughters of the nymph Doris and of Nereus")

 

[Moonbear]

Now do certain races have a higher median level of testosterone than others? If this is the case, the pattern of higher aggressive behavior should be visible.

I already provided evidence that this is not the case. That you chose to ignore it and instead claim it is just "PC" is not my problem. I again point out that study I referred to was EXPECTING to find a difference and to use it to support their hypothesis, therefore, that they did not find a difference was not in any way helpful to them or fulfilling some PC agenda.

You should also be aware that daily fluctuations in testosterone are much greater than those differences in testosterone observed between the races. Further, the PEAK in testosterone in men occurs at about 7 AM, with the lowest levels at about 10 PM. When do most crimes occur? If you can show me credible statistics that most homocides, or crimes, occur around 7 AM, then I may concede testosterone is associate with this. If, however, more homocides, or crimes (since it's still not clear to me if we're discussing only homocide or all crime rates) happen in the evening, then there's a problem with your prediction that small differences in testosterone concentrations are responsible. Here is another reference and abstract supporting the time of day difference (also has a nice graph of differences between young and middle-aged men in testosterone concentrations...note that the daily nadir for the young men is lower than the daily peak for middle-aged men, so even though middle-aged men have overall lower testosterone than young men, this would predict that middle-aged men would still have high enough testosterone in the mornings to commit crimes at that time of day.

Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2003 Jun;58(6):710-7.
**
Diurnal rhythms of serum total, free and bioavailable testosterone and of SHBG in middle-aged men compared with those in young men.
Diver MJ, Imtiaz KE, Ahmad AM, Vora JP, Fraser WD.
Department of Clinical Chemistry, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK. mjdiver@liv.ac.uk
BACKGROUND: Conflicting views are reported on the association between advancing age and gradually diminishing concentrations of serum total testosterone in men. The putative loss of diurnal rhythm in serum total testosterone in older men is reported to be in part due to low concentrations in the morning when compared to concentrations found in young men. We have measured total, free and bioavailable testosterone along with SHBG in samples taken every 30 min throughout a 24-h period in 10 young and eight middle-aged men. RESULTS: Both young and middle-aged men displayed a significant diurnal rhythm in all variables, with a minimum fall of 43% in total testosterone from peak to nadir in all subjects. Subjecting the data to a time series analysis by least squares estimation revealed no significant difference in mesor (P = 0.306), amplitude (P = 0.061) or acrophase (P = 0.972) for total testosterone between the two groups. Comparing bioavailable testosterone in the two groups revealed no significant difference in mesor (P = 0.175) or acrophase (P = 0.978) but a significant difference (P = 0.031) in amplitude. Both groups display a significant circadian rhythm (middle-aged group P < 0.001; young group P = 0.014). Free testosterone revealed a highly significant rhythm in both the young group (P < 0.001) and the middle-aged group (P = 0.002), with no significant difference between the groups in mesor (P = 0.094) or acrophase (P = 0.698). Although analysis of the SHBG data revealed a significant rhythm in the young group (P = 0.003) and the older group (P < 0.001), the acrophase occurred in the mid afternoon in both groups (15.12 h in the young and 15.40 h in the middle-aged). The older men had a significantly greater amplitude (P = 0.044) but again no significant difference was seen in mesor (P = 0.083) or acrophase (P = 0.477) between the two groups. Acrophases for total, bioavailable and free testosterone occurred between 07.00 h and 07.30 h; for SHBG the acrophase occurred at 15.12 h in the young group and 15.40 h in the middle-aged group. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that the diurnal rhythm in these indices of androgen status is maintained in fit, healthy men into the 7th decade of life.

 

[Nereid]

There are a number of factors that causes criminal behavior. Testosterone level would be one of them. Certainly not in all aspects a bad hormone. This magical hormone does many things. It gives you a sex drive, it allows you to build muscle mass, as well as other so called "male" characteristics. One of them is aggressive behavior. Aggressive behavior would often even be positive. It allows you to be more competitive which is great as long as you have it under control. But this aggressive behavior often times turns criminal.

