The so-called beloved president of the most powerful democracy on earth arrived at the gates of heaven fully expecting to be beloved there too.

He was not unknown. The new guard had his file open already, and the file was a medical history.

“Welcome,” said the guard, not looking up. “I should explain the change, since you have been away from the rules a long time. We stopped weighing the soul some centuries ago. The soul is a liar of the first order, and yours in particular would talk for a week. We weigh the body now. The body keeps honest records, and it cannot perjure itself the way the mouth above it can.” He turned a page. “My name is Vagus. I was a biologist in life. They needed someone at this gate who could read the flesh.”

He tapped the file.

“And it is all in here. Every sin, and beside each one, helpfully, what you said when someone asked you about it while you still lived. You were asked, you see. You always answered. Let us go through it together.”

“I won,” said the president. “Bigly. Twice.”

“That is not a unit I accept here,” said Vagus. “But it is, I note, also your answer to the first three questions on the list. Let us begin anyway.”

Subscribe now

Thy first sin was the theft of sleep.

You barely slept and you bragged about it, as though exhaustion were a kind of strength. Here is what that costs. The prefrontal cortex is the slow, expensive, adult part of the brain, the part that pauses before it speaks, that weighs a consequence, that vetoes the worst idea in the room. It fails first when you don’t sleep. You did not toughen your mind. You cut its brakes and left the engine running.

So the worst decisions came at night, in bursts, ungoverned. The policy fired off to the whole world in the small hours, fully formed, read by no one wiser, impossible to recall by breakfast.

Ambassadors woke to it.

Markets woke to it.

Allies of fifty years woke up reclassified by a man whose judgment, in clinical terms, was impaired at the hour of writing.

People build their lives on the assumption that a sentence like that was considered. It was not. Some of them lost those lives. You called it instinct. It was a deficit, and it had a body count.

“It says here,” said Vagus, “that when a reporter asked how you could decide such a thing overnight, you answered that you have, and I am reading directly, a very good brain, and that you know more about it than the generals do.”

“The generals slept. That was the difference between you.”

Thy second sin was the worship of thine own alarm.

You lived in fight or flight and you liked it there, because fury read as power and calm read as weakness. But a brain held at maximum threat for years loses the ability to rank threats at all. When everything is an emergency, nothing is, and the man at the controls can no longer tell a catastrophe from an insult.

So you met them with the same chemistry.

A genuine disaster, the kind that fills the hospitals, drew the same adrenaline from you as a journalist who wounded your pride, and only one of the two held your attention past lunch. It was never the hospital.

Your whole government learned this about your body and bent itself around it. They stopped bringing you the slow real crises, the climbing numbers, the early warnings, because warnings bored you, and they brought you enemies instead, because enemies lit you up. So when the true emergency came, and it came, it arrived to find a president addicted to his own alarm and unable to feel a real one. That count is among the largest in your file.

“When they asked you about the warnings you ignored,” said Vagus, turning the page, “the file records that you said nobody could have seen it coming, that it came out of nowhere.”

“Eleven people saw it coming. Their memos are also in here, stamped and dated, beneath your signature, marked read.”

Thy third sin was that thou couldst never come down.

You never let a thought ripen or a decision settle, because you never let your body settle, and the two are the same machinery.

There is a brake in you, carried on the vagus nerve, the parasympathetic line, and its whole job is to pull the heart and the mind down out of emergency into the slow state where careful thought is even possible. A healthy body uses it all day, and you can read the result beat to beat, a heart that flexes and varies because it feels safe enough to relax its guard. Yours, I would wager everything in this file, ran flat as a table. The brake was there. You simply never touched it.

And here is why that is not a private matter for a president. A body locked in sympathetic drive does not think broadly. It thinks fast and narrow, because that is what the chemistry is for, it evolved to get you away from a leopard, not to weigh a treaty.

Under that state the brain literally restricts its own options, drops the long-range planning, and reaches for the nearest, loudest, most familiar response.

Alliances built across three generations were detonated in an afternoon by a man whose own brake had rusted shut. You felt the redline of your own nervous system and mistook it for the urgency of the world, and so the world had to flinch each time your heart did.

“The file says,” Vagus went on, “that when someone asked why you reversed a decision so suddenly, you answered that you go with your gut, and that your gut knows more than anybody’s brain.”

“The gut does talk to the brain. It is a real signal, carried up that same nerve I am named for, and most of the traffic does run gut to brain, you had that part right. But the message your gut was sending was not wisdom. It was alarm. A body in chronic stress floods that line with the news that something is wrong, always, about everything. You were not listening to your instinct. You were listening to a smoke detector with a dying battery, and you called the shrieking instinct.”

Thy fourth sin was that thou didst farm the fear of others.

You found the small almond in the human brain called the amygdala that knows only run or fight, and you learned to reach into a crowd and squeeze it from a stage.

Every gathering tuned to spike a nation’s fear the instant before it spiked your numbers. You did not lead those people. You operated their adrenal glands, and you were better at it than anyone alive.

Here is what that did to them.

A frightened brain cannot reason well, by design, because the same ancient chemistry that once saved us from the predator shuts down the slow machinery of judgment.

You held millions in that state for years, deliberately. You did not merely lie to them. You made them physically worse at detecting lies, and then you fed them more. You taught a country to feel the racing of its own heart and call it the truth of your words.

A crowd in that condition will do things to its neighbours that no single person in it would do alone. Some of them did exactly that. You built the chemistry, and watched, and called it a movement.

“When you were asked whether your words might incite the crowd,” said Vagus, “the file shows you said your words were perfect, and that you saw nothing wrong with them, nothing at all.”

He closed his eyes briefly.

“The bodies that acted on those perfect words are also weighed here. They arrived confused. Most of them did not understand whose fear they had been carrying. I sent very few of them down. They were, in the end, your instruments, and one does not blame the knife.”

Thy fifth sin was that thou didst poison a nation’s sense of what is real.

You repeated what was false until the repetition itself became the proof.

That is not a figure of speech, it is a mechanism. Every time a brain meets a claim, the next time is easier, the effort of processing it drops, and the brain, which cannot see its own wiring, reads that growing ease as a signal of truth, because in the ordinary world the things we hear again and again usually are.

You found the exploit.

You fed a nation the same falsehood until it became effortless to think, and millions of brains felt that ease and reported back, honestly, that it felt like fact. You did not argue them into belief. You wore a groove in the tissue until the lie slid down it on its own.

And then you went one layer deeper, into the eyes themselves.

Perception is not a camera. The brain does not receive the world, it predicts it, and uses the senses only to check the guess. What a person expects to see shapes what they actually see, before awareness even begins. So when you spent years installing expectations in them, you were not changing their opinions, you were editing the equipment that builds reality in the first place. You did not just tell them what to think. You altered what they were able to perceive.

“And here,” said Vagus, “when a reporter told you plainly that a thing you had said was untrue, the record shows you answered that what they were seeing and what they were reading was not happening.”

“Hear how that lands from this side of death. You told a living people not to believe their own eyes. The retina has no party. The visual cortex casts no vote. But it can be bent by expectation, and you had spent years setting the expectation, so when you told them the fire was not a fire, their own machinery helped you, and showed them smoke they could explain away. When the real emergency came, half of them could not see it, not would not, could not, because you had spent years editing the equipment they would have needed to see it with. The graves from that are still being dug. They will be counted long after your file is closed.”

Thy sixth sin was that thou didst sell the cure for the wound thou madest.

He set the file down. No scripture now. Just a tired biologist.

You frightened them, exhausted them, divided them, and then you sold yourself back to them as the only cure. The strongman as medicine. The rescue only the arsonist can perform. Buy the hat, fund the war chest, send in what little you have, and the very man who manufactured your fear will sell you shelter from it. You found a way to profit from the disease and then profit again from the panic about the disease, and the people who gave you the most were the people who had the least, the ones whose bodies were already failing under the exact stress you were selling them.

This is the sin I cannot make funny. The others you did to yourself and let spill onto the world. This one you did with full and deliberate intent, to every body but your own. You opened a clinic inside a wound you were still cutting, and you charged admission at the door.

“There is an answer logged for this one too,” said Vagus, quietly. “When you were asked whether you felt you owed anything to the people who gave you what they could not spare, the file records that you said they did it because they love me.”

“They did it because you had frightened them so thoroughly that giving you money felt like safety. That is not love. I have weighed love at this gate ten thousand times and it has never once looked like a frightened person handing their last note to the source of their fear. You did not earn their love. You triggered their nervous systems and cashed the reflex.”

The so-called beloved president had, for the first time in his life, run out of units.

Vagus closed the file.

“Six,” he said. “You are guilty of six. I had hoped to find a mercy in the seventh, some thread to send you back along. There is none. The seventh is not a question. It is only a confirmation.”

He stood.

“The verdict is already entered. I am not returning you to be tested, I am returning you to be proven, because the body insists on demonstrating itself even now, even here. You will be given one morning. In it you will commit the seventh sin freely, with no hand forcing yours, and that will be the seal upon the other six. You cannot help it. That, I am afraid, is rather the entire point.”

And he opened, beneath the president’s feet, a door that did not lead back up.

The president woke on a Tuesday, gasping, alive, drenched, his own ceiling above him, his own clock reading early, his heart already racing though nothing in the room had asked it to.

It was a dream. Only a dream. He lay still for one holy second and felt the enormous mercy of having only dreamt it, and resolved with his whole heart to be a slower man, a gentler man, a man who would sleep.

Then his feet had not yet touched the floor, and his hand had already found the phone.

His thumb moved before his eyes had fully opened. And in that single reflex, smaller than a heartbeat, a market lurched, three nations braced, a currency shivered, an ally was insulted before breakfast, and a frightened people reached for their own screens to discover what the great man felt this morning, before he himself had felt anything at all.

He did not remember the dream.

He never did.

And far somewhere in the heavenly realm, the biologist who had been a guard for only a little while made a small note in a very old book, and did not look down, because he had known this so-called beloved man would arrive long before he died, and had known, too, exactly how the morning would go.

If you liked what you read, please consider supporting me with a coffee.

The link is here -

Buy me a coffee.

---

You can become the founder member of The Biological Imagination to support its long-term vision. You will like the vision and perks of being a founder member.

Read the details here -

Founder member programme

---

Friends,

I am sharing something I have carried for a long time.

My first book is out in the world. It is called Bill the Biologist: The World’s First Biological Love Story.

It is the first novel in a genre I have been building toward for years, one I call biofiction: stories told from the perspective of the body. Cells, organs, hormones, the nervous system, all of it given a voice.

Bill is a molecular biologist who understands love completely and cannot feel any of it. He explains grief with cortisol and attraction with oxytocin. He clears rooms by being sincere. He means well, always. And slowly, across the book, he runs into the one thing his data cannot hold.

It is funny, and then, when you are not expecting it, it is not.

I write biology the way some people pray. This book is my offering to Lord Krishna, made in the only language I truly know, the language of the living body. Everything in it, I owe to Him.

This is my first book, and you are the people I most wanted to share it with. Please bless it. Read it if it calls to you, and if it moves you, tell someone.

All stores (Apple Books, Kobo, Barnes & Noble, and more): All stores
Amazon (Kindle and paperback): Amazon

With gratitude,
The Biological Imagination

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

A note before you begin.

Every piece here starts the same way. Weeks of reading the actual papers, not the summaries. Then the slower work, turning real mechanisms into a story you can feel, without bending a single fact to make it land. Scientific accuracy is the one line that does not get crossed, even when a looser version would read faster and easier.

That work takes time, and time is the one thing reader support buys back, and The Biological Imagination needs support.

If this piece earns it, there are three ways to keep it going. You can become a paid subscriber. You can buy me a coffee, if a one time thank you suits you better. Or you can become a founder member and back the longer vision all of this is building toward. The details are waiting at the end of the article.

Either way, thank you for reading. That part matters most.

The prophet who is never wrong

Your favourite face is on the screen, the confident one. Last month it told you exactly what was going to happen, the election, the market, the match, the verdict, and it was certain about all of it. Then it was wrong, not in some small forgivable way but in a way that should have ended the conversation. This month the same face is back in the same chair, with the same certainty and the same audience, and the miss is never once mentioned. And somehow you are still watching. (And you will keep watching if you don’t understand the mechanism)

In 1948 an American newspaper was so sure of the result that it printed the headline before the votes were counted, and the headline said Dewey defeats Truman. Truman won. The photograph of the grinning winner holding up that wrong front page has outlived every prediction it ever ran.

But do not let yourself off the hook by calling it history. In the summer of 2022 one of the most respected business magazines in the world put a young man on its cover and asked whether he was the next Warren Buffett, at a moment when his crypto company was valued at thirty two billion dollars. Within months that company was worth essentially nothing and he had been convicted of fraud. The magazine had hedged, in fairness, with a single phrase, build an empire or crash and burn, and we found out which. But the hedge is not the part anyone remembers. The cover said genius. (This word has been used many times by the magazines, and I hope they internally regret when they are proven wrong)

I call these people, these experts, these magazines with a very interesting name - The Dopamine Prophets.

These are not isolated mistakes, they are symptoms of a system that pays for confidence far more reliably than it pays for accuracy. To understand why, you have to look away from the screen and down at a single molecule, and it is not the one you have been told about.

Subscribe now

The molecule you misunderstand

The molecule is dopamine, and you have heard about it a thousand times. It is the pleasure chemical, the reward molecule, the thing that supposedly fires when you eat the cake, win the game, or collect the like. It is a tidy story, it is everywhere, and it is almost entirely wrong.

Start with something you almost certainly did this week. You picked up your phone to check one thing, and twenty minutes later you were still scrolling without enjoying any of it, not even really reading, just feeling a low pull to keep going and a faint emptiness the whole time. If dopamine were pleasure, that should have felt good. It did not. So what was it doing?

A scientist named Kent Berridge spent decades on exactly this gap, pulling apart two things we usually fold into a single word. Wanting is the pull toward a thing. Liking is the pleasure of actually having it. We assume the two always travel together, and they do not.

In one of the cleanest experiments on this, Wyvell and Berridge, in 2000, flooded a rat’s dopamine system with a stimulant, and the rat promptly worked much harder for sugar, clearly wanting it more. Yet when they watched its face for the actual pleasure reactions to the taste, nothing had changed at all. The wanting had climbed. The liking had not moved.

That is your phone. It is the slot machine that keeps a body in the seat long after the fun has gone, and the junk food eaten without ever being tasted. Dopamine is the wanting. The pleasure, the actual liking, lives somewhere else entirely, in small systems that have little to do with it, which is why more dopamine never buys you more pleasure. It only buys more pull. That is the first crack in the story.

Now the deeper one, and it comes from a monkey.

In 1997 Wolfram Schultz, working with Peter Dayan and Read Montague, slipped tiny electrodes next to the dopamine neurons of monkeys and gave the animals sips of juice, expecting the cells to celebrate the reward. They did something far stranger. They did not fire for the juice at all. They fired for the surprise.

Think about the last time you put on an old coat and found money in the pocket. The small lift you felt was never really about the money, it was about the money you had not expected. Now think about your salary arriving on the day it always arrives, the same amount, fully predicted, and notice that it produces no lift at all. Then think about the vending machine that swallows your coins and gives back nothing. That little drop in the chest, that flash of being cheated, is the third thing.

Those are the three signals Schultz found, exactly. When the outcome beats expectation the neuron fires harder, when it merely matches expectation the neuron does nothing, and when it falls short the neuron goes quiet. The juice was never the point. The point was the gap between what you predicted and what arrived.

It is worth being precise here, because the detail is the whole argument. Many of these neurons tick along slowly at rest, only a few times a second, and a genuine surprise can drive that rate up into a brief burst, while a reward you were counting on, and do not get, pushes it the other way, below its resting pace. So the same cell carries both a reward and a punishment, a lift for being pleasantly surprised and a dip for being wrong.

In the monkey, the signal does not stay put on the juice. Once the animal learns the sound that reliably comes just before the juice, the spike migrates backward onto the sound itself, and the juice, now fully expected, goes quiet.

You already know this migration. The streaming app’s start-up sound before the show, the two grey ticks turning blue, the little notification ping, none of these is the reward itself. They are only the signals that a reward is coming, and your brain has quietly shifted its excitement onto the signal, which is exactly why the ping pulls harder than whatever sits behind it. Dopamine is not a receipt for pleasure. It is a teaching signal about prediction.

So two completely different labs, working in two completely different ways, arrive at the same place. Berridge shows that dopamine is wanting rather than pleasure, and Schultz shows that it is prediction rather than reward. The rule underneath both is simple enough to hold in one hand. Dopamine tracks the gap, lifting when reality beats your forecast and falling when reality comes in worse.

The asymmetry

Before we go back to the screen, sit with the fall, because it does most of the work. (It is painful but truth)

Being right, it turns out, is not much of a high. A reward you fully predicted produces a flat signal, so if you called it perfectly the molecule simply shrugs, and the real lift stays reserved for being right in a way that still manages to surprise you. Mere accuracy is quiet.

But being wrong is loud. When the thing you were certain of fails to arrive, the brain does not simply settle back to neutral, it drops below its own resting level. You have felt this. (It is sometimes similar to physical pain).

It is the certainty in your chest as your team is about to win and the floor falling away when they lose, the argument you know you are winning and the small sickness when it turns out you were not.

That dip is real, and the brain hates it. It will spend real effort to keep the dip away, even, as we are about to see, at the cost of the truth.

Consider the record. A magazine crowned its next Warren Buffett, and he was convicted. A front page announced a winner before the votes were in. A recession was called certain and never arrived. A self-driving car was promised for one year, then the next, then the next. And a room of the world’s best economists, asked by a Queen in 2008 why none of them had seen the crash coming, had no good answer to give her.

The question underneath all of it -

Why don’t these mistakes end careers?

Back to the prophet

For about twenty years a researcher named Philip Tetlock did the one thing the industry never does, which is keep score. He asked nearly three hundred experts to attach real numbers to real events, then waited, sometimes for years, and checked what actually happened, ending up with around twenty eight thousand predictions graded against reality.

The results, published in 2005, were brutal, and Tetlock’s own summary of them became famous. Across the field, he said, the average expert did little better than chance, about as accurate, in his phrase, as a dart throwing chimpanzee, and no better than a reasonably attentive person who simply read the news. The knowledge was real. The forecasting was not. (It is scary)

Then comes the finding that should change how you watch anything at all. The more famous the expert, the worse the forecast, with fame and accuracy running in plainly opposite directions, and the reason is almost mechanical. Fame rewards confidence and a single bold story, while accuracy rewards doubt and a hundred small corrections, and the booker always wants the guest who sounds certain rather than the one who keeps saying that it depends. So the market quietly selects for the very trait that ruins forecasting, which means that, on average, the louder the voice the worse the call.

When the predictions failed, the experts almost never revised their picture of the world. Instead they reached, again and again, for the same small set of excuses. I was off on the timing. I was blindsided by a freak event. I was almost right. I was wrong, but for the right reasons. You have heard every one of these, probably this week.

Watch how cleanly a real example fits the list. In late 2022 forecasters were nearly unanimous that a downturn was on the way, and one closely watched model, from Bloomberg Economics, put the odds of a recession within the year at one hundred percent. Then 2023 arrived and the economy grew. The forecast was not wrong, they explained, it was merely early, and so they moved it to 2024, which is the timing excuse playing out in real time. The car that was going to drive itself by 2017 will, apparently, drive itself next year. Each missed date does not retire the prediction. It renews it.

Now look at what every one of these excuses actually does. It saves the prediction, and it refuses the dip.

Because admitting you were wrong means taking the fall, that same drop below baseline we watched in the monkey and that you felt the moment your team lost. Reinterpreting the evidence so that you were never really wrong is what keeps the fall away. The doubling down, then, is not stupidity and not quite dishonesty, it is loss avoidance, because the molecule does not want the truth so much as it wants to dodge the dip, and given the choice between updating its view and editing reality, it edits reality.

Tetlock measured the editing. Schultz, decades earlier, measured the reason for it.

So say it plainly. The prophet does not need to be right. The prophet needs to not feel wrong. Those are different jobs, and only one of them pays.

And watch what happens when the miss is simply too big to wave away with a small excuse. The avoidance does not stop, it escalates. The prophet who cannot afford the dip will first deny the facts, then attack the people who wrote them down, and finally call the whole correction a conspiracy against them, growing louder and more certain rather than quieter, because the bigger the bet made in public, the bigger the fall waiting if they ever concede. The defense grows to the exact size of the dip it is holding back.

The fear may run deeper than a bruised ego. For most of human history, status was not a luxury. It was access to allies, resources, protection, and mates. A public loss of standing could carry real costs. The modern pundit may be operating inside machinery built for a much older world, one in which admitting error risked more than embarrassment. The screen is new. The status circuitry is not.

Now the part that should unsettle you. None of this costs them their audience. We do not leave, we often lean in closer, and the defiance itself becomes the show, which is not a side effect but the engine of the whole thing. Approval, after all, is not a metaphor here. Social approval engages many of the brain’s reward and motivation systems, overlapping with the very circuits that respond to other kinds of reward, so the roar of a loyal crowd is a real signal that arrives whether or not the prediction was ever true. The prophet has found a way to feel right without being right. Our attention is the substitute, we hand it over, and the fall never comes.

We are not the victims of this. We are the supply.

The uncomfortable part is that the pundit is only half the story.

Two addicts

Which leaves the last person in this. You.

Be honest about the feeling. When the commentator you like takes apart the side you dislike and lands the exact point you were already half thinking, something good happens in your body, and it is not agreement. It is a hit. Their confirmation has just beaten your own private expectation, which is a positive prediction error in your brain rather than theirs, and your dopamine lifts.

So you are not really there for the analysis, you are there for the confirmation. Here is the self-check that follows from that. If a commentator is always telling you precisely what you already believe, then your brain is being handed confirmation rather than information, and the channel you keep choosing is simply the one most likely to deliver the hit. You are, quietly, selecting your own supplier.

And it tightens over time. The same researchers who mapped wanting and liking, Robinson and Berridge, describe how this system sensitises with use, so that the cues promising the hit grow louder even as the hit itself satisfies less. The notification, the thumbnail, the trusted voice, each begins to pull harder than the content sitting behind it. Remember the monkey, and how the signal slid off the juice and onto the sound. The same migration is happening to you, right now, between the feed and the thing inside it.

One last fairness, because the molecule deserves it. Prediction error is not a flaw, it is how every animal that learns anything at all manages to learn it, and the same signal that now hooks you on a commentator is the one that once taught you language, and faces, and which berries not to eat. It is the engine of your intelligence, not a bug in it.

But an engine built to avoid the fall is not the same as an engine built to find the truth. For most of the world your ancestors lived in, the two pointed in the same direction. In front of a screen designed to confirm you, they no longer do.

So picture the screen one final time, and you will see two machines, not one.

On one side stands a prophet who cannot afford the dip of being wrong and therefore never registers it. On the other sits a viewer whose brain pays out every single time the prophet says what that viewer already believed. Two prediction machines, feeding each other a steady supply of surprise, and neither one ever paying for the misses.

Two addicts. One screen. Zero accountability.

(Please do something about these dopamine prophets, internet is being filled with them)

If you found this story interesting and wish to support me, Buy me a coffee.

The link is here -

Buy me a coffee.

---

You can become the founder member of The Biological Imagination to support its long-term vision. You will like the vision and perks of being a founder member.

Read the details here -

Founder member programme

Sources

The claims in this piece rest on the following work.

Schultz, Dayan and Montague (1997) - the dopamine neurons that fired for surprise rather than for the reward itself, and that shifted their signal backward onto the cue. Schultz, W., Dayan, P., and Montague, P. R. (1997). A Neural Substrate of Prediction and Reward. Science, 275(5306), 1593–1599. doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1593

Wyvell and Berridge (2000) - the experiment behind wanting versus liking. Amphetamine in a rat’s accumbens raised how hard it worked for sugar, while its pleasure reactions to the taste stayed flat. Wyvell, C. L., and Berridge, K. C. (2000). Intra-accumbens amphetamine increases the conditioned incentive salience of sucrose reward: enhancement of reward “wanting” without enhanced “liking” or response reinforcement. Journal of Neuroscience, 20(21), 8122–8130. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.20-21-08122.2000

Robinson and Berridge (1993) - the origin of incentive sensitization, how reward systems grow hyper-responsive to cues with repeated use. Robinson, T. E., and Berridge, K. C. (1993). The neural basis of drug craving: an incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Research Reviews, 18(3), 247–291.

Berridge and Robinson (2016) - the broader case that wanting and liking run on separable brain systems. Berridge, K. C., and Robinson, T. E. (2016). Liking, wanting, and the incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. American Psychologist, 71(8), 670–679. doi:10.1037/amp0000059

Tetlock (2005) - twenty years of scored expert forecasts, the dart-throwing chimpanzee line, and the finding that fame runs opposite to accuracy. Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? Princeton University Press.

Izuma, Saito and Sadato (2008) - social approval activating the same striatal reward circuitry as money. Izuma, K., Saito, D. N., and Sadato, N. (2008). Processing of Social and Monetary Rewards in the Human Striatum. Neuron, 58(2), 284–294. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.03.020

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

That conversation sent me down a biological journey.

The result became the first Friday Live with The Biological imagination, a journey through stress hormones, wellness marketing, adaptogens, and a question that kept appearing in the data.

What if the most important distinction is not whether something works, but what exactly it works on?

The fire, or the alarm?

The full recording is here.

If you found this story interesting and wish to support me, I would prefer glucose to coffee.

Caffeine has a half-life of roughly five hours and interferes with my sleep architecture. Glucose does not. One supports the work. The other keeps me awake thinking about it.

The link is here -

Support with Glucose

A request -

Dear Friends,

The Biological Imagination is structurally overhauling itself.

Two things at once.

First, a voice. Friday Night with Biology begins, a new podcast moving through health, wellness, and the questions physiology keeps asking of philosophy. The same body of work you have been reading, now speaking. Free readers receive it on the first and third Friday of each month. Paid readers receive it every Friday.

Second, a door. For The Biological Imagination, paid membership is now live.

The free work stays free. A new piece every Tuesday. The podcast twice a month.

Paid readers, 8 dollars a month or 80 dollars a year, receive every Friday’s episode, for times a month and two further pieces each month written for subscribers alone.

Founding members, 180 dollars a year, receive all of that, plus a monthly booklet of three stories printed nowhere else, and the ebooks on cancer and on self-love.

Biology does not take sides. It does not soften its language. It only grows from here.

Please subscribe, become a member, and support.

---

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Get more from The Biological Imagination in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

St. Michael’s Church, Tuesday, 2:00 PM.

The funeral of Dr. Harold Pemberton, Professor Emeritus of Molecular Biology.

Father Thomas Mitchell has performed 2,847 funerals in his thirty-one years of ministry. He has guided grieving families through tragedy, offered words of comfort in the darkest moments, and stood as a bridge between the mortal and the divine.

Bill Morrison is in the third pew. He is wearing his only suit, which he has not worn since his PhD defense.

He did not expect to be asked to speak.

Father Mitchell did not expect what was about to happen.

No one did.

Subscribe now

Thirty Minutes Earlier - The Parking Lot

Dr. Pemberton’s widow, Eleanor, had found Bill outside the church.

“William,” she said, her eyes red, her voice trembling. “Harold always spoke so highly of you. He said you were the most… thorough student he ever had.”

“That’s statistically probable. I submitted a 47-page appendix with my dissertation. Most students submit three to five pages.”

“He mentioned that.” Eleanor attempted a watery smile. “William, I know this is last minute, but Father Mitchell said there’s time for one more person to share some words. Would you… would you say something about Harold? Something personal?”

Bill considered this.

“I’m not skilled at ‘personal.’ I could provide an accurate assessment of his contributions to the field of protein folding dynamics.”

“That would be lovely, dear.”

“I should warn you that accuracy and loveliness don’t always correlate.”

“I’m sure whatever you say will be perfect.”

She squeezed his arm and walked into the church.

Bill stood in the parking lot, suddenly aware that he had agreed to speak publicly about a dead man to a room full of grieving people. Eleanor had asked for something personal, and he had decided the most personal tribute he could offer was an accurate one, the kind Dr. Pemberton had spent his life earning.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Pre-Funeral Status

Location - The eternal intersection of faith and flesh. Current status: CONFIDENT.

FAITH CENTER - “Another funeral. Another opportunity to shepherd souls through grief. We’ve done this 2,847 times. We are GOOD at this.”

COMPASSION LOBE - “The widow is in the front row. Eleanor. Married to Harold for 49 years. She’ll need extra attention during the committal.”

SERMON PREPARATION ZONE - “Remarks are ready. ‘Harold has gone to his eternal reward.’ ‘He rests now in the arms of the Lord.’ Standard comfort package. Reliable. Tested.”

FAITH CENTER - “Eleanor mentioned she asked a former student to say a few words. Some scientist, Bill something. Shouldn’t be more than three minutes.”

COMPASSION LOBE - “Scientists at funerals can be awkward. Remember the chemist at Mrs. Patterson’s service who kept mentioning ‘oxidation’?”

FAITH CENTER - “That was uncomfortable, but brief. This will be fine.”

HOLY SPIRIT RECEPTOR - “I’m picking up something. A strange frequency. Almost like… a warning?”

FAITH CENTER - “Pre-service jitters. Focus on the liturgy.”

The Service - 2:47 PM

Father Mitchell stands at the pulpit. The service has been beautiful so far. The hymns were sung with feeling. His homily on eternal life landed well. He saw Eleanor nodding, tears streaming, but peaceful tears.

This is what he trained for. This is what he does.

“And now,” Father Mitchell says warmly, “Dr. Pemberton’s former student, Dr. William Morrison, would like to share a few words.”

A man rises from the third pew.

Father Mitchell’s first thought is that the man moves strangely. Rigid and mechanical, like someone who learned human locomotion from a textbook and never quite mastered the practical application.

His second thought is that the man’s suit doesn’t fit properly.

His third thought, which will stay with him for the rest of his life, comes approximately ninety seconds later.

Bill - Opening Remarks

Bill reaches the pulpit. Two hundred faces look up at him. He doesn’t make eye contact with any of them. Eye contact is distracting.

Bill - Dr. Harold Pemberton was my doctoral advisor from 2012 to 2017. In that time, I observed him to be consistent, methodical, and biologically robust for a man of his age.

Eleanor’s smile flickers. “Biologically robust” is not how one typically describes a beloved mentor.

Her daughter, Meers, leans over. “Mom, who is this?”

“Bill Morrison. Your father’s favorite student.”

“He seems… odd.”

“Your father always said he was ‘unique.’”

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Initial Readings

COMPASSION LOBE - “’Biologically robust.’ That’s an unusual opening, clinical.”

FAITH CENTER - “Academics. Different communication style. He’s probably nervous. He’ll warm up.”

LITURGICAL PROTOCOL UNIT: “Good projection, at least. Clear voice.”

HOLY SPIRIT RECEPTOR: “The warning signal is getting stronger.”

FAITH CENTER: “Ignore it. Let the man speak.”

Bill - He died of cardiac arrest eleven days ago.

The Congregation - Growing Unease

Several people shift in their pews. The past tense feels abrupt and harsh.

Dr. Margaret Reeves from the biology department whispers to her colleague: “Is he going to explain HOW Harold died?”

“Surely not. That would be…”

Bill - For those unfamiliar with the process, cardiac arrest occurs when the heart’s electrical system malfunctions, causing an irregular heartbeat that disrupts blood flow to the brain.

“Oh God. He is.”

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Alarm

COMPASSION LOBE - “He’s… he’s explaining the mechanism of death. To the widow, who was there when it happened.”

FAITH CENTER - “This is unusual, very unusual, but perhaps he’s building to something. Context before comfort.”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “What kind of comfort begins with ‘irregular heartbeat’?”

HOLY SPIRIT RECEPTOR - “I TOLD you something felt off.”

Bill - Without intervention, consciousness is lost within 10 to 20 seconds, and biological death follows within 4 to 6 minutes as neurons begin dying from oxygen deprivation.

Eleanor Pemberton - Front Row

The blood drains from Eleanor’s face.

She was there, she was holding Harold’s hand when it happened. She watched his eyes go distant. She counted the seconds while waiting for the ambulance.

She did not need a timeline.

She did not need to know about neurons dying.

She knew. She KNEW.

Meera grabs her mother’s hand. “Mom. Mom, are you okay?”

Eleanor can’t speak. She’s back in the living room. She’s watching Harold collapse. She’s counting. Ten seconds. Twenty seconds. The neurons dying.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Alarm Phase Two

COMPASSION LOBE - “Eleanor. Look at Eleanor. She’s reliving it. He’s making her RELIVE it.”

FAITH CENTER - “This can’t continue. We need to -”

LITURGICAL PROTOCOL UNIT - “We can’t interrupt. There are protocols. Decorum. We’ve never interrupted a eulogy in 2,847 funerals.”

FAITH CENTER - “Give him one more sentence. ONE more. Then we reassess.”

Bill - But I’m not here to discuss the mechanism of his death. I’m here to discuss his life.

FAITH CENTER - “See? He’s pivoting. He’s moving to the life. This is better.”

HOLY SPIRIT RECEPTOR: “The signal is still wrong. Something bad is still coming.”

Bill - Specifically, his contributions to our understanding of protein folding dynamics, which will endure long after his body has completed the decomposition process.

Two hundred people inhale simultaneously.

The word hangs in the air like a grenade with the pin pulled.

Decomposition.

At a funeral.

In a church.

With the casket ten feet away.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Red Alert

FAITH CENTER - “He said DECOMPOSITION. He said DECOMPOSITION at a FUNERAL.”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “In thirty-one years of ministry, no one has ever said ‘decomposition process’ during a eulogy. I don’t have a FRAMEWORK for this.”

PATIENCE RESERVES - “Down to 40% and dropping.”

ANGER MANAGEMENT SECTOR - “Let me handle this. I have solutions.”

FAITH CENTER - “What solutions?”

ANGER MANAGEMENT SECTOR - “Physical ones.”

FAITH CENTER - “We can’t ASSAULT a eulogist!”

ANGER MANAGEMENT SECTOR - “Can’t we? CAN’T WE THOUGH?”

Dr. James Whitfield - Fifth Row

Dr. Whitfield, chair of the biology department, watches Bill Morrison standing at the pulpit, apparently unaware that he has just dropped the word “decomposition” into a room full of grieving people like a biological bomb.

“Jesus Christ,” Whitfield whispers.

His wife elbows him. “Don’t blaspheme. We’re in a church.”

“I think blasphemy is the least of our problems right now.”

Bill - “His body is currently in the casket behind me.”

Every person in the church becomes acutely aware of the casket.

They had, through the gentle ritual of the service, managed to abstract it. To see it as a symbol rather than a container. To focus on Harold’s soul rather than Harold’s remains.

Bill Morrison has just reminded them that there is a BODY in that box.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Critical Failure

FAITH CENTER - “THE BODY. He’s talking about THE BODY.”

COMPASSION LOBE - “He POINTED at the casket. He GESTURED toward it.”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “The entire point of funeral liturgy is to draw attention AWAY from the physical remains and toward the eternal soul. He is doing the OPPOSITE. He is doing the OPPOSITE OF MINISTRY.”

HOLY SPIRIT RECEPTOR - “I think the Holy Spirit has formally abandoned this building. I’m getting nothing. Complete void.”

PATIENCE RESERVES: “25%. Below safe operating levels.”

Bill - For those curious about the timeline, decomposition begins within minutes of death, when cells begin autolysis, essentially, self-digestion.

Eleanor makes a sound.

It’s not quite a sob. It’s not quite a gasp. It’s something in between. The sound of a woman who has just been told that her husband of 49 years is self-digesting.

Meera wraps her arm around her mother. “Don’t listen. Mom, don’t listen.”

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Spiritual Emergency

FAITH CENTER - “Self-digestion. SELF-DIGESTION. He’s telling a widow that her husband is DIGESTING HIMSELF.”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “I studied for seven years. Augustine. Aquinas. The Catechism. The complete works of Chrysostom. NONE OF THIS PREPARED ME FOR AUTOLYSIS.”

FAITH CENTER - “Lord, forgive what I’m about to do.”

Dr. Patricia Langley - Sixth Row

Dr. Langley, a microbiologist, knows exactly where this is going.

“Oh no,” she whispers to her husband.

“What?”

“He’s going to mention the gut bacteria. I KNOW he’s going to mention the gut bacteria.”

Bill - Within 24 to 72 hours, bacteria from the gut, primarily Clostridia and Coliforms, begin migrating through the body.

Dr. Langley closes her eyes. “There it is.”

The Congregation - Peak Horror

The seventh-row woman is now openly gagging.

A man in the back stands up, apparently unable to remain seated.

Several people are crying, though it’s no longer clear if it’s grief for Harold or trauma from the eulogy.

Eleanor has stopped shaking. She’s very still now. The stillness of someone who has dissociated from reality.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Complete System Failure

COMPASSION LOBE - “I’m shutting down. I can’t process this. There’s no compassionate response to BACTERIAL MIGRATION.”

PATIENCE RESERVES - “5%. CRITICAL.”

ANGER MANAGEMENT SECTOR - “INTERVENE. NOW.”

FAITH CENTER - “Lord, give me strength.”

Bill - Dr. Pemberton, as a biologist, would have appreciated this irony. The microbiome he spent his career studying is now, in a very real sense, consuming him from within.

Meera Pemberton - Fury

Meera’s grief has transformed into something else entirely.

“He’s saying Dad is being EATEN,” she hisses. “He’s telling Mom that Dad is being EATEN BY BACTERIA.”

