This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
Jon, PCa is also generally a disease for old age, when testosterone levels drop naturally, but it does occur in younger men. Similarly, PCa has been reported in men with low testosterone, but I'm not sure that any man can have zero testosterone, whether chemically or physically castrated. There is a genetic aspect to this, too. Would a man with a genetic proclivity to PCa who has been castrated nevertheless be at risk of PCa? Who knows!
It seems very unlikely that there is any research available (dearth of eunuchs) to provide a definitive answer to your "silly question" so better to bin it, don't you think?
O.C. I think you are right, this question should be forgotten. Should a lifelong absence of testosterone have even the slightest effect on preventing this disease, our "ever so wise" society might view castration at birth as justified as it does circumcision at birth as a disease prevention procedure! (That kind of thinking would have saved me the inconvenience of a worn out thumb joint had my thumb been amputated at birth also.) Jon.