80-90% of homicides are commited by men. It's hard to make a case for environment being the main cause of it. Men are much more aggressive than their female counterparts. That magical male hormone testosterone probably responsible for it.

Now do certain races have a higher median level of testosterone than others? If this is the case, the pattern of higher aggressive behavior should be visible.

In summary:
race -> testosterone -> aggression -> crime.

Let's examine the last in the chain first.

There are many types of crime; which ones have well-established relationships with aggression? What proportion of all crime do these types comprise?

 

[Nereid]

And oh yeah to your question, if a person is of mixed races, then it will likely be listed as whatever race that person considers themselves. Kinda like the Census Bureau I suppose.

Thanks.

So, for the avoidance of doubt, in compilations of US crime statistics, the 'race' of the perpetrator is whatever the perp said it is? And if the perp says "I'm white, Hawaiian, black, and other", four records are created?

How is the 'race' of the victim determined, in cases where the victim is dead?

 

[hitssquad]

How coroners determine race from human remains

How is the 'race' of the victim determined, in cases where the victim is dead?

A coroner makes an official determination of the race from the remains:

• http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/10-286/Appe.htm
  
  Positive identification of a remains can be made through a knowledge of the skeletal system. Identification as to race, sex, age, and height is possible through applying a knowledge of the human skeleton.
  
  
  
• E-10. Identifying Skeletal Remains
  
  a. General. Persons assigned to carry out the identification of deceased personnel must be able not only to identify bones and place them in anatomical order but also to identify the sex, race, height, and age of skeletal remains.
  
  
  
• c. Race. The three primary races are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongolian; the two classifications are American Indian and mixed. Some skeletal differences exist among the races. They are restricted to the orbital cavities, long bones, nasal ridge, back of the skull, and hair.1
  
  
  • (1) Orbital cavity. The orbital cavities of the three primary races differ. Those of Caucasians are square with rounded corners; those of Negroids are rectangular with rounded corners; and those of Mongoloids are oval.
    
    (2) Long bones. The long bones of a member of the Negroid race are relatively longer than those of a member of the Caucasian race. The long bones of a member of the Mongolian race range in length between those of the other two races.
    
    (3) Nasal ridge. The nasal ridge, the edge of the bone at the base of the nasal cavity, has noticeable racial differences. In a member of the Caucasian race, the edge is sharp; in a member of the Negroid race, it is smooth or dull.
    
    (4) Back of the skull. The back of the skull of a member of the Mongolian race is relatively flat as compared to that of either of the other two races.
    
    (5) Hair. In a general way, race can be determined from the characteristics of the shaft, or free portion, of hair strands. However, since hair characteristics of the races overlap, they should not be the only evidence used in determining the race of the remains.
    
    
    • (a) Caucasian. The wavy and curly hair of Caucasians is smooth and silky. The color varies from ash blond to black, including red.
      
      (b) Negroid. The hair of members of the Negroid race is frizzly, woolly, and peppercorn and either brown or black in color. Also, the hair is typically coarse and crisp.
      
      (c) Mongolian. The hair of members of the Mongolian race is typically straight, limp, and coarse and either dark brown or black in color.

 

[Nereid]

Thanks hitssquad.

Presumably the same techiques are not used to establish the 'race' of the perps?

What say do the family members of a victim (assuming they are involved in any way) have in determining the 'race' of the victim (as such is recorded for crime stats)?

What 'race' would a coroner assign a person who has mixed parentage, say someone like Tiger?

 

[Loren Booda]

Put aside your statistics for just a moment and consider a black man walking toward you. Is it significant that he might murder you, or is he much more likely to be friendly given the opportunity to acknowledge your genuine smile, gesture or greeting? Maybe he had a good day, maybe not - just give him the benefit of the doubt.

Overall conditions of blacks are no more likely to have arisen from whatever arbitrary color ("indigo") they inherited than I from my different, arbitrary skin color ("pink"). In black and white populations you can almost always find people whose IQ, say 80, matches that of another person in the other racial group. Would you give your neighbors the eugenics diatribe that their responsible daughter of such IQ is not worthy to marry your son of IQ 110?