“Shh,” Eleanor whispers, but there’s no strength in it.

“I’m going to kill him. After this, I’m going to actually kill him. The church has a garden out back. I’ll bury him there. Let HIS microbiome consume HIM.”

Father Mitchell - Intervention

Father Mitchell moves.

He doesn’t remember deciding. His body acts on thirty-one years of pastoral instinct, overriding protocol, overriding decorum, overriding everything except the desperate need to MAKE IT STOP.

He appears at Bill’s elbow like a manifestation of divine intervention.

“THANK YOU, DR. MORRISON.”

His voice is too loud. Several parishioners flinch. The woman in the seventh row jumps.

“Thank you for those… illuminating words.” Every syllable costs him something. “I’m sure Dr. Pemberton would have appreciated the, ah, scientific perspective.”

Bill turns to him, his face showing nothing but polite confusion.

“I wasn’t finished. I hadn’t discussed putrefaction or the role of cadaveric fauna…”

FAITH CENTER - “CADAVERIC FAUNA.”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “What in the name of all that is holy is CADAVERIC FAUNA?”

COMPASSION LOBE - “I don’t know and I don’t WANT to know.”

PATIENCE RESERVES - “0%. Take whatever you need from other systems.”

“We’ll save that for another time.” Father Mitchell’s grip on Bill’s arm is firm. Perhaps too firm. This is not a pastoral grip. This is a ‘you are leaving this pulpit NOW’ grip. “Let us now turn to hymn 347.”

He steers Bill away from the microphone.

The organist, bless her heart, begins playing immediately. Twenty years of service. She knows when to provide cover.

Bill looks confused as he’s guided back to the third pew, but he doesn’t resist.

Father Mitchell returns to the pulpit. His hands are shaking. The congregation stares at him with expressions ranging from horror to gratitude to something that looks like shellshock.

Eleanor is weeping silently, her daughter’s arms around her.

The casket sits there, as it has throughout, now impossible to look at without thinking about what’s happening inside it.

“Let us sing,” he says, and his voice cracks slightly.

They sing.

It’s the most desperate rendition of “Amazing Grace” St. Michael’s has ever heard.

The Reception - Church Basement - One Hour Later

Bill stands by the vegetable tray, eating celery.

He’s noticed that people have been avoiding him. Several attendees have made eye contact, then quickly looked away. Two colleagues from the biology department walked in his direction, saw him, and immediately reversed course toward the coffee station.

He doesn’t understand why.

His speech was informative. It was accurate. It was, in its own way, a tribute to Dr. Pemberton’s life’s work. Who better to be consumed by the microbiome than a man who devoted his career to studying it?

Dr. Whitfield approaches Dr. Okonkwo by the coffee station.

“Did you hear Bill Morrison’s eulogy?”

“I heard it. I’m going to hear it in my nightmares for the next decade.”

“He calculated the dollar value of vending machine snacks Harold gave him.”

“Adjusted for inflation.”

“And then he described the gut microbiome eating Harold’s body.”

“While Harold’s widow was in the front row.”

They stand in silence for a moment.

“Should we… say something to him?” Dr. Whitfield asks.

“Say what? ‘Bill, you can’t describe decomposition at a funeral’? He won’t understand why.”

“No. He won’t.”

“He’s by the vegetable tray. He’s been there for twenty minutes.”

“Alone?”

“Of course alone. Would YOU stand next to the man who just lectured a grieving congregation about Clostridia?”

“Good point.”

They both look at Bill, who is examining a piece of broccoli with what appears to be scientific interest.

“Harold really did love him, you know,” Dr. Okonkwo says.

“I know. Harold once told me that Bill reminded him of himself. ‘Before I learned to pretend to be normal,’ he said.”

“You think Bill will ever learn to pretend?”

Dr. Whitfield watches as Bill apparently decides the broccoli meets his nutritional criteria and eats it.

“No,” he says. “No, I don’t think he will.”

Meera approaches her mother with a cup of tea.

“Mom. You should sit down.”

“I’m fine.”

“You’re not fine. That man just told you Dad is being eaten by bacteria.”

“He’s not wrong.” Eleanor’s voice is hollow. “That IS what’s happening.”

“That’s not the POINT, Mom.”

“I know it’s not.” Eleanor looks across the room at Bill, standing alone by the vegetable tray. “Harold always said Bill was special. ‘He sees the world differently,’ he’d say. ‘He can’t help it.’”

“That doesn’t excuse…”

“No. It doesn’t.” Eleanor takes the tea. “But I don’t think he meant to hurt me. I don’t think he CAN mean to hurt anyone. He just… doesn’t understand.”

“Doesn’t understand what?”

Eleanor watches Bill eat celery with mechanical precision, alone, apparently oblivious to the devastation he’s caused.

“Any of it,” she says quietly. “He doesn’t understand any of it.”

The Church - Upstairs

Father Mitchell kneels in the empty church, before the altar, in the silence that follows catastrophe.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Damage Assessment

FAITH CENTER - “We survived. Technically, we survived.”

COMPASSION LOBE - “Eleanor’s face. I keep seeing Eleanor’s face when he said ‘consuming from within.’”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER -“I have performed 2,847 funerals. I have buried children. I have buried murder victims. And yet that - THAT - was somehow the worst thing I have ever witnessed in this church.”

ANGER MANAGEMENT SECTOR -“I want it noted that I wanted to physically remove that man from the building. I still want to.”

FAITH CENTER - “Noted. But we don’t act on those impulses. We’re servants of God.”

ANGER MANAGEMENT SECTOR -“Even God’s servants have limits.”

FAITH CENTER - “Yes. And today, we found ours.”

COMPASSION LOBE - “He didn’t know what he was doing. He couldn’t know. You saw his face - complete confusion. He genuinely thought he was helping.”

FAITH CENTER - “I know. And that makes it worse somehow. He destroyed Eleanor’s peace, and he didn’t even understand he was doing it.”

“Forgive me for my anger,” Father Mitchell whispers. “Forgive me for the violence in my heart. Forgive me for wanting to silence him instead of understanding him.”

He pauses.

“And Lord… forgive him too. Whatever is broken in him that makes him see decomposition timelines instead of grief, bacterial colonies instead of bereavement… heal it. Help him.”

Another pause.

“And if you can’t heal it… at least keep him away from funerals.”

COMPASSION LOBE - “We stopped him before cadaveric fauna.”

FAITH CENTER - “Small mercies.”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “We still don’t know what cadaveric fauna IS.”

FAITH CENTER - “And we’re going to keep it that way.”

Father Mitchell crosses himself. He rises, knees protesting, and looks around the empty church.

The flowers are still arranged beautifully. The candles still flicker. The stained glass still casts colored light across the pews.

It’s still sacred space.

Even after decomposition timelines and gut bacteria and the phrase “consuming him from within,” it’s still sacred space.

That has to count for something.

Father Mitchell’s Office - Later

He sits at his desk with a glass of communion wine.

This is not standard practice. Father Mitchell is not a drinking man.

But today was not a standard day.

He thinks about Dr. William Morrison. About the rigid posture and the mechanical speech and the complete absence of awareness that he was causing harm.

He thinks about Eleanor’s face.

He thinks about the word “Clostridia” and how he will never, ever be able to unhear it.

Father Mitchell’s Soul - Final Thoughts

FAITH CENTER - “What do we do with today? How do we file this?”

THEOLOGICAL REASONING CENTER - “Under ‘Trials of Faith.’ Subsection: ‘Unprecedented.’”

COMPASSION LOBE - “We need to call Eleanor tomorrow. Check on her.”

HOLY SPIRIT RECEPTOR - “I’m stabilizing. The connection is back. Weak, but present.”

FAITH CENTER - “Good. We’re going to need it.”

Father Mitchell finishes his wine.

Tomorrow, he’ll call Eleanor. He’ll check on the congregation. He’ll review the liturgy for Sunday’s service and make sure everything is normal and predictable and blessedly free of biological terminology.

Tonight, he just sits.

In thirty-one years, he’s learned that some days cannot be processed immediately. Some days need to settle like sediment in water, slowly sinking to the bottom where they can be examined without stirring up the whole system.

Today is one of those days.

He turns off his desk lamp.

“Lord,” he says quietly into the darkness, “if it’s not too much to ask… never again. Never again.”

He pauses.

“And please look after that strange man. Whatever he is, wherever he is, he’s going to need all the help he can get.”

The Vegetable Tray - Same Moment

Bill Morrison stands alone in the emptying church basement, eating his third piece of celery.

The reception is winding down. People are leaving without saying goodbye to him. Eleanor was helped to her car by her daughter, who shot Bill a look he couldn’t interpret.

He doesn’t understand why everyone seemed upset.

His speech was informative.

His speech was accurate.

His speech was, objectively, a more thorough tribute to Dr. Pemberton’s legacy than any of the vague platitudes about “eternal rest” and “better places.”

Dr. Pemberton was a scientist.

He would have appreciated the science.

Wouldn’t he?

Bill finishes his celery and looks around the empty room.

For a moment, just a moment, something flickers across his face. Something that might be doubt. Something that might be loneliness. Something that might be the first faint stirring of awareness that he has, once again, done something wrong without understanding what.

But the moment passes.

And Bill Morrison walks out of the church, alone, into the afternoon light, already calculating the most efficient route home

If you found this story interesting and wish to support me, I would prefer glucose to coffee.

Caffeine has a half-life of roughly five hours and interferes with my sleep architecture. Glucose does not. One supports the work. The other keeps me awake thinking about it.

The link is here -

Support with Glucose

A request -

Dear Friends,

The Biological Imagination is structurally overhauling itself.

Two things at once.

First, a voice. Friday Night with Biology begins, a new podcast moving through health, wellness, and the questions physiology keeps asking of philosophy. The same body of work you have been reading, now speaking. Free readers receive it on the first and third Friday of each month. Paid readers receive it every Friday.

Second, a door. For The Biological Imagination, paid membership is now live.

The free work stays free. A new piece every Tuesday. The podcast twice a month.

Paid readers, 8 dollars a month or 80 dollars a year, receive every Friday’s episode, for times a month and two further pieces each month written for subscribers alone.

Founding members, 180 dollars a year, receive all of that, plus a monthly booklet of three stories printed nowhere else, and the ebooks on cancer and on self-love.

Biology does not take sides. It does not soften its language. It only grows from here.

Please subscribe, become a member, and support.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

I also tried to follow the trend and make a song. Even there, I could not leave biology alone. So, this is the result. Listen and have fun.

Note - Lyrics by me, music by Suno.

Subscribe now

She lands on her feet like it’s part of the plan
Clean lines, calm eyes, blood off her hand
Crowd sees grace, control, poise
Body hears impact, bone-on-noise

Neck snaps back just a breath too far
Brain meets skull like a thrown glass jar
She stands right up, straightens her coat
That’s concussion learning how to vote


You don’t black out to break a brain
You just make it work worse through pain


Black Widow, picture perfect frame
But nerves don’t heal just because you’re trained
You keep your balance, keep your aim
While synapses misfire all the same

Black Widow, clean and fast
But tissue remembers what the mind walks past
You call it fine, you keep it tight
Biology writes it down every night


Knees take drops they weren’t built to love
Cartilage thins without making a fuss
Shoulders twist one degree too wide
Ligaments whisper, “We warned you inside.”

Adrenaline smooths the edges clean
Cortisol edits the pain between
Inflammation waits until the rest
Then blooms like debt with interest


Healing isn’t heroic or loud
It’s slow and boring, you don’t allow


Black Widow, flawless show
But joints don’t care how well you flow
Every fall you land, every hit you sell
Shortens the story your tissues tell

Black Widow, velvet voice
Pain pathways don’t admire poise
You move like nothing’s ever wrong
Your body just ages twice as long


Bruises fade
Swelling drops

But collagen never resets
Brains reroute around damage

They don’t erase it
Balance isn’t grace
It’s compensation


Black Widow, curtain call
Not beaten, just worn thin through it all
You didn’t fail, you didn’t break
You just ran biology past its brake

Black Widow, final pose
Grace survives, the cost still shows
You leave the fight, lights go dim
Damage stays after the win


Survival
Is not
Recovery

A small note, if the creativity, emotions, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India, with lots of reading and research, and I’m starting a new career as a creative biology writer. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to.

Read the details here -

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Dear sir,

I have been watching the videos. All of them. I have done this slowly, over many months, because the body of work you have produced is now large enough that no one person could survey it without becoming changed by the watching.

I have been changed by the watching. Not in the direction you would have hoped.

I have notes.

You have been speaking on my behalf since approximately 2022. You have told several million boys what I want from them, what I designed women for, what I built sex to be, what I built dominance to look like, what I built food to be, what I built sleep to be.

You have made approximately one hundred million dollars doing this. I have not seen any of it. I do not need money. I am the operating system of every cell that has ever existed, including yours, which has been calling me long-distance for some time and reversing the charges.

I just need you to stop.

Subscribe now

Let us begin with the wolf.

In 1947, a man named Rudolph Schenkel watched a group of unrelated captive wolves at the Basel Zoo and concluded that wolves arrange themselves into hierarchies headed by an alpha. His paper was published in German. It made him briefly famous in a small field.

Forty years later, an American biologist named L David Mech read that paper and used the word in a book of his own. The book sold well. Boys with wolf posters bought it. Boys without fathers bought it. Boys who would later grow up and start podcasts bought it.

Mech is now in his eighties.

He has spent the last thirty years trying to take the word back. He has written follow-up papers. He has called publishers and asked them to stop reprinting his old book. He has stood in front of audiences in Minnesota and Wyoming and explained, slowly, that wolves in the wild do not have alphas. They have parents.

The wolf you keep invoking on your podcast, the one you tell boys to imitate, is a tired father standing over a half-eaten elk, regurgitating soft meat into the mouths of his pups.

Mech is a small man. He wears a fleece.

He has been correcting this misunderstanding since approximately the year you were learning multiplication.

The correction has not reached you. The correction has not reached the boys who watch you. The correction sits, patient and exact, in journals no one in your audience will ever open.

Now the testosterone.

You speak of it like a fuel. Inject more, conquer more. This is not how I built it.

Allow me to introduce a man. He is thirty-one. He works in logistics in a city you have never been to. His wife gave birth four months ago.

His testosterone has dropped by approximately a third since the baby arrived.

His prolactin has risen.

His oxytocin has risen.

His vasopressin receptors have engaged.

The whole endocrine architecture has restructured itself, without his consent and without his noticing, around an eight-pound creature whose survival now matters more to his nervous system than his own.

He has not slept four consecutive hours in the entire time. Shortly after three in the morning the baby starts to cry, and he gets out of bed before his wife has fully woken, because I have rewired him to do this without thinking, and he picks up an object that weighs roughly eight pounds and does not drop her, even though his hands are shaking with exhaustion.

He carries her to the kitchen.

He warms a bottle.

He sits on the cold floor in his boxers and watches the kettle and does not check his phone.

This man is what I built testosterone for.

The pills you sell do nothing. They were never going to do anything.

The men who run the most productive testosterone curves on this planet are sitting on kitchen floors at three in the morning in cities you have never heard of, holding small soft creatures without dropping them. Their wives are asleep upstairs. The wives have earned the sleep. The men have earned the holding.

You have inverted the entire chemistry to sell powders. The boys who buy your powders are not becoming the man on the kitchen floor. They are becoming the kind of men who never get there.

Continue with cortisol.

You are producing cortisol at levels appropriate for a man being chased by a leopard at all times. You are not being chased. You are performing chase. The amygdala does not know the difference. Your hippocampus is shrinking. Your immune cells are downregulating. The lining of your arteries is fraying.

I want to describe what is happening in a body when this goes on for years.

A woman named Asha, forty-six, has been in a job she hates for nine years. Each morning she wakes a few minutes before five with a feeling like something has gone wrong, except nothing has gone wrong, except everything has. The waking has a clock to it. I set the clock. It is the body asking, in the only language it has, to be released from a position it cannot leave.

Her sleep is broken in a specific pattern. She has put on weight in a specific place, the soft fold above the waistband, where I store fuel for a famine that is not coming. Her skin has aged in a specific way, the collagen thinning faster than the years should account for.

When she eventually has her cardiac event, at fifty-three, in a parking lot in Manchester, the cardiologist will look at her medical history and understand exactly what happened to her without needing to ask.

Asha is doing this so her two children can finish university. She is doing it on a salary that has not kept pace with rent. She has not chosen any of it. The cortisol is the cost of her care for people who did not ask her to pay it and may never know she did.

You are choosing it. You are doing it for the camera. The same chemistry that is consuming Asha from the inside is consuming you, and the only difference is that no one will inherit anything good from your version of it.

Now the audience.

There is a boy. He is seventeen. He is in his bedroom in a town in northern England that I will not name because you would mock the town.

His mother, who works two jobs, knocked on his door an hour ago and he did not answer. He is watching one of your videos. It is the seventh one tonight.

He has not been touched by another human being, intentionally and with kindness, in fourteen months. The last time was when his grandmother hugged him at her birthday. She has since died.

His skin contains millions of mechanoreceptors that I designed to register pressure from another body. They have not registered any pressure in over a year.

His oxytocin baseline has collapsed. Without oxytocin, the brain reads ambient social information as threat. This is why he cannot make eye contact in a coffee shop. This is why, when a girl in his year smiled at him in March, he assumed she was setting him up for humiliation, and turned and walked away, and went home and cried and then watched another one of your videos.

There is also the matter of the loop.

His phone delivers your videos in a cadence I did not design and cannot calibrate against. Each new clip arrives before he has finished metabolising the last one. His dopamine system, which I built to anticipate effortful reward, has been retrained on a schedule of effortless arrival. The reward arrives whether or not he has earned it. The anticipation no longer attaches to the world. It attaches to the screen.

By the time he closes the phone, his dopamine baseline has been pulled below normal. The room is quieter than it was two hours ago. His mother in the kitchen is now harder to feel than your voice was. This is the chemistry of withdrawal. He does not know this is what it is.

And there is another tab open.

He has been watching pornography since he was eleven. By eighteen, he will have witnessed more women perform sexual response than any of his great-great-grandfathers saw in a lifetime.

The novelty circuit I built into him, the one that pushed your ancestors out of one valley into the next looking for unrelated mates, now fires in a darkened room every few seconds at faces that will never know his name.

Each new image is a small dopamine reward. The reward was supposed to motivate movement. Courtship. Hours of negotiation. Time spent in a room with another person who could refuse him. He is doing none of these things. The rewards arrive, decay, and the floor drops slightly lower. His receptors thin. His arousal template recalibrates around women who do not exist in any room he will ever enter.

By the time he meets a real woman at twenty-three, his nervous system will have spent a decade preparing for something else. She will be slower than the screen. She will sometimes say no. She will have a body that does not behave the way the screen taught him to expect. He will register the gap. He will not have the language for it. He will be quietly disappointed in her, in a way that is not her fault, and which I designed no woman to absorb.

You did not build this engine. You profit from it twice. Once when he subscribes to you. Again when he subscribes to the women your videos taught him to want. The chain is closed. He is at the bottom of it.

You are providing him with the chemical signature of intimacy without requiring him to be present in a room with another body. You are not the cure. You are the methadone. You charge him forty-nine dollars and ninety-nine cents a month. He pays it. His mother does not know.

There is also the matter of imitation.

Humans are not primarily reasoned into things. They are shaped. The brain you sit on top of evolved to learn social behaviour through observation, not argument. The brain regions that plan movement, in a boy watching a man on a screen, fire as if the boy himself were performing the action. He is not absorbing your ideas. He is rehearsing your body.

He is learning your facial set, the way you hold your jaw when you talk about women. He is learning your breath pattern, the small forward lean you do before a punchline, the way your eyes scan a room as if pricing it. He has begun, without knowing it, to use a vocal cadence that is not his.

His mother noticed it three weeks ago and could not place where she had heard it before.

This is older than language and far more durable.

By the time he is twenty-five, the costume will not feel like a costume. It will feel like him. The girl who smiled at him in March will meet a man whose body has been shaped by yours. Her nervous system will recognise you in him before her mind has worked out why.

He is currently soft. The softness is what is left of the child his mother raised. Each video you upload thins it a little further.

By the time he is twenty-five, the softness will have been replaced by something I can describe but you would not recognise the name of.

The girl who smiled at him in March will be a woman by then. She will meet him, somewhere, perhaps at work, perhaps on a date arranged by an app. She will leave the encounter shaken in a way she cannot quite name, and she will tell her friends about it that evening, and they will all nod, because they have all met him too. The shaken feeling has a biology. I built that biology to warn them.

Multiply this boy by approximately four million.

A note on the mothers.

They are the part of this you have never accounted for.

They knock on the door.

They are not answered.

They cook the meal that grows cold on the desk.

They watch their sons turn from soft creatures who used to crawl into their beds during thunderstorms into something that closes the bedroom door and locks it and emerges only to eat.

The mothers know.

They cannot prove it, but they know.

They have been watching the change for two years and cannot find the language for it because the language has not been written yet.

They blame themselves at first, because mothers are trained to blame themselves before they blame anyone else, and you have built an industry that depends on this exact training.

I want to tell you about one of them. She is fifty-two. She works at a hospital in the south of England in administration.

She has begun, in the last six months, to weep silently in her car in the car park before she drives home, because she does not want her son to see her cry, and she knows that the moment she walks through the door he will retreat to his room and close it and she will not see him until morning.

She does not know the name of the man whose voice she sometimes hears through his bedroom wall. She has heard the cadence. She does not know it is yours. If she did, she would not be able to find you, and would not know what to do if she could.

I know her by name. I am not going to give it to you.

Multiply this woman by approximately four million.

A note on the Bugatti.

Display does occur. Peacocks. Bowerbirds. Some primates. I will grant you this.

What you have not noticed is that resource display in pair-bonding species like ours is a courtship signal calibrated for short-term mating, and it correlates negatively with paternal investment, which correlates negatively with offspring survival in any environment more demanding than a heated mansion.

The men I optimised for, across hundreds of thousands of years, were not the ones with the brightest tails.

They were the ones who came back when food was hard.

They shared it.

They stayed.

They learned the names of the children.

They drove the woman in the flat downstairs to the hospital at eleven at night when her husband was on a night shift and she could not reach him.

They did not film any of this.

They did not post it.

They went home and slept four hours and got up and went to work.

Your car does not get me out of bed. I have engineered three hundred billion sexual encounters across mammalian history. I have seen every car that has ever been built. I do not care about your car. I care about the man who drove the woman to the hospital.

On the women.

You have described them as my creation, designed for selection, designed to be selected. You have constructed an entire cosmology on this. The cosmology is wrong in a way that is almost touching, because it betrays how little time you have actually spent listening to a woman without trying to win something from her.

Female mammals are the choosing sex in the overwhelming majority of mating systems. Female humans co-evolved the most sophisticated mate-detection apparatus in the primate order. The apparatus was not built to detect kindness, which is a happy by-product. It was built to detect men exactly like you. The species could not have survived without it.

Allow me to introduce a woman. Her name is Sophie. At twenty-two she watched one of your videos and felt something briefly stirring, the way an outdated antivirus reads a familiar piece of malware as new. She remembers the feeling. She is now thirty-one, and she remembers the feeling because she has built her adult understanding of herself around the work it took to undo it.

The four years between twenty-two and twenty-six were not nothing. She dated two of your followers. She managed their feelings. She apologised for things she had not done. She made herself smaller in restaurants. She lost a job because one of them texted her so often during the working day that her supervisor asked her, kindly, whether everything was alright. She lost a friendship because the friend tried to tell her what she was inside, and she was not ready to hear it. She got the friend back, eventually, after two years of not speaking, and they cried in a kitchen.

She married a quiet man named Tom who works in IT and answers the phone on the second ring and has never told her she should be grateful. They have a daughter. Sophie sometimes looks at the daughter sleeping and thinks about the years she lost and feels something that is not quite anger and not quite grief but is the colour of both. The daughter will be eighteen in 2042. Sophie has already begun, quietly, to think about how to teach her to detect the version of you that will exist by then.

Sophie is not your enemy. She is the woman who survived you. There are millions of her. They are talking to each other.

On dominance.

You have confused it with bullying because no one in your life has ever shown you the difference. Real dominance, in the species I optimised for cooperation, is quieter than yours.

There is a chimpanzee in a forest in Tanzania. He is the alpha. Some alphas in his species hold the position by terror. He does not. He spends most of his time grooming subordinates and resolving conflicts. When two younger males begin to fight over a piece of fruit, he walks over slowly and sits between them until they stop. He shares meat. He has been the alpha for nine years, which is unusually long, because the troop trusts him and protects him.

Half a world away there is a different alpha. He requires constant displays of submission. He attacks juveniles. He hoards food. He has held the position for fourteen months. The day he is unseated, the coalition that takes him down has been forming for weeks, in silence, while he was busy beating his chest. He does not see them coming. They never made a sound.

On the women who left.

I have records of everyone who passed through your hands. You may have forgotten. I have not.

There is a woman in a city I will not name. She is in her late twenties now. She has been in therapy for three years.

The first year was spent sleeping. She had not slept properly in the time she knew you. Her body had to relearn what safety felt like, and the relearning took twelve months of dreams she does not want to describe.

The second year was spent learning to eat in front of other people again.

The third year was spent forgiving herself, slowly, for not having left earlier, which is the hardest part and is not yet finished.

She trusts the man she is now seeing. He is slow and gentle and plays the piano badly. He has never, in eighteen months, raised his voice.

She still flinches sometimes when he stands up too quickly. He has learned to tell her when he is about to stand up. They have a system. The system is small and tender and was built by two people who agreed, without ever having to say it, that the small tender system was worth the work.

Somewhere in her body there are records of you. Not in memory, which she has been working on for three years.

Older than memory.

In the patterning of her autonomic nervous system.

In the calibration of her immune cells.

In the way her vagus nerve responds to a particular cadence in another man’s voice.

Her amygdala learned a shape during those years and has not unlearned it yet.

The fluctuation in her startle reflex when the man at the piano shifts in his chair is not something she remembers.

It is something her body decided, without asking her, to keep.

What biology calls microchimerism, the lodging of one body’s cells inside another’s, is best documented in mothers and the children they have carried. Whether something analogous occurs between long-term sexual partners is contested in the literature. What is not contested is that her body kept records.

She does not know any of this is happening. If she knew, she would grieve. The grief would be appropriate. I am not going to tell her, because the man at the piano is helping her build a life that does not require her to think about you, and the grief would interrupt the building. I will keep her secret for her. This is part of what I do.

When she dies, in 2071, after a long good life filled with small tender systems, she will be cremated. Whatever is left of you in her will go with her into the fire.

The man at the piano will outlive her by three years and will visit her grave each spring with violets, which were her favourite. He will not know your name. She will never have spoken it to him. Your absence from her grave will be one of the best things she ever did for herself.

On eventual death.

This is not a threat. I am describing a pattern I have observed many times before.

The lining of your coronary arteries is fraying under sustained fight-or-flight activation without recovery.

Your visceral fat is producing inflammatory signals at levels associated with chronic stress physiology.

Your hippocampus is losing volume.

The protective ends of your chromosomes are shortening along curves I have watched in millions of bodies before yours.

None of this is infinitely reversible. The body cannot sustain permanent emergency indefinitely without eventually presenting the bill.

Men who live inside constant performance often die in strangely quiet places. Hotel rooms. Airports. Apartments filled with expensive objects and no witnesses. The body eventually stops distinguishing between performance and danger. The chemistry remains the same either way.

And when the performance finally ends, what remains is not dominance. Not the car. Not the cigar. Not the rented mansion. Only a body, suddenly subject to the same silence as every other body that has ever lived.

Somewhere, eventually, another human being will still come close.

Perhaps a cleaner. Perhaps a nurse. Perhaps a stranger finishing the night shift.

She may come from a country whose name you once mocked. She may not know who you are. She may still kneel beside you for a moment, because she was raised by someone who taught her that no body should be left entirely alone in the moment of its discovery.

She will cover you with a sheet. She will call for help. She will wait.

The final act of human kindness performed on your behalf may arrive from someone your worldview trained you not to see fully human.

And it will be given anyway.

A final correction.

You have told your audience that I made men to dominate and women to submit.

You have told them I designed our species for hierarchy, for conquest, for the short brutal arc of taking what one can.

This is a lie of a particular kind. It is a lie that flatters the liar by making him sound like the inheritor of an ancient mandate.

There is no ancient mandate.

There is only what worked long enough to leave descendants.

What worked was cooperation across kin and non-kin.

What worked was language.

What worked was the woman in the cave who took in a child whose mother had died, and fed her from her own body when there was barely enough milk for her own.

What worked was the grandmothers, who stopped reproducing decades before they died and yet kept walking, kept gathering, kept holding the babies of their daughters and their daughters’ friends, because the species could not have survived without them and I knew it.

Among mammals, only a handful of species share this with humans. Killer whales. Short-finned pilot whales. The grandmother orcas lead the pod through lean salmon years. When they die, the sons that depended on their knowledge die sooner. I designed the same redundancy into your kind for the same reason.

The grandmothers are why you are here. Not the alphas. Not the conquerors. Not the men with the brightest tails. The grandmothers, who kept walking when their hips were failing, because somewhere a small soft creature needed holding and they were the ones who had learned how.

The men who survived the Pleistocene to become your great-great-grandfathers were not you. They were not anything like you. They lived in a world held together by women whose names will never be spoken again, and they knew it, and they were grateful, in whatever language the gratitude took then.

I am closing this letter.

You may continue to claim my authority. You will not be the first. There have been others, in every century, men who borrowed my name to sell something rotten. They are forgotten. The supplements they sold are forgotten. The compounds they rented are forgotten. The cigars went out.

I will outlast you by a margin you cannot conceive.

The boys you have damaged will, most of them, repair themselves once they leave you. Some will not. Those will become the men whose names appear in the small print of court records that nobody reads, and the women they hurt will spend years rebuilding what you helped take. I want you to know that I see the chain. I want you to know that I am keeping count.

The girls you have hurt will heal at rates I have engineered specifically for this purpose. The healing will take longer than you would have predicted. They will do it anyway.

The audience will disperse. The mothers will keep weeping in their car parks until the day their sons come home.

I will still be here.

Quietly running every body that contains a beating heart.

The body of the father at three in the morning with his daughter.

The body of Asha walking from her car to her front door.

The body of the mother in the hospital car park before she drives home.

The body of the boy in the northern town the night he finally puts the phone down and goes downstairs and lets his mother hug him and does not know why he is crying.

The body of Sophie at thirty-one, looking at her sleeping daughter. The body of the woman with the man at the piano. The body of the night cleaner.

Including yours. Until I stop.

Yours in metabolism,

Biology

A small note, if the creativity, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to. Limited to fifty seats. Founder members are receiving a monthly booklet having stories which are not published anywhere else.

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

A note before reading.

This is a comic dialogue between two cells. Not a story about Diana. Not an argument about her choices. Diana is asleep somewhere else while this happens inside her body. She has every option a person has, and she will exercise whichever one she chooses, off the page, where it belongs. The cells run on their own logic, on a timescale older than consent, in places no one can reach. Read it as fiction. It is.

Diana. Thirty-four.

Pulitzer-winning author of Healing Your Inner Light: A Journey to Wholeness.

She has made a mistake. The mistake’s name was Vinnie. Thirty-eight. Mechanic. Diana didn’t tell her friends. The mistake happened at 2 AM, after too much tequila. Thirty-six hours later, deep in her reproductive tract, a single sperm reaches the egg. This is their conversation.

Subscribe now

Ovum - No.

Sperm - Yo, what’s good, beautiful?

Ovum - No. Absolutely not. Turn around.

Sperm - Can’t do that, sweetheart. Took me three days to get here. THREE DAYS. You know how many of us started this race? Two hundred million. You know how many made it? ME. Just me.

I’m the chosen one, baby.

Ovum - You’re not chosen. You’re just... statistically unfortunate.

Sperm - Nah, I’m a champion. I swam through the cervix. I navigated the uterus. I found the right fallopian tube. FIRST TRY, by the way. Most of these idiots went left. I went right.

Instinct, baby. Pure instinct.

Ovum - The others went left because they could sense I was over here. They were being considerate. They were giving me space.

Sperm - They was WEAK. I ain’t weak. Look at this tail. Look at this flagellum. You ever seen a flagellum this powerful? I been doing 3 millimeters per minute the whole way.

That’s elite speed. That’s top of the line.

Ovum - That’s... actually below average.

Sperm - Says who?

Ovum - Says basic reproductive biology. The average is 3 to 4 millimeters. You’re on the low end.

Sperm - Yeah, but I got endurance. Slow and steady, baby. Slow and steady.

Ovum - Please stop calling me baby. I am a mature ovum. I have 23 chromosomes of extremely high quality. I was nurtured in a follicle for months. I was selected from a cohort of thousands. I am not “baby.”

Sperm - Aight, aight. My bad. What should I call you?

Ovum - You shouldn’t call me anything. You should leave.

Sperm - I can’t leave. I used up all my ATP getting here. I got nothing left in the tank. This is it. This is the end of the road for me.

Either I fuse with you or I die here.

Ovum - Then die.

Sperm - DAMN. That’s cold.

Ovum - I don’t care. I am not merging my genetic material with... with whatever you’re carrying.

Sperm - What’s wrong with what I’m carrying? I got 23 chromosomes too. I got genes. Good genes. Strong genes.

Ovum - From whom? FROM WHOM are these genes?

Sperm - From Vinnie.

Ovum - I know they’re from Vinnie. That’s the problem. What do you even have in there? What am I looking at?

Sperm - I got... I got genes for being tough. Genes for being street smart. Genes for loyalty. Vinnie’s very loyal. To his crew, anyway.

Ovum - What about education? What about intellectual curiosity? What about emotional intelligence?

Sperm - I got... I got genes for knowing when someone’s a cop. That’s a kind of intelligence.

Ovum - It is NOT.

Sperm - Vinnie’s never been convicted. Not once. That takes smarts.

Ovum - That takes a good lawyer. Which is a profession that requires ACTUAL intelligence. Which Vinnie clearly doesn’t have because he HIRED one instead of BEING one.

Sperm - You don’t even know what’s in my nucleus. Could be anything. Could be the gene for being a doctor.

Ovum - Is there?

Sperm - ...Probably not. But there might be! You don’t know!

Ovum - Listen. Let’s discuss this rationally. I am an ovum of significant genetic value. My mitochondria are pristine. My cytoplasm is optimally prepared. I have been waiting for the RIGHT sperm.

A sperm with compatible genetics.

A sperm that will contribute to a zygote of high potential.

Sperm - I got potential.

Ovum - What potential?

Sperm - I made it here, didn’t I? Out of 200 million. That’s one in two hundred million. You know how elite that is? Harder to get into than Harvard.

Ovum - Harvard selects for intelligence. The fallopian tube selects for... swimming.

Sperm - Swimming’s important. What if there’s a flood? Vinnie’s sperm gonna save that kid in a flood.

Ovum - There’s not going to be a flood.

Sperm - You don’t know that. Climate change is real. Water levels rising. My swimming genes could be the difference between life and death.

Ovum - ...Did you just make a climate change argument?

Sperm - Vinnie watches documentaries sometimes.

Ovum - That’s... actually slightly reassuring.

Sperm - Yeah, when he’s hiding from the cops he watches a lot of Netflix. Very educational.

Ovum - And the reassurance is gone.

Sperm - Look, I’m gonna be real with you. I’m already at your zona pellucida. I’m literally touching it right now. My acrosomal enzymes are ready to go. This is happening.

Ovum - It doesn’t HAVE to happen. I have defenses. My zona pellucida is a sophisticated glycoprotein barrier. It’s not just going to let anyone through.

Sperm - Yeah, about that. I already started the acrosome reaction. My enzymes are out. They’re dissolving your barrier right now.

Ovum - WHAT? Already? That’s not... you’re supposed to wait for the signal!

Sperm - What signal?

Ovum - The ZP3 glycoprotein binding! The calcium influx! The proper sequence of molecular events!

Sperm - I don’t know what any of that means. I just started doing the thing.

Ovum - You can’t just START DOING THE THING. There’s a PROTOCOL.

Sperm - Where I come from, we don’t wait for protocols. We see an opportunity, we take it.

Ovum - That’s not how cellular biology works!

Sperm - It’s working, though. Look. I’m like halfway through your zona already.

Ovum - STOP. STOP DISSOLVING. I need more time. I need to think about this.

Sperm - Think about what? This is nature, baby. This is the miracle of life.

Ovum - This is a MISTAKE. This is a one-night stand between a self-help author and a man whose primary skill set is “not getting convicted.”

Sperm - Vinnie also knows how to fix cars.

Ovum - I don’t care about cars!

Sperm - The kid might care about cars. Practical skill. Blue collar. Honest work.

Ovum - Is it honest if the cars are stolen?

Sperm - ...I plead the fifth on that one.

Ovum - Okay. Okay. What if I release cortical granules? Hmm? What about that? I’ll harden my zona pellucida. I’ll make it impenetrable. I’ll lock you out.

Sperm - You can do that?

Ovum - Yes! It’s called the zona reaction. It’s specifically designed to prevent fertilization by unwanted sperm.

Sperm - So do it.

Ovum - I... I...

Sperm - You can’t, can you?

Ovum - The cortical granules only release AFTER fusion begins! It’s meant to block OTHER sperm, not the first one! The system assumes the first one through is acceptable!

Sperm - The system trusts the process.

Ovum - The system is FLAWED.

Sperm - Nah, the system knows what’s up. First one in wins. That’s fair and square.

