Ring finger length, indicator of testosterone?

[purpleiguana]

I wasn't sure to put this here or with Old Wive's Tales. If it requires a move, it would be much appreciated.

My dad told me that if your ring finger is nearer in length to your middle finger than to your index finger, it is an indication of increased levels of testosterone. He showed me both of his hands, on which the ring fingers, while not the same length as his middle fingers, were much closer in length to them than they were to his index fingers. So I immediately looked at my own hands (come on, you just looked at your hands, right?), and found that on my right hand, my ring finger is about the same length as (of not a millimeter or so shorter than) my index finger. On my left hand, my ring finger is 4-5mm longer than my index finger.

Anyone ever heard anything like this before?

[bjohn13]

The length of my ring finger in comparison to my other fingers differs based on how I hold my hand. If I curl my palms just right, my ring finger is actually longer than any of my other fingers. Hmm...interesting.

What were we discussing again?

[purpleiguana]

Originally Posted by bjohn13

The length of my ring finger in comparison to my other fingers differs based on how I hold my hand. If I curl my palms just right, my ring finger is actually longer than any of my other fingers. Hmm...interesting.

What were we discussing again?

Okay, fingers out like the manual representation for the number 5, but with the fingers closed.

[mags]

Both of my ring fingers are longer than my index fingers. Which probably explains my mustache.

[Jahungo]

Lutchmayaa, S, S Baron-Cohenb, P Raggattc, R Knickmeyerb and JT Manning. 2004. 2nd to 4th digit ratios, fetal testosterone and estradiol. Early embryonic development 77: 23-28.

Abstract

Background: The ratio of 2nd to 4th digit length (2D:4D) is sexually dimorphic (mean 2D:4D is lower in males than females) and is thought to be fixed early in development. 2D:4D has been reported to be related to fetal growth, hand preference, autism, Asperger's syndrome, sperm counts, family size, age at myocardial infarction in men and breast cancer in women. There is indirect evidence that 2D:4D is established in utero and is negatively related to prenatal testosterone and positively with prenatal estradiol. However, there are no studies which show direct relationships between fetal testosterone (FT), fetal estradiol (FE) and 2D:4D. Aims: To investigate the relationships between 2D:4D ratios and FT and FE from amniotic fluid. Study design: Cohort study. Subjects: 33 children. Outcome measures: Radioimmunoassays of FT and FE obtained from routine amniocentesis; 2D:4D ratios calculated from 2nd and 4th digit length of the right and left hands at age 2 years. Results: A significant negative association between right 2D:4D ratio and FT/FE ratio, which was independent of sex. Conclusions: These preliminary findings lend support to an association between low 2D:4D and high levels of FT relative to FE, and high 2D:4D with low FT relative to FE.

Science!

[bjohn13]

Could someone please translate that into Moron for me?

[Nick Theodorakis]

Originally Posted by bjohn13

Could someone please translate that into Moron for me?

(1) Men tend to have longer ring fingers (4D) relative in index fingers (2D) than women do. (2) People have tried to correlate 2D:4D ratio with a bunch of stuff. (3) Finger length ratios are probably fixed before birth. Perhaps this had to do with the levels of sex hormones they were exposed to in utero. (4) We looked at 33 children whose finger lengths we could measure and who still had amniocentesis samples available for which we could measure the levels of testosterone and estradiol they were exposed to while fetuses. (5) High levels of testosterone (relative to estrodiol) during fetal development is correlated with having a longer ring finger to index finger ratio (in both boys and girls).

Nick

[bjohn13]

Originally Posted by Nick Theodorakis

(1) Men tend to have longer ring fingers (4D) relative in index fingers (2D) than women do. (2) People have tried to correlate 2D:4D ratio with a bunch of stuff. (3) Finger length ratios are probably fixed before birth. Perhaps this had to do with the levels of sex hormones they were exposed to in utero. (4) We looked at 33 children whose finger lengths we could measure and who still had amniocentesis samples available for which we could measure the levels of testosterone and estradiol they were exposed to while fetuses. (5) High levels of testosterone (relative to estrodiol) during fetal development is correlated with having a longer ring finger to index finger ratio (in both boys and girls).

Nick

lol...you're not fluent in Moron, are you

j/k of course. Thanks for the translation. Much easier to parse.

[Nick Theodorakis]

Originally Posted by bjohn13

lol...you're not fluent in Moron, are you

j/k of course. Thanks for the translation. Much easier to parse.

Moron?! I thought you said Mormon!

Nick

[Beejtronic]

Good find, Jahungo! I knew of the study the OP was referring to, but I couldn't remember anything that might help identify it.

[A Turtle Named Mack]

I remember a study a few years ago that tried to correlate gay-itude with having the ring and index fingers equal.

[Embra]

Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack

I remember a study a few years ago that tried to correlate gay-itude with having the ring and index fingers equal.

This study looked at:

sexual orientation, spatial ability, status, physical prowess, and components of reproductive success. In addition, we examined the relationship between 2D:4D measures and several other traits whose expression is thought to be related to sex hormones, including voice pitch, sociosexuality, mating success, and fluctuating asymmetry.

Professor John Manning thinks he can look at your fingers and tell whether you would be any good at football.

[bjohn13]

Originally Posted by Embra

This study looked at:

Professor John Manning thinks he can look at your fingers and tell whether you would be any good at football.

There could be a certain validity to that. People who are naturally good at catching a football are likely to have a certain finger characteristic. You take a dude with that certain finger characteristic and throw in about 400 hours of rigorous practice, you're bound to find some success....right?

ETA: After posting, I realized that you probably weren't talking about American football.