Try to compare polar opposites (black/white, male/female, atheist/fundamentalist, obese/ectomorphic, communist/fascist, rich/poor, etc.) of independent variables throughout a comprehensive statistical accounting against the resultant dependent statistics. You will find that extremes can beget other extremes. The haves dehumanize the have nots in poverty, poor nutrition, lack of education, disenfranchisment, bad environment, drug abuse, unemployment and crime, as does the simplistic prejudice of numerically pigeonholing people. The operative word is poor, the cause is often ignorant greed, and the solution is making a good faith effort to respect and even enjoy how we complement each other, to make a long-term, personal investment in people.

 

[Nereid]

Worthy sentiments Loren, and good advice.

However, I believe that BlackVision posted an opinion that is, in all likelihood, rather more common than many of us would wish. That he hasn't been able to defend his assertion is both unsurprising and disappointing. Unsurprising because I suspect his statements have essentially no basis; disappointing because without a discussion we cannot show clearly that the assertions are empty.

To summarise: we didn't even get to first base - the very terms that BV used have not been defined with any rigour or consistency.

I'm curious though - why did BlackVision make these indefensible statements?

 

[BlackVision]

Worthy sentiments Loren, and good advice.

However, I believe that BlackVision posted an opinion that is, in all likelihood, rather more common than many of us would wish. That he hasn't been able to defend his assertion is both unsurprising and disappointing. Unsurprising because I suspect his statements have essentially no basis; disappointing because without a discussion we cannot show clearly that the assertions are empty.

To summarise: we didn't even get to first base - the very terms that BV used have not been defined with any rigour or consistency.

I'm curious though - why did BlackVision make these indefensible statements?

Simply stating that I didn't defend my position doesn't make it so. Do you even remember my one and ONLY statement? Did you forget already? I thought I made it quite clear when I told you that you kept twisting my words. Here it is again, DO NOT make me repeat it again in the future.

"The white, asian, black crime rate gap is consistent in each and every country where a mixture of these populations exist."

Are you honestly going to sit there and tell me that I haven't provided evidence to support this? While you go on and blab going to crime rates in Estonia. a homogeneous country, which is completely irrelevant to the matter? But if it makes you happier you can PRETEND that no evidence was provided. If it allows you to sleep at night, you can pretend all you want.

 

[BlackVision]

And for those who think different races aren't genetically real, here's proof that different races does in fact have genetic basis:

"Every one of us has DNA that is 99.9 percent identical to everyone else, despite our differences in appearance. But as this IOL article reports, researchers have found that the 0.1 percent variations in DNA can provide enough information to accurately identify an individual's geographic ancestry. A recent study "Genetic Structures of Human Populations" published in Science Magazine, attempted to predict where an individual was from by taking DNA samples from from 1,056 people from 52 populations in five major regions--Africa, Eurasia (Europe, the Middle East, Central and South Asia), East Asia, Oceania and the Americas. After removing the labels from all the individuals so they would not know where they came from, researchers looked at the DNA and tried to detect where groups of individuals form clusters that are genetically related to one another. They then applied a statistical technique using many independent genes to detect the geographic patterns of ancestry in samples. The result was that they were able to accurately pinpoint the ancestral continent of virtually every individual from Africa, East Asia, Oceania and the Americas"

Source: Science Magazine. http://www.sciencemag.com

 

[Loren Booda]

What about the trait of a race to impose upon others the ultimate in genetic crimes against humanity, racial cleansing? Is not this perceived superiority itself just an expression of inferior breeding?

 

[BlackVision]

Also I must ask. Why so much heat on races? I did also post gender statistics that show that men commit about 90% of homicides, yet nobody gives a dime's worth about that. It seems society is far more willing to accept this difference but not the race ones. There's far too much people that cannot carry a race related discussion without letting their emotions and PC getting in the way.