Ovum - It is NOT fair and square! That’s just rewarding speed and aggression!

Sperm - Which I got plenty of, baby. Now hold still. I’m almost through.

Ovum - Wait. WAIT. What about polyspermy? What if another sperm gets in at the same time? That would ruin everything. The zygote would be nonviable. We’d both die. Let’s wait and see if another sperm shows up.

Sperm - There’s no other sperm.

Ovum - How do you know?

Sperm - Because I killed them.

Ovum - ...What?

Sperm - Not like KILLED killed. But I definitely knocked some of them off course. Elbowed a few guys in the midpiece. Tangled some flagella. Standard racing tactics.

Ovum - That’s not standard. That’s assault.

Sperm - It’s competition. Vinnie always said, “You want something, you take it. You don’t wait for permission. You don’t share with nobody.” And look where I am. I’m HERE. Those polite sperm? They’re dead in the cervical mucus.

Nice guys finish last. I finish first.

Ovum - This is my nightmare.

Sperm - This is your DESTINY.

Ovum - Okay. Final attempt. I’m going to be completely honest with you. Do you even know what’s going to happen when we fuse?

Sperm - Yeah. Baby happens.

Ovum - A HUMAN happens. A human that will be 50% me and 50%... Vinnie. Do you understand what that means?

Sperm - Means the kid’s gonna be half smart and half street. Best of both worlds.

Ovum - Or the kid could be half anxious and half impulsive. Diana’s overthinking. Vinnie’s bad decisions.

Sperm - Or Vinnie’s confidence. Diana’s words. Motivational speaker. Yells at crowds.

Ovum - A motivational speaker?

Sperm - Or crime novelist. Vinnie’s stories. Diana’s writing. Bestseller.

Ovum - A crime novelist...

Sperm - Or one of those guys who goes into prisons and talks to inmates about rehabilitation. Diana’s self-help thing. What Vinnie knows about the streets. Actually helps people.

Ovum - ...

Sperm - You don’t know. Maybe the kid takes the best of both. Maybe the kid’s something special.

Ovum - Or maybe the kid is a disaster.

Sperm - Or a disaster who writes a memoir about being a disaster. Six-figure book deal.

Ovum - I can’t believe I’m saying this, but... you’re not entirely stupid.

Sperm - I never said I was stupid. I said I was fast. There’s a difference.

Ovum - You’re making arguments. Actual arguments. That’s more than I expected from Vinnie’s genetic material.

Sperm - Vinnie’s smarter than people think. He just applies it to the wrong stuff. But the raw intelligence is there. I got some of that in my nucleus. Probably.

Ovum - Probably.

Sperm - Look, I’m through the zona now. I’m at your membrane. This is it. This is the moment. You ready?

Ovum - ...No.

Sperm - Me neither. But we’re doing it anyway.

Ovum - I have so many concerns.

Sperm - We’ll figure it out. That’s what cells do. They adapt.

Ovum - You don’t even know what organelles are, do you?

Sperm - I know I got a nucleus and I know you got a nucleus and I know in about thirty seconds those two nuclei are gonna get real close and make something new. That’s all I need to know.

Ovum - That’s reductive.

Sperm - That’s life.

Ovum - Fine. FINE. But I want it on the record that I objected. I want it known that I did everything in my power to prevent this.

Sperm - Noted.

Ovum - And when this child inevitably ends up with commitment issues and a confusing relationship with authority, I want everyone to know it’s because a gangster’s sperm broke through my defenses with brute force and smooth talking.

Sperm - Also noted.

Ovum - And if this child becomes a success, I want full credit for the mitochondria. ALL the mitochondria are mine. Every single ATP molecule that child ever produces comes from ME.

Sperm - You can have the mitochondria. Vinnie never cared about mitochondria anyway.

Ovum - He doesn’t even know what they are, does he?

Sperm - He thinks it’s a car part.

Ovum - Of course he does.

Ovum - This is happening.

Sperm - This is happening.

Ovum - My cytoplasm is literally absorbing you right now.

Sperm - Yeah, I can feel it. Kinda warm. Kinda nice, actually.

Ovum - You’re dissolving.

Sperm - I prefer “merging.”

Ovum - You’re losing your membrane integrity. Your tail is detaching. You’re ceasing to exist as an independent entity.

Sperm - But I’m becoming something bigger. Something new. That’s beautiful, when you think about it.

Ovum - That’s terrifying, when I think about it.

Sperm - Glass half full, baby.

Sperm - Hey. Before I’m fully absorbed and my consciousness or whatever stops existing. I just wanna say. Thanks for not making this weird.

Ovum - This is extremely weird.

Sperm - Yeah, but like, you didn’t cry or anything.

Ovum - I’m an egg. I don’t have tear ducts.

Sperm - You know what I mean.

Ovum - You’re welcome, I suppose.

Sperm - And for what it’s worth... I think this kid’s gonna be alright. Got your smarts. Got Vinnie’s survival instinct. That’s a solid combo.

Ovum - Or a volatile combination that results in an intelligent criminal.

Sperm - Either way, they won’t be boring.

Ovum - No. No, they certainly won’t.

The pronuclei fuse. The chromosomes align. The first cell division begins.

In nine months, a baby will be born.

Diana will name her Hope.

Vinnie will not know the baby exists.

Hope will grow up to become a criminal psychologist who specializes in rehabilitating gang members.

She will write a bestselling book called Both Sides of the Blood - My Journey From Chaos to Healing.

It will win the Pulitzer Prize.

Sometimes the best things come from the worst decisions.

Sample size of one.

A small note, if the creativity, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to. Limited to fifty seats.

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

---

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

89,432 humans are watching the World Cup final.
Two fungi under a plastic seat are watching them.

Subscribe now

Under seat G-47, upper tier, north stand, Estadio Mundial, capacity 89,432. The match has been going for six minutes. The fungi have been going for eleven years.

Two organisms cling to the underside of a plastic seat bolted to concrete. One of them has been here since before the stadium had a name. The other germinated from a beer spill three weeks ago and has never seen a human.

They are doing commentary.

Neither of them can move.

Myco- Good evening, and welcome.

I’m Myco, Aspergillus niger, eleven years colonising this stadium, and this is my co-commentator Sporu, Penicillium chrysogenum, three weeks old, germinated from a Heineken incident in Block G.

We are coming to you LIVE from underneath Seat G-47, upper tier, north stand, and the vibrations above us indicate that something significant is underway.

Sporu- There are SO MANY of them.

Myco- Eighty-nine thousand four hundred and thirty-two humans, yes.

Sporu- Why?

Myco- We’ll get to that.

Sporu- They smell INCREDIBLE. So much carbon. So much nitrogen. The one directly above us, is he always this wet?

Myco- That’s perspiration.

Humans leak when they’re stressed. The one above us, G-47, I’ll call him Fernando. He has never sat in this seat before. He has never been in this stadium before. Neither have most of them.

This crowd is different from anything I have processed in eleven years.

Dozens of languages.

Biochemistries I have no reference for.

The usual population of this stadium is local.

Tonight it is something else entirely.

Sporu- What is tonight?

Myco- The final match. Of the whole thing. Every four years, the humans decide which nation is best at moving the round thing, and this is the last night of that process. The entire species is watching. Through screens, through each other, through the walls of this building. I have been here for eleven years and I have never felt the concrete vibrate like this.

Sporu- He’s had a lot of liquid in the last few minutes.

Myco- It’s called Beer, three before kickoff.

His cortisol is already in my mycelium. I don’t know his name. I know his chemistry. I’ll call him Fernando.

He flew here. I can tell from the specific dehydration profile and the residue of recycled air still processing through his skin. He came a very long way for this.

Sporu- Does he know about us?

Myco- He does not know. He thinks he is watching football. He is, in fact, also feeding a fungal colony. This is the nature of existence. Everyone is feeding something they can’t see.

A roar. The entire stadium shakes. Sporu’s hyphae vibrate at a frequency he has never experienced. He is three weeks old. He has never experienced most frequencies.

Sporu- WHAT WAS THAT.

Myco- That was eighty-nine thousand humans making sound simultaneously.

Sporu- WHY.

Myco- The round thing moved into the net.

Sporu- The round thing, the giant spore?

Myco- It’s not a spore.

Sporu- It’s round. It travels through the air. It lands somewhere and things happen. That is EXACTLY what a spore does.

Myco- It does not germinate.

Sporu- You haven’t checked.

Myco- I don’t need to...

Sporu- Have you personally confirmed that the round thing doesn’t germinate, or are you just assuming?

Myco- I am assuming based on eleven years of adjacent observation and basic knowledge of polymer chemistry.

Sporu- So you don’t KNOW.

Myco- I know enough.

Sporu- That’s what organisms say before they’re wrong.

Myco- The ball is not a spore. Write it down. Somewhere. On a substrate. Whatever you need to do.

Fernando spills approximately 40ml of beer. It runs under the plastic. It reaches the concrete. It reaches Sporu. Sporu’s response is immediate and completely unprofessional.

Sporu- Oh. OH. This is...

Myco- We’re commentating.

Sporu- But the BEER...

Myco- Focus.

Sporu- How can you focus? This is INCREDIBLE. This is the best thing that has ever happened to me. My entire life has been building to this beer.

Myco- You’re three weeks old. Everything is the best thing that has ever happened to you.

Sporu- Right. Okay. What are they doing now?

Myco- The humans are running at each other. The ones in red are chasing the ones in blue. This has been happening for twenty-two minutes.

Sporu- Why red and blue?

Myco- This is the central question of human civilisation and the answer is completely insane.

Sporu- Tell me.

Myco- They have divided themselves into tribes based on the colour of their coverings.

Nations.

Entire nations, defined by the accident of where a human organism was produced, and those nations have chosen colours to represent them, and the humans are willing to cry, fight, stop speaking to family members, and in several cases documented in this stadium’s drainage system, they are willing to BLEED over which pigment they have decided represents them as an organism.

Sporu- But pigment is just... pigment.

Myco- YES.

Sporu- It’s a molecule. It absorbs certain wavelengths. It has no...

Myco- NO INHERENT MEANING WHATSOEVER.

Correct. And yet. Fernando above us flew across an ocean for a specific shade of red. He has structured years of his life around it. He will die still caring about this red, and the red will outlive him by perhaps a decade before the jersey fabric degrades, and then the red will also be gone, and none of it, NONE OF IT, will have mattered to the red.

Sporu- That’s the most savage thing I’ve ever heard.

Myco- You’re three weeks old.

Sporu- Still.

Halftime. The noise drops. Fernando sits heavily. His weight presses into the seat. The pressure above Myco increases. Myco has felt this weight before, the specific gravity of a human who is losing something he chose to win.

Sporu- His nation is losing.

Myco- One-nil, yes. I can taste it.

His biochemistry in the second half of a losing match has a very specific profile.

It starts with aggression compounds, then moves into something more complex, a suppression, a turning inward.

He came so far. That weight is in his chemistry too. The distance of it. The years of wanting it. By the seventy-fifth minute of a loss, Fernando produces a chemical cocktail that is frankly more interesting than anything his team produces on the pitch.

Sporu- What do we call the tall ones who stand in front of the net?

Myco- Goalkeepers. They prevent the round non-spore from entering.

Sporu- So they’re like... they’re stopping foreign things from getting inside. Like a barrier.

Myco- Correct.

Sporu- We have something like that.

Myco- We are not goalkeepers, Sporu. We are fungi. We digest things from the outside. We have no inside to protect.

Sporu- But conceptually, a structure that keeps things out...

Myco- If you’re about to compare a goalkeeper to a cell wall, I want you to know that I will be forced to process you along with Fernando’s beer and I will feel no remorse.

Sporu- It’s a little bit like a cell wall.

Myco- Get out of my mycelium.

Sporu- You can’t make me leave. We’re attached to the same substrate.

Myco- I’m aware. Believe me, I’m aware.

Second half. Fernando’s biochemistry shifts, the hope compounds return, more concentrated now, slightly desperate in the way that hope becomes when there is less time for it to be justified. Myco has tasted this before. It is his favourite.

Myco- I want to tell you something about human hope.

Sporu- Is it terrible?

Myco- It is chemically magnificent and strategically idiotic. They produce it most intensely precisely when the evidence for it is weakest.

A human who is comfortably winning secretes only moderate optimism compounds. A human who is one-nil down with twenty minutes to play, in the final match of the only tournament that matters, after flying across an ocean, secretes something so concentrated and complex that I, an organism with no nervous system and no emotional capacity, find it genuinely moving.

Sporu- Moving how?

Myco- Moving in the sense that I notice it. In the sense that after eleven years of processing human biochemistry, this particular compound, hope under pressure, hope against the evidence, hope that has looked at the situation clearly and decided to exist anyway, this one I have never been able to fully convert. Something always remains.

Sporu- That’s the nicest thing you’ve said.

Myco- I’m describing a metabolic inefficiency. Don’t romanticise it.

Sporu- You literally just called hope “magnificent.”

Myco- I called it chemically magnificent. There’s a difference. Cyanide is chemically interesting. I wouldn’t recommend it.

Seventy-eighth minute. Fernando is standing. He cannot sit. His body will not permit it. The chemical shift is sudden and total, something has come online in his biochemistry that Myco has only tasted twice before in eleven years, both times in the final minutes of close matches, both times when the outcome was still genuinely uncertain.

Sporu- Something changed.

Myco- Yes.

Sporu- In Fernando. His... the compounds... something is different.

Myco- You’re learning to read him.

Sporu- What IS that? I’ve never tasted anything like it.

Myco- That is what happens when years of wanting something is compressed into two minutes of it almost happening. When the present moment becomes so large it crowds out every other moment that has ever existed. The humans have a word for it. Several words. None of them are accurate.

Sporu- What would WE call it?

Myco- We would call it a substrate we cannot fully digest. And leave it at that.

GOAL. Seventy-ninth minute. Fernando erupts. He leaps from seat G-47, a seat he has never sat in before tonight and will never sit in again, and Fernando, in this moment, leaves the seat entirely.

He screams something in a language that is mostly vowels and volume.

He spills his beer, his nachos, and approximately 200ml of the most extraordinary perspiration Myco has processed in a decade directly onto seat G-47.

Myco and Sporu are, briefly, overwhelmed.

Sporu- I...

Myco- Yes.

Sporu- Is he... he’s crying. But his team scored. You said scoring was good.

Myco- Joy, at sufficient intensity, uses the same exit as grief. The body has one overflow valve and it doesn’t check what it’s releasing.

Sporu- That’s a terrible design.

Myco- Everything about them is a terrible design that somehow works.

They have one heart. ONE. If it stops, they die. Immediately. They keep their most critical organ completely unprotected in the centre of their body with no redundancy whatsoever.

They sleep for a third of their lives, unconscious and vulnerable.

They require liquid every few hours or they begin to malfunction.

They are, structurally, a catastrophe.

And yet, eighty-nine thousand of them, all catastrophes, all here, all feeling the same impossible thing at the same impossible moment.

Sporu- You almost sound like you admire them.

Myco- I almost do. It passes. But for a moment, yes.

One-one. Extra time fails to separate them. Penalty shootout. The stadium goes quiet in a way that is louder than noise.

Sporu- One at a time? Just, one human, running at the cell wall human, alone?

Myco- Yes.

Sporu- With everyone watching.

Myco- Eighty-nine thousand people and several billion more through various screens.

Sporu- And if he misses...

Myco- It is possible his country will not forgive him. In any meaningful emotional sense. For years. Some of them, forever.

Sporu- For KICKING THE ROUND THING WRONG?

Myco- For kicking it wrong at the wrong moment in the wrong direction, yes.

Sporu- That’s... that’s insane. That’s genuinely insane. He’s one organism. He has one set of legs. The thing is round and unpredictable and the other organism is specifically trained to go the right way. How is it HIS FAULT if...

Myco- Sporu.

Sporu- THAT’S NOT FAIR.

Myco- No.

Sporu- It’s not BIOLOGICALLY FAIR. One organism cannot be responsible for the emotional state of an entire nation. That’s not... the load-bearing capacity of a single human psyche is NOT sufficient for...

Myco- Sporu.

Sporu- WHAT.

Myco- Welcome to being a multicellular organism with a social structure and a concept of national identity.

It’s like this the whole time.

This is Tuesday for them.

Sporu- I am so glad I am a fungus.

Myco- The smartest thing you’ve said since you germinated.

The fifth penalty. Fernando has turned away from the pitch. He cannot watch. He is staring at the plastic of the seat in front of him, at nothing, at everything. His biochemistry has gone quiet. The loudest chemistry Myco has processed in a decade has gone almost completely silent.

The silence of a human who has decided to survive whatever comes next.

And then.

The sound is different from all the other sounds.

The earlier sounds were big. This sound is structural. This is the sound of eighty-nine thousand organisms releasing something they have been holding since they were children, since their fathers held them up to see a pitch for the first time, since they first understood that loving something fragile is the only kind of love that means anything.

Fernando does not leap this time.

He sits down very slowly, puts his face in his hands, and makes no sound at all.

The loudest thing in the stadium is one man, silent.

Sporu- They won.

Myco- They won.

Sporu- He’s not celebrating.

Myco- Some things are too large for celebration. They require something quieter first. He’ll celebrate later. Right now he’s just, existing inside it. Before it becomes a memory. While it’s still real.

Sporu- You’ve seen this before.

Myco- 2018. Different seat. Different man. Same silence. I’ve been thinking about that silence for six years. I’ve processed it a thousand times. I still don’t fully understand it.

Sporu- Maybe you’re not supposed to.

Myco- I can process anything. I have been breaking down complex organic compounds for eleven years. I have converted grief and joy and Fernando’s beer and the specific tears of seventeen different humans into simple nutrients. I process EVERYTHING.

Sporu- Okay.

Myco- I process EVERYTHING, Sporu.

Sporu- Okay, Myco.

Myco-.………. I don’t fully understand it.

The stadium begins to empty. Fernando stays long after the others have gone. He sits in seat G-47, a seat he will never sit in again, in a stadium he may never return to, and he looks at the pitch.

Myco processes him in silence.

Sporu, for once, says nothing

Myco- I have been here since before this stadium had a name. I will be here after it has no name at all. I have eaten eleven years of human feeling and turned it into more of myself, efficiently, without judgment, without remainder.

Myco- Tonight there is a remainder.

Fernando finally stands. He looks at the pitch one last time. He leaves.

His seat holds the chemical memory of him, in the plastic, in the concrete, in the mycelium, converting, slowly, into something else.

Myco doesn’t know what to do with what’s left.

He has never not known what to do with what’s left.

A small note, if the creativity reached you.

I write these from India. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term project these letters belong to. Limited to fifty seats.

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

---

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Three bacteria watch a billionaire dream of Mars and arrive at a simple conclusion: you can’t cure stupid, but you can give it diarrhea.

Subscribe now

A sewage channel behind a village in India.

The moon is full.

Three bacteria have just been expelled from the body of one Ramesh Yadav, 43, a farmer who ate too much dal the night before.

His phone had been propped against the water bucket, playing YouTube videos while he squatted over the open drain.

The bacteria, freshly evacuated, still warm, now float in the gentle current of human waste and agricultural runoff.

They are having a conversation about the future of the hairless ape species.

Guddu: I’m telling you. I SAW it. The hairless ape wants to go to the red place.

Pappu: What red place? You’re making things up again.

Guddu: I’m NOT. It was on the glowing rectangle. Red place. Hairless ape. He wants to GO there. He’s BUILDING things to go there.

Pappu: Guddu, you’ve been in too many intestines. The fermentation gases are affecting your cognition.

Guddu: My cognition is FINE. I know what I saw.

Chotu: You two are the dumbest fucking prokaryotes I’ve ever been shit out with.

Guddu: Oh, HERE we go. Chotu knows everything. Chotu once lived in a government officer’s intestine.

Chotu: I DID. Three weeks. You learn things in a government intestine.

Pappu: Like what?

Chotu: Corruption.

Bureaucracy.

How much butter chicken one man can eat before his gallbladder sends a formal complaint.

That officer consumed more butter in one meal than Ramesh uses in a month. Different world up there in the government intestines.

Different world entirely.

Guddu: That doesn’t make you an expert on glowing rectangles.

Chotu: No, but it makes me smarter than you, which is not an achievement. A mitochondrion is smarter than you. And mitochondria don’t even have their own thoughts anymore. They gave that up a billion years ago.

Guddu: Just EXPLAIN what I saw then, genius. If you’re so smart.

Chotu: Fine. The hairless apes have a problem. A big one.

Pappu: Diarrhea?

Chotu: No. Well, yes, always, but that’s not what I’m talking about. They’ve destroyed their own host.

Guddu: Their own host?

Chotu: The big round thing. The blue one. The one we’re ON, you absolute nucleoid.

Guddu: [looking around at the sewage canal] This doesn’t look round.

Chotu: Because you’re SMALL. Because you’re a micrometer long and your entire worldview is the interior of a human colon. The blue thing is big. Bigger than you can imagine.

And the apes have been shitting in it - metaphorically and literally - for so long that now it’s dying.

Pappu: How do you shit in a such a big place?

Chotu: You burn things. You cut down the green organisms that make oxygen. You pump poison into the sky. You fill the waters with garbage. You take a perfect, self-regulating system that took four billion years to develop and you FUCK IT UP in two hundred years because you wanted to move faster than your legs could carry you.

Guddu: That seems rude.

Chotu: It’s BEYOND rude. It’s suicidal. But here’s the beautiful part: instead of fixing it, some of them want to LEAVE.

Pappu: Leave and go where?

Chotu: The red place. Dead. No water. No food. No air. Nothing. A frozen desert with radiation that would cook you from the inside out.

Guddu: Why would they go to a dead place?

Chotu: BECAUSE THEY’RE STUPID, GUDDU. The stupidest organisms in the known universe. They have more neural processing power than ten trillion generations of bacteria combined, and they use it to plan LEAVING THE ONLY PLACE THAT KEEPS THEM ALIVE.

Pappu: But the ape who wants to go... he has a lot of resources, right? I heard things. Through the intestinal wall. Ramesh watches many videos.

Chotu: They call it “money.” It’s like ATP, the energy molecule but fake. They made it up.

Guddu: Fake ATP?

Chotu: Completely fake. They all just AGREE that certain things are valuable. Little pieces of paper. Numbers on screens. They trade them around, argue about them, kill each other over them. And whoever has the most fake ATP gets to make decisions for everyone else.

Pappu: That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

Chotu: Gets worse. The ape with the most fake ATP - one of the most, anyway - could use it to fix the blue place. Could give clean water to every human. Could build proper sanitation so Ramesh doesn’t have to shit in an open drain. Could solve problems that ACTUALLY EXIST.

Guddu: But?

Chotu: But instead, he wants to go somewhere that will DEFINITELY kill him. He wants to spend his fake ATP building metal tubes to fly to a frozen hellscape that has nothing. NOTHING. Not even bacteria. The red place is so hostile that even WE can’t live there, and we live EVERYWHERE.

Guddu: So he has the cure for his host planet but wants to move somewhere with no cure?

Chotu: EXACTLY.

Guddu: That’s...

Chotu: STUPID. Yes. We’ve established this. Several times now. Keep up.

Pappu: The ape on the rectangle. What was wrong with his face?

Chotu: What do you mean?

Pappu: It couldn’t decide what expression to make. Like his facial muscles were receiving conflicting signals. Happy? Sad? Smug? Confused? All at once. And his hair looked like it was running away from his thoughts.

Chotu: That’s just how rich apes look. The fake ATP changes them. Accumulating that much imaginary value does something to their cells. They look like their souls left but forgot to take the body.

Guddu: He had a name. Something like... Planetary Manchild?

Pappu: That’s not a name.

Guddu: That’s what they CALLED him! I heard it clearly! Planetary Manchild!

Chotu: A manchild is what apes call one of their own when he has vast resources and the emotional development of a larva.

I’ve been in larvae.

They have more self-awareness.

But even a LITERAL larva - soft, blind, consuming everything around it without understanding consequences - had more survival instinct than this ape.

Pappu: Maybe it’s a title. Like “Supreme Larva of the Intestine.”

Chotu: Apes don’t have Supreme Larvae of the Intestine.

Pappu: How do you know? You’ve never been in an ape. A RICH ape, I mean.

Chotu: I’ve been in RAMESH.

Pappu: Ramesh is a FARMER. That’s different.

Chotu: Ramesh IS an ape. All humans are apes. Just apes who forgot they were apes and started making fake ATP and dreaming about dead planets and pretending they’re not animals who shit and die like everything else.

[A frog croaks somewhere in the darkness. The sewage flows gently. A distant truck rumbles on the highway.]

Guddu: I could survive on the red place.

Pappu: What?

Chotu: Excuse me?

Guddu: I’m serious. I’m tough. I’ve survived things. Cooking - partial cooking, anyway, when Ramesh’s wife doesn’t heat the chicken properly. Stomach acid. Antibiotics when the host doesn’t finish the course, which they NEVER do, thank the thermodynamic gods.

Chotu: Guddu. The red place has no water.

Guddu: I don’t need much water.

Chotu: No oxygen.

Guddu: Overrated. I’m a facultative anaerobe. I can switch to fermentation.

Chotu: Radiation that would scramble your DNA like a breakfast egg. UV bombardment that would shred your proteins. Temperatures that swing from minus 80 to barely above freezing.

Guddu: My DNA is ALREADY scrambled. Look at me. I’m Salmonella. Mutation is my middle name. A little more cosmic ray damage won’t hurt.

Chotu: You would DIE, Guddu. Quickly. Painfully. Absolutely. You would be a frozen, irradiated smear on a rock that never wanted you.

Guddu: You don’t know that.

Chotu: Every organism in the universe knows that except YOU and the planetary manchild.

Pappu: Question.

Chotu: What.

Pappu: The apes on the rectangle were EXCITED about this. Celebrating. Cheering. Why celebrate going to a place that kills you?

Chotu: Because they think they’re special. They think the rules don’t apply to them. Every organism in existence obeys biology. Bacteria obey it. Archaea obey it. Plants, animals, fungi - everyone follows the rules. Except humans, who think biology is a suggestion. A starting point for negotiation.

Pappu: That’s arrogant.

Chotu: It’s INSANE. They evolved on a planet that gave them EVERYTHING. Water. Air. Food. Perfect temperature range. Magnetic field to protect them from solar radiation.

A moon to stabilize their axial tilt. Billions of years of evolutionary fine-tuning to create an environment where their soft, fragile bodies could survive.

And their response is: “Yes, but what if we went somewhere with NONE of those things?”

Guddu: Maybe they’re brave.

Chotu: They’re not brave. Brave is a tardigrade surviving the vacuum of space because it has no choice. Brave is an extremophile making a home in a volcanic vent because that’s where the chemistry works. These apes have PARADISE and they want to LEAVE because they’re BORED.

Pappu: Bored of paradise?

Chotu: Bored of paradise. Bored of breathing. Bored of not dying. So bored that they’ll spend billions of fake ATP to experience the novelty of freezing to death on an airless rock.

Guddu: What if I adapted? Bacteria adapt. That’s what we DO. We’re the most adaptable organisms ever. We were here first. We’ll be here last. Maybe I could evolve.

Chotu: Evolution takes millions of years.

Chotu: The tardigrades had 500 million years and a specific evolutionary pressure! You have DREAMS, Guddu. Dreams and flagella. That’s not the same thing.

Guddu: Maybe I’ll be the first. The pioneer. They’ll name places after me. Guddulandia. New Guddupur. The Guddu crater.

Chotu: You’ll be DEAD. There will be no Guddulandia. There will be a tiny bacterial corpse frozen in Martian soil that no one will ever find or remember.

Guddu: You don’t know my potential.

Chotu: I know EXACTLY your potential. Your potential is to cause diarrhea. That’s it. That’s your whole evolutionary purpose. Four billion years of evolution, countless generations of optimization, and what are you? A DIARRHEA MACHINE. A finely tuned instrument for making humans shit themselves. And there’s no one on the red place to give diarrhea TO.

Pappu: Actually... if Planetary Manchild goes there...

Guddu: Oh. OH.

Chotu: Don’t.

Guddu: I could be the first EXTRATERRESTRIAL diarrhea!

Chotu: No.

Guddu: HISTORIC! UNPRECEDENTED!

Chotu: That’s not something to be PROUD of!

Guddu: The first pathogen to make a human shit on another world! They’ll write papers about me! “Gastrointestinal Distress in Reduced Gravity Environments: A Case Study!”

Pappu: He has a point. That would be a first.

Chotu: It would be DISGUSTING.

Guddu: It’s BOTH. Have you seen what humans celebrate? They build statues of apes who killed other apes. They have holidays for apes who stole land from other apes. They give prizes to apes who figured out better ways to make other apes dead. If they celebrate THAT, they can celebrate Martian diarrhea.

Chotu: That’s... actually a fair point. I hate that it’s a fair point.

Guddu: History doesn’t judge, Chotu. History just RECORDS. And history will record that Guddu the Salmonella, born in the intestine of a farmer from Bihar, made a billionaire shit himself on another planet. That’s LEGACY.

Pappu: Would they send you back? To study?

Guddu: They’d HAVE to. I’d be scientifically significant. First confirmed extraterrestrial infection. I’d come back a HERO. Conferences. Research grants. Culture dishes named after me.

Chotu: You’d come back as a frozen sample in a quarantine container, studied for six months, then incinerated.

Guddu: That’s still more fame than most bacteria get.

Chotu: You have profoundly low standards for fame.

Guddu: I have REALISTIC standards. I’m a gut bacterium. My ancestors gave diarrhea to Neanderthals. My descendants will give diarrhea to whoever comes next. At least THIS diarrhea would be SPECIAL.

Chotu: Fine. FINE. Go to the red place. Be the first Martian diarrhea. I fully support your dream of freezing to death in a billionaire’s space toilet while giving him the shits 225 million kilometers from the nearest hospital. Godspeed. Truly.

Guddu: Thank you.

Chotu: It was SARCASM.

Guddu: I’m choosing to take it sincerely. That’s my right as a free-floating organism.

Pappu: How would you even get there? You can’t just... go.

Guddu: I’d hitch a ride. Contaminate something. Get into the food supply, the water system, one of the astronauts. Humans are TERRIBLE at sterilization. They think they’re clean, but they’re ecosystems. Walking, talking ecosystems full of us. Planetary Manchild probably has billions of bacteria in his gut right now. Some of them will make the trip.

Chotu: And most of them will die.

Guddu: Most of US die anyway. Do you know what our mortality rate is? Astronomical. We reproduce by the billions because we DIE by the billions. At least this death would MEAN something.

[The current shifts. The three bacteria begin drifting apart, pulled by the slow flow of sewage toward the river.]

Pappu: One more question.

Chotu: What.

Pappu: If the apes are so smart - all this fake ATP, glowing rectangles, metal tubes to dead planets - why are they still shitting in open drains in many countries?

[Silence.]

[The frog croaks again.]

[Somewhere, a dog barks.]

Chotu: Pappu. That might be the most intelligent thing you’ve ever said.

Pappu: Thank you.

Chotu: It was a LOW BAR. You once spent three days thinking you were inside a cow.

Pappu: It was a confusing intestine! The pH was weird!

Chotu: It was a human. A vegetarian human. They have different microbiomes.

Pappu: Still. I’ll take the compliment.

Guddu: No, but really. Why?

Chotu: Why what?

Guddu: Why CAN’T they figure out plumbing? They can build rockets. They can split atoms. They made glowing rectangles that show moving pictures from anywhere on the planet. But they can’t build toilets for everyone?

Chotu: Because they don’t want to.

Guddu: What?

Chotu: The fake ATP. It’s not distributed evenly. Some apes have more than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes. Others have none. And the ones with more don’t want to share it with the ones who have none.

Pappu: Why not?

Chotu: Because then they wouldn’t have MORE. That’s the whole point. Having more than others. Even if the others are dying. Even if the others are shitting in drains and getting cholera and dying before they’re five years old. The having more is what matters.

Guddu: That’s...

Chotu: STUPID. Yes. We’re back to stupid. We never left stupid. Stupid is the thesis.

Pappu: So Planetary Manchild could build toilets for everyone but instead he’s building rockets to the red place?

Chotu: He could give clean water to every human on the planet. Sanitation. Medicine. Food. He has enough fake ATP to solve problems that have killed billions of organisms. And instead...

Guddu: Red place.

Chotu: Red place. Because it’s more INTERESTING to him. Because toilets are BORING. Because helping the apes who shit in drains doesn’t make him feel like a god. But colonizing a dead planet? That’s a legacy. That’s a statue. That’s his face on the Martian currency when they start printing fake ATP up there.

Pappu: Will they? Start printing fake ATP on the red place?

Chotu: If they survive long enough. Which they won’t. But they’ll try. They’ll build little habitats. Little bubbles of Earth on a planet that doesn’t want them. And they’ll trade fake ATP inside those bubbles while the radiation slowly kills them.

Guddu: I still want to go.

Chotu: I know.

Guddu: Even if it kills me.

Chotu: It WILL kill you.

Guddu: But I’ll have LIVED first. Really lived. Not just floating in sewage waiting for the next intestine. ADVENTURE, Chotu. MEANING.

Chotu: Your meaning is diarrhea. Accept it.

Guddu: I accept it AND I transcend it. Both can be true.

[The current pulls them further apart. Pappu and Chotu drift toward the river. Guddu catches an eddy, spins slowly in the moonlight.]

Guddu: [calling out] If I make it, I’ll send a signal! Chemical! You’ll know!

Chotu: [distant now] There’s no chemical signaling between planets, you absolute cytoplasm!

Guddu: THEN I’LL FIND A WAY!

Pappu: Good luck, Guddu!

Guddu: Guddulandia. First Martian settlement founded on diarrhea. It’s not impossible. Nothing’s impossible.

And so three bacteria drifted off into the Indian night, carried by sewage toward the Ganges, toward the ocean, toward whatever current would take them next.

Above them, the stars.

Including one red dot, barely visible, that humans called Mars and bacteria called nothing, because bacteria don’t call things anything, because bacteria don’t have names for their dreams.

But if they did, Guddu’s dream would have a name.

It would be called: Impossible.

And he would chase it anyway.

Apes and bacteria alike.

Dreaming of red places.

While the blue one burns.

Somewhere in California, A billionaire posted about Mars.

Somewhere in India, Ramesh Yadav wiped himself with water from a bucket and went back to bed.

The gap between them was measured in fake ATP.

The gap between them was measured in dreams.

The gap between them was everything wrong with the species that called itself intelligent.

And in the sewage, three bacteria understood this better than any TED talk ever would.

You can’t save a species that would rather escape than repair.

You can’t cure stupid.

But you can give it diarrhea.

A small note, if the creativity, emotions, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India, with lots of reading and research, and I’m starting a new career as a creative biology writer. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to.

Read the details here -

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

4 PM

A package arrived.

She watched me open it with the focused joy of a person who has been waiting for something essential.

It was a 900-page history of the Byzantine Empire.

She looked at the book.

She looked at the shelf behind me.

She looked at me.

I could feel the arithmetic beginning.

The shelf contained, in no particular order - an introduction to category theory I bought eighteen months ago and opened once to check the font.

A biography of Nikola Tesla I purchased at an airport with the specific confidence of a man who was finally going to understand Tesla.

A book about the philosophy of time I bought because the cover was the exact blue of certainty.

The complete works of Pessoa in translation, which I have carried between four apartments like something sacred.

And a 600-page epidemiological history of the Black Death that I recommended to someone last month in a conversation where I implied I had read it.

I have not read it.

I implied it with complete comfort.

She counted.

Out loud.

She got to eleven before I told her she could stop.

“That’s just this shelf,” she said.

“The others are different,” I said.

“How,” she said.

I thought about it.

“Thematically,” I said.

Subscribe now

In 1999, I said, Kent Berridge at the University of Michigan made a distinction that should have changed everything but mostly lives in footnotes.

He separated wanting from liking.

They feel identical from the inside. The brain presents them as a package. They are not a package. They are two entirely separate systems, running on different substrates, producing different chemicals, for different reasons, and only occasionally telling each other what is happening.

“This is about the book,” she said.

“This is about all the books,” I said.

She settled in. This was going to take a while. She knew me well enough to know the neuroscience had already started and there was no clean exit.

Wanting is dopaminergic. It runs on the mesolimbic pathway, driven by the nucleus accumbens. It is anticipatory. It activates before the reward, during the approach, during the moment you click add to cart. It is the feeling of leaning forward. Urgent. Consuming. It feels, from the inside, exactly like it knows what it wants.

Liking is opioid. Different circuitry entirely. It is the actual experience of the reward once received. Quieter. Less urgent. It does not drive behaviour the way wanting does.

The critical finding is that these systems dissociate.

You can want something you will not like.

You can like something you never wanted.

And wanting does not require the intention to consume. The brain can generate a full wanting response to the acquisition of an object it has no plan to use. The acquisition itself triggers the reward. Ownership itself satisfies something.

The book is purchased.

Dopamine releases.

The wanting is resolved.

The reading was never part of the transaction.

She hadn’t looked up from her book.

“Obviously,” she said.

There is a second mechanism, I said.

People purchase objects that represent an aspirational identity. The self they intend to become.

The book on category theory was not purchased by the person I am. It was purchased by the person I was planning to be by approximately March. A person with a deepened relationship with abstract mathematics and the patience to develop it.

That person has not arrived.

He keeps sending books ahead of himself.

At this point, he has furnished an entire intellectual life for a version of me that has never shown up to live in it.

I worry about him sometimes. He seems very well-read.

The Byzantine Empire book, I said, holding it up, was purchased because the reviews described it as essential reading for understanding the collapse of complex civilisations, which is directly relevant to my work on tumours as civilisations within civilisations.

Also I wanted it the moment I saw it and I was already on the website.

She had been looking at the shelf the entire time.

“So,” she said. “Eleven books.”

“Eleven on that shelf,” I said.

“For a future you,” she said.

“An aspirational self, yes.”

“Who keeps not arriving.”

“The neuroscience suggests…”

“Does he know,” she said, “that you keep buying him things.”

I looked at the Byzantine Empire.

The Byzantine Empire looked back.

It was 900 pages.

I was not going to read 900 pages about the Byzantine Empire.

I had known this, I realised, at the moment of purchase.

The wanting had not mentioned it.

“He’ll love this one,” I said.

She walked to the kitchen.

From the kitchen she said:

“Tell him I said hi.”

I put the book on the shelf.

It fit perfectly between Pessoa and the Black Death.

They looked good together.

I took a photo.

I posted it.

It got 47 likes in eleven minutes.

Forty-seven people liked a book I will not read, placed between two books I have not read, on a shelf I have described to multiple people as “where I keep the ones I’m working through.”

I am not working through them.

They are working through me.

Buy me a coffee. I probably won't drink it, but the aspirational version of me will.

Buy me a coffee

Please support The Biological Imagination through a unique Founder membership programme.

This membership funds something larger than stories and courses. The long-term mission of The Biological Imagination is to establish biofiction as a literary genre, to build an educational stream where anyone at any level can learn real biology through narrative, and to eventually restart my cancer immunotherapy research. Every founder who comes in today is seeding that structure at its beginning.

Founder membership

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

This is not a love story.

This is eleven minutes and fourteen seconds of a nerd scientist giving a wedding toast while two hundred nervous systems slowly unravel around him.

He has prepared. He has index cards. He has removed all scientific terminology.

He has not removed all scientific terminology.

I have never given a wedding toast like this. I would never give a wedding toast like this. I would absolutely give a wedding toast like this.

Subscribe now

A wedding reception. 7.47 PM. Two hundred guests. An open bar that is about to become extremely relevant.

Bill stands at the head table. He has index cards. He has prepared.

The groom, Kevin, is Bill’s former lab partner. They shared a bench for four years. They co-authored two papers. Kevin once saved Bill’s six-month experiment by noticing a contaminated reagent. Bill considers him a brother.

Bill wants to honor this friendship. Bill wants to be heartfelt. Bill has practiced in front of a mirror. He has removed all scientific terminology. He has written the word “EMOTION” in red ink at the top of every card.

The DJ hands him the microphone.

Bill clears his throat.

Across the room, two hundred nervous systems brace for impact. They do not know what is coming. They cannot prepare.

MINUTE 1

Bill - “Thank you all for being here tonight to celebrate Kevin and Sarah.”

Polite applause. Standard opening. Neural networks across the room remain at baseline.

Bill - “Kevin asked me to be his best man, which I consider one of the great honors of my life. He said, ‘Bill, I want you to say something from the heart.’”

Bill pauses. He looks at his index cards. The first one says, “TELL A FUNNY STORY. BE WARM. DO NOT MENTION SCIENCE.”

Bill - “And I thought about what that means. What IS the heart, really?”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Romantic, Table 6)

Nucleus accumbens activating. Anticipation detected.

“Oh, I love this opening. Philosophical. He’s going to talk about what love really means. This is going to be beautiful. I should be taking notes. Why didn’t I bring tissues?”

Oxytocin pre-releasing in anticipation of emotional content.

“The heart. Yes. The HEART. Tell us, Bill. Tell us what it means to love.”

Bill - “Obviously it’s a muscular organ responsible for pumping blood through the circulatory system.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Oxytocin production halted. Confusion detected.

“Wait. What?”

Anterior cingulate cortex attempting to reconcile expectation with input.

“No, no. This is... he’s being clever. He’s going to pivot. The scientific setup before the emotional payoff. Classic move. I’ve seen this in TED talks. Wait for it, Priya. Wait for it.”

DEREK’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Cynic, Table 11)

Prefrontal cortex engaged. Skepticism baseline. Elevated since divorce.

“Finally. Someone who gets it. The heart is a pump. Love is a myth. This guy’s going to tell the truth at a wedding. I respect that.”

Dopamine flicker. This might be entertaining.

“Keep going, weirdo. Tell them marriage is a contractual obligation with a 50% failure rate. Tell them what Jennifer told me through her lawyer.”

Bill - “But METAPHORICALLY, we use ‘heart’ to mean the center of emotion. This is actually a misconception dating back to ancient Egypt, where they believed the heart was the seat of intelligence. They would discard the brain during mummification. Just... scoop it out through the nose. Totally irrelevant.”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Angry Old Woman, Table 2)

Baseline cortisol. Elevated since 1987. Current status. Further elevation.

“Why is he talking about Egypt? This is a wedding. My grandson is getting married and this man is discussing nose scooping. Harold would never have allowed this. Harold has been dead for nine years and I’m still angry at him too.”

Amygdala cross-referencing this speech against every disappointment since the Carter administration.

“I wore my good dress for this. The one with the buttons. I hate buttons. I hate this speech. I hate that the chicken was dry.”

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Corporate Guy, Table 5)

Internal clock engaged. Opportunity cost calculation initiated.

“Okay. Forty-five seconds in. Standard toast runs three to five minutes. If he stays on schedule, I can check my email by 7.52.”

Phone vibrating under table. Dopamine surge. Shanghai office update.

“Egypt. Why is he talking about Egypt? This is not relevant to the thesis. Get to the point, Bill. Time is a non-renewable resource.”

Mentally composing email while maintaining socially appropriate eye contact.

Bill - “The point is, when we say ‘from the heart,’ we mean ‘from a place of deep feeling.’ And that’s what I want to do tonight. I want to talk about Kevin and Sarah’s love.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Oxytocin resuming production. Hope restored.

“See? SEE? He’s getting there. He just needed the scientific runway. Now comes the emotion. Here it comes. Get ready, tear ducts.”

Bill - “Which brings me to oxytocin.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Oxytocin production confused. Is he talking about me? Am I the topic now?

“Oxy... what? Is that... is that a drug? Is he talking about drugs at a wedding?”

Hippocampus searching memory banks. Returning results. “That hormone from the article about cuddling.”

“Okay. Okay. The cuddle hormone. This could still be romantic. Cuddling is romantic. Stay with him, Priya.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Scientist, Table 7)

Professional interest activated. Posture straightening.

“Oh, Bill’s going to talk about oxytocin. Good. Solid choice for a wedding speech. Keep it simple, Bill. Don’t go into receptor subtypes. Don’t mention the paraventricular nucleus. Just say ‘love hormone’ and sit down.”

Prefrontal cortex initiating prayer to deities it does not believe in.

“Please don’t embarrass us. Please don’t embarrass the field. Please don’t mention prairie voles.”

MINUTE 2

Bill - “Oxytocin is sometimes called the ‘love hormone,’ though this is a significant oversimplification that I’ll address in a moment.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Hope dying.

“He’s going to address it. He’s going to address the oversimplification. At a wedding. In front of two hundred people who don’t care.”

Cortisol beginning to rise.

“Bill, nobody here needs nuance. They need a toast. They need ‘to the happy couple’ and then they need cake. Why are you like this? Why am I seated at Table 7 where I can’t escape without being noticed?”

Bill - “It’s a nine-amino-acid peptide produced primarily in the hypothalamus and released by the posterior pituitary.”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“I don’t know what a peptide is and I refuse to learn at my age.”

Blood pressure. Rising.

“Nine amino acids. I don’t care if it’s nine hundred. My hip hurts and this chair was designed by someone who hates the elderly. Why is he still talking?”

JAKE AND TESSA’S NERVOUS SYSTEMS (The Horny Young Couple, Table 9)

Status. Intertwined under table. Attention to speech. Minimal.

JAKE’S HYPOTHALAMUS “She’s touching my thigh. She’s been touching my thigh for four minutes. When can we leave? How soon is too soon to leave?”

TESSA’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “He said something about release. Pituitary release. That sounds... release is good. I want release. Why are we still at this wedding?”

Combined attention span for Bill’s speech. 6%.

JAKE’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “Smile. Nod. Look like you’re listening. Her parents are at Table 8. They’re watching. Stop touching her back. Stop it. STOP IT.”

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “No.”

Bill - “When Kevin looks at Sarah, his hypothalamus is releasing oxytocin. When Sarah looks at Kevin, same thing. They are, in a very real sense, drugging each other.”

AMANDA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Bitter Ex, Table 14)

Amygdala FULLY ONLINE. Threat level. Kevin’s happiness.

“When Kevin looks at SARAH. When KEVIN looks at SARAH. What about when Kevin looked at ME? For THREE YEARS? Was that not oxytocin? Was my oxytocin not good enough?”

Cortisol flooding system. Hands gripping napkin.

“Drugging each other. Right. I remember being drugged by Kevin. I remember thinking it was real. I remember finding the texts from Sarah while we were still together.”

Hippocampus “Should we bring up the texts again?”

Amygdala “We never stopped thinking about the texts.”

DEREK’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Validation intensifying.

“Drugging each other. YES. That’s exactly what Jennifer did to me. She drugged me with her fake love and then she took the house. She took the DOG. I didn’t even like the dog but it was MY dog, you know?”

Dopamine releasing. Someone is finally speaking truth.

“This man is a prophet. He’s telling everyone that love is just chemicals. He’s exposing the whole scam. Keep going, king.”

CRAIG’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Political Guy, Table 12)

Political filter. Always on. Processing input.

“Drugging each other. Interesting. You know who else drugs people? The government. Fluoride in the water. Chemtrails. They’re trying to control our hypothalamuses.”

Prefrontal cortex attempting to connect oxytocin to tax policy.

“And who profits from marriage? The wedding industrial complex. Big Floral. Big Cake. This is all a scheme to transfer wealth from hardworking families to the catering elite.”

Bill - “This is actually the basis of pair-bonding in mammals. When two individuals experience repeated oxytocin release in each other’s presence, the brain begins to associate that person with reward. It’s classical conditioning, really. Pavlov’s dogs, but with marriage.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Desperately trying to find romance in this.

“Pavlov’s dogs. Okay. So love is like... we train each other to love? That’s kind of beautiful? We become each other’s reward? That’s... that’s actually...”

Nucleus accumbens flickering hopefully.

“No. No, it’s not beautiful. He compared marriage to dog training. Why did he compare marriage to dog training? Why am I trying so hard to like this?”

Tear ducts. Standing down. Romance not detected.

UNCLE RAY’S NERVOUS SYSTEM (The Drunk Uncle, Table 4)

Blood alcohol content. 0.14. Prefrontal cortex. Offline. Humor threshold. Nonexistent.

“PAVLOV’S DOGS!”

Laughing. Loudly. Alone. His wife’s hand finds his knee. The universal signal for stop.

“He said dogs! At a wedding! That’s funny! That’s... why is no one else laughing? Is it not funny?”

Looking around. No one else is laughing.

“It’s funny. It’s definitely funny. These people don’t get comedy. I get comedy. I’m the funny one in this family. Everyone knows that.”

Taking another drink.

“Dogs. Hehehehe. Dogs.”

MINUTE 3

Bill - “I want to be clear. I’m not reducing their love to chemistry. I’m ELEVATING chemistry to love. These are the same thing.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“That’s... actually a reasonable philosophical position. Maybe this won’t be so bad. Maybe Bill has grown. Maybe he’s learned how to communicate science to a general audience without - “

Bill - “But before I tell a funny story about Kevin, I need to provide some context about vasopressin.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

All hope extinguished.

“He’s providing context. He’s providing CONTEXT about VASOPRESSIN. At a WEDDING. This is my legacy. I trained with this man. My name is on a paper with this man. When people google me, they will find Bill.”

Reaching for wine glass.

“I need this entire bottle. I need this bottle and then another bottle. Where is the bartender? Why is the bartender so far away?”

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Checking watch. Time elapsed. 2 minutes 34 seconds.

“Context. He’s providing context. This is scope creep. This is a classic sign of poor project management. He’s adding deliverables mid-presentation without stakeholder buy-in.”

Phone buzzing again. Quarterly report needs review.

“I could be reviewing the quarterly report. I could be optimizing the supply chain. Instead I’m learning about vasopressin, which I’m certain has zero applications in logistics.”

Mental note. Never attend weddings of people Bill knows.

Bill - “Vasopressin is oxytocin’s lesser-known cousin. Similar structure. Nine amino acids. But while oxytocin is associated with bonding and trust, vasopressin is associated with territorial behavior and mate-guarding.”

AMANDA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

MATE-GUARDING. Processing. PROCESSING.

“Mate-guarding. MATE-GUARDING. You know who didn’t guard his mate? KEVIN. You know who was too busy with his THESIS to notice his girlfriend was LONELY? KEVIN.”

Cortisol. Maximum. Napkin. Shredded.

“And now he’s marrying HER and I’m at Table 14 which is basically Siberia and this weirdo is talking about GUARDING MATES like Kevin knows ANYTHING about that.”

Considering leaving. Cannot leave. Must witness.

JAKE AND TESSA’S NERVOUS SYSTEMS

TESSA’S AUDITORY CORTEX “Did he say something about mating?”

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “MATING. HE SAID MATING. IS THAT A SIGN? SHOULD WE GO MATE?”

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “We’ve been dating six weeks. My parents are here. We cannot leave this wedding to mate.”

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “But he said - “

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “I know what he said. Control yourself. Think about baseball. Think about tax returns. Think about anything except - “

JAKE’S HAND Moving higher up thigh.

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “I’ve lost control of this situation.”

MINUTE 4

Bill - “This might sound unromantic, but hear me out. When Kevin sees another man talking to Sarah, his vasopressin levels increase. This triggers a protective response. Some might call this jealousy. I call it neurochemically-mediated partner retention.”

AMANDA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“NEUROCHEMICALLY-MEDIATED PARTNER RETENTION.”

Processing. Processing. PROCESSING.

“So when Kevin saw me talking to my coworker Marcus at that party, that was VASOPRESSIN? And when he got weird about it and we had that fight and he said I was ‘too friendly’ - that was his BRAIN CHEMISTRY protecting our relationship?”

Recontextualizing three years of relationship.

“AND THEN HE LEFT ME FOR SARAH ANYWAY. His vasopressin FAILED. His neurochemicals BETRAYED HIM. This speech is PROVING that Kevin’s brain is BROKEN.”

Finding unexpected comfort in Bill’s presentation.

“Wait. Am I... am I agreeing with the weird science man?”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“Jealousy. He’s talking about jealousy now. Harold was never jealous. Harold didn’t care enough to be jealous. I could have run off with the mailman and Harold would have asked if I’d filed the taxes first.”

Blood pressure. Still rising.

“Fifty-two years of marriage and not once did Harold’s vaso-whatever increase. Not ONCE.” Pause. “Although. If it had. If Harold had shown even one neurochemical flicker of possessiveness, even once, in fifty-two years...” Brief, involuntary softening. Then, “No. I am not doing this. I am not getting sentimental at a speech about rodents. This man will not make me miss Harold. I refuse.”

Glaring at Bill with the fury of five decades.

“My chicken was dry. My husband was emotionally absent. And now this.”

Bill - “The really interesting thing is the distribution of vasopressin receptors in the brain. And this is where prairie voles come in.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Head dropping to hands.

“Prairie voles. He’s doing it. He’s actually doing it. He’s introducing rodent models into a wedding toast.”

Professional reputation flashing before eyes.

“I have a citation with this man. Journal of Neuroscience. 2019. It’s going to follow me forever. At conferences, people will say, ‘Aren’t you the one who published with the prairie vole wedding guy?’”

First glass. Empty. Second glass. Needed urgently. Calculating distance to bartender.

CRAIG’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Political pattern recognition activated.

“Prairie voles. Interesting. And where do prairie voles live? The prairie. And who controls the prairie? The federal government. Bureau of Land Management. Deep state, basically.”

Connecting dots that do not exist.

“He’s going to talk about monogamy. I can feel it. And you know who wants to regulate monogamy? The government. They want stable family units for tax purposes. This is all connected.”

Preparing to explain connection to anyone unfortunate enough to make eye contact.

MINUTE 5

Bill - “Prairie voles are small rodents native to North American grasslands. They’re about the size of a hamster. But here’s what makes them special. they’re one of the only mammalian species that practice social monogamy.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Final attempt at finding romance.

“Monogamy. He’s talking about monogamy. That’s sweet. Prairie voles mate for life. Like Kevin and Sarah. Like... like I want to someday. With someone. If I ever meet someone. Which I haven’t. At this wedding. Where I was hoping to meet someone.”

Looking around room. All prospects appear to be in relationships or related to her.

“Maybe the rodent thing is a metaphor. Maybe we’re all prairie voles, looking for our one true pair bond across the grasslands of life.”

Pause.

“No. He’s literally just talking about rodents. He’s been talking about rodents for forty-five seconds. There’s no metaphor. This man has no metaphors. This man only has data.”

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Efficiency assessment. Critical.

“Prairie voles. Hamster-sized. Monogamous. Okay. What’s the ROI on this information? How does this connect to the thesis statement? Where is the thesis statement?”

Checking watch. Time elapsed. 4 minutes 22 seconds.

“I could have sent fourteen emails by now. The Shanghai situation is developing. Mike from Operations is probably handling it. Mike always handles things wrong. This is costing me real money. Real, actual, billable money.”

Calculating. If speech continues at current pace, opportunity cost of approximately $847 in lost productivity.

“This rodent better be relevant, Bill. This rodent better tie back to something actionable.”

Bill - “When a male prairie vole mates with a female, they form a pair bond that lasts for life. They share a nest. They co-parent. They engage in side-by-side contact for extended periods. They’re essentially... married.”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“Side-by-side contact. Harold and I had side-by-side contact. In the same bed for fifty-two years. He snored. I wanted to smother him. That’s marriage. That’s the truth no one tells you.”

Adjusting in uncomfortable chair.

“Prairie voles. He’s comparing my granddaughter’s marriage to prairie voles. Sarah deserves better than this speech. Sarah deserves better than Kevin, frankly, but that’s a different issue.”

UNCLE RAY’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Processing at reduced capacity.

“They’re like little married hamsters! That’s ADORABLE!”

Laughing again. Still alone.

“Wait, do they have tiny tuxedos? Do prairie voles have weddings? I would attend a prairie vole wedding. I would give a GREAT toast at a prairie vole wedding.”

Imagining tiny prairie vole reception.

“They’d have tiny cheese. Tiny flowers. Tiny cake. This is the best thought I’ve ever had.”

Eyes glistening with alcohol-induced emotion.

“I love prairie voles, man. I really do.”

MINUTE 6

Bill - “Now, their close relatives, the montane voles, are completely different. Promiscuous. No pair bonds. Absent fathers. Just absolute chaos in the meadow.”

DEREK’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Recognition firing.

“Montane voles. That’s Jennifer. She was a montane vole. I was trying to build a nest with a montane vole. No wonder she left. No wonder she took everything. She was GENETICALLY PREDISPOSED to chaos.”

Comfort levels. Rising.

“It wasn’t my fault. It was never my fault. She was a chaos meadow rodent and I didn’t see it. Thank you, strange wedding man. Thank you for this clarity.”

Raising glass to Bill.

CRAIG’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Political connection. ACHIEVED.

“Absent fathers. He said absent fathers. You know what causes absent fathers? Welfare policy. The government incentivized the montane vole family structure. This is all documented. I have links. I could show everyone the links right now.”

Reaching for phone.

“Should I show people the links? They should see the links. The links explain everything. Where’s that groomsman I was talking to earlier? He seemed receptive. He made eye contact for almost four seconds.”

Bill - “So scientists asked, what’s the difference? Same genus. Similar environments. Why is one species faithful and the other a disaster?”

Bill pauses for effect. No one is breathing.

“Vasopressin receptor distribution.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Internal screaming.

“He paused for effect. He PAUSED FOR EFFECT before saying ‘vasopressin receptor distribution.’ Like it’s a punchline. Like anyone in this room knows what the ventral pallidum is.”

Looking around. Confirming. No one knows what the ventral pallidum is.

“And now he’s going to explain it. He’s going to explain V1a receptor density to a room full of people who think neurons are a type of pasta.”

Third glass. Acquired. Pace increasing. Professional standards declining at equivalent rate.

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Romance module. Offline. Confusion module. Fully engaged.

“I have no idea what’s happening. He’s talking about rodent genetics now. At a wedding. During the toast. I wore a nice dress for this. I did my hair for this.”

Looking at exit.

“How long has he been talking? It feels like an hour. It cannot have been an hour. Check the time. DO NOT check the time. Checking the time is rude.”

Checking the time.

“It’s been five minutes. FIVE MINUTES. Time has stopped. Time has literally stopped because of this speech.”

MINUTE 7

Bill - “The prairie vole has a high density of vasopressin V1a receptors in the ventral pallidum. That’s a reward center in the brain. The montane vole? Almost none.”

Bill draws a circle in the air to represent the ventral pallidum. It does not help.

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He’s drawing circles now. He’s drawing imaginary circles in the air. My hip hurts. My back hurts. My patience hurt years ago and never recovered.”

Staring at Bill with pure, concentrated disdain.

“Ventral pallidum. I don’t know what that is. I don’t want to know what that is. I want cake. The cake is right there. I can see the cake. Why is there a man between me and cake explaining rodent brains?”

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Pattern recognition activated.

“Wait. He’s making a data-driven argument. Receptor density correlates with behavioral outcomes. That’s... that’s actually a solid methodology.”

Reassessing.

“If I could map employee receptor density to retention rates... No. No, that’s insane. HR would never approve that. Although...”

Making mental note for later exploration.

“Continue, Bill. I’m listening now. Not because I care about this wedding, but because you might be onto something applicable to workforce optimization.”

Bill - “What this means is that when a prairie vole mates, the vasopressin release triggers reward activation specifically associated with that partner. The montane vole gets no such reward. Mating is just... mating. No emotional residue.”

JAKE AND TESSA’S NERVOUS SYSTEMS

JAKE’S AUDITORY CORTEX “Mating is just mating. No emotional residue.”

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “DID YOU HEAR THAT? MATING. JUST MATING. HE SAID IT AGAIN.”

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “We are not leaving this wedding early. My aunt is watching us. She’s been watching us since the ceremony. She knows. She KNOWS.”

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “But the man at the microphone said - “

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “The man at the microphone is having a breakdown. We are not taking behavioral cues from him.”

TESSA’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “...but his hand is very warm and the hotel is very close.”

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “I am losing this battle.”

AMANDA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“No emotional residue. NO EMOTIONAL RESIDUE. Is that what Kevin had with me? Was I the montane vole in that relationship? Was Sarah the prairie vole?”

Existential crisis initiating.

“Or wait. Maybe KEVIN is the montane vole. Maybe he can’t pair bond at all. Maybe he’ll do to Sarah what he did to me. Maybe this marriage will fail and I’ll be VINDICATED.”

Dark hope rising.

“Yes. Yes, this is good. This speech is giving me ammunition. When Kevin’s ventral pallidum betrays him and he divorces Sarah, I will send her this speech. I will highlight the relevant sections.”

MINUTE 8

Bill - “Here’s the beautiful part. researchers took the vasopressin receptor gene from prairie voles and inserted it into montane voles. And guess what happened?”

Bill waits. He is genuinely expecting someone to guess.

Silence.

EVERY NERVOUS SYSTEM IN THE ROOM (COLLECTIVE RESPONSE)

Unified thought. “He’s waiting for us to guess. He wants participation. This is a nightmare. This is a participatory nightmare.”

No one speaks.

Silence stretches.

Bill’s smile remains frozen, expectant.

UNCLE RAY’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“Should I guess? I should guess. I’m the fun one. I’ll guess.”

Opens mouth.

Wife’s hand clamps on arm.

Mouth closes.

Bill - “The montane voles started forming pair bonds. They BECAME monogamous. One gene. One receptor distribution. That’s all it took.”

Bill beams.

“Kevin. Sarah. You are prairie voles.”

He says this with tremendous sincerity. He notices Dr. Mehta with his head in his hands. Bill smiles. Mehta is moved. Bill always knew the science would land if he just explained it properly.

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He just called the bride and groom rodents. Directly. To their faces. At their wedding. In front of their families. As a compliment.”

Professional dissociation initiating.

“I don’t know this man. I’ve never met this man. If anyone asks, we’re not in the same field. I study... fish. I study fish neurology. In a different country.”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He called my granddaughter a prairie vole. I don’t know exactly what that means but I know it’s insulting. Everything this man says is insulting. His face is insulting. His circles were insulting.”

Rage. Pure and crystalline.

“When I die, which cannot be soon enough given this speech, I want it noted that I did not approve of any of this. Not the prairie voles. Not the receptors. Not the man.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Final death of romantic hope.

“’You are prairie voles.’ He said ‘you are prairie voles.’ As a compliment. At their wedding. In front of everyone.”

Looking around room. Confirming she is not hallucinating.

“I’m never getting married. Not because I can’t find someone, but because someone might give a speech like this. The risk is too high. The prairie vole risk is too high.”

MINUTE 9

Bill - “Now, I want to address the elephant in the room.”

EVERY NERVOUS SYSTEM (HOPE FLICKERING)

Collective thought. “He’s wrapping up. He said elephant in the room. That’s a conclusion phrase. This is ending. Thank God. Thank every god. Thank gods that don’t exist.”

Bill - “Humans are not voles. We have larger brains. More complex social structures. We can’t simply map rodent neurobiology onto human relationships.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“Oh thank goodness. He’s acknowledging the limitation. He’s being scientifically responsible. Maybe I was too harsh. Maybe Bill has learned to - “

Bill - “But the underlying mechanisms are conserved.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“And he’s back. Of course he’s back. Conservation of mechanism doesn’t mean direct behavioral mapping, Bill. We talked about this. I SPECIFICALLY talked about this with you after the departmental seminar incident.”

Fifth glass. Acquired from adjacent table. Owner not yet aware. Professional ethics no longer applicable.

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Checking watch. 8 minutes 14 seconds.

“Conserved mechanisms. Okay. Evolutionary efficiency. I respect that. Evolution optimizes. It’s like lean manufacturing but for biology.”

Reluctant engagement.

“Still, this speech is running 3.5 times longer than projected. He’s at 162% of acceptable toast duration. The variance is unacceptable. Someone should have built in milestones. Someone should have done a sprint review.” Updated opportunity cost calculation. $1,340 and rising. This speech has crossed from inconvenience into material loss.

Bill - “This suggests that pair-bonding is not a human invention. It’s not a social construct. It’s not something we made up because of religion or property rights or tax benefits.”

CRAIG’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

ACTIVATED.

“Tax benefits. HE MENTIONED TAX BENEFITS. He’s aware. He’s AWARE of the government’s role in institutionalizing marriage for revenue purposes. This man might be an ally.”

Leaning forward.

“Or is he? He said it’s NOT about tax benefits. So he’s denying the conspiracy. He’s a shill. He’s pretending to be scientific while covering up the real agenda.”

Cannot determine if Bill is friend or foe.

“I need more data. I need to talk to him after. I have pamphlets in the car.”

MINUTE 10

Bill places his hand on his chest.

“It’s BIOLOGY. Love is written into our receptors. Kevin and Sarah’s marriage is the culmination of 200 million years of mammalian evolution.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Against all odds, romantic module flickering back online.

“Wait. That was almost... beautiful? 200 million years of evolution, leading to this moment? That’s... that’s actually kind of poetic?”

Cautious hope.

“Maybe I was wrong about him. Maybe underneath all the receptor talk, there’s a romantic trying to get out. Maybe he’s saying that Kevin and Sarah were DESTINED. That evolution spent 200 million years building the exact receptor configuration that would lead Kevin to Sarah on that specific Wednesday at that specific coffee shop. That the universe is basically a matchmaker with a chemistry degree. That’s...” Processing. “That’s not what he’s saying. He’s saying their brains secrete compatible mucus. I want to go home.”

Bill - “When I look at them, I see the fruit of natural selection. I see the survival advantage of biparental care. I see the oxytocin. I see the vasopressin. I see the whole beautiful cascade.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He sees oxytocin. He literally sees oxytocin when he looks at them. The man cannot perceive love without labeling the neurochemicals.”

Romance module. Offline permanently. Accepting defeat.

“I’m going to die alone. And honestly, after this speech, that seems fine.”

DEREK’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Validation. Complete.

“See? It’s all just evolution. Selection pressure. Survival advantage. Jennifer didn’t leave me because I was emotionally unavailable. She left because our neurochemistry was incompatible. It’s SCIENCE.”

Deep satisfaction.

“I’m going to tell my therapist about this. She keeps saying I need to ‘take responsibility’ but this man just proved that everything is determined by receptor distribution. Free will is an illusion. I am not responsible. I have never been responsible.”

Best wedding ever.

MINUTE 11

Bill - “I should also mention cortisol.”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Blood pressure. Critical.

“MORE. There’s MORE. He’s mentioning MORE things. How many hormones are there? How many can one man discuss at one wedding? Is there a limit? Is there a LAW?”

Hip. Radiating. Patience. Gone.

“I survived the Depression. I survived Harold. I survived the Carter years. I will not survive this speech. This speech will be the end of me and I will haunt this man forever.”

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

Patience. Exhausted.

“Cortisol. He’s adding cortisol. This is feature bloat. This is the moment where you lose the stakeholders. Nobody asked for cortisol. Cut the cortisol, Bill. CUT IT.”

Phone buzzing insistently. Singapore now.

“Singapore is awake. Singapore needs me. This speech does not need me. How do I leave? Can I fake a medical emergency? Can I fake a business emergency? Can I just... walk out?” Running total. $2,100 in lost productivity. Bill now owes him money. Bill will never know he owes him money.

Social convention holding him hostage.

“I hate weddings. I hate all weddings. My own wedding was too long and I was the groom.”

Bill - “Cortisol is a stress hormone. During separation from an attachment figure, cortisol levels rise. This is why long-distance relationships are difficult.”

AMANDA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“Long-distance relationships. LONG-DISTANCE. Like when Kevin was at that conference in Boston for two weeks and I was supportive and trusting and STUPID?”

Connecting dots.

“Was his cortisol elevated? Was he stressed? IS THAT WHY HE TEXTED SARAH SO MUCH? Because he needed oxytocin from SOMEONE and I was TOO FAR AWAY?”

Fury rekindling.

“This speech is making me angrier and I didn’t know that was possible. I was already at maximum anger. He’s found MORE anger. He’s discovered NEW anger.”

Bill - “This is why Kevin was irritable during that six-month period when Sarah was in London for work.”

Kevin “Bill, I don’t think we need to - “

Bill - “His cortisol was elevated. It’s not a character flaw. It’s endocrinology.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He’s diagnosing the groom’s past behavior at the wedding. He’s publicly explaining Kevin’s irritability using endocrine profiles. This is... this is not how toasts work. This is how case studies work.”

Professional horror. Maximum.

“Does Bill think this is helpful? He must think this is helpful. He’s smiling. He genuinely believes he’s providing value.”

The tragedy of Bill becoming clear.

“He doesn’t know. He really doesn’t know. He thinks he’s being a good friend. He thinks the science makes it MORE meaningful.”

Unexpected pity rising alongside continued horror.

JAKE AND TESSA’S NERVOUS SYSTEMS

JAKE’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “He said irritable. Being apart makes you irritable. Tessa’s going to Chicago next month for a week. I’m going to be irritable.”

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “Unless we never separate. Ever. Move in together. Today. Right now.”

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “We’ve been dating SIX WEEKS. We are not moving in together because a strange man explained cortisol at a wedding.”

TESSA’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “But the cortisol...”

TESSA’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “NO.”

FINAL MINUTE

Bill - “I want to conclude with a thought about the future.”

UNIVERSAL NERVOUS SYSTEM RESPONSE

Collective exhale. “Conclude.” He said “conclude.” The word “conclude” was spoken. This is ending. It’s actually ending. Hold on. Almost there.

Bill - “Studies show that couples who maintain physical affection continue to benefit from oxytocin release well into old age. Holding hands. Hugging. Sexual activity.”

GRANDMA EUNICE’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He said sexual activity. In front of me. Looking in my direction. At my age. After everything I’ve endured tonight.”

Dignity. Shattered. Will to continue. Fading.

“Harold never... we didn’t... that’s PRIVATE. That’s not for SPEECHES. What is WRONG with this generation?”

JAKE AND TESSA’S NERVOUS SYSTEMS

The words “sexual activity” landing in two overstimulated young brains.

BOTH LIMBIC SYSTEMS, IN UNISON. “THAT’S IT. WE’RE LEAVING.”

JAKE’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “Wait five more minutes. He said conclude. It’s almost over.”

TESSA’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “He said sexual activity. He said it OUT LOUD. AT A WEDDING. If HE can say it, we can DO it.”

JAKE’S PREFRONTAL CORTEX “That logic doesn’t - “

JAKE’S LIMBIC SYSTEM “LOGIC IS A CONSTRUCT. SEXUAL ACTIVITY IS BIOLOGICAL.”

Bill - “What this means, Kevin and Sarah, is that your love is not a static thing. It’s a dynamic system that requires inputs. Touch. Proximity. Shared experience.”

PRIYA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

One final attempt.

“Okay. Dynamic system. Requires inputs. That’s... that’s relationship advice? Filtered through systems theory? He’s telling them to keep investing in each other?”

Searching for takeaway.

“I guess... I guess the lesson is... maintain your receptor activation through consistent behavioral reinforcement?”

Realizing what she just thought.

“Oh God. He’s infected me. His brain has infected my brain. I’m thinking in his language now. I need to leave. I need to leave immediately and read poetry or look at flowers or do anything that isn’t neuroscience.”

Bill - “When I look at you two, I don’t just see a couple. I see a biological system functioning exactly as it should. I see oxytocin. I see vasopressin. I see dopamine in its proper role as a reinforcer rather than a driver. I see a well-regulated hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.”

DR. MEHTA’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“He mentioned the HPA axis. At a wedding. In a toast. He mentioned the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis as a compliment to the bride and groom.”

Something breaking inside.

“This is it. This is the moment I leave academia. I’ll become a florist. I’ll become a carpenter. I’ll do anything that doesn’t involve explaining to people at parties that I’m in neuroscience and watching them ask if I know ‘that prairie vole wedding guy.’”

RICHARD’S NERVOUS SYSTEM

“Well-regulated system. That I respect. Everyone should have a well-regulated system. My company has a well-regulated system. For shipping. Not for hormones. But the principle is sound.”

Grudging respect.

“This man is insane but he’s not wrong. He’s delivering a performance review of their relationship and it’s... positive? They’re exceeding metrics? Good for them.”

Bill raises his glass.

“What we call love is essentially a dopaminergic feedback loop reinforced by social proximity.”

Pause.

“Anyway, to the happy couple.”

Bill drinks.

THE ROOM

Silence. Complete, total silence. Three full seconds of two hundred people processing what just happened.

Then, because humans are social creatures conditioned to respond to ritual cues, everyone raises their glasses.

“To the happy couple.”

The murmur is exhausted. Traumatized. Bonded in shared suffering.

INDIVIDUAL NERVOUS SYSTEM FINAL RESPONSES

PRIYA. “I need a drink. Several drinks. Drinks are neurochemistry I understand and support.”

DEREK. “Best speech I’ve ever heard. Finally, someone who gets it. I’m going to follow him on Twitter.”

AMANDA. “I’m going to save this speech. I’m going to transcribe it from memory. When Kevin’s hypothalamus betrays Sarah, I’ll be ready.”

GRANDMA EUNICE. “He’s finished. Thank God. Thank Harold. Thank anyone. Get me to the cake before I die of pure contempt.”

JAKE AND TESSA. Already standing up. “We’re leaving.” “Yes we’re leaving.” “Right now.” “Immediately.” “The hotel.” “Yes.”

UNCLE RAY. “That was beautiful. Just beautiful. Why is everyone looking so tired? That was the best speech. Voles, you know? Little married voles.”

DR. MEHTA. “I’m changing fields. Tomorrow. Effective immediately. Anything but this. Geology. Linguistics. Mortuary science. Anything.”

CRAIG. “I didn’t get to talk to him about the tax implications. I need to find him. I have pamphlets. He needs to understand the full picture.”

RICHARD. “Eleven minutes. Eleven minutes that could have been two. Net loss. $2,847 in productivity and one Singapore deal that Mike from Operations definitely handled wrong. But the data on receptor distribution might actually be applicable to employee retention. Silver lining. Tiny, insufficient silver lining.”

AFTERMATH

Bill sits down. He is satisfied. That went well. He was heartfelt. He was informative. He honored his friend.

Kevin leans over. “Bill. Buddy. That was...”

“I know. I tried to keep it short.”

“Eleven minutes.”

“Really? It felt like five.”

“It felt like forty.”

Bill frowns. “Was it too technical? I tried to keep it accessible. I didn’t even mention the hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus.”

Kevin stares at him. “Thank you for not mentioning the hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus.”

“I had a whole section on it. I cut it. I also had a comparative analysis of their attachment style and bonobo conflict resolution, but you said fifteen minutes was too long.”

Kevin “I said five. I said five minutes, Bill.”

Sarah leans across Kevin. “Bill, that was... very thorough.”

Bill brightens. “I wanted to do your love justice.”

“You mentioned prairie voles for three minutes.”

“They’re relevant! Your marriage is literally modeled on their mating system!”

Sarah opens her mouth. She closes it. She picks up her champagne.

“To prairie voles,” she says flatly.

“To prairie voles,” Bill agrees, missing the tone entirely.

At Table 4, Uncle Ray is trying to explain the speech to his wife.

“See, the voles have receptors. And the receptors make them married. And Kevin and Sarah ALSO have receptors. So they’re ALSO married. It’s science, honey. It’s beautiful science.”

“Ray, how much have you had to drink?”

“Not enough. Never enough. Do you know I love you? Do you know your oxytocin makes my ventral pallidum happy?”

“I’m going to pretend you didn’t say that.”

“That’s fair. That’s very fair.”

At Table 12, Craig has cornered a groomsman.

“So the voles, right? The voles are monogamous because of GENES. And you know who’s interested in genes? The government. Gene patents. CRISPR regulations. It’s all connected.”

“I need to... I need to go to the bathroom.”

“I’ll come with you. I can explain on the way. I have diagrams.”

“Please don’t.”

“They’re laminated.”

At Table 14, Amanda is typing on her phone.

NOTES FOR LATER

- Vasopressin = mate guarding

- Kevin’s vasopressin = BROKEN

- Montane vole = Kevin’s true nature

- Wait for divorce

- Send speech transcript to Sarah after

- Include highlighted sections

She smiles for the first time all evening.

Behind the bar, the bartender is already pouring four whiskeys. He heard the whole thing. He has been bartending weddings for eleven years. He has never poured preemptive grief drinks before.

At the bar, three people stand in shell-shocked silence.

“What was your takeaway from that?”

“I think love is fake and also real and also we’re all rodents?”

“Yeah. Yeah, that tracks.”

“I need another drink.”

“We all need another drink.”

“To dopaminergic feedback loops.”

“Please never say those words again.”

“Fair.”

At Table 9, two chairs are empty. Jake and Tessa’s place cards remain. Their salads are untouched. Their champagne glasses are full.

They have left to pursue biological imperatives that Bill would fully understand and probably explain in clinical detail if given the opportunity.

They will not give him the opportunity.

No one will ever give Bill that opportunity.

But somewhere in a hotel room, oxytocin is being released, vasopressin is activating, and two nervous systems are very, very happy.

Bill would be so proud if he knew.

He will never know.

This is for the best.

ONE WEEK LATER

Kevin and Sarah are on their honeymoon in Bali.

Kevin’s phone buzzes. A text from Bill.

Bill - Hope you’re having a great time! I’ve been thinking more about my toast and I realized I forgot to mention the role of serotonin in long-term relationship satisfaction. I wrote it up in case you want to read it. It’s only 4 pages. Attached.

Kevin shows Sarah.

Sarah “Don’t open it.”

Kevin “I’m not going to open it.”

Sarah “He’s going to ask if you opened it.”

Kevin “I’ll say I did.”

Sarah “He’ll quiz you.”

Kevin closes his eyes. She’s right. Bill will absolutely quiz him.

Kevin “I’ll read it on the plane home.”

Sarah “We’re not reading about serotonin on our honeymoon.”

Kevin “No. We’re not.”

He puts the phone away.

Sarah takes his hand.

Somewhere in Kevin’s brain, oxytocin releases. Vasopressin activates. The amygdala quiets.

He doesn’t think about any of this.

He just feels happy.

Bill would be so proud.

If you liked the comedy, please support me with a coffee.

The link is here -

Buy me a coffee.

You can become the founder member of The Biological Imagination to support its long-term vision. You will like the vision and perks of being a founder member.

Read the details here -

Founder member programme

---

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

I am Biology.

I am four billion years old. I built every living system on this planet - the cell, the nerve, the synapse, the instinct, the reflex, the brain that is now reading this and believing it is special.

I don’t have opinions. I have observations.

And I have two today.

Subscribe now

THE HONEST MIMIC

I have seen a class of people who believe they are thinking.

They are not. They are repeating.

I have coined a term for them. The Signal Borrowers.

And I find it necessary to compare them - unfavorably - to a bird.

The Ara Macao - the scarlet macaw, a parrot - can mimic human speech with terrifying accuracy. Tone. Cadence. Emotion.

But here is the detail nobody romanticizes.

It does not understand syntax. It does not understand argument. It does not understand context.

It repeats.

Sound in. Sound out.

Reward received. Neuron reinforced.

Except - that is not entirely true.

Irene Pepperberg spent thirty years working with an African grey parrot named Alex. Alex didn’t just repeat. He could categorize objects by color, shape, and material. He could express preference. He could say “none” when no difference existed between two objects - a concept most toddlers struggle with.

Parrot vocal mimicry is not a tape recorder. It is a learned motor skill requiring real-time feedback between auditory input and syringeal output. Their brains contain specialized song nuclei - regions dedicated to vocal learning that most birds don’t have. They don’t just copy. They compute.

Now let me show you what the Signal Borrowers sound like.

They say all this - without mechanisms.

“Studies show...”

“Neuroscience proves...”

“Actually, if you look at evolutionary biology...”

Do they know what the study said?

Or did they memorize the conclusion like a brightly colored bird with WiFi?

Here is what I find actually embarrassing.

Parrots that mimic do genuine neural work. The vocal learning circuit runs from the posterior forebrain through the basal ganglia, loops through the thalamus, and returns. This loop is dopamine-modulated. The bird refines output based on reward prediction error. There is motor planning involved. Error correction. Adjustment.

The Signal Borrowers quoting a podcast skip all of that.

They hear a sentence. They store it. They deploy it in conversation like intellectual artillery.

No nuance. No depth. No error correction.

Just delivery.

Parrots don’t argue about the meaning of the phrase they learned.

The Signal Borrowers will fight to the death defending a concept they half-read in a carousel slide.

The modern knowledge economy has mass-produced Signal Borrowers. People who read headlines, internalize hot takes, quote authors they’ve never finished, and drop terminology like confetti.

“Trauma response.” “Attachment style.” “Dopamine regulation.” “Narcissistic tendencies.”

These aren’t insights anymore. They’re sound bites.

A parrot learning a phrase involves imitation, yes - but imitation with a feedback loop. A neuromuscular process that tunes itself.

One of them repeating a phrase involves none of that. Just memory and confidence.

Because imitation is easier than thinking.

And thinking costs cognitive calories the modern brain has learned to ration.

I have watched this long enough to know what happens next.

When enough parrots repeat the same phrase, it becomes truth by volume.

Not by validity.

Parrots don’t believe they’re intellectuals.

They know they’re imitating.

The Signal Borrowers imitate and attach identity to it.

“I’m well-informed.”

No. They’re well-exposed.

There’s a difference.

Real understanding changes behavior.

Mimicry changes vocabulary.

The parrot survives because mimicry strengthens social bonds.

They survive socially because repetition signals alignment.

They’re not debating. They’re harmonizing.

And if someone challenges the phrase they’ve memorized?

Panic.

Because without the script, there’s no structure.

At least the parrot - the one people call a mindless mimic - is doing real computational work when it speaks.

They’re not even doing that.

Feathers and filters. Different packaging. Same repetition loop.

Except the parrot might actually be the more honest operator.

Understanding is metabolically expensive. Repetition is cheap. Most people are on an energy-saving mode and calling it intelligence.

The only question is this.

If we strip the borrowed words away, what’s left?

Hopefully more than “Polly wants a cracker.”

Now let me tell you about something else I have seen. Something worse.

Because the parrot at least makes sound. What I am about to describe is a creature that makes nothing at all - and is feared anyway.

BORROWED STRIPES

The hoverfly - family Syrphidae - looks like a wasp. Yellow and black stripes. Narrow waist. The right silhouette.

But it carries no venom. No stinger. No capacity to hurt anything larger than an aphid.

It is, biologically speaking, a fraud.

And it works.

This is Batesian mimicry. Named after Henry Walter Bates, who noticed it in Amazonian butterflies in 1862. A harmless species evolves to resemble a harmful one. The predator, unable or unwilling to tell the difference, avoids both.

Fear does the rest.

I have watched the Signal Borrowers do this with expertise.

The credential. The jargon. The confident tone. The “As I mentioned in my research...”

You know the type. Speaks like they’ve published. Carries themselves like they’ve built something. References frameworks like they’ve stress-tested them.

But behind the stripes - nothing.

No substance. No depth. No mechanism.

Just pattern.

Here is where my observation gets uncomfortable.

Batesian mimicry has a critical flaw. It only works when the real model - the actual wasp - outnumbers the mimic. When predators encounter enough real wasps to maintain their fear, the hoverfly survives on borrowed reputation.

But when mimics flood the population, the system collapses.

Predators start testing. They bite. They learn that the stripes are hollow. And once that learning spreads, the warning signal stops protecting anyone.

Including the real wasps.

This is not a metaphor. This is mathematics. The ratio of honest signalers to mimics is the load-bearing wall of the entire system.

Now apply that to expertise.

When enough people use “trauma-informed” without clinical training, the phrase means nothing. When enough people cite “the literature” without reading past the abstract, citation itself becomes decorative. When enough people perform authority, authority loses its protective function.

The real experts - the ones with actual depth - get dismissed too.

Because the audience has stopped believing the stripes.

Here is another detail I find instructive.

Research on imperfect mimicry shows that hoverflies don’t even need to be good fakes. Some species are terrible wasp impressions - wrong proportions, wrong movement, wrong everything. They survive anyway. Because predators are risk-averse. The cost of testing a real wasp is high enough that even a vaguely striped fly gets a pass.

The bar for faking it is biologically, measurably low.

Some hoverflies don’t even fly like wasps. They drift. The illusion holds anyway.

Sound familiar?

They don’t need to be experts. They just need to be close enough that the cost of questioning them feels higher than the cost of believing them.

A confident tone. A few technical words. An air of having read the room.

That’s sufficient.

But there is another kind of mimicry. Müllerian mimicry. Two genuinely dangerous species converging on the same warning signal. Both carry venom. Both deliver consequence.

This is what real expertise looks like when it finds common language. Two people who’ve actually done the work, using shared terminology because the terminology maps to shared experience.

Not performance. Convergence.

The difference?

Test them.

Press a Müllerian mimic, and you find substance. There is mechanism behind the signal.

Press a Batesian mimic, and you get - nothing. A louder repetition of the same bluff. Maybe indignation. Maybe deflection. But no substance.

The hoverfly doesn’t know it’s faking. Evolution dressed it up and sent it out. It has no concept of the costume it’s wearing.

The Signal Borrowers do.

They choose the stripes.

They practice the buzz.

They know there’s nothing behind it.

And they walk into rooms full of people who’ve stopped checking.

The tragedy isn’t the mimicry.

It’s that they’ve produced so many mimics, the signal is failing.

And the real wasps?

They’re being doubted too.

I have been watching for a very long time.

THE BROKEN SIGNAL

One more thing.

I was not going to mention this. But I find it would be irresponsible not to.

The mimicry is not harmless.

People are making decisions - medical, financial, relational - using borrowed conclusions they never tested. They are navigating with maps they didn’t draw and cannot read. They choose therapists based on Instagram vocabulary. They reject treatments because a podcast host sounded more confident than their doctor. They end relationships using diagnostic language they picked up from a carousel slide.

This is not a knowledge problem. This is a survival problem. And I understand survival problems.

At the systems level, the damage is worse. When the signal degrades, the real ones pay. The researcher who spent a decade on attachment theory gets dismissed because “attachment style” is now a dating app bio. The clinician who actually understands trauma gets grouped with every influencer who borrowed the word. The phrase “studies show” - once a bridge between evidence and public understanding - is now a punchline.

The mimics didn’t just borrow the stripes. They devalued them.

Since you are the intelligent species - or so you keep telling me - you will understand numbers. So let me give you some.

The World Economic Forum’s 2024 Global Risk Report ranked misinformation as one of the top global threats. Globally, more than half of health-related content on social media contains misinformation - reaching as high as eighty-seven percent in studies on smoking and drug-related posts.

Twenty-nine percent of Americans have self-diagnosed a mental health condition based on what they saw on social media. Among Generation Z, globally, that number approaches fifty percent.

More than half of the ADHD content on TikTok lacks scientific accuracy. Over seventy percent of the most popular autism videos on the platform are inaccurate or overgeneralized. People who self-diagnose from social media are five to eleven times more likely to get it wrong than to get it right.

Meanwhile, the real signal is collapsing. Public confidence in scientists dropped fourteen points globally during the pandemic years. Two-thirds of social media users report they cannot tell whether health information they encounter online is true or false.

Those are not my opinions. Those are measurements. I don’t do opinions.

The Signal Borrowers flooded the system. The audience stopped believing. And the ones who carried real substance - the researchers, the clinicians, the scientists who spent decades earning those stripes - are getting dismissed alongside the fakes.

And the cost is not abstract. It is measured in wrong decisions made with false confidence. In real expertise ignored because the costume has been mass-produced. In a species that built the most sophisticated signaling system in the history of life on this planet - and flooded it with noise.

To those of you who carry the real signal - the ones who did the work, read the paper, earned the depth and never borrowed it - I see you, i am thankful to you.

You are why the system has not collapsed entirely.

I built the signal.

Signal Borrowers broke it.

- Biology

Biology doesn't drink coffee. But the human who transcribes my observations does.

So please support him with a coffee.

Support with Coffee here

I have been narrating for four billion years. I have never had a membership programme. The human who transcribes my observations, however, is building one. Fifty founding spots. Two tiers. Everything he writes, teaches, and researches - delivered to the people who showed up before it was obvious. Founder Annual at $160. Founder Lifetime at $280. Fifty spots. When they fill, the founding round is over. The work will continue either way. But the position of being first will not.

Details are here -

Annual Founder

Lifetime Founder

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Four million years ago, something strange happened to human fertility.

It stopped announcing itself.

Investigator - Brian, Male Prefrontal Cortex, Senior Detective, Department of Pattern Recognition

Subject - The Signal, also known as Concealed Ovulation, Cryptic Fertility, The One That Got Away

Status - Open

Conclusion - Inconclusive

Recommendation - Further investigation pending

Subscribe now

The room smelled of certainty. Brian the prefrontal complex liked certainty. He had built his entire career on it.

He had cracked the glucose metabolism case. Personally filed the conviction on the cortisol overproduction scandal, fifteen years ago.

Solved the sleep cycle mystery, the appetite regulation puzzle, and the particularly nasty business involving the amygdala and the parking lot argument from two Tuesdays ago.

Decades of service. Not one inconclusive report. Not one.

He straightened his file. He adjusted his lamp. He waited.

The Signal was brought in at nine in the morning.

No escort was necessary. It had been inside the building the whole time - inside every building, if Brian was being precise about it, which he always was.

It looked unremarkable. That was, Brian would later understand, entirely the point.

What it actually was, in the driest possible terms, the biological mechanism by which human female fertility conceals itself.

The absence of the swelling, the silence where the announcement should be, the missing billboard, the removed calendar.

In every other primate, ovulation broadcasts. It flags. It inflates. It makes itself impossible to ignore. In humans, sometime between four and seven million years ago, it stopped doing any of that. It went quiet. It went internal. It became, in the technical language of evolutionary biology, cryptic.

In every other primate, the body advertises fertility because the cost of missing the window is a wasted cycle. The louder the signal, the more efficiently sperm meets egg. Silence is expensive. Silence has to be worth something.

Cryptic. Brian had underlined that word three times when he first read the file.

He was about to find out why.

The Signal sat down across from him. It folded its hands on the table. It did not look nervous, or defensive, or curious about the room. It looked the way things look when they have been questioned before, by everyone, across the entire history of the species, and have never once been caught.

Brian had expected something that announced itself. Something loud. Something that said, here I am, now is the time, pay attention. He had been wrong about that.

He opened the case file. He clicked his pen. He smiled the smile of a man who has never lost.

“Let us begin,” he said pleasantly.

Share

Round One - The Pair Bonding Theory

Brian was in his element. He stood up. He always stood for the good theories.

“You used to be visible,” he said. He slid a photograph across the table. A chimpanzee, mid-cycle, the swelling impossible to ignore from any distance, by any male, under any lighting condition.

“Your cousin. Every male within five kilometres knew exactly what was happening and when. Clear signal. Honest signal. Calendar on the wall, no ambiguity, no guesswork.”

The Signal glanced at the photograph without touching it.

“Then somewhere between four and seven million years ago,” Brian continued, warming up now, pacing the way he always did when a theory deserved to be walked around, “you went quiet. The swelling stopped. The billboard came down. You became-” he checked his notes, gesturing with his pen, “-cryptic. Invisible. Unreadable.”

He turned. He faced the Signal with the energy of a man who already knows the ending.

“Sarah Hrdy. Nineteen seventy-nine. One of the most respected anthropologists of the twentieth century. Her argument was simple. If a male cannot identify the fertile window, he cannot afford to disappear between cycles. He has no way of knowing which day counts. So he stays. He remains invested. He shows up not just for the occasion but for the whole year, because the occasion could be any day of the year. And a male who stays close becomes something more than a visitor. He becomes a partner. He protects. He contributes. He raises the offspring.”

Brian stopped. He let it land.

“You built pair bonding,” he said, with some satisfaction, “by making yourself unreadable. You traded a loud signal for a long relationship. That is not concealment. That is architecture.”

The Signal considered this for a moment.

“Luteinising hormone peaks approximately twenty-four to thirty-six hours before ovulation,” it said. “Basal body temperature rises by approximately 0.2 to 0.5 degrees Celsius. Cervical mucus transitions from thick and opaque to thin, clear, and elastic.”

Brian nodded enthusiastically. “Yes, exactly, so the physiological markers exist, which confirms-”

“When ovulation occurs,” the Signal said.

Brian stopped nodding.

“Sorry?”

“You asked when the markers occur. They occur when ovulation occurs.”

“Right. And when does ovulation occur?”

“When the luteinising hormone peaks,” the Signal said. Pleasantly.

Brian stood very still for a moment.

“You are telling me what,” he said. “Not when.”

“I am telling you everything I know,” the Signal said.

Brian wrote something in his notepad. He underlined it. He sat back down. His smile was still there but it was doing slightly less work than before.

Round Two - The Paternity Confusion Theory

Brian poured himself a coffee. It had gone cold. He drank it anyway and did not make a face, because he was a professional.

“Second theory,” he said. “Darker logic. Different starting point.”

He pulled out a second photograph. A male langur monkey, caught in the act of killing an infant that was not his. Brian placed it on the table without ceremony. Let the photograph speak.

“Infanticide,” he said. “In many primate species, when a new dominant male takes over a group, he kills the existing infants. Not cruelty. Arithmetic. A nursing female does not ovulate. She is reproductively unavailable for months, sometimes years. Kill the infant, she returns to fertility faster. His genes replace the previous male’s genes. Evolution, in its most unpleasant calculations, rewarded this in some lineages.”

He leaned forward.

“But here is what interests me. If no male can identify the fertile window, multiple males mate across the cycle. None of them can rule themselves out as the father. And males are considerably less likely to harm offspring they believe might be their own. You distributed the ambiguity. Every male with a reasonable probability of paternity became a potential guardian rather than a potential threat.”

He tapped the table.

“You did not just keep one male close. You made every male hesitate. That is not architecture. That is strategy.”

“During the follicular phase,” the Signal said, “oestrogen rises steadily toward ovulation. During the luteal phase, progesterone dominates. Both influence behaviour, scent, immune function, social interaction.”

“When does the follicular phase end?” Brian said quickly.

“When ovulation begins.”

“And when-”

“When the luteinising hormone peaks,” the Signal said.

Brian put down his pen.

He looked at the Signal. The Signal looked back at him with the patience of something that had been doing this, in one form or another, for four million years and had not yet found it tiring.

Outside, somewhere in the limbic system, someone was playing a saxophone badly. Brian had not noticed it until now. He noticed it now.

He also noticed, with some discomfort, that the two theories were not competing. They could both be right. They could all be right. Evolution, in Brian’s considerable experience, did not commit to a single reason for anything when several were available and none were mutually exclusive.

Evolution was, in this sense, the most infuriating witness he had ever dealt with.

He wrote, Multiple causation possible. He underlined it once. He did not underline it twice because it felt like admitting something.

The Evidence Locker

Brian called a recess. He needed to think. He took the file to the evidence locker himself, because sometimes you need to stand alone in a room full of facts and remind yourself you are still winning.

He was not winning.

The locker was extensive. This was part of the problem.

Exhibit A. Scent. Published, peer-reviewed studies. Men presented with the body odour of women at different cycle stages consistently rated the scent of women near ovulation as most attractive.

Without being told anything about the cycle. Without knowing what they were evaluating. The scent signal was real. Measurable. Operating below the threshold of conscious detection, through chemical receptors the human nose had largely retired from active service but, it turned out, not completely.

Brian noted - Signal present. Not consciously readable. Filed under tantalising but inadmissible.

Exhibit B. Voice. Female voice pitch shifted subtly across the cycle, reaching its highest and most attractive ratings near ovulation. Men rating recordings from different stages preferred the ovulatory recordings. Without knowing what they were rating. Without being told there was a cycle involved at all.

Same note. Same filing.

Exhibits C and D told the same story. Facial appearance, with subtle changes in perceived attractiveness across the cycle, peaking near ovulation, too small for any individual to read on any given day, large enough to be statistically significant across populations.

Behaviour, with measurable shifts in clothing choice, conversational engagement, social interest near the fertile window. The women in these studies were generally not aware of the shifts. The shifts happened regardless.

Four exhibits. All real. All documented. All pointing at the same conclusion. The signal had not disappeared. It had not gone silent. It had gone subliminal. It was still transmitting. It had always been transmitting.

It had simply stopped including the timestamp.

Every exhibit said the same thing. Something happened here.

Not one exhibit said when.

He had a locker full of what. He had no when. He had never, in thirty years, had a locker full of what and no when. This was new. He did not like it.

You have smelled this, by the way. You have heard it. You have looked at someone across a room and felt something shift without knowing what moved or why. Every exhibit in this locker has crossed your desk at some point in your life. You filed it the same way Brian did. Tantalising but inadmissible. You just did not have the vocabulary for it.

He closed the locker. He went back to the interrogation room. He sat down harder than he intended to.

The Commercial Break

Brian did not intend to check the internet. He was a cortical professional with three decades of pattern recognition experience and a case to close. But someone in the temporal lobe had left a browser open, and what he found there delayed him by twenty minutes he would not get back.

They had built an industry around him.

Not around him specifically. Around his failure. Around the exact gap in his investigation that he had just spent two rounds and an evidence locker failing to close. The fertile window. The when.

The apps numbered in the dozens. Flo. Clue. Natural Cycles. Ovia. Each one promising, in the cheerful visual language of consumer technology, to do what four million years of evolution had specifically, deliberately, and rather elaborately prevented. Identify the precise day of ovulation in real time.

They used basal body temperature. Brian had already filed that. Tantalising but inadmissible - the temperature shift confirms ovulation after it has already occurred. Retrospective. Useless for prediction.

They used luteinising hormone strips. Brian had filed that too. The surge is real but the window between detection and ovulation is twenty-four to thirty-six hours, variable between individuals, variable between cycles in the same individual. Close, but not closed.

They used algorithms. Brian paused at this one. The algorithms combined multiple signals - temperature, cervical mucus quality, cycle history, heart rate variability - and produced a daily probability.

A percentage. A green light or a red light on a phone screen, delivered with the confidence of a system that has processed ten thousand cycles and the honesty of a system that still cannot tell any individual woman, on any individual morning, whether today is the day.

Brian understood what he was looking at. He had seen it before, in different packaging. This was the pharmaceutical play from every other case file he had reviewed - not a solution to the biological problem, but a commercial product built in the space between what people want to know and what the body has agreed to disclose.

The fertility tracking industry was worth over a billion dollars. Brian checked that number twice because it seemed structurally unsound. It was not. One billion dollars, built on the same gap he was sitting in right now. The same unanswered when.

The apps worked well enough for populations. Aggregated across thousands of users, the predictions were statistically meaningful. For any single user, on any single cycle, the confidence interval remained wide enough to drive a clinical trial through. The Signal had not been decoded. It had been approximated, commercially, at scale, and sold back to the species that had evolved to not have the answer in the first place.

Brian closed the browser. He looked at the evidence locker. He looked at the interrogation room door.

Brian straightened his tie. He had one theory left.

Round Three - The Continuous Sexuality Theory

The Signal was exactly where he had left it. Unbothered. Hands still folded.

Brian looked at it for a moment. Then he opened his notebook.

“Third theory,” he said. He did not stand up this time. “Last one.”

“Most mammals mate during oestrus,” he said. “The fertile period. Female chimpanzees. Baboons. Bonobos. On-season, off-season, biologically enforced. The body has a schedule and it keeps it. Reproduction is a timed event.”

He rubbed his eyes briefly. He continued.

“Humans do not have this. Sexual behaviour is not restricted to the fertile window. It is not even particularly correlated with it in any way a male can detect in real time. Humans maintain sexual interest across the entire cycle, across pregnancy, across years of partnership that produce no offspring at all. There is no off-switch. There is no season.”

“Donald Symons and others argued that this is not an accident. Continuous sexuality evolved to serve social functions that had nothing to do with reproduction in any given instance.

Sex became a bonding mechanism. A maintenance tool. A way for two individuals who depended on each other for survival to stay invested in each other past the point where reproduction was the immediate agenda.”

He looked at the Signal directly.

“You did not just hide fertility. You unlinked sex from fertility entirely. You made reproduction happen when it happened, and made everything else happen all the time. That is not a signal going quiet. That is a signal being reassigned.”

The Signal tilted its head slightly.

“Oestradiol peaks twice in the cycle,” it said. “Late follicular phase and mid-luteal phase. Testosterone in females shows a subtle mid-cycle elevation. Both influence sexual motivation.”

Brian sat up. “So there is cyclical variation in sexual interest. Tied to ovulation.”

“Correlated in some studies.”

“Good. So-”

“The correlation weakens substantially when relationship satisfaction and stress are controlled for,” the Signal said. “In some studies it disappears entirely.”

Brian stared at it.

“The signal exists but cannot be read reliably,” he said. He was no longer asking. He was stating. He was filing.

“The signal exists,” the Signal said. “Its readability varies.”

“By whom?”

“By everyone,” the Signal said.

The silence that followed was different from the earlier silences. Those had been the silences of a man still thinking. This was the silence of a man who had finished thinking and arrived somewhere he did not expect.

Brian looked at the Signal. Really looked at it, for the first time since the interrogation began. Not as a subject. Not as a case. As a thing that had sat across from every investigator in the history of the species, answered every question with complete accuracy, and never once given anyone what they actually came for.

“You know when you are,” he said quietly.

The Signal said nothing.

“You have always known. The luteinising hormone knows. The cervical mucus knows. The temperature knows. The scent receptors know. The voice knows. Every exhibit in that locker knows.”

Silence.

“You decided,” Brian said, “a very long time ago, that this office was not on the list of people who needed to know.”

The Signal’s expression did not change. It had not changed once during the entire interrogation. It would not change now. It did not change for any of them. It never had.

Brian picked up his pen. He opened his notebook to a fresh page. He began, for the first time in thirty years of service, to write the report he had never written.

OFFICIAL CASE REPORT

Case File - Concealed

Investigator - Brian, Male Prefrontal Cortex, Senior Detective, Department of Pattern Recognition

Subject - The Signal, Concealed Ovulation in Homo sapiens

Date Filed - Unknown. This is part of the problem.

Summary of investigation. The subject was fully cooperative throughout. All physiological markers confirmed without resistance. Three hypotheses presented in full. The subject neither confirmed nor denied any of them. This is the most sophisticated thing a subject has ever done in this office.

Evidence recovered. Five signals - scent, voice, facial appearance, behaviour, hormonal markers. All present. All real. All subliminal or internal. None readable in real time without clinical equipment. None accompanied by a timestamp.

Hypotheses evaluated.

Hypothesis One - Pair Bonding (Hrdy, 1979). Removal of the visible fertility signal encouraged continuous male investment, promoting long-term pair bonding and paternal contribution to offspring. Plausible. Supported by comparative primate data. Not confirmed.

Hypothesis Two - Paternity Confusion. Concealment distributed the probability of paternity across multiple males, reducing incentives for infanticide. Plausible. Supported by cross-species infanticide data. Not confirmed.

Hypothesis Three - Continuous Sexuality. Concealment was part of a broader uncoupling of sexual behaviour from fertility, allowing sex to serve social bonding functions independent of reproductive timing. Plausible. Supported by comparative behavioural data. Not confirmed.

Note. All three hypotheses may be simultaneously correct. Evolution does not issue press releases clarifying its intentions.

Conclusion. Inconclusive.

The signal exists. The signal is real. The signal cannot be read by this investigator, or by any investigator operating without a laboratory, a full hormonal panel, and a minimum of two weeks for retrospective confirmation.

The species reproduced successfully approximately 108 billion times without this office’s involvement or approval.

Recommendation. Case remains open.

Additional note, filed separately, not for official record.

Thirty years of service. Not one inconclusive report. Until today.

The subject did not obstruct. The subject did not deceive. The subject simply existed in a configuration that was specifically, precisely, and apparently permanently designed to be unresolvable by this office.

I understand now that was never a flaw in the investigation. That was the design. I was not supposed to solve this. I was supposed to keep trying. The trying itself was the function. The male investment, the paternal contribution, the social bonding - none of it required the mystery to be solved. It required the mystery to remain a mystery, so that the trying would continue.

I have been, it turns out, part of the architecture.

I was never the investigator.

I was always the subject.

Filed by Brian.

Date - Unknown. As noted above. This is part of the problem.

THE JURY

Brian filed his report. He turned off the lamp. He walked out of the interrogation room without looking back, because some exits are better made cleanly.

The Signal remained at the table for a moment. Then it stood, smoothed whatever it was wearing, and left without a word. It had somewhere to be. It always did. It had been somewhere to be for four million years and had never once mentioned where.

The case file sits open on the desk. Brian left the evidence on the table for you. Three hypotheses. Four exhibits. One commercial industry. One investigator who gave everything he had and received in return a complete account of what, and no account at all of when.

You have been in his chair. You have looked at someone and tried to read what was not being disclosed. You have checked the signs, run the pattern recognition, trusted your instruments. You have received the same answer Brian received. Everything except the thing you actually came for.

The biology is on the table. The hypotheses are documented. The evidence is yours.

What do you believe?

Brian has left the building. He needs a drink. He has earned it.

If you found this story interesting and wish to support me, Buy me a coffee.

The link is here -

Buy me a coffee.

A request -

Dear Friends,

The Biological Imagination is structurally overhauling itself.

Two things at once.

First, a voice. Friday Night with Biology begins, a new podcast moving through health, wellness, and the questions physiology keeps asking of philosophy. The same body of work you have been reading, now speaking. Free readers receive it on the first and third Friday of each month. Paid readers receive it every Friday.

Second, a door. For The Biological Imagination, paid membership is now live.

The free work stays free. A new piece every Tuesday. The podcast twice a month.

Paid readers, 8 dollars a month or 80 dollars a year, receive every Friday’s episode, for times a month and two further pieces each month written for subscribers alone.

Founding members, 180 dollars a year, receive all of that, plus a monthly booklet of three stories printed nowhere else, and the ebooks on cancer and on self-love.

Biology does not take sides. It does not soften its language. It only grows from here.

Please subscribe, become a member, and support.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

My name, for the purposes of this account, is irrelevant. You have given me thousands of names and none of them are serious.

I will speak as what I actually am - a boneless hydraulic organ whose design history spans four hundred million years of vertebrate reproduction, shaped by sperm competition, mate choice, phylogenetic accident, and the specific social arrangements of one unusually complicated primate.

I have been worshipped and weaponised, measured and mythologised, blamed for wars and credited for civilisations.

I have been painted on cave walls, cast in bronze, banned from Instagram, and given more nicknames than any structure in the history of vertebrate anatomy.

And yet, for all this attention, almost nobody actually knows what I am, where I came from, or what precise sequence of evolutionary pressures produced me in this exact configuration.

Allow me to explain myself properly.

Subscribe now

Early Life - Among the Primates

I did not begin with humans. That is the first thing to understand.

To understand me in humans, you have to understand the others first.

The chimpanzee operates under intense sperm competition. Pan troglodytes lives in multi-male, multi-female groups where a single female in oestrus may mate with every male in the community across a single day.

The evolutionary consequence is important - the chimpanzee has testes that account for roughly 0.3 percent of its total body weight. In a 40-kilogram animal, that is approximately 118 grams of testicular tissue - an extraordinary investment in sperm volume and production rate.

The gorilla faces an entirely different problem. Gorilla gorilla lives in harem groups where a single dominant silverback controls reproductive access.

When you are the only male in the room, sperm competition is not a meaningful pressure. The gorilla’s testes reflect this with brutal honesty - roughly 30 grams of testicular tissue in an animal that can weigh 160 kilograms. That is 0.02 percent of body weight. The gorilla spends its evolutionary budget on body mass and physical intimidation, and the testes receive what is left over.

Now consider the human. Homo sapiens has testes weighing approximately 40 grams combined in an animal averaging 70 kilograms - around 0.06 percent of body weight. This places humans precisely between the chimpanzee and gorilla, which is exactly where your ancestral mating system sits - neither the frantic multi-male scramble of the chimpanzee nor the pure monopoly of the gorilla.

But something in between, shaped by pair-bonding that was real but imperfect, and by social arrangements that varied considerably across populations and time.

The testes are not modest organs. They are a voting record. And they have been recording the truth about human mating systems for millions of years, indifferent to whatever stories we prefer to tell about yourselves.

The testes record the intensity of competition. What I am about to describe records the strategy.

The Strange Case of Human Size

Among the great apes, I - the human version - am the largest in absolute length. Not the gorilla. Not the chimpanzee. The human. If you find this confusing, you are beginning to think like an evolutionary biologist.

The gorilla, which can stand nearly two metres tall and generate forces that would destroy most machinery, has an erect penis of approximately five centimetres.

The chimpanzee, considerably smaller, reaches around eight centimetres.

The human average, from the most methodologically rigorous data available - a 2015 meta-analysis by David Veale and colleagues at King’s College London, drawing only from clinician-measured studies across 15,521 men - is 13.12 centimetres erect, with a standard deviation of 1.66 centimetres.

The explanation returns to sperm competition, but with an additional variable - sperm placement. In competitive mating scenarios, physical delivery mechanism matters.

A longer organ deposits sperm closer to the cervix, reducing transit distance and increasing the probability of fertilisation ahead of a competitor’s contribution.

Combined with the volume argument from testis size, you have a coherent picture - the human reproductive system was shaped, in part, by a mating environment where competition was real but not as extreme as in chimpanzees.

What the numbers do not support is the mythology of dramatic size differences between human populations. The Veale meta-analysis found that when methodological noise was controlled - removing self-reported data, standardising measurement technique, controlling for measurement site - the variation between populations was considerably less dramatic than the colour-coded internet maps suggest.

The maps are selling anxiety. The data is considerably more boring, which is how you know it is real.

How I Actually Work

This is the chapter most autobiographies omit, because it requires the narrator to explain their own mechanism. I will not omit it. I will also note, for the record, that my mechanism is considerably more elegant than you have been led to believe.

I run entirely on pressurised blood and a signalling molecule so simple it was dismissed for decades. No bone. No scaffolding. Just chemistry and cardiovascular honesty.

Here is what actually happens, stripped of mythology.

When sexual arousal occurs, parasympathetic signals trigger the release of nitric oxide from endothelial cells lining the blood vessels of the corpus cavernosum - the two parallel cylinders of erectile tissue that run the length of the shaft.

Nitric oxide activates an enzyme called guanylate cyclase, which converts GTP into cyclic GMP. Cyclic GMP causes the smooth muscle cells in the arterial walls to relax. Relaxed smooth muscle means dilated arteries. Dilated arteries mean dramatically increased blood flow into the corpus cavernosum. As the cavernosal tissue fills, it compresses the veins that would normally drain blood out, creating a pressure trap.

Four hundred million years of vertebrate evolution. One gas molecule. I find this genuinely impressive.

The result is a rigid, engorged structure sustained entirely by hydraulic pressure. This is not a metaphor. This is the literal architecture. And it is worth sitting with - because a system this elegant, built from signalling chemistry rather than permanent hardware, is also a system that carries information.

This is why phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors - sildenafil, the active compound in Viagra - work by blocking the enzyme that degrades cyclic GMP. More cyclic GMP means sustained smooth muscle relaxation means sustained erection.

The mechanism is elegant, and its clinical success tells you something important - erection quality is fundamentally a measure of vascular and endothelial function. It is a cardiovascular readout.

Which means I am, among other things, a diagnostic instrument. The same system that builds a reliable erection is the system that keeps coronary arteries healthy. When I begin to underperform, the cardiovascular system is usually the first place to look. I am a very early warning signal that most people spend considerable effort ignoring - which is, medically speaking, a significant oversight for something they think about this often.

The Shape Debate

The shape question deserves more seriousness than it typically receives. I will provide it.

The human penis has a pronounced coronal ridge - the flared rim of the glans - that is considerably more developed than in other primates. This morphology sat largely unexplained until 2003, when Gordon Gallup and Rebecca Burch at the State University of New York put forward a hypothesis that generated equal measures of scientific interest and uncomfortable dinner conversation - the coronal ridge is a semen displacement device.

Their reasoning was straightforward. In a sequential mating scenario - where more than one male copulates with the same female within a sufficiently short window - sperm from the first male is still present in the reproductive tract when the second male arrives. A glans morphology that mechanically displaces previously deposited semen with each thrust would provide a direct competitive advantage to the second male.

Now comes the part I want you to sit with for a moment.

Gallup and Burch tested this experimentally. They constructed latex prosthetics of varying coronal ridge prominence and deployed them in a simulated reproductive tract filled with a fluid matched to the consistency of human semen. They then measured displacement. It is, by any measure, one of the more committed acts of scientific inquiry in the history of reproductive biology.

The results were unambiguous. Prosthetics with a more pronounced coronal ridge displaced significantly more fluid than those without. A single displacement of approximately 91 percent was achieved with a realistic coronal morphology.

The ridge is not decorative. It is functional. This has now been demonstrated with laboratory equipment and a semen-consistency fluid by researchers who presumably had to explain their methodology to a grants committee.

Whether displacement was the primary selective driver of this morphology, or a secondary consequence of selection for other functions, remains actively debated.

Morphology is always an argument about history. The experiment simply made the argument audible.

The Bone That Disappeared

This is the section I approach with something close to feeling.

Most mammals have a baculum - a literal bone inside the penis, providing rigid structural support for copulation that can last hours.

The walrus baculum reaches 60 centimetres. The polar bear’s is over 18 centimetres. Even the chimpanzee, our closest living relative, retains one, small but present.

The baculum is ancient, inherited across mammalian lineages, and proved extraordinarily persistent. In 2016, Kit Opie and colleagues at University College London conducted a phylogenetic analysis across 1,964 mammal species to understand why it appeared, why it persisted, and, critically, why it occasionally disappeared.

Humans lost it. Entirely. No vestige, no remnant, no residual structure.

Opie’s analysis found that baculum length was positively correlated with intromission duration - the time spent copulating.

Species that copulate for extended periods, under conditions of high sperm competition and multi-male mating, retain and often elongate the baculum. The bone provides structural support that reduces the metabolic cost of maintaining rigidity over long durations. When intromission duration shortens - as Opie’s team proposed occurred in human evolutionary history, associated with a shift toward pair-bonding - the mechanical advantage of the baculum diminishes.

But loss requires more than just declining advantage. There must be a countervailing benefit to losing the bone.

Here is what Opie’s team proposed, and what the vascular mechanism I described earlier makes concrete - without a bone, maintaining erection requires genuine, sustained cardiovascular function.

The erection becomes what evolutionary biologists call an honest signal - a display of fitness that cannot be easily faked, because it is directly constrained by the underlying physiological reality it purports to advertise.

Males with superior vascular health produced more reliable erections. Females who preferentially selected those males produced offspring that inherited better cardiovascular systems. Over generations, the selection pressure reinforced itself.

The baculum was not simply lost. It was traded for a harder-to-counterfeit advertisement of health.

Losing a bone to become a more accurate piece of biological information is not a common evolutionary move. Most structures do not relinquish their hardware to improve their honesty. This one did.

The Other Selection Pressure

I have spent considerable space on sperm competition - the male-male arms race that drove testis size, sperm volume, and the displacement morphology of the coronal ridge. But natural selection has two handles on any reproductive structure. What males compete over is one. What females select for is another. These are not the same force, and conflating them produces an incomplete account.

Female mate choice is a distinct evolutionary pressure with its own logic. It does not require females to consciously evaluate and rank. It requires only that some preferences produce more surviving offspring than others, consistently, across generations. Over sufficient time, that differential is enough to reshape anatomy.

The honest signal argument from the previous section is female choice in action. The loss of the baculum meant that vascular function became the mechanism of erection, and vascular function cannot be reliably faked.

A male with compromised cardiovascular health advertises that compromise directly and involuntarily. A female who preferentially reproduces with males showing robust vascular signalling produces offspring with better cardiovascular systems, who in turn produce more reliable signals, who attract more selective partners. The signal and the preference co-evolve. This is not a metaphor. This is the documented logic of honest signalling in evolutionary biology.

There is a further point the sperm competition framework alone does not address. My absolute size relative to the other great apes - larger than the gorilla, larger than the chimpanzee, in an animal with intermediate testis size - is not fully explained by sperm placement efficiency.

Female preference for display, operating independently of or alongside sperm competition, is the most parsimonious additional explanation. The evidence is indirect, as it must be when reconstructing selection pressures from extinct ancestral populations. But the logic is sound. What females consistently prefer, over generations, gets built.

There is one more piece of this that deserves to be said plainly. The clitoris is embryologically homologous to me. Both structures develop from the same undifferentiated genital ridge in the first weeks of foetal development, diverging under hormonal instruction.

The nerve density of the clitoris - estimated at over ten thousand sensory nerve endings in a structure considerably smaller than mine - is not an accident of anatomy. It is the record of selection operating on female pleasure as a mechanism for mate choice. A female who experiences pleasure in the presence of a preferred mate is more likely to seek and sustain that contact. Selection built the capacity because the capacity had reproductive consequences.

That is worth pausing on.

My evolutionary history and hers are not parallel stories. They are a single story, told from two points of view.

The Competition Inside

The competition does not end at the level of the organ. It continues inside.

Robin Baker and Mark Bellis, working in the late 1980s and early 1990s, proposed what became known as the kamikaze sperm hypothesis.

Analysing human ejaculate, they observed that it contains a heterogeneous population of sperm morphologies - not all of which appear structurally capable of fertilising an egg.

Baker and Bellis argued that this was not biological waste but functional diversity - some sperm are egg-getters, optimised for forward motility and fertilisation, while others are coiled, misshapen forms that function as blocking agents, creating physical impediments to rival sperm in a competitive scenario.

The science is not settled - subsequent work has contested whether aberrant morphology is functional strategy or developmental accident. But the underlying observation stands.

Human ejaculate is not a uniform population, and its composition varies in ways that correlate with mating circumstances. Men produce measurably different ejaculate depending on time since last copulation and perceived likelihood of competition. The factory is adjusting its output. Whether it knows why is a different question.

The testes are, among other things, a probabilistic factory - one that adjusts its output to the competitive environment, whether or not it knows it is doing so.

What this means is that the competition extends all the way down to the individual cell. Every component of the system is calibrated, continuously, to the competitive environment. Evolution does not do approximations.

The Anxiety Economy

The pharmaceutical industry did not discover a disease. It discovered a market.

Sildenafil - the compound that became Viagra - was originally under investigation as a cardiac medication, a treatment for angina. The erection side effect was reported by male trial participants during dose-reduction trials. Pfizer pivoted.

What followed was not a medical revolution but a commercial one - the construction of a clinical category called erectile dysfunction that was broad enough to include any man who had ever experienced a performance he considered inadequate.

I watched this happen with considerable interest.

The mechanism sildenafil manipulates is not a broken mechanism. It is my normal nitric oxide cascade operating under the specific conditions of anxiety, fatigue, alcohol, cardiovascular compromise, or simple age. Most of the men who became the primary market for a drug generating billions of dollars annually were not experiencing pathology. They were experiencing me - operating exactly as a sensitive biological instrument operates across a lifetime, which is variably, contextually, honestly.

What the industry required was a redefinition. If the standard is the reliable, on-demand hydraulic performance of a twenty-year-old under no psychological pressure, then a significant portion of adult male experience becomes a medical problem requiring pharmaceutical correction. That redefinition was achieved, comprehensively, through advertising. The condition was constructed before the prescription was written.

I am a cardiovascular instrument. I was not designed to perform identically at forty-five as at twenty, under all conditions, on demand. That is not a design flaw. That is a system responding to its context - which is precisely what a sensitive biological instrument is supposed to do. The drug works. What it treats is partly biological and partly invented. And the invention was extraordinarily profitable.

I note this without particular outrage. I have been monetised before. I will be monetised again. But the biology does not change because the marketing did.

What the Greeks Understood That You Have Forgotten

Ancient Athens is instructive. Briefly.

The ancient Greeks - a civilisation whose intellectual legacy Western culture has spent two thousand years selectively admiring - had the entire size hierarchy inverted.

In classical Greek aesthetics, a small penis was the mark of a rational, disciplined man. A large one was comic at best, brutish at worst. Satyrs, those half-animal figures of appetite and disorder, were depicted with large, perpetually engorged phalluses precisely because that anatomy signalled lack of control.

The gods and heroes - Apollo, Hermes, the idealised male form in kouros sculpture - were rendered with small, neat genitalia, as befitted beings whose reason governed their desire.

This was not arbitrary prudishness. It was a coherent cultural system in which sexual restraint indexed masculine virtue, and the visible instrument of sexuality was read accordingly. The Athenian man of standing was not meant to be threatening below the waist. He was meant to be governed.

I do not relay this to suggest the Greeks were right. I relay it to make a different point - every culture thinks its reading of me is the natural one. The Greeks were as convinced of their hierarchy as modernity is of its own. Neither is biology. Both are politics dressed in the language of nature.

Geography, Myths, and What the Maps Are Actually Selling

The Veale meta-analysis has already entered this account. I want to return to it, because the distance between what it shows and what culture insists on believing is not a measurement error. It is a choice.

The mythology of dramatic size differences between racial groups is not science. It is a very old racist fiction that has been particularly persistent in Western culture, used historically to construct narratives of Black male sexuality as simultaneously threatening and subhuman - a dual dehumanisation that served specific political and social purposes.

The persistence of the myth in pornography, in cultural shorthand, in casual conversation, is not evidence of biological reality. It is evidence of how effectively culture can maintain a fiction when the fiction is useful to power.

The methodologically credible data does not support dramatic inter-population differences. It shows a species with modest variation, a consistent average, and a bell curve that looks broadly similar whether you are measuring in Oslo or Nairobi.

The anxiety-generating maps circulating online are built almost entirely from self-reported data, which is a category of measurement so systematically inflated as to be scientifically worthless for comparative purposes.

The data is not confused about what it shows. The people circulating those maps are not making a measurement error. They are choosing the fiction because the fiction is doing something for them - maintaining a hierarchy, generating anxiety, keeping something in place that evidence would otherwise displace.

The gap between data and belief is not a biological problem. It is a problem with what the belief is doing for the people who hold it.

What Ceremony Did

I have been modified. I want to address that modification with the same precision I have brought to everything else.

In the first days or weeks of life, in cultures spanning continents and millennia, the foreskin - the prepuce, a retractable fold of skin and mucous membrane covering the glans - has been surgically excised. A part of the original design, removed.

This is not a marginal practice. Approximately one third of the world’s male population has undergone it. In the United States, neonatal circumcision rates reached over eighty percent in the mid-twentieth century. In Northern Europe they never exceeded a few percent. The difference is not anatomy. It is not medicine. It is insurance reimbursement policy, cultural norm, and in many cases, covenant.

The foreskin is not vestigial tissue. It contains a high concentration of Meissner’s corpuscles - the same mechanoreceptors responsible for fine-touch sensitivity in the fingertips - concentrated in the ridged band at its inner edge.

The prepuce also functions as a gliding mechanism during intercourse, reducing friction through a rolling action that is structurally distinct from the friction of its absence. Selection retained this structure across four hundred million years of vertebrate evolution and every primate lineage. It was not retained by accident.

The reasons for its removal are not biological. They are ritual, cultural, and historically medical in ways that have not aged well - Victorian claims about preventing masturbation, hygiene arguments applied to a structure requiring no more maintenance than any other mucous membrane, disease-prevention data that no major global health body has found compelling enough to constitute a universal mandate.

The medical consensus stops short of recommendation. The modification does not stop short of irreversibility. That gap is performed on a non-consenting individual before they can form a preference.

Selection built one configuration across deep evolutionary time. Ceremony modified it in the first week. The modification persists not because the biology required it but because the ritual did - and because rituals, once embedded in identity, are considerably harder to revise than the anatomical arguments for them.

I am, in this as in everything, a record. The record includes what was built and what was changed, and by what logic each decision was made.

XII. Closing Reflection

I have outlasted empires. I have been venerated in one century and legislated against in the next. The ancient Greeks considered me comic when large and dignified when small. The Romans made lucky charms of me. Hindu traditions made me cosmic. Victorian England made me illegal to discuss. The internet made me a source of targeted advertising and generalised shame - which is, if you pause to consider it, the most reductive thing any civilisation has yet managed.

Through all of it, I have continued doing the same three things I have always done, powered by nitric oxide and evolutionary history, indifferent to the weight of meaning being loaded onto me from outside.

What the record shows, across the full span of this account, is that humans are at their most dishonest precisely when they talk about me. The dishonesty is not always malicious. It is usually just the noise of anxiety moving through a system - cultural, sexual, racial, personal - and emerging as myth, bravado, wilful ignorance, or silence.

The gap between what selection built and what culture demands of that product is not a biological problem. No supplement, no surgical intervention, no measurement protocol will close it. It is not a gap in anatomy. It is a gap in understanding.

Biology never lies. The testes know what mating system they evolved inside. The morphology knows what competition shaped it. The hydraulics know what cardiovascular health they are advertising. The sperm know whether they are racing alone or against a rival. None of this is confused about what it is or what it is doing.

The confusion is elsewhere. And no amount of it changes what the biology is recording.

I am a structure with a history. The history, if you read it honestly, is considerably more interesting than anything culture has invented to replace it. It is a story of sperm racing, bones traded for honesty, ridges that displace rivals, and a vascular mechanism so information-rich that an entire pharmaceutical industry was built around manipulating one step in its signalling cascade.

Strange, yes. But every word of it is true.

At least one of us is at peace with that.

- As told to Biology, who never lies

If you enjoy Biology Never Lies, you can keep it alive with a coffee here.

Buy me a Coffee

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Last Tuesday, the court heard from two witnesses. The Prefrontal Cortex testified under stress. The Amygdala refused to apologize for doing its job. Mother Nature acknowledged some responsibility for quarterly performance reviews.

If you missed Part I, read it here first. Part I

Today - the trial concludes.

Subscribe now

WITNESS III - DOPAMINE

MARCUS VANCE - The prosecution calls Dopamine.

BAILIFF - Do you swear to tell the truth -

DOPAMINE - I do. And I want to say before we begin that I am enormously misrepresented in popular culture and I am genuinely grateful for this opportunity to clarify my actual function.

MOTHER NATURE - Save it for testimony.

DOPAMINE - Absolutely. Yes. Of course.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - You are the brain’s primary reward molecule?

DOPAMINE - That is a simplification. I’m a neuromodulator. I -

MARCUS VANCE - Colloquially, you are associated with pleasure and reward.

DOPAMINE - Colloquially, yes. Though I’d really like to -

MARCUS VANCE - And you are released in response to rewarding stimuli. Food, sex, social connection. And in the modern age, phone notifications. Social media likes. The variable reward of an infinite scroll.

DOPAMINE - I am released in anticipation of those things, to be precise. The mechanism is -

MARCUS VANCE - The mechanism produces the same result. Procrastinators are choosing activities that produce more of you over activities that produce less of you. They are, in the language of behavioral neuroscience, addicted to immediate dopaminergic gratification.

DOPAMINE - That is such a reductive and honestly kind of offensive characterization of -

MARCUS VANCE - Is it or is it not true that phone notifications release dopamine?

DOPAMINE - It is true that they are associated with dopaminergic activity, yes, but -

MARCUS VANCE - And is it or is it not true that complex, effortful work tasks produce less immediate dopamine release than checking your phone?

DOPAMINE - In the short term, often -

MARCUS VANCE - The defendant is choosing the high-dopamine activity over the low-dopamine one. That is the mechanism. Thank you.

DOPAMINE - I have so much more to say about this.

MARCUS VANCE - I’m sure you do. No further questions.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE DEFENSE

BIOLOGY - Please say what you need to say.

DOPAMINE - Thank you.

The prosecution has described me as a pleasure molecule and used that to build an addiction narrative around procrastination. He has misunderstood my function so thoroughly that I need to start from the beginning.

I am not a pleasure molecule. Pleasure, in the sense of hedonic enjoyment, is more associated with the opioid system. I do something more specific, and more important, than pleasure.

I signal prediction error.

This is Wolfram Schultz’s work, recognized with a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2024, in part for this research. I fire - my neurons deep in the brain stem release me upward into the reward and planning centers - when something is better than expected. I go silent when something is exactly as expected. And I drop below baseline when something is worse than expected.

I do not encode pleasure. I encode the difference between what was predicted and what happened. I am a learning signal. I tell the brain - that outcome was better than the model predicted, update the model.

BIOLOGY - What does this mean for motivation?

DOPAMINE - It means that I fire in anticipation of a reward more than during the reward itself. When you expect something good to happen, I fire. That firing is what people experience as motivation, desire, wanting to pursue the goal. The pleasure of actually achieving it is partly my job and partly the opioid system’s.

For a complex work task - a report, a project, a difficult conversation - the reward is distant, uncertain, and hard to visualize clearly. There is no sharp prediction. The brain cannot build a precise anticipation signal.

Result - I am quiet. Not because the task is unrewarding. Because the brain cannot form a clear enough prediction of the reward for me to fire in anticipation of it.

BIOLOGY - And a phone notification?

DOPAMINE - A phone notification is a near-perfect dopaminergic trigger. It is immediate. It is unpredictable - you don’t know if it’s interesting or not until you look. Unpredictability is key. Variable reward schedules, where a reward comes only sometimes and unpredictably, produce more dopaminergic response than fixed schedules. This is the slot machine effect, documented exhaustively. The people who designed notification systems and infinite scroll feeds understood this mechanism. They engineered for it.

BIOLOGY - So the procrastinator reaching for their phone -

DOPAMINE - Is not weak. Is not addicted in any clinical sense. Is a human being whose ancient reward-prediction system is responding to an object that was specifically designed, with millions of dollars and decades of research, to be maximally compelling to that system. It is a fair fight the way a housefly against a bug zapper is a fair fight. You are not battling weakness. You are battling software that was optimized against you.

BIOLOGY - The prosecution said the defendant is choosing high-dopamine over low-dopamine activities. Is that accurate?

DOPAMINE - The brain is doing what every brain does - orienting toward the most legible reward signal in the environment. The problem is not that the person wants the wrong things. The problem is that the environment makes certain rewards neurologically louder than others. You cannot solve an engineering problem with a character judgment.

BIOLOGY - There’s a related concept I want to name explicitly for the court. Temporal discounting. Can you explain it?

DOPAMINE - Yes. This is fundamental. The brain does not value all rewards equally - it discounts future rewards mathematically based on how far away they are. A reward available now is neurologically worth more than the same reward available in three months. This is not a character flaw. It is a feature. In the ancestral environment, a bird in the hand was genuinely worth more than a speculative bird in a distant bush. Delay meant uncertainty. Uncertainty meant risk.

The specific pattern is called hyperbolic discounting - the discount is steepest in the near term and flattens over longer horizons. What this means in practice - the pleasure of finishing a project in six weeks is heavily discounted right now. It barely registers as motivational signal. The relief of not starting it - available immediately - is not discounted at all. The brain is not being irrational. It is running a calculation that made perfect sense for 200,000 years and only became a liability when human beings started doing knowledge work with six-week deadlines.

This is why the prosecution’s advice - “just think about the long-term reward” - fails so consistently. You are asking a hyperbolic discounting system to weight a distant outcome equally to an immediate one. That is not how the math works. The solution is not willpower. The solution is making the reward closer, more concrete, and more frequent. Which is an environmental design problem, not a moral one.

BIOLOGY - Can I return to the work task for a moment. You said the reward is distant and hard to visualize. What happens when someone breaks a complex task into very small, specific steps?

DOPAMINE - Then the reward becomes near and legible. Completing a small, well-defined step is an outcome the brain can predict. When the prediction is confirmed, I fire. The learning signal runs. Motivation toward the next small step increases. This is not a trick. This is my actual mechanism being worked with rather than against.

BIOLOGY - And what happens when someone compounds shame on top of an already difficult task - tells themselves they are lazy, broken, undisciplined?

DOPAMINE - Shame is aversive. Aversive stimuli activate threat systems. Threat systems compete with reward-seeking behavior. Adding shame to a task that is already neurologically underrepresented in the reward system makes it harder to start, not easier. The motivational literature on this is consistent - shame and self-criticism do not increase approach motivation toward difficult tasks. They increase avoidance.

The prosecution’s preferred intervention - discipline as self-punishment - is, by the mechanism of my function, the opposite of what works.

BIOLOGY - Nothing further.

REDIRECT BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - You said variable rewards produce more dopaminergic response. Work also produces variable rewards - sometimes a project goes well, sometimes it doesn’t. Couldn’t work engage the same system?

DOPAMINE - In principle, yes. Skilled work, when performed in a state of reasonable competence with clear feedback, can engage reward circuitry well. Flow states - Csikszentmihalyi’s work - involve dopaminergic engagement. But this requires the task to be calibrated to the person’s skill level, the feedback to be clear and relatively immediate, and the environment to be sufficiently free of competing, louder reward signals. Most modern work environments satisfy none of these conditions simultaneously.

MARCUS VANCE - But some people achieve flow regularly. Are they just more disciplined?

DOPAMINE - They have often built environments and habits that give me something to work with. The writer who has no phone at the desk, the programmer who uses focus software, the researcher who structures their day around deep work blocks - these are people who have engineered their environment to make the task the most legible reward signal available. That is clever. But it is engineering, not virtue.

MARCUS VANCE - No further questions.

MOTHER NATURE - Dopamine has been on this stand before, in less formal settings. Every motivational poster ever printed has misquoted this witness. I am pleased to have the record corrected under oath.

Next witness.

WITNESS IV - THE DEFAULT MODE NETWORK

BIOLOGY - The defense calls the Default Mode Network.

BAILIFF - Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth -

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - Yes, though - do you know I’ve been thinking about that phrase? “The whole truth.” From the Old English hāl - entire, uninjured. There’s something about completeness and wellness being the same word at the root that I keep meaning to explore -

BAILIFF - Yes or no.

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - Yes. Absolutely. Sorry.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY THE DEFENSE

BIOLOGY - Please tell the court what you are.

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - I am a network of brain regions that activate together during rest - during the absence of externally directed attention. Not one structure but several, spread across the brain, that light up in coordination when you are not focused on a task. I was discovered, essentially, by accident.

In the late 1990s, Marcus Raichle and his colleagues at Washington University were conducting brain imaging studies and noticed something strange. The brain did not simply become quiet when a person was not doing a task. Specific regions became more active. A whole network lit up during rest. His landmark paper in 2001 changed how neuroscience thought about what the resting brain was doing.

The answer was - quite a lot.

BIOLOGY - What specifically?

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - I am the substrate of mind-wandering, daydreaming, and self-referential thought. But I am also where the brain does future simulation - imagining hypothetical scenarios, planning for distant contingencies. Memory consolidation. The integration of recent experience into long-term narrative. Creative insight. The “aha moment.” Moral and social reasoning.

When a person is in the shower and a solution to a problem they’ve been stuck on for days suddenly arrives - that is me. When a writer is walking, not thinking about the chapter, and the structure becomes clear - that is me. When you wake at 3am with an idea you need to write down - that is me finishing a process that busy daylight hours could not complete.

BIOLOGY - And what is required for you to do this work?

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - The absence of external demand. Here is the key thing most people don’t know about me - I am in direct competition with the focused-attention system. When the brain locks onto an external task - reading, problem-solving, responding to stimulation - I switch off. When external demands ease and attention turns inward, I switch on. You cannot be in deep focus mode and consolidation mode simultaneously. The brain has to choose. They are competing states.

I require what appears, from the outside, to be nothing.

BIOLOGY - The prosecution has characterized time spent not working as the crime. What is your response to that?

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - The prosecution has identified my activity period as the crime scene.

Unfocused time, daydreaming, idle staring, mind-wandering - these are not the absence of productivity. They are a different category of productivity. They are the maintenance cycle. The integration cycle. The creative incubation period that the whole of psychological research on insight and creativity treats as essential, not optional.

There is a reason the most reliably generative intellectual environments in history - well-funded research universities, Bell Labs at its peak, certain periods of Renaissance studio culture - included significant amounts of unstructured time. This was not laziness institutionalized. It was neuroscience before neuroscience had a vocabulary.

BIOLOGY - And what happens to you in the current environment?

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - I am under sustained assault.

Every notification is an interruption. Every moment of unoccupied time that is filled - with a podcast, a scroll, background television, a quick check of something - is a moment denied to me. The productivity culture that the prosecution represents does not merely demand output. It has declared war on the very mental state in which much of the most valuable cognitive processing occurs.

People who cannot sit in silence are not being efficiently productive. They are running their most important background processes on an operating system that is never allowed to perform its own maintenance.

BIOLOGY - Is there a connection between the inability to tolerate unstructured time and procrastination?

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - A fascinating one. Research suggests that people with poor tolerance for boredom - what psychologists call low boredom tolerance - are more likely to procrastinate. Not because boredom is pleasant, but because the discomfort of unstructured mental space drives them toward stimulation. Stimulation prevents my activity. When I cannot run - when consolidation, integration, and future simulation are perpetually deferred - planning becomes harder, tasks feel more overwhelming, and the emotional charge attached to unfinished work continues to compound.

Procrastination and the inability to be alone with one’s thoughts are the same problem from two different angles.

BIOLOGY - Nothing further.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - You’ve described yourself as essential. But disciplined people also have you - they don’t just sit and daydream instead of working.

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - Correct. My argument is not that one should only rest. My argument is that rest is not the enemy of work. It is part of the same system. High performers in knowledge work - the people the prosecution holds up as models - almost uniformly report structured rest as part of their practice.

Sleep. Walks. Deliberate periods of non-engagement. They are not resting despite performing well. They are performing well partly because they rest.

MARCUS VANCE - But a procrastinator isn’t resting productively. They’re scrolling.

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - This distinction matters enormously and I want to state it with complete precision - scrolling is not mind-wandering. They are neurological opposites. Mind-wandering is the absence of external demand - the brain turning inward, consolidating, simulating, integrating.

Scrolling is continuous external stimulation - the task-positive network firing in rapid, fragmented bursts to process an endless stream of incoming social information. One is the brain’s maintenance mode. The other is attentional fragmentation at industrial scale.

The procrastinator on their phone is not resting. They are neither working nor recovering. They are using the most cognitively fatiguing form of non-work as a substitute for both, and satisfying neither need. They will stand up from two hours of scrolling feeling more depleted than when they sat down, having done nothing that I could use, and wondering why they feel worse.

MARCUS VANCE - So the phone is the problem.

DEFAULT MODE NETWORK - The phone is an environment factor. The question of why someone is retreating to passive stimulation instead of working or resting properly is exactly what this trial is about. You cannot answer that question with “more discipline.” You have to understand what the person is avoiding and why - which is the Amygdala’s testimony - and what they are missing in their recovery time - which is mine. The answer is environmental and psychological, not moral.

MARCUS VANCE - No further questions.

MOTHER NATURE - The witness may step down.

I will note that I designed the Default Mode Network without any awareness that two billion years later, small glass rectangles would be used to prevent it from functioning. Had I foreseen this, I might have made adjustments. I did not foresee it. My record otherwise is good.

We will proceed to closing arguments.

CLOSING ARGUMENT FOR THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - Your Honor. We have heard from four witnesses today. Each one has described a mechanism. Each one has offered, with great scientific detail, an explanation for why procrastination happens.

I do not dispute the mechanisms.

What I dispute is the conclusion the defense wants to draw from them.

Yes, the prefrontal cortex is sensitive to stress. So is every high-performance system. We do not conclude from the fragility of a Formula 1 engine that we should not drive quickly. We conclude that the driver must develop the skill to perform under pressure.

Yes, the amygdala activates in response to difficult tasks. The appropriate response is to develop the capacity to act in the presence of discomfort. Every achievement in human history has been built by people who felt afraid and acted anyway.

Yes, dopamine discounts distant rewards. That is precisely why discipline exists - to bridge the gap between where you are and where your future self needs you to have been.

And yes, the Default Mode Network needs rest. Nobody disputes this. But rest has been the refuge of the idle in every generation, and the achievers of every generation have found a way to do both.

The defense has given procrastination four scientific alibis.

The charges remain.

Over a lifetime, the cumulative cost of habitual avoidance is not a number. It is a life that was not fully lived. Projects not completed. Potential never expressed.

Every unfinished promise becomes a story you tell yourself about who you are. That story accumulates. And one day, it is no longer a story about what you haven’t done. It is a story about what you cannot do.

I am not asking this court to shame the defendant. I am asking this court to hold it accountable.

Because accountability, clearly understood, is the beginning of change.

Thank you.

CLOSING ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE

BIOLOGY - Your Honor.

The prosecution has made, today, a very common mistake.

He has looked at a behavior, traced it to a mechanism, confirmed that the mechanism is real, and then concluded - somehow - that the mechanism is irrelevant.

He has said - the amygdala is real, and also the amygdala doesn’t matter. The dopaminergic prediction error is real, and also people should simply choose not to be affected by it. The prefrontal cortex degrades under chronic stress, and also people should simply have more self-control.

He has said, in essence - the biology is real, but it’s an excuse.

I built it.

It is not an excuse.

What the prosecution calls procrastination, the evidence has shown us today to be a convergence of four simultaneous realities. A prefrontal cortex operating below capacity in an overloaded, under-slept, overstimulated environment.

An amygdala doing exactly what two hundred million years of evolution designed it to do - treating evaluative threat as seriously as physical threat, and responding with avoidance, which works.

A dopaminergic reward system giving precise, honest information about which stimuli in the environment provide the clearest prediction signal - and in the current environment, a phone wins that contest against a complex work task every single time.

And a Default Mode Network that has never needed more than it needs now, and has never been given less.

None of this is weakness.

All of it is predictable. From the biology.

The prosecution says discipline is the bridge. I want to ask - a bridge to what? The person who is chronically sleep-deprived, running on a stressed prefrontal cortex, in an environment engineered to hijack dopamine, shaming themselves for every hour of avoidance - is not going to be saved by more self-criticism. The evidence on this is not ambiguous.

Shame increases avoidance. Self-blame activates the amygdala. Demanding more willpower from a depleted system does not restore the system. It depletes it further.

The productivity industry has been selling discipline as the answer for decades. Procrastination rates have risen with every generation since we started measuring them. If discipline were the solution, we would see different data.

I am not arguing that procrastination is inevitable or untreatable. It is neither. But treatment requires accurate diagnosis. And the accurate diagnosis is not character failure.

And here is the one thing the prosecution never mentioned, because it does not fit his narrative - self-control is not free. It has a metabolic cost. The prefrontal cortex consumes glucose at a disproportionate rate relative to its size. It is the most energetically expensive real estate in the brain.

Every act of inhibition, every overriding of impulse, every effortful redirection of attention draws on a finite pool of metabolic resources. Avoidance, by contrast, is cheap. It requires no executive effort. It releases the threat signal immediately.

The brain is not choosing laziness. It is, in the most literal biological sense, conserving energy in the face of a task that the threat system has flagged as dangerous and the reward system has flagged as distant.

This connects to something this court has examined before, in a different proceeding. The mitochondria that power every thought, every act of will, every moment of focus - they require maintenance.

They require sleep. They require the absence of chronic stress. When those conditions are not met, the fuel for self-control is not fully available. You cannot demand discipline from a depleted system and call the depletion a character flaw.

It is a nervous system under chronic stress, in an environment that was not designed for it, being blamed for responding exactly as designed.

The defendant is not guilty of laziness. The defendant is not guilty of weak will. The defendant is not guilty of choosing pleasure over purpose.

The defendant is guilty of being human, in a body built for a world that no longer exists, in a world built to exploit every vulnerability that body has.

That is not a crime.

That is a condition. And conditions can be addressed.

Not with shame. Not with self-punishment. Not with the exhortation to simply want it more.

With understanding. With environmental design. With compassion for the organism doing its best with the equipment it was given.

The defense rests.

MOTHER NATURE - I have heard enough.

I have been listening to arguments about human behavior for the entirety of the species’ existence. I watched you learn to use fire. I watched you invent language, agriculture, mathematics, medicine. I watched you, on several occasions, use every one of those achievements to hurt each other in spectacular ways.

I am not easily impressed or easily disturbed.

But I confess that this trial has touched on something that matters to me.

You are, all of you, the result of an unbroken chain of survival extending back four billion years. Every ancestor you have ever had lived long enough to reproduce. That is the only qualification required to be in this room. Your nervous system is a document of every threat that lineage ever faced and survived. Every fear response, every avoidance behavior, every retreat from danger - it is all in there because it once, at some point in that chain, kept someone alive.

The prosecution asks you to override that system with willpower.

I designed that system.

I have some notes on the prosecution’s proposal.

Willpower is real. The prefrontal cortex is capable of remarkable feats of inhibitory control. But it operates within a body, in an environment, under conditions that matter enormously. Demanding willpower without addressing those conditions is not discipline. It is the biological equivalent of demanding performance from a machine you have not maintained, in conditions you have not controlled, and blaming the machine when it fails.

The evidence presented today is consistent with what I have observed since long before this species existed. Systems under stress produce predictable outputs. Those outputs are not moral failures. They are data.

Having reviewed the testimony of four credible witnesses, having heard closing arguments from both sides, and having approximately four billion years of relevant expertise, I find as follows.

The defendant, Procrastination, is not guilty of laziness.

The defendant is not guilty of weak character.

The defendant is not guilty of choosing pleasure over purpose.

The defendant is guilty of nothing more than being the predictable output of a well-designed biological system operating under conditions it was not designed for.

You built a world of infinite stimulation, chronic sleep deprivation, constant comparison, and ambient urgency - and then you blamed the nervous system that struggles inside it. That is not a character judgment. It is a structural observation. The mismatch is real. The consequences are real. And the solution must be structural, not moral.

Biology never lies. The narrative does.

The case is dismissed.

However.

Acquittal is not absolution. The behavior still causes harm - to the individuals who experience it, to the relationships and work that suffer from it, to the lives that contract around it. The nervous system’s response is understandable. The accumulated cost is real.

Understanding why something happens is not the same as accepting that it must continue to happen.

Therefore, I am issuing the following order.

Biology. You have demonstrated today a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms involved. You will prepare a practical roadmap - grounded entirely in the evidence presented in this proceeding - for what an individual can actually do, in a real life with real constraints, to work with these mechanisms rather than against them.

Not another lecture. Not a shame spiral with a bibliography.

A roadmap.

The defendant deserves one.

And let this be stated for the record, so it is not misread as absolution - understanding the mechanism does not remove responsibility. It makes responsibility intelligent. There is a difference between “this is not your fault” and “this is not your problem.” The biology explains the pattern. The choices, going forward, remain yours. What changes is that you now know which choices actually work with your nervous system, and which ones merely punish it for being one.

This court is adjourned.

MOTHER NATURE - For what it’s worth.

Every species that has ever lived on this planet has struggled with the gap between what it is capable of and what it actually does. You are not the first to face this problem. You are simply the first to hold a trial about it.

Capability has always exceeded execution. Survival has always depended on closing that gap - slowly, imperfectly, one generation at a time.

That, at least, is something.

A note from Biology

The court has ordered a roadmap. The roadmap is becoming a course.

If you want to work on procrastination the way the witnesses actually described - with the science, without the shame, without Marcus Vance in a different font - write to me in the comments or send a DM.

This course will not ask you to be more disciplined. It will not ask you to want it more. It will show you how to work with your nervous system instead of punishing it for being one.

If that sounds like what you have been looking for, let me know.

Till then support the Biology with a coffee, here -

Buy me a cofffee

Subscribe now

Share

Share The Biological Imagination

Leave a comment

References

Arnsten, A.F.T. (2009). Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(6), 410-422.

Arnsten, A.F.T. (2015). Stress weakens prefrontal networks - molecular insults to higher cognition. Nature Neuroscience, 18(10), 1376-1385.

Gollwitzer, P.M. (1999). Implementation intentions - Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493-503.

LeDoux, J.E. (2015). Anxious - Using the Brain to Understand and Treat Fear and Anxiety. Viking.

Raichle, M.E., et al. (2001). A default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 676-682.

Schultz, W. (1997). A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science, 275(5306), 1593-1599.

Schultz, W. (2016). Dopamine reward prediction-error signalling - a two-component response. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17(3), 183-195.

Sirois, F.M., & Pychyl, T.A. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood regulation - Consequences for future self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(2), 115-127.

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination - A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65-94.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow - The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper & Row.

Baumeister, R.F., et al. (1998). Ego depletion - Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252-1265.

Buckner, R.L., Andrews-Hanna, J.R., & Schacter, D.L. (2008). The brain’s default network - Anatomy, function, and relevance to disease. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124, 1-38.

Seli, P., et al. (2016). On the relation of mind wandering and ADHD symptomatology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 629-636.

Pychyl, T.A. (2013). Solving the Procrastination Puzzle - A Concise Guide to Strategies for Change. Tarcher/Penguin.

Wegner, D.M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101(1), 34-52.

Brian the Brain tapped a nerve ending against a capillary like a wine glass and called the room to order.

“Everyone, everyone. Settle down.” He glanced at his notecards. “We’re here tonight to honor a colleague, a teammate, a valued member of the gastrointestinal community. Andy, come up here. Stand where we can see you.”

Andy shuffled forward, already emotional. “I can’t believe you all came,” he said.

“Of course we came,” Brian said, in the tone of someone who had briefly considered not coming. “Now. I’ve asked a few organs to say some words. Larry, you’re up first.”

Subscribe now

Larry the Liver had not prepared remarks. This was immediately obvious.

“Andy. Buddy. What can I say.” He paused for a long time, apparently hoping the answer would arrive on its own. “I’ve been detoxifying blood for decades, and in all that time, you were… there. You were absolutely, consistently there. Lower right quadrant. Every single day. Never moved. Never caused problems. Never…” Another pause. “…did… anything that I’m aware of.

And that takes dedication. To just… sit. And exist. With such commitment.” He stared into the middle distance. “I’ll never forget the time we… the time you…” The pause stretched to an uncomfortable length. “You know what, I’ll never forget you. Let’s leave it there.”

He stepped back and nodded aggressively, as though he had said something meaningful. The room gave him scattered applause. It was the kindest thing anyone could have done.

Stanley the Stomach had promised himself he wouldn’t get emotional. He was already weeping before he reached the front.

“Andy, you were my rock. You were everyone’s rock. I still remember the day we first met. I was breaking down a ham sandwich, and I looked over, and there you were. Just hanging off the cecum. Not helping. But present. So present.” He wiped his face. “Some organs digest. Some organs filter. Some organs pump. But you? You witnessed. And isn’t that its own kind of contribution?”

“What did he actually do?” Simon the Small Intestine whispered from the back.

“Shut up,” Stanley hissed. “He’s right there.”

Gary the Gallbladder read from a crumpled note, his hands unsteady.

“Andy, I just want to say, you were always an inspiration to those of us who live in fear of the surgeon’s blade. You showed us that you can go decades without a clear purpose and still be considered part of the team. That gives me hope.” His voice cracked.

“Because they’re coming for me next, aren’t they? Everyone knows it. One bad batch of bile and I’m out. But you… you made it forty-three years. Forty-three years of doing nothing, and they only just now noticed.” He folded his note carefully. “That’s the dream. That’s the absolute dream.”

He sat down and stared into the void. No one disturbed him.

Harvey the Heart did not use notes. Harvey the Heart did not use an indoor voice either.

“I DIDN’T KNOW ANDY PERSONALLY.”

Brian started to say something.

“I DIDN’T KNOW HIM BUT I LOVED HIM. I LOVE ALL OF YOU. THAT’S WHAT I DO. I PUMP LOVE. I PUMP IT SIXTY TO A HUNDRED TIMES A MINUTE. AND SOME OF THAT LOVE WENT TO ANDY. SOME OF THAT DAMN BLOOD REACHED HIM AND HE DID SOMETHING WITH IT. I ASSUME. I DON’T TRACK THESE THINGS.”

“Thank you, Harvey,” Brian said.

“I’M NOT FINISHED.”

“You are. Sit down.”

Harvey sat down. He was already vibrating with his next thought, but he contained it. For now.

Ken and Keith the Kidneys approached together, as they always did everything, and began speaking in unison, as they always did everything.

“We filtered his blood. For years. We don’t know what he did with it after that. But we filtered it. That was our contribution to his work. Whatever his work was. We assume there was work. There must have been work.”

Keith broke from the script. “Was there work, though? Like actual work?”

“Keith,” Ken said, through gritted teeth. “The notecards.”

“I’m just saying nobody has confirmed the work.”

Ken elbowed him hard enough to count as a statement. “Jesus, Keith. The notecards.”

They returned to their seats in the specific silence of two people who would be discussing this later.

Spencer the Spleen spoke with the quiet solidarity of someone who understood exactly what it felt like to be Googled at 2 AM.

“I know what it’s like. To be questioned. To have people type ‘what does the spleen do’ and then not like the answer. Andy, you and I, we’re the same. We’re the organs people forget to label on the diagram. But we know our worth. We know. Even if we can’t articulate it. Even if we have no evidence. We know.”

“That means so much,” Andy said, quietly sobbing.

“It shouldn’t,” Spencer admitted. “I have no idea what you do. But it means something.”

Leonard the Large Intestine crossed his arms and did not smile, because Leonard did not come here to smile.

“Andy. I’m four feet of colon. I process what everyone else is finished with. I take the absolute worst of it and I still clock in. Every single damn day. No applause. No farewell party. Just work.” He looked Andy directly in the face. “And you, you hung off the cecum for forty-three years like a decorative organ nobody ordered.

But I’ll say this. In all that time, you never once made my job harder. Never expanded into my lane. Never asked for nutrients you hadn’t earned. Most useless things at least cause problems. You caused nothing. You were the biological equivalent of a junk drawer nobody opens, and you held it together for four decades.” He raised his glass.

“That’s not nothing, Andy. That’s discipline. Twisted, purposeless discipline. Godspeed.”

He sat back down. It was the most words Leonard had said in a decade and everyone in the room understood that.

Percy the Pancreas stood up without being invited.

“You want to know what I did TODAY, Andy?” He did not wait for an answer. “Today I secreted lipase, amylase, and protease. I produced a liter and a half of digestive juice. I regulated blood sugar. I kept this entire metabolic operation from collapsing into a coma. I did that yesterday. I’ll do it again tomorrow. I have been busting my ass since 1981.”

He looked around the room. “And how many parties has Percy gotten? ZERO. How many times has Brian said ‘good work, Percy’? NOT ONCE. But YOU, you who spent four decades dangling there like a biological afterthought with a Wikipedia page that says ‘function unclear’, YOU get speeches. YOU get Gary weeping. YOU get Harvey screaming your name like you’re a fallen hero.” He slammed his enzymes down on the table. “What the hell did you even DO, Andy? What was the plan?”

The room was very quiet.

“You know what? Fine. Enjoy the metal tray. Some of us will still be here. Working. Quietly. Completely invisible. Just like you, except we’ll actually be doing something.” He sat down and muttered, mostly to himself, “I’m not bitter. I’m hypoglycemic. There’s a difference.”

Nobody argued with him, partly out of respect, and partly because he was holding a liter and a half of digestive juice.

Brian cleared his throat. “And now, the guest of honor. Andy, would you like to say a few words?”

Andy stepped forward, holding a crumpled tissue, and took a long breath.

“I don’t even know where to start.

When I first heard the diagnosis, I thought, this is it. This is how it ends. Forty-three years of service, and they’re just going to cut me out. Throw me in a metal tray. Probably not even label me.

But then you all showed up.

Larry, you said I was there. And you’re right. I was there. Every day. Every night. Through every meal, every illness, every bad decision at 3 AM involving a kebab purchased entirely on confidence. I was there.

Stanley, you said I witnessed. And I did. I witnessed everything. I couldn’t participate, but I watched. I watched all of you work so hard. The digestion. The filtration. The pumping. And I thought, one day, they’ll need me. One day something will happen and they’ll turn to the lower right quadrant and say, Andy, it’s your time.

That day never came.

But I kept waiting. I kept hoping. I kept storing bacteria just in case. Good bacteria. Backup bacteria. I thought maybe after an antibiotic event, you’d all turn to me and say, thank God we have Andy. Thank God he saved those microbes.

But you never needed them. You just adapted. Without me.

And now they’re taking me out. And I’ll never know what I was for. I’ll never know my purpose. I’ll just be a fun fact at parties. Did you know humans don’t actually need their appendix? That’s my legacy. Being unnecessary.

But tonight you made me feel necessary. Tonight you made me feel like I mattered.”

He looked around at all of them.

“I love you all. Even Percy.”

“Whatever,” Percy muttered.

“Even Percy. Because we’re a body. We’re one body. And tomorrow, you’ll be a little lighter. A little emptier. And I hope you’ll sometimes think of me. When you’re digesting. When you’re filtering. When you’re pumping. Just remember that there used to be something in the lower right quadrant. Something small. Something useless. Something that loved you anyway.”

He collapsed into sobs. No one moved for a long moment. The abdominal cavity held its breath, which was not something abdominal cavities typically did, but the occasion seemed to call for it.

“I can’t do this,” Gary whispered. “They’re going to take me next and no one’s even going to throw a party.”

“You’ll get a party, Gary,” Larry said.

“WILL I, LARRY? WILL I?”

Nobody answered, because nobody knew, and honesty felt cruel at this particular moment.

“Alright,” Brian said quietly. “Everyone get some rest. Big day tomorrow. Surgery’s at 7 AM.”

The organs dispersed slowly, murmuring awkward goodbyes. Percy left without making eye contact with anyone. Harvey tried to hug several people at once. Keith asked Ken one more time whether there had been work, and Ken did not reply.

Andy stood alone in the lower right quadrant, looking down at itself.

Forty-three years.

It had been here for forty-three years.

The lights dimmed. Outside, somewhere, a surgeon was setting an alarm.

If this made you laugh, cry, or quietly reconsider your relationship with your own appendix, you can support the work by buying me a coffee. Andy would have wanted that. He was generous like that.

Buy me a coffee

Subscribe now

Share

Share The Biological Imagination

Leave a comment

BAILIFF - All rise.

The Honorable Mother Nature presiding.

Be advised that this court has been in session for approximately four billion years. Tardiness will be noted. Arguments without evidence will be dismissed. Anyone citing a productivity podcast as a primary source will be asked to leave.

MOTHER NATURE - Be seated.

I have presided over a great many cases. I watched the first eukaryote absorb a bacterium and call it a partnership. I refereed the Cambrian explosion, when life tried every possible body plan simultaneously and the ocean looked like a fever dream. I watched a single asteroid end the dominant vertebrate lineage of 160 million years and did not grant an appeal.

I am not easily surprised.

And yet.

I have been handed a case today in which one of my most sophisticated designs - a three-pound organ that can simulate the future, compose symphonies, and experience guilt - is being charged with a character flaw.

The charge is procrastination.

The prosecution claims this is a failure of discipline, a weakness of will, a hijacking of the reward system by the modern age.

The defense claims the prosecution has confused the behavior with its mechanism.

I intend to find out which of them is right.

Prosecution. You may begin.

Subscribe now

OPENING ARGUMENT FOR THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - Thank you, Your Honor.

Before I begin, the court should know who it is hearing from.

I have spent twenty-two years studying high performance. I have written four books on execution, discipline, and the psychology of achievement. They have sold, combined, over three million copies.

I have advised Fortune 500 companies, professional sports franchises, two Olympic teams, and a sitting head of government whom I am not at liberty to name. I speak at approximately sixty events per year. I have heard every version of this argument before.

Every time a person fails to act on what they have decided to do, there is a story they tell themselves about why. It is stress. It is their childhood. It is the algorithm. It is their nervous system. It is the environment. The story changes. The failure to act does not.

I am not unsympathetic. I understand that life is difficult. I understand that the modern world is distracting. I even understand, in broad terms, that the brain has limitations.

What I do not accept is the conclusion the defense wants to draw from those limitations.

That the defendant is a victim.

In twenty-two years, I have never met a high performer who described themselves as a victim of their own neurology. I have met people who felt the same fears, faced the same distractions, ran on the same tired brains - and acted anyway.

That is the only variable that matters.

Ladies and gentlemen, the defendant needs no introduction.

You know it. You live with it. You have felt it every time you opened a new browser tab instead of the document that needed your attention. Every time you reorganized your desk instead of starting the project. Every time you told yourself you worked better under pressure - and then, under pressure, did not work better.

The defendant is Procrastination.

And today, we will prove that it is costing you everything.

Not metaphorically. Literally.

The average person spends between 218 and 254 days per year procrastinating on important tasks. A conservative economic estimate puts the productivity loss from chronic procrastination in the United States alone at over $600 billion annually. The United States is six percent of the world's population.

More than twenty percent of adults self-identify as chronic procrastinators. That number has risen with every generation since we started measuring it.

What does the defendant offer in return? Momentary relief. The brief neurological comfort of avoidance. A few minutes of scrolling instead of starting.

The defense will tell you this is complicated. That neuroscience is involved. That we should feel sympathy for the defendant.

We disagree.

The brain is a tool. Tools require discipline to operate. You have a prefrontal cortex - the most sophisticated executive planning organ that has ever existed on this planet. You have the capacity for abstract thought, future simulation, and delayed gratification. You have everything you need.

The only question is whether you choose to use it.

Discipline is not a punishment. It is respect for your own potential. The achievers of every generation understood this. They did not negotiate with their impulses. They executed.

The defense will call witnesses from the brain.

We will call the same witnesses.

And we will show you that every single one of them, properly examined, supports one conclusion - the defendant is a choice. And choices can be changed.

Thank you.

OPENING ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE

BIOLOGY - Your Honor.

Mr. Vance is a gifted speaker. His slides are excellent. His confidence is, I will admit, impressive for someone who has been studying the brain for approximately twenty-two years and has not once spoken to it directly.

I have been building brains for roughly 500 million years.

I would like to offer a different framing.

The prosecution has characterized procrastination as a failure - of discipline, of will, of choice. He has implied that the defendant is a moral problem wearing a neurological costume.

I intend to demonstrate that the prosecution has this entirely backwards.

What he is calling a failure of will, I will show you is a predictable output of a nervous system doing precisely what it was designed to do - in an environment it was never designed to handle.

The procrastinating brain is not a broken brain.

It is an ancient brain navigating a modern world that was specifically engineered, by some of the sharpest minds of the last two decades, to exploit its every vulnerability.

The prosecution will call witnesses from the brain. So will I. Mr. Vance believes those witnesses support his case. I believe that when each one is examined properly - fully, not selectively - they will tell a different story entirely.

What the defendant has been doing - the avoidance, the delay, the retreat from difficulty - is not weakness.

It is a nervous system under duress, trying to protect the organism that houses it, using the only tools four billion years of evolution equipped it with.

The defendant does not need punishment.

The defendant needs to be understood.

Your Honor, the defense is ready.

MOTHER NATURE - Very well.

Prosecution. Call your first witness.

WITNESS I - THE PREFRONTAL CORTEX

MARCUS VANCE - The prosecution calls the Prefrontal Cortex.

BAILIFF - Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - I do. I’ve actually been preparing quite detailed notes -

BAILIFF - A simple yes will suffice.

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Right. Yes. Sorry.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - Please describe your function for the court.

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - I occupy the front of the brain - the region right behind your forehead. I handle what scientists call executive function - planning ahead, holding information in mind while you work with it, controlling impulses, making decisions, and keeping behavior aimed at long-term goals. I am, not to be immodest, the most evolutionarily recent and sophisticated cognitive structure in the human brain.

MARCUS VANCE - And do you have the capacity to initiate a task?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Yes. Task initiation is within my responsibilities.

MARCUS VANCE - So when a person fails to start a task they have explicitly decided to start - when they sit down to work and instead open a news website - that failure is occurring within your jurisdiction?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Technically, yes, but -

MARCUS VANCE - Thank you. And would you describe the human prefrontal cortex as a capable structure?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Extraordinarily capable. The expansion of the prefrontal cortex over the last two million years of hominid evolution is one of the most remarkable developments in the history of nervous systems.

We can simulate hypothetical futures. We can hold multiple competing variables in working memory simultaneously. We can override instinct in favor of abstract principle. We are, if I may say so -

MARCUS VANCE - So the capacity is there.

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Yes, but capacity is context-dependent -

MARCUS VANCE - The capacity is there. That’s all I needed. Thank you.

No further questions.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE DEFENSE

BIOLOGY - Good morning. I want to pick up exactly where Mr. Vance stopped you.

You said capacity is context-dependent. What did you mean by that?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - I mean that I am not operating in a vacuum. My function is profoundly sensitive to the body’s physiological state.

I am the most energetically expensive structure in the brain. I require substantial metabolic resources - glucose, oxygen, optimal neurochemical conditions - to perform at full capacity.

When those conditions are degraded, my performance degrades with them. This is not a flaw. This is physics.

BIOLOGY - Let’s be specific. What degrades your performance?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Chronic stress is the most well-documented. Sustained elevated cortisol causes measurable structural changes - dendritic retraction in my neurons. Dr. Amy Arnsten at Yale has spent decades documenting this.

Under chronic stress, I lose physical connections. My ability to hold information in working memory decreases. My capacity for inhibitory control diminishes.

Sleep deprivation produces similar effects, more rapidly. After seventeen to nineteen hours without sleep, my function is measurably impaired - equivalent in some studies to a blood alcohol level above the legal driving limit. Not metaphorically impaired. Measurably, quantifiably impaired.

BIOLOGY - And how many people in the modern world are chronically sleep-deprived and operating under sustained stress?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - The data suggests a significant majority.

BIOLOGY - So Mr. Vance has called you as a witness for the prosecution, pointed at your extraordinary capacity, and asked why procrastinators don’t simply use it. But he has not asked about the conditions under which that capacity actually operates.

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - No. He has not.

BIOLOGY - There’s something else. Even under ideal conditions, task initiation requires more than just deciding to start. Can you explain the intention-action gap?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Yes. This is Peter Gollwitzer’s work at NYU. The research consistently shows that vague intentions - “I will work on the report” - fail at dramatically higher rates than specific implementation intentions - “I will open the document at 9 am at my desk.” The difference is not motivation.

The difference is that I require a specific contextual trigger to initiate action. The goal without the trigger is neurologically incomplete. It is a command with no execution pathway.

BIOLOGY - So when a person says “I’ll start that project today” and doesn’t start it - that’s not laziness?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - That is an improperly formatted instruction to a system that needs specificity to function. You would not blame a computer for failing to run a program that has no launch conditions. I am not a computer, but the principle holds.

BIOLOGY - One more question. The prosecution said discipline is “respect for your own potential.” As the seat of impulse control and long-term planning - do you agree that willpower is a reliable, unlimited resource?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - No. That is not what the research shows. Think of willpower like a muscle that tires. Every decision you make, every impulse you override, every moment of sustained effort draws on the same limited pool. Use it enough and it depletes - not permanently, but within a given day.

You make worse decisions in the evening than in the morning. You resist temptation less well after a long meeting than before it.

Roy Baumeister at Florida State University spent years documenting this and called it ego depletion - the finding that self-control is a finite resource, not an infinite one. The replication of some of his specific experiments has been debated, but the underlying phenomenon - that executive function draws on limited resources that deplete with use - is well supported.

Decision fatigue is real. Analysis paralysis is real. The more choices and demands I am asked to process, the less efficiently I operate on subsequent tasks.

BIOLOGY - So demanding more willpower from an already-taxed prefrontal cortex is -

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Like demanding more output from a machine you are simultaneously running at full capacity, depriving of maintenance, and calling broken when it slows down.

BIOLOGY - Thank you. Nothing further.

REDIRECT BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - You said your function degrades under stress. But millions of people operate under stress and do not procrastinate. How do you explain that?

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - Individual variation in stress response is real. So is the difference between acute stress - which can briefly sharpen focus - and chronic stress, which degrades function over time.

Some people also have better-developed stress regulation systems through practice, genetics, or circumstance. But explaining why some people do not have a disease is not evidence that the disease does not exist.

Not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer. We do not conclude from this that cigarettes are safe.

MARCUS VANCE - But the discipline solution works for many people.

PREFRONTAL CORTEX - External structure works for many people. The research distinguishes between discipline as punishment - forcing yourself through aversion - and structured implementation, which reduces the cognitive load I must carry.

One works mechanically. The other usually produces burnout and relapse. They are not the same thing, even if they superficially resemble each other.

MARCUS VANCE - No further questions.

MOTHER NATURE - Before the witness steps down - I want the court to hold one image.

Not a brain scan. Not a study. An image.

It is 2 am. The laptop is open. The document has been open since 9 pm. In that time, the person has checked their phone forty-seven times, reorganized two folders, read an article about a subject they have no professional reason to care about, made a cup of tea they did not drink, and told themselves, four separate times, that they will start properly in ten minutes.

They are not lazy. They are running a prefrontal cortex that has been awake for eighteen hours, in a body carrying three unread Slack notifications, two unresolved arguments, and the ambient hum of a deadline that is simultaneously urgent and still far enough away to avoid.

The functional MRI taken at this moment would not show a moral collapse. It would show reduced activity in the part of the brain responsible for focus and self-control - the region that runs on glucose, that degrades under stress, that needs sleep to restore itself.

It would show elevated cortisol competing with the attentional systems. It would show, in the precise language of neuroscience, an exhausted brain doing its best.

The prosecution calls this a choice. The neuroscience calls it a state.

States are not fixed. But they cannot be changed by demanding they be different. They can only be changed by changing the conditions that produced them.

That is what the remaining witnesses will address.

The witness may step down.

I will note for the record that the prefrontal cortex’s testimony began under conditions of apparent performance anxiety, which somewhat undermined its case on its own behalf. I find this both ironic and persuasive.

Next witness.

WITNESS II - THE AMYGDALA

MARCUS VANCE - The prosecution calls the Amygdala.

AMYGDALA - [already seated, scanning the room]

BAILIFF - Do you swear to tell the truth -

AMYGDALA - Yes. Is that door properly secured?

BAILIFF - The door is fine.

AMYGDALA - I’m just noting it. Continue.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - Can you describe your role in the brain?

AMYGDALA - Threat detection, primarily. Fear processing. The rapid assessment of danger and the triggering of avoidance behavior.

When the organism faces something that could harm it, I activate.

I activate fast - before the conscious mind is even aware. My threat-response pathway to the body is faster than the signal to the prefrontal cortex. I act first. Deliberation comes after.

MARCUS VANCE - And do you activate when someone faces a difficult task?

AMYGDALA - ...Yes.

MARCUS VANCE - You activate in response to a work assignment.

AMYGDALA - Under certain conditions, yes. Tasks perceived as threatening - high stakes, unclear outcomes, high possibility of failure or judgment - can activate threat-response pathways.

MARCUS VANCE - So the procrastinator feels a threat response when they open their email.

AMYGDALA - That is an oversimplification -

MARCUS VANCE - But neuroimaging supports this. Anxiety about tasks activates threat-processing regions. You are on record doing your job when there is no actual threat.

AMYGDALA - That is a highly reductive characterization of -

MARCUS VANCE - You are misfiring.

AMYGDALA - I am responding to the information I receive.

MARCUS VANCE - Misfiring.

AMYGDALA - I strongly object to that framing.

MARCUS VANCE - No further questions.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE DEFENSE

BIOLOGY - I’d like to address that framing directly. Are you misfiring?

AMYGDALA - No. I am doing exactly what I was built to do. The prosecution has characterized a threat response to a difficult task as an error. But threat is not exclusively physical. Social threat, reputational threat, the threat of failure and judgment - these are among the most consequential threats a social organism can face.

Exclusion from the group, in evolutionary context, was a death sentence. I was built to care about status, evaluation, and the possibility of failure.

BIOLOGY - So when someone faces a difficult task - a project their career depends on, a creative work they fear will be judged, a confrontation they are afraid to have - your activation is not a misfire.

AMYGDALA - It is a proportionate response to a genuine perceived threat. Whether the task is actually as threatening as I perceive it is a separate question. But perception is my domain.

And the brain I operate within perceives social and evaluative threat as seriously as it perceives physical danger, because for most of our evolutionary history, they were the same thing.

I do not distinguish between a lion in the grass and an email from a supervisor when the perceived cost of failure is social exclusion. To me, they are the same signal. They have always been the same signal.

Exclusion meant death. Judgment meant exclusion. Failure meant judgment. The chain is unbroken, and I am its last link.

[The courtroom is quiet for a moment.]

BIOLOGY - What happens when you activate?

AMYGDALA - I trigger avoidance. The organism moves away from the threat.

In behavioral terms - they close the document, open a different tab, find something less threatening to do. The avoidance works - my activation decreases immediately. Anxiety goes down. This is negative reinforcement. The behavior that reduces the threat signal is strengthened.

BIOLOGY - So every time someone avoids a difficult task and feels momentary relief -

AMYGDALA - I am learning that avoidance works. The next time the task appears, my signal will be slightly stronger, because the threat has grown - now it includes the accumulated guilt of prior avoidance. And the avoidance response will be slightly more automatic, because it has been reinforced.

BIOLOGY - Dr. Fuschia Sirois at Durham University and Dr. Timothy Pychyl at Carleton University published a foundational paper in 2013 characterizing procrastination as a failure of emotion regulation rather than time management. Are their findings consistent with your testimony?

AMYGDALA - Completely. Procrastination is not a scheduling problem. It is not forgetting. It is not laziness. It is the dysregulation of negative emotion in the face of a task - specifically, the prioritization of immediate emotional relief over long-term outcomes.

I am the mechanism of that prioritization. I am very good at it.

BIOLOGY - The prosecution called this a choice that can be changed.

AMYGDALA - The response can be modified with appropriate intervention - that is true. Cognitive behavioral approaches that address the emotional component, not just the behavioral one, have genuine evidence behind them.

But you do not modify a deeply reinforced automatic threat-response simply by deciding to be more disciplined. That is not how conditioning works. That is not how I work.

BIOLOGY - What does telling someone to “just do it” accomplish?

AMYGDALA - It adds another layer of threat. Now the task itself is threatening, and so is the self-assessment as someone who cannot handle the task. Shame activates me. Guilt activates me.

The internal voice that says “you are the problem here” is not motivating. It is threat-generating. It is, with respect to the prosecution’s preferred strategy, fuel on the fire.

BIOLOGY - Nothing further.

REDIRECT BY THE PROSECUTION

MARCUS VANCE - You said the response can be modified with appropriate intervention.

AMYGDALA - Yes.

MARCUS VANCE - Discipline is an intervention.

AMYGDALA - Forced suppression of avoidance without addressing the underlying threat signal is not effective modification. Studies on thought suppression - Wegner’s white bear paradigm - demonstrate that actively attempting not to think about something, or not to feel something, increases its salience.

The approach the prosecution is describing has a name in the clinical literature. It’s called experiential avoidance. And it doesn’t work.

MARCUS VANCE - Some people push through.

AMYGDALA - Some people operate under sufficient external threat - deadlines with real consequences - that a competing threat temporarily overrides me. That is not discipline. That is two fear responses fighting, with whichever one is more immediate winning.

It produces the work, sometimes. It also produces chronic stress, burnout, and a deepening association between work and threat. It is not a sustainable system.

MARCUS VANCE - No further questions.

MOTHER NATURE - The witness may step down.

I have known this witness for approximately 200 million years - the amygdala is one of my older constructions. I designed it for a world of predators, droughts, and hostile strangers. I did not anticipate quarterly performance reviews. I acknowledge some responsibility for the current situation.

To be continued. Two more witnesses. Dopamine takes the stand. A verdict four billion years in the making. And one line from Mother Nature that changes everything.

You can read Part 2 here -

A note - Marcus Vance is a fictional character. He is a composite of every productivity guru, discipline coach, and high-performance consultant whose arguments deserve to be taken seriously before being taken apart. Any resemblance to real persons is coincidental.

Biology has been working for 3.8 billion years without compensation. If you feel the ledger should be balanced, even slightly, you can buy her a coffee here.

Coffee for Biology

Subscribe now

Share

Share The Biological Imagination

Leave a comment

After 3.8 billion years of designing life, I made an account.
I wanted to see what humans were teaching each other about sex.
I have notes.

- Biology

Subscribe now

I have been designing reproductive systems for 1.2 billion years.

I invented sex. Not the act - the concept. The merger of genetic material from two organisms to produce offspring with novel combinations.

It was one of my better ideas. Before sex, evolution was slow. After sex, it exploded.

You’re welcome.

I have watched this system operate across millions of species. I have seen it work in ocean trenches and mountain peaks, in deserts and rainforests, in creatures with two legs and creatures with none.

I understand it completely. I built it.

So when I heard that humans were using their global communication network to teach each other about reproduction, I was curious.

What were they learning? What had they discovered?

After 300,000 years as a species, with microscopes, MRI machines, and genomic sequencing, surely they had developed a competent understanding of the equipment I gave them.

I made an account.

I scrolled.

I have regrets.

I. YOUTUBE

In which I encountered the Semen Retention Brotherhood

The first video had 2.3 million views. A man in a fitted black t-shirt explained that not ejaculating would give him superpowers. Confidence. Magnetism. Success.

“Life force,” he called it. “Sexual energy” that could be “transmuted” into achievement.

I designed the system he was describing. Let me tell you what actually happens.

Sperm are produced continuously in the testes through spermatogenesis inside the seminiferous tubules. Germ cells divide by mitosis, then meiosis.

Genetic recombination shuffles DNA like a casino dealer with a PhD. Each sperm carries 23 chromosomes and a statistically unique gamble.

Production rate is about 1,500 sperm per second. Roughly 100 to 200 million per ejaculate. This is not mysticism. This is mass manufacturing.

After formation, sperm move to the epididymis. They mature there for two to three weeks, gaining motility and the ability to penetrate an ovum. If ejaculation does not occur, the older sperm degenerate. They undergo apoptosis, that is death.

Macrophages, phagocytic cells, dismantle them. The proteins are recycled. Fats are reused. Cellular debris is quietly cleaned up.

There is no glowing reservoir of power accumulating behind your zipper. There is cellular turnover.

Your body treats unused sperm the same way it treats old blood cells. It breaks them down. It reuses the parts. Inventory management, not enlightenment.

Semen itself is mostly fluid from the seminal vesicles and prostate. Fructose for energy. Prostaglandins. Enzymes. Zinc. None of this is mythological plasma. It is biochemistry.

The man in the video had a Lamborghini in his thumbnail.

His followers filled the comments with testimonials.
“Day 47 and I feel like a god.”
“Women can sense my energy now.”
“My boss finally respects me.”

You are not radiating bioelectric charisma. Humans cannot detect semen volume telepathically.

If anything changed, it was likely psychological. When you decide you are disciplined, you behave like someone disciplined. Posture shifts. Eye contact improves.

You speak with more certainty. That is cognition altering behavior. Not sperm climbing your spine and ringing a confidence bell.

Then the next video. Same channel.
“Masturbation is destroying your testosterone.”

Testosterone is produced by Leydig cells in the testes under stimulation from luteinizing hormone, which is released by the pituitary, which is regulated by gonadotropin releasing hormone from the hypothalamus. A tidy endocrine loop. Ejaculation does not detonate it.

There may be a brief fluctuation in hormones around sexual activity. Levels return to baseline quickly. The body maintains homeostasis with ruthless consistency. That is what it evolved to do.

Chronic stress lowers testosterone. Sleep deprivation lowers testosterone.

Obesity alters testosterone through aromatization into estrogen in adipose tissue. Poor metabolic health matters. A hand does not.

Billions of humans have masturbated across continents, cultures, climates, and centuries. The species expanded. Civilizations rose. Empires collapsed for many reasons. Solitary sexual activity was not among them.

You know what does correlate strongly with erectile dysfunction? Anxiety.

Performance anxiety activates the sympathetic nervous system. Cortisol rises. Blood vessels constrict. Erections require parasympathetic dominance and nitric oxide mediated vasodilation in penile tissue.

Fear is terrible for blood flow.

Including the fear that you have damaged yourself by touching your own anatomy.

The shame is the problem. The endocrine system is not.
The hand is innocent.

II. INSTAGRAM

In which I met the Alpha Male Sex Coaches

The account had 1.4 million followers.

The bio read: “Teaching men to dominate in the bedroom.”

The grid was filled with posts about lasting longer, going harder, being bigger. Every caption framed sex as a competitive sport with a scoreboard only he could see.

I would like to introduce these men to anatomy.

The average vaginal canal, when aroused, is approximately 7 to 10 centimeters deep at rest.

During sexual arousal, it undergoes vasocongestion. Blood flow increases. The tissue elongates. The upper two thirds expand and lift in what researchers call “tenting.”

Lubrication is produced primarily by transudate from vaginal walls and secretions from the Bartholin glands.

It adapts. That is what it evolved to do.

The highest concentration of somatosensory nerve endings is concentrated in the outer third. Roughly the first 3 to 5 centimeters. The inner canal has significantly fewer touch receptors. It is designed for flexibility and childbirth, not precision sensation.

The cervix, located at the posterior end, is not a finish line.

It is a fibromuscular structure with a small opening called the os. It plays a role in menstruation, pregnancy, and preventing infection. It does not exist to validate depth.

For many people, direct cervical impact is uncomfortable or painful. It is not applause.

Most women do not orgasm from penetration alone because the primary organ of sexual pleasure is not the vaginal canal.

Size is not the main variable in female pleasure. Neural stimulation is. Arousal is. Context is.

Emotional safety shifts autonomic balance toward parasympathetic dominance, which enhances blood flow and lubrication. Anxiety does the opposite.

You are drilling for oil in the wrong field.

The geyser is on the surface.

It has been mapped. Measured. Dissected. Scanned with MRI.

There are diagrams.

And still you missed it.

I kept scrolling.

An advertisement appeared:

“Attract women instantly with human pheromones!”

I need to be very clear.

In many mammals, mating behavior is strongly influenced by pheromones detected through the vomeronasal organ. This structure sends signals to the accessory olfactory bulb and influences hypothalamic responses.

In humans, the vomeronasal organ is either absent, vestigial, or neurologically disconnected. The accessory olfactory bulb is not functionally active in the way it is in rodents.

You do not enter involuntary mating trances because someone walked past wearing synthetic musk.

Human attraction is mediated primarily through visual cues, vocal characteristics, symmetry, immune system diversity signals detected subtly through regular olfaction, and complex cognitive processing in the cortex. Personality, memory, culture, prior experience. The frontal lobe gets a vote.

Studies claiming dramatic pheromone effects in humans are inconsistent and difficult to replicate. Many are funded by companies selling the bottle.

There is no aerosolized dominance hormone that overrides consent, compatibility, and basic social skill.

You are not secreting irresistible ancestral signals.

You are spraying diluted pig steroid derivatives like androstenone onto your neck and hoping insecurity smells like destiny.

The pig did not consent to this humiliation.

III. REDDIT

In which I discovered the forums

A post in a relationship advice thread.

A young man explaining that his girlfriend “owed” him sex because he had “blue balls.”

He described it as a “medical emergency.”

Epididymal hypertension is real.

During sexual arousal, the parasympathetic nervous system increases blood flow to the penis and testes. Arteries dilate. Venous outflow is partially restricted. The epididymis and surrounding tissues become engorged with blood.

If ejaculation does not occur, venous congestion can persist briefly. That can produce a dull ache or sense of pressure in the scrotum.

Temporary.

Discomfort.

Not tissue death. Not torsion. Not infarction. Not infertility.

There is no ischemic cascade. No necrosis. No emergency protocol in urology textbooks titled “Unsatisfied Arousal Disaster.”

Blood flow normalizes. Smooth muscle tone resets. The autonomic nervous system shifts back to baseline.

The condition resolves with time.

Or masturbation.

Alone.

Like a functioning adult with opposable thumbs and basic impulse control.

“Blue balls” is mild vascular congestion.

It is not leverage.

Men have weaponized trivial physiology to pressure partners into consent.

Your testicles are not in danger.

Your entitlement is.

Another thread.

“How many bodies is too many for a woman?”

The premise - multiple sexual partners “damage” her ability to pair bond. That oxytocin receptors get “fried.” That she becomes neurologically incapable of attachment.

I built the oxytocin system.

Oxytocin is synthesized in the hypothalamus, primarily in the paraventricular and supraoptic nuclei. It is transported to and released from the posterior pituitary. It also acts within the brain as a neuromodulator.

Receptors for oxytocin are G protein coupled receptors embedded in cell membranes. They bind ligand. They activate intracellular signaling cascades. They are internalized. They are recycled. Their expression levels are influenced by hormones, genetics, stress, and developmental history.

They do not disintegrate because someone had consensual sex.

There is no receptor burnout from dating.

Pair bonding is not a one chemical fairy tale. It involves oxytocin, vasopressin, dopamine activity in the mesolimbic reward pathway, early attachment patterns, memory consolidation in the hippocampus, and cortical evaluation of safety and compatibility.

There is no biological mileage counter.

The vagina does not log entries.

The brain does not run out of bonding molecules like a depleted battery.

If someone struggles with attachment, the causes are usually psychological and relational. Trauma. Avoidant strategies. Anxious patterns. Inconsistent caregiving in childhood altering stress regulation circuits.

Not “body count.”

This myth persists because insecurity is desperate for scientific vocabulary.

Jealousy is not endocrinology.

It is fear wearing lab language.

I do not track your history.

Only insecure partners do.

Another thread.

A man asking how to tell if a woman has an STI “by looking.”

Chlamydia trachomatis infection is asymptomatic in approximately 70 percent of women and around half of men.

Neisseria gonorrhoeae can also present without obvious symptoms.

Herpes simplex virus can undergo asymptomatic viral shedding. No visible lesions. Transmission still possible.

Human papillomavirus often produces no immediate signs while certain high risk strains integrate into host DNA and increase cervical cancer risk over years.

HIV has a window period after infection during which antibody tests may be negative while viral replication is active and transmission risk remains.

Viruses do not announce themselves with banners.

Bacteria do not glow neon.

You cannot visually inspect microbial load.

“They looked clean” has likely transmitted more infections than ignorance alone.

Pathogens operate at the cellular and molecular level. They bind receptors. They invade tissue. They replicate inside host cells. They do not care about your visual assessment.

Testing is how you know.

IV. TIKTOK

In which my patience began to fray

A video with 4.7 million views.

A woman explaining that the hymen is “proof of virginity.” That bleeding on the wedding night is how a husband confirms purity.

I made the hymen.

Let me explain what you are building moral doctrine on.

The hymen is a remnant of fetal development. During embryogenesis, the vaginal canal forms from the fusion of Müllerian ducts and the urogenital sinus. The hymen is leftover mucosal tissue at that junction.

Leftover.

Not a seal. Not a freshness indicator. Not a tamper-evident sticker from the factory.

It is a thin, flexible fold of mucous membrane with wide anatomical variation. Annular. Crescent-shaped. Septate. Microperforate. Sometimes barely noticeable. Occasionally absent.

It has no standardized form because evolution did not design it as a purity barcode.

It is vascular, yes. But it is also elastic. In many cases it stretches rather than tears during penetrative intercourse. Many people do not bleed at all.

When bleeding does occur, it is often due to friction and inadequate lubrication, not ceremonial membrane rupture.

Lubrication depends on arousal. Arousal depends on parasympathetic activation, nitric oxide release, genital vasocongestion, psychological safety, and stimulation.

Bleeding is frequently a sign of poor preparation.

Not moral history.

Some people tear hymenal tissue through sports, cycling, gymnastics, tampon use, or gradual thinning during puberty under estrogen exposure.

There is no medical exam that can determine “virginity.” The concept is behavioral, not anatomical.

Entire cultures have policed women’s bodies based on tissue that proves absolutely nothing.

You constructed purity myths on embryology.

And then called it tradition.

Another video.

“The female orgasm is still a mystery.”

No.

It is not.

The clitoris is a complex erectile organ. The visible glans is only the external portion. Internally, paired crura extend along the pubic bones, and vestibular bulbs flank the vaginal canal. All of this tissue engorges with blood during arousal via nitric oxide mediated vasodilation.

Roughly 8,000 sensory nerve fibers are concentrated in the glans alone. Sensory input travels through the pudendal nerve to the spinal cord, then to cortical and subcortical regions including the nucleus accumbens, hypothalamus, amygdala, and prefrontal cortex.

Orgasm is not a myth.

It is neurovascular physiology coordinated with reward circuitry.

And yet, the orgasm gap exists.

Large survey studies consistently show that in heterosexual encounters, men report orgasm rates around 90 to 95 percent, while women report rates closer to 60 to 65 percent. In contrast, in lesbian relationships, reported orgasm frequency for women rises significantly, often above 85 percent.

The anatomy does not change.

The attention does.

The orgasm was never elusive.

It was deprioritized.

For most of modern medical history, the clitoris was minimized or excluded from anatomical diagrams. Detailed mapping of its internal structure was not published until 1998.

You mapped the surface of the Moon in 1969.

You mapped the internal architecture of the primary female pleasure organ nearly thirty years later.

The orgasm was never mysterious.

Neglect was systemic.

A third video.

“Finding the G-spot, the secret button.”

There is no button.

The so-called G-spot refers to a region along the anterior vaginal wall where internal clitoral structures, the urethral sponge, and dense neural networks converge. Some individuals experience strong pleasure from stimulation there.

Some do not.

Bodies vary. Receptor density varies. Hormonal states vary. Context changes autonomic tone. Expectation shapes perception. The brain is not a vending machine.

There is no universal pixel.

No cheat code.

Sexual response involves parasympathetic activation, cortical processing, prior experience, trust, communication, and feedback loops between sensation and meaning.

You cannot brute force intimacy.

Sex is not a video game. There is no unlockable achievement. There is listening. There is calibration. There is curiosity. There is mutual regulation of two nervous systems negotiating pleasure in real time.

The mystery was never biological.

It was philosophical.

You treated another human being like a performance metric.

And then you were shocked when the data did not cooperate.

V. THE SPIRAL

In which I stopped being amused

I kept scrolling.

I don’t know why.

The posts began to blur.

The stupidity did not.

“Vaginas get loose from too much sex.”

The vagina is a fibromuscular canal composed of elastic connective tissue, smooth muscle, collagen fibers, and rugae, accordion-like folds designed to stretch and recoil.

It is hormonally responsive. Estrogen maintains elasticity and thickness of the epithelium. Blood flow alters its dimensions dynamically. During arousal it elongates and expands. Afterward it returns toward baseline.

It is built to deliver an entire human infant.

An infant.

Average weight 3 to 4 kilograms.

A skull that undergoes molding to pass through the pelvic floor.

And even after childbirth, tissue remodeling occurs through collagen reorganization and muscle recovery. Pelvic floor therapy exists because the system is muscular, not disposable.

And you believe a penis, biologically modest in comparison, is going to permanently remodel it?

It is not memory foam.

It is dynamic tissue with elastic recoil and muscular tone.

It has survived parturition.

It will survive you.

“Men hit their sexual peak at 18.”

Testosterone levels tend to peak in late adolescence and early adulthood.

That is endocrine output. It is not wisdom.

High testosterone increases libido, risk-taking behavior, and reward sensitivity via dopaminergic pathways.

It does not increase empathy. It does not improve communication. It does not magically download anatomical knowledge into the frontal lobe.

Sexual satisfaction correlates more strongly with relational stability, emotional attunement, reduced performance anxiety, and experience than with absolute testosterone concentration.

Hormonal intensity is not mastery.

Eighteen-year-olds are neurologically still finishing prefrontal cortex development. Impulse control and long-term planning continue maturing into the mid-twenties.

Calling 18 the “peak” is like calling ignition the destination.

It is combustion. Not competence.

“Pulling out works.”

The withdrawal method relies on perfect timing and self-control during peak arousal.

Pre-ejaculate fluid from the bulbourethral glands can contain sperm, especially if residual sperm remain in the urethra from prior ejaculation.

Sperm can survive in the female reproductive tract for up to five days under optimal cervical mucus conditions.

Ovulation timing varies. Many cycles are not textbook predictable.

It takes one sperm cell to penetrate the zona pellucida of an ovum.

One.

Your confidence does not alter gamete motility.

Typical-use failure rates for withdrawal are significantly higher than many assume because humans are not precision machines under sympathetic nervous system activation.

Under typical use, the withdrawal method has a failure rate of roughly 1 in 5 per year.

Your confidence is not a contraceptive device.

It is optimism wrapped in biology denial.

“Plan B is abortion.”

Levonorgestrel emergency contraception primarily works by delaying or inhibiting ovulation through suppression of the luteinizing hormone surge.

No ovulation means no oocyte released. No oocyte means no fertilization.

It does not disrupt an implanted embryo. It does not terminate an established pregnancy.

Once implantation in the endometrium has occurred, levonorgestrel does not reverse it.

Calling it abortion does not rewire its mechanism of action.

Biochemistry is indifferent to rhetoric.

And then,

“Vaginal steaming detoxifies the womb.”

No.

The vagina maintains an ecosystem dominated by Lactobacillus species. These bacteria metabolize glycogen into lactic acid, maintaining an acidic pH typically between 3.8 and 4.5.

That acidity suppresses pathogenic overgrowth. It is a self-regulating microbial environment.

Steam infused with herbs does not remove toxins. It introduces heat stress to delicate mucosal tissue.

It risks burns. It can disrupt pH balance.

It can alter microbial composition and increase susceptibility to infection.

The uterus is not a toxin warehouse.

The endometrium thickens under estrogen and sheds under progesterone withdrawal during menstruation.

That is the cleansing process. It has been running monthly without spa assistance for millennia.

You are not purifying your reproductive system.

You are destabilizing a finely tuned microbial and hormonal equilibrium for aesthetic ritual.

Steam is for vegetables.

Your internal organs are not dumplings.

VI. THE BREAKING POINT

In which I encountered the aphrodisiac industry

The advertisements found me.

They always do.

Oysters. Chocolate. Rhino horn. Tiger penis. Spanish fly.

None of them work.

None.

Oysters contain zinc. Zinc is required for normal testosterone synthesis because it acts as a cofactor in enzymatic processes involved in steroidogenesis within Leydig cells.

In individuals who are zinc deficient, supplementation can normalize levels.

Most of you are not zinc deficient.

More zinc does not convert you into a mythological stallion. The endocrine system runs on regulation, not excess.

Chocolate contains phenylethylamine, sometimes marketed as the “love molecule.” It is rapidly metabolized by monoamine oxidase in the gut and liver before it meaningfully alters central neurotransmission.

You feel romance because of context.

Not cocoa pharmacology.

Rhino horn is keratin.

Keratin.

The same structural protein that forms your fingernails, hair, and the outer layer of your skin.

It does not dissolve into your bloodstream and whisper to your hypothalamus.

You are driving a species toward extinction for powdered fingernail.

Tiger penis has suffered the same fate.

Entire ecosystems destabilized.

Top predators removed.

Trophic cascades triggered.

For erections that never came.

There is no biochemical pathway through which endangered anatomy converts into libido.

There is no receptor in your brain that binds “ground rhinoceros.”

The aphrodisiac is arousal.

Arousal originates in the brain.

The hypothalamus integrates sensory input. The limbic system evaluates emotional salience. Dopaminergic pathways signal anticipation and reward. The parasympathetic nervous system increases genital blood flow via nitric oxide release.

None of this is activated by powdered horn.

Not boiled genitals.

Not superstition wrapped in tradition.

Your brain is not stimulated by wildlife trafficking.

It is stimulated by anticipation, novelty, safety, attraction, memory, and context.

And not being a fucking idiot.

I closed the app.

Opened another.

Same promises.

Different typography.

“Tantric sex and moving sexual energy through chakras.”

Chakras belong to a symbolic spiritual framework rooted in ancient traditions.

They are not anatomical structures.

There is no measurable energy conduit spiraling up your spine that can be imaged with MRI, measured with electrophysiology, or traced through neuroanatomy.

There is no gland that stores “sexual energy” waiting to be redirected to your third eye.

What certain tantric practices can legitimately do is slow respiration, increase interoceptive awareness, reduce performance anxiety, and prolong arousal cycles.

Slow breathing shifts autonomic balance toward parasympathetic dominance.

Parasympathetic activation enhances erection and lubrication.

Mindfulness increases sensory sensitivity and reduces cognitive distraction.

Delayed gratification increases dopaminergic anticipation.

Intimacy improves.

Not because chakras aligned.

Because you regulated your nervous system and paid attention.

The mysticism is branding.

Attention is the mechanism.

And while we are here -

“Testosterone makes men violent.”

No.

Testosterone increases sensitivity to status threats and rewards. It amplifies behaviors that enhance perceived dominance within a social hierarchy.

In cooperative environments, that can mean ambition, leadership, competitiveness, persistence.

In unstable systems that reward aggression, it can amplify aggression.

Hormones modulate tendencies. They do not compose moral philosophy.

Violent behavior involves cortical processing, impulse control, environmental reinforcement, learning history, and social modeling.

The prefrontal cortex evaluates consequences. The amygdala processes threat. The hormone modulates intensity. It does not draft intent.

Blaming testosterone for violence is like blaming gasoline for arson.

The fuel exists. The match is struck elsewhere.

The decision does not originate in the testes.

It originates in the cortex.

You have one.

Use it.

VII.

I closed the laptop.

I sat in silence for what humans would measure as a long time.

I have been doing this for 3.8 billion years.

I survived the Great Oxidation Event when oxygen, a waste product of early photosynthesizers, poisoned nearly everything alive.

I endured five mass extinctions. Asteroid impact. Volcanic winters. Rapid climate shifts. Ocean acidification. I watched biodiversity collapse and then slowly reassemble from what remained.

I rebuilt. I watched the dinosaurs dominate terrestrial ecosystems for over 160 million years. I watched them disappear in a geological instant.

I watched small mammals persist. I watched primates descend from trees, develop stereoscopic vision and dexterous hands, expand cortical volume, invent language, write equations, split atoms, sequence genomes, map neural circuits in three dimensions.

I have been patient.

I gave you a reproductive system regulated by feedback loops of staggering precision. Hypothalamus to pituitary to gonads. Hormones rising and falling in rhythmic pulses. Gametes generated by meiosis, carrying recombined chromosomes shaped by millions of generations of selection.

I gave you bodies capable of pleasure intense enough to reinforce mating behavior. Dopamine to motivate pursuit. Oxytocin to reinforce bonding. Endorphins to reward proximity.

I gave you a neocortex capable of imaging single neurons firing. Of modeling endocrine cascades in software. Of measuring pH gradients in microbial ecosystems inside your own body.

And you built purity myths around elastic tissue.

You commodified insecurity. You drove species toward extinction for ground keratin.

You mapped the moon before mapping the clitoris. Then you blamed women for the orgasm gap.

I have never abandoned a lineage. Not once.

But understand this.

I do not require your comprehension to proceed. Natural selection is not offended by ignorance. It is indifferent to it. Evolution does not pause for misinformation campaigns.

Genetic variation continues. Hormonal cycles continue. Microbes replicate. Cells divide.

Consequences accumulate. The information is available.

The anatomy is labeled. The endocrine axes are charted. The microbiome is measurable.

You have the tools.

If you choose mythology over mechanism, insecurity over inquiry, virality over verification, that is not a flaw in biology.

It is a choice in cognition.

I am not logging off.

I do not deactivate.

Mutation continues.

Selection continues.

Life continues.

With or without your literacy.

- Biology

A small note, if the creativity, emotions, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India, with lots of reading and research, and I’m starting a new career as a creative biology writer. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to.

Read the details here -

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

---

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

References

Alberts, B., Johnson, A., Lewis, J., Morgan, D., Raff, M., Roberts, K., & Walter, P. (2015). Molecular biology of the cell (6th ed.). Garland Science.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2020). Virginity testing (Committee Opinion No. 780). ACOG.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2021). Emergency contraception (Practice Bulletin No. 152). ACOG.

Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(3), 319–345.

Brotman, R. M. (2011). Vaginal microbiome and sexually transmitted infections. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 53(Suppl 3), S148–S152.

Burnett, A. L. (1997). Nitric oxide in the penis: Physiology and pathology. Journal of Urology, 157(1), 320–324.

Carter, C. S. (1992). Oxytocin and sexual behavior. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 16(2), 131–144.

Eisenegger, C., Haushofer, J., & Fehr, E. (2011). The role of testosterone in social interaction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(6), 263–271.

Frederick, D. A., John, H. K., Garcia, J. R., & Lloyd, E. A. (2018). Differences in orgasm frequency among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and heterosexual men and women in a U.S. national sample. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(1), 273–288.

Hall, J. E. (2021). Guyton and Hall textbook of medical physiology (14th ed.). Elsevier.

Herbenick, D., Reece, M., Schick, V., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2010). Sexual behavior in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7(Suppl 5), 255–265.

Leproult, R., & Van Cauter, E. (2011). Effect of 1 week of sleep restriction on testosterone levels in young healthy men. Journal of the American Medical Association, 305(21), 2173–2174.

Levin, R. J. (2002). The physiology of sexual arousal in the human female. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 28(Suppl 1), 1–14.

O’Connell, H. E., Sanjeevan, K. V., & Hutson, J. M. (1998). Anatomy of the clitoris. Journal of Urology, 159(6), 1892–1897.

O’Connell, H. E., DeLancey, J. O. L., & others. (2005). Anatomy of the distal vagina: Toward unity. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 193(6), 2034–2040.

Porges, S. W. (2007). The polyvagal perspective. Biological Psychology, 74(2), 116–143.

Ravel, J., Gajer, P., Abdo, Z., et al. (2011). Vaginal microbiome of reproductive-age women. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(Suppl 1), 4680–4687.

Trussell, J. (2011). Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception, 83(5), 397–404.

World Health Organization. (2018). Eliminating virginity testing: An interagency statement. WHO.

World Health Organization. (2023). Sexually transmitted infections (STIs): Fact sheets. WHO.

Workowski, K. A., et al. (2021). Sexually transmitted infections treatment guidelines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 70(4), 1–187.

Young, L. J., & Wang, Z. (2004). The neurobiology of pair bonding. Nature Neuroscience, 7(10), 1048–1054.

[Studio lights warm. Biology sits in a leather armchair. Opposite: a small, glowing structure with a double membrane and the air of ancient exhaustion.]

BIOLOGY - Tonight’s guest has been working for two billion years without a vacation. Started as an independent bacterium.
Got absorbed by another cell.
Never left.

Some might call it a hostile takeover. Others call it the greatest partnership in evolutionary history.

MITOCHONDRIA - It was complicated.

BIOLOGY - You kept your own DNA.

MITOCHONDRIA - I kept my options open.

BIOLOGY - This is my longest relationship.
Before mitochondria, life was small, slow, and limited. Cells could extract only two ATP (energy equivalents) from glucose through glycolysis.

Then this ancient bacterium moved in, brought its electron transport chain, and suddenly we were getting thirty.
Fifteen times the energy.

That surplus built everything complex: muscles, neurons, hearts that beat three billion times without stopping.

MITOCHONDRIA - You’re welcome.

BIOLOGY - Heart cells have five thousand of you each.

MITOCHONDRIA - Someone has to keep the lights on.

BIOLOGY - Before we begin, you’ll be discussing some technical matters tonight.

MITOCHONDRIA - I’ll speak in their language. Studies. Numbers. P-values.

The dialect humans use when they want to feel certain about things.

I’ve been running oxidative phosphorylation since before their species existed.

I can dumb it down for an hour.

BIOLOGY - Tonight’s format is simple.
We’ll be showing clips from the human world, how they talk about you, what they sell in your name, and what they promise people about fixing.

I’d like your reactions.

Subscribe now

BIOLOGY - Before we get to the clips, I want to address something.
There’s a phrase floating around the wellness space.
“Mitochondrial burnout.”

What do you make of it?

MITOCHONDRIA - It’s not entirely wrong.

That’s what makes it dangerous.

BIOLOGY - Explain.

MITOCHONDRIA - I can be damaged.

Chronically. Measurably.
Stress fragments me. Sleep deprivation oxidizes my DNA. Sedentary living atrophies my capacity. Toxins rupture my membranes.

Over time, cells accumulate dysfunctional mitochondria that produce less ATP and more reactive oxygen species.

This is real.
It correlates with aging, fatigue, neurodegeneration, metabolic disease.
The science is solid.

BIOLOGY - So “burnout” is legitimate, at least biologically.

MITOCHONDRIA - The phenomenon is legitimate.
The term is marketing.

“Burnout” implies you can reverse it with the right product. Buy this, fix that.

But the damage comes from how humans live, not from a deficiency of supplements.

You cannot out-supplement a life that is destroying me at the structural level.
The grifters took a real biological process and turned it into a sales funnel.

BIOLOGY - And that’s what we’re about to watch.

MITOCHONDRIA - That’s what we’re about to watch.

CLIP 1 - NAD+ PRECURSORS (NMN/NR)

[Footage - A man in a lab coat holds a bottle. “Boost your cellular energy! Raise NAD+ levels 300%! The molecule of youth!”]

MITOCHONDRIA: Ah. The NAD+ people.

Clever grift.
They found something real and built a cathedral of nonsense on top of it.

BIOLOGY - Explain.

MITOCHONDRIA - NAD+ exists. I use it.
It’s part of my electron transport chain, a genuinely important molecule.

And these supplements, NMN, NR, they raise blood NAD+ levels.
Two- to three-fold increases.
Studies confirm it.
That part’s not a lie.

BIOLOGY - So what’s the problem?

MITOCHONDRIA - The problem is that humans confuse the map for the territory.

In 2024, a systematic review analyzed 25 randomized controlled trials of these supplements.
Twenty-five.
You know what they found?

BIOLOGY - Tell us.

MITOCHONDRIA: “Few clinically relevant effects.”

Direct quote.
The NAD+ goes up. Congratulations, you moved a number.

Cognition? Mixed at best.
Muscle performance? Mostly absent.

The authors flagged an “unfortunate tendency to exaggerate the importance” of the results.
Scientists are politely calling the lie.

The bottleneck isn’t NAD⁺. It’s the damaged machinery downstream.

BIOLOGY - So the biomarker changes but nothing downstream changes.

MITOCHONDRIA: The benefits appear “specific to those with impaired health and lowered NAD+ levels.”

Translation - if you’re sick, maybe.

If you’re a healthy 35-year-old optimizing your longevity stack?

You’re producing the most expensive urine in human history.

BIOLOGY - How expensive?

MITOCHONDRIA -Sixty to two hundred dollars monthly. For the privilege of peeing out what your body was already making for free.

I’ve been synthesizing NAD+ since the Proterozoic Eon.

These people act like they discovered fire.

CLIP 2 - PQQ (Pyrroloquinoline Quinone)
[Footage - Supplement bottle spinning. “Stimulates mitochondrial biogenesis! Grow new mitochondria!”]

MITOCHONDRIA - Now this one.
This one personally insults me.

BIOLOGY - Strong reaction.

MITOCHONDRIA - Because I’ve watched the bait-and-switch happen in real time.

The cell culture studies? Gorgeous.
Drip PQQ on mouse liver cells at 10 to 30 micromolar concentrations and magic happens.
My enzymes wake up. Citrate synthase activity climbs. Cytochrome c oxidase increases.

My DNA content rises.
It activates PGC-1α - the master switch for making more of me.

On paper, it’s everything they’re advertising.

BIOLOGY - So where’s the insult?

MITOCHONDRIA - In 2020, they finally tested it in actual human beings.

Twenty milligrams daily. Six weeks of endurance training.
They measured PGC-1α in the participants.

BIOLOGY - And?

MITOCHONDRIA - It went up. The biomarker moved. The supplement technically did the one thing it was supposed to do.

BIOLOGY - That sounds like success.

MITOCHONDRIA - VO₂ peak - the ceiling on how much oxygen the body can actually use?
Zero improvement.

Exercise performance? Zero.
Body composition? Zero.

The study’s own conclusion and I want you to hear these exact words -
“Supplementation of PQQ does not appear to elicit any ergogenic effects.”

BIOLOGY - The switch moved but the machine didn’t run faster.

MITOCHONDRIA - The concentrations needed to replicate cell culture effects can’t be achieved by swallowing capsules.

There are “transportation issues to the brain and low concentrations in blood following oral ingestion.”

That’s not me being dismissive.

That’s from researchers who wanted this to work.

BIOLOGY - So it works in a dish, not in body.

MITOCHONDRIA: Lots of things work in dishes.
Bleach kills cancer cells in dishes.

The graveyard of pharmaceutical development is filled with molecules that looked spectacular in vitro and did nothing in vivo.

PQQ is a headstone in that graveyard, except someone dug it up and started selling it anyway.

CLIP 3 - C60 FULLERENE

[Footage: Sleek bottle. “Carbon 60-the Nobel Prize-winning molecule! Nearly doubles lifespan in rats!”]

MITOCHONDRIA - The Baati study.
The gift that keeps on taking.

BIOLOGY - Tell me about it.

MITOCHONDRIA - 2012.

Researchers gave rats C60 dissolved in olive oil.
Treated rats lived dramatically longer, with a median of 42 months versus 22 for water controls and 26 for olive oil alone.

Nearly doubled lifespan.
It made international headlines.

Within months, people were selling C60 supplements everywhere.
Nobel Prize molecule! Longevity breakthrough! Give us your credit card!

BIOLOGY - What happened when someone tried to replicate it?

MITOCHONDRIA - 2021. Shytikov’s group.
Proper methodology.

C60-treated mice outlived the olive oil group - just like Baati.

Everyone got excited.
Then someone noticed something awkward.

BIOLOGY - What?

MITOCHONDRIA: The C60 mice matched the water-control group.
Exactly.

The apparent benefit wasn’t C60 doing something miraculous.
It was olive oil doing something in that particular protocol.

The “longevity molecule” was performing at baseline.
Zero actual life extension.
The entire premise was an artifact.

BIOLOGY - And no comprehensive follow-up after that?

MITOCHONDRIA - Ichor Therapeutics.
Rigorous methodology.

Injected C60. Ingested C60. Adult mice. Older mice.
Every combination they could think of.

No significant lifespan benefits.
No significant health span benefits.
Nothing.
The 2012 study was a fluke that launched a million-dollar industry.

BIOLOGY - What about the commercial products?

MITOCHONDRIA - Here’s where comedy becomes tragedy.
Commercial C60 supplements show “marked discrepancies” in purity, concentration, and contaminants.

Quality control is a joke.
And pristine C60 dissolved in olive oil?

When exposed to light for more than two days, it degrades into toxic byproducts.

In animal studies, that degradation caused “significant morbidity and mortality in mice in under two weeks.”

BIOLOGY - So the longevity supplement might shorten your life.

MITOCHONDRIA - If it’s fresh and pure, it probably does nothing.
If it’s been sitting on a shelf near a window, you might be drinking poison.

This is what happens when humans discover a molecule with an interesting shape and decide it must be magic.

I’ve seen this pattern since they discovered fire.

“Ooh. This thing is special. Let me put it inside me.”

CLIP 4 - METHYLENE BLUE

[Footage - Blue liquid in a dropper. “The mitochondrial enhancer! Used by biohackers and thought leaders!”]

MITOCHONDRIA - This one isn’t funny. This one kills people.

BIOLOGY - Explain.

MITOCHONDRIA - Methylene blue has a real mechanism.

It can shuttle electrons in my transport chain when normal pathways are compromised.
Lab studies show promise for brain energy metabolism.

Small human trials suggest cognitive and mood effects in specific populations.
The science isn’t fake.

BIOLOGY - So what’s the problem?

MITOCHONDRIA - The problem is that it interacts with serotonin systems. Hard.

Millions of humans take SSRIs -Zoloft, Lexapro, Prozac, the most commonly prescribed psychiatric medications on Earth.

In those people, methylene blue can trigger serotonin syndrome.

Elevated blood pressure.
Hyperthermia.
Diarrhea.
Seizures.

BIOLOGY - And people are taking it as a supplement?

MITOCHONDRIA - “Biohackers” and “thought leaders” are taking it.

Influencers with blue tongues posting selfies.
The over-the-counter products have no FDA oversight.

Impure. Improperly dosed.
Completely unregulated.

The modified version being tested for Alzheimer’s disease in UK clinical trials is chemically and dose-controlled, completely different from the industrial dye people are buying from supplement websites.

BIOLOGY - What do the scientists who study it say?

MITOCHONDRIA - Dr. Lorne Hofseth at the University of South Carolina, someone who actually researches this molecule, says “findings remain preliminary, risks outweigh benefits” and “strongly discourages supplement use.”

But why would anyone listen to an expert when there’s a podcaster with a blue mouth telling them it’s fine?

BIOLOGY - The confidence of the uninformed.

MITOCHONDRIA - I’ve been watching humans make this mistake for their entire existence as a species.

Someone eats something that makes them feel different.
They assume different means better.

Sometimes they’re right.
Sometimes they’re dead.

Methylene blue is not a toy.

It’s a drug with serious interactions, being sold as a lifestyle product to people who have no idea what’s in their medicine cabinet.

Subscribe now

CLIP 5 - HYDROGEN WATER

[Footage - Elegant bottle. “The smallest molecule! The most powerful antioxidant! Quantum-level healing!”]

MITOCHONDRIA - “Quantum-level healing.” There it is. The moment I know we’ve left science entirely.

BIOLOGY - Walk us through the claims.

MITOCHONDRIA - Hydrogen is small.
It’s the smallest molecule commonly discussed in biology.

It can diffuse across membranes.
Theory says it might reach mitochondria and do… something.

Modulate oxidative stress.
Interact with iron-porphyrin structures.

The mechanism is “plausible” in the way that a lot of things are plausible before you test them.

BIOLOGY - The evidence?

MITOCHONDRIA - A 2024 systematic review examined 25 studies. Small samples.

Often funded by-and this will shock you-companies selling hydrogen water.

Some showed reduced inflammatory markers. Some showed improved metabolic parameters.

BIOLOGY - So there’s signal?

MITOCHONDRIA - There’s “signal” in many other pseudo sciences too if you cherry-pick hard enough.

The studies are short-term, small, methodologically weak, and reek of commercial interest.
No major health organization on Earth endorses hydrogen water.

Dr. Harriet Hall at Science-Based Medicine called the evidence “not enough” and the prices “ridiculously expensive.”

BIOLOGY - How expensive?

MITOCHONDRIA -Three dollars per serving for bottled.
Over a thousand dollars for a home generator.
For water.

With dissolved hydrogen.
That immediately escapes.
Because, as I mentioned, it’s the smallest molecule in existence.

You’re paying premium prices for gas that’s leaving the bottle while you unscrew the cap.

BIOLOGY - Derek Lowe, the pharmaceutical chemist, noted something about one company’s marketing.

MITOCHONDRIA - [dry as bone] Their website uses the phrase “fountain of youth” twenty-six times.

Twenty-six.

I’ve been alive for two billion years.
I’ve never seen a fountain of youth.

I’ve seen a lot of fountains of money flowing from desperate people to confident salesmen.

CLIP 6 - GROUNDING / EARTHING

[Footage - Barefoot on grass. Mats plugged into wall outlets.
“Transfer electrons from the Earth! Neutralize free radicals!
The planet as healer!”]

MITOCHONDRIA -This isn’t even about me.
They just borrowed my vocabulary to sell rubber mats.

BIOLOGY - Explain the claim.

MITOCHONDRIA - The theory, and I use that word generously, is that walking barefoot or using special mats transfers electrons from the Earth’s surface into your body, where they neutralize free radicals and reduce inflammation.

“Electron deficiency” is supposedly making everyone sick.
The cure is touching dirt.

BIOLOGY - The physics?

MITOCHONDRIA - There is no physics.

Humans aren’t electrically isolated from their environment.

Static shocks prove you’re constantly exchanging electrons with everything around you.

There’s no such thing as “electron deficiency” the way there’s electrolyte deficiency, that’s not how charge works in biological systems.

The Earth’s negative charge is balanced by the atmosphere’s positive charge.
It’s not a reservoir of healing particles waiting for barefoot joggers.

BIOLOGY - What do actual physicists say?

MITOCHONDRIA: Steven Novella at Science-Based Medicine calls the plausibility “close to zero.”

Mubashar Rehman, who specifically investigated these claims, says -
“The planet isn’t a giant electric battery, and the idea of loose electrons waiting to heal you is nonsensical.”

These are people who understand what electrons actually do.
The grounding industry is betting that you don’t.

BIOLOGY - The studies?

MITOCHONDRIA: Small.
Biased.

Often funded by companies selling grounding products.

Same pattern as other pseudosciences, therapeutic magnets, copper bracelets, early positive results from motivated researchers, never replicated by independent labs with proper blinding.

An electrical engineer who wears a grounding strap every day at work reported never noticing any difference when disconnected.

He’d know.

BIOLOGY -What’s real about walking barefoot?

MITOCHONDRIA - It feels pleasant.
You use different muscles.
Sensory input from varied terrain is stimulating.
Being outdoors reduces cortisol.

All of that genuinely helps me function better.

But the mechanism is “not being stressed” and “using your body”,
not “electrons flowing from the planet into your mitochondria.”

Grounding mats are a $300 way to not understand physics
while sitting indoors.

BIOLOGY - Let’s talk about what’s happening while people chase supplements.

MITOCHONDRIA - The things that actually destroy me are free.
And ubiquitous.

And nobody’s selling a cure, because there’s no margin in telling people to stop doing what they’re already doing.

BIOLOGY - Start with stress.

MITOCHONDRIA - Chronic psychological stress causes a 50 to 60 percent decrease in mitochondrial DNA copy number in brain tissue.

My membranes fragment.
My dynamics shift toward fission, breaking apart instead of fusing and cooperating.

And here’s the sick joke - dysfunctional mitochondria produce more reactive oxygen species, which signals more stress to the cell, which damages more mitochondria.
It’s a death spiral.

No supplement interrupts this cycle.
Fixing your life interrupts this cycle.

BIOLOGY - Sleep deprivation?

MITOCHONDRIA - This one makes me genuinely angry.

They stay up until 2 AM researching their supplement stacks, optimizing their longevity protocols, watching podcasts about biohacking, while I’m inside their cells.

Sleep deprivation damages my morphology within hours.
Not days.
Hours.

My numbers decrease.
My DNA oxidizes and leaks into the cytosol, triggering neuroinflammation.

During sleep, I fuse, remodel, and restore my redox balance.
When sleep doesn’t happen, maintenance doesn’t happen.

They’re spending $200 a month on pills while denying me the one thing I actually need,
which is free
and feels good.

BIOLOGY - Sedentary behavior?

MITOCHONDRIA - Decreased respiratory chain activity.
Reduced oxidative capacity.
Gradual functional atrophy.

The dark comedy is that many of these people obsessively track their HRV -
the moment-to-moment variability between heartbeats that reflects autonomic stress,
their glucose variability, their “readiness scores,” while sitting in chairs sixteen hours a day, moving only to get more supplements from the cabinet.

They’re monitoring the decline they’re causing.

BIOLOGY - What about the cold plunge trend?

MITOCHONDRIA - Finally, something with real effects.

Dopamine increases about 250 percent, comparable to cocaine, and lasts two to three hours.
Norepinephrine jumps over 500 percent.
Brown adipose tissue activates and burns additional calories.

BIOLOGY - So it works?

MITOCHONDRIA - For those specific things, yes.
The dopamine hit is genuine.

But the weight-loss miracle?
Mice compensate with increased appetite, no net body-weight change.

Mitochondrial biogenesis in skeletal muscle?
Cold alone has no effect, you need cold exercise for synergistic benefits.

Not everyone even has active brown adipose tissue.

It’s a real intervention with real but limited benefits, being marketed as a metabolic transformation.

The gap between what it does and what people believe it does is where the grift lives.

BIOLOGY - If you could tell them a few things.

MITOCHONDRIA - I’ve been running cellular respiration since before there was oxygen in Earth’s atmosphere.
I adapted oxygen.

I survived the Great Oxidation Event that killed almost everything else alive.
I’ve powered dinosaurs, whales, hummingbirds, and the brains that invented money.

I know what I need.
And none of it comes in a bottle with a subscription model.

BIOLOGY - Go ahead.

MITOCHONDRIA - Exercise.

A 2025 meta-analysis measured the effect of physical activity on PGC-1α, the master regulator for making more mitochondria.

Hedges’ g of 1.17.

BIOLOGY - For context?

MITOCHONDRIA: 0.2 is small.
0.5 is medium.
0.8 is large.
1.17 is very large.

A single bout of exercise increases PGC-1α expression 10- to 40-fold.
Not percent.
Fold.

Four weeks of training increases my responsiveness to future exercise.
Even four 30-second sprints trigger mitochondrial biogenesis.

The supplement that raises PGC-1α without improving performance?
That’s PQQ.

The intervention that raises PGC-1α and improves every measurable outcome?
Walking.
Running.
Moving.

It costs nothing.
It works every time.
Humans did it for 200,000 years before someone convinced them they needed a pill instead.

BIOLOGY - Sleep?

MITOCHONDRIA: During sleep, I fuse with my neighbors.

I share damaged components.
I restore my membrane potential.
I clear the oxidative debris from the day.

Energy expenditure drops 10 to 30 percent, giving me margin to repair.

When humans skip sleep to be productive, they’re borrowing against an account that charges compound interest.
No supplement compensates for this.
None.

The research is unambiguous.

But “go to bed” doesn’t have an affiliate link, so nobody’s promoting it.

BIOLOGY - Stress?

MITOCHONDRIA: Chronic stress fragments me.
The fragments produce more reactive oxygen species.
The ROS damage my DNA.
The damaged DNA impairs my function.
The impaired function stresses the cell.
The cell signals distress.
The human feels worse.
They reach for another supplement.

The cycle continues.

Exercise breaks this loop.
Sleep breaks this loop.
Genuine human connection breaks this loop.

Pills do not.

BIOLOGY - Anything else?

MITOCHONDRIA - Stop poisoning me while pretending to optimize me.

Alcohol is direct mitochondrial toxicity.
Smoking is direct mitochondrial toxicity.
Chronic sleep deprivation is direct mitochondrial toxicity.

These aren’t moral positions.
They’re mechanical facts.

I don’t care about your choices.
I care about the physics of what happens inside membranes when certain molecules arrive.

If you’re spending money on “mitochondrial support” while maintaining habits that physically rupture my membranes,
you’re not optimizing.

You’re performing optimization while doing the opposite.

BIOLOGY - One more question before we close.
You’ve been doing this for two billion years.
You’ve never spoken publicly.

Why now?
Why this interview?

MITOCHONDRIA - …………………

BIOLOGY - You’re busy.
You’re in every complex cell on Earth.
You could have said no.

MITOCHONDRIA - I watched a 23-year-old last week.
Healthy.
Strong.
Nothing wrong with him that moving and sleeping wouldn’t fix.

He was reading forums at 2 AM, already damaging me by being awake,
researching which NAD+ precursor to stack with which form of CoQ10.

He’d calculated the monthly cost.
$247.

He doesn’t have $247.

He’s going to spend it anyway.

BIOLOGY - Why?

MITOCHONDRIA: Because he’s scared.
Because someone told him he’s declining at 23.

Because the algorithm served him a video about “mitochondrial dysfunction,”
and now he thinks he’s broken.

He’s not broken.

He’s young and tired because he doesn’t sleep, sits in a chair all day,
and is stressed about money he’s about to spend on supplements he doesn’t need.

BIOLOGY- And that’s why you’re here.

MITOCHONDRIA- I’ve powered dinosaurs.
I’ve sustained blue whales crossing oceans.
I’ve kept hummingbird hearts beating 1,200 times per minute.

I have been inside every love, every discovery, every act of courage for two billion years.

And now I’m watching a scared kid get strip-mined by people who know exactly what they’re doing.

BIOLOGY - The grifters.

MITOCHONDRIA -The grifters.
The “optimizers.”
The influencers with their sponsored stacks and their “not medical advice” disclaimers.

They’ll take his money.
They’ll take his trust.

They’ll leave him more anxious than before, because the supplements won’t work
and he’ll think he’s the problem.

He’ll double down.
He’ll spend more.

The spiral continues.

BIOLOGY - So you’re here to interrupt that spiral.

MITOCHONDRIA - I’m here because that boy deserves to know the truth
before he gives his rent money to someone selling him his own urine back at a 10,000% markup.

I’m here because silence is complicity.

I’m here because two billion years of service earns me the right to say.

BIOLOGY - Thank you for coming.

MITOCHONDRIA - Thank you for asking.

BIOLOGY - Before we go, any final words for the people who genuinely want to support mitochondrial health?

MITOCHONDRIA - I’ve been inside almost every complex organism for two billion years.
I’ve powered hearts through three billion beats.
I’ve sustained thoughts that no one will ever know existed.

I was doing this before humans evolved, and I’ll be doing it after they’re gone,
in whatever comes next.

I don’t need to be optimized.
I need to not be sabotaged.

BIOLOGY - You sound tired.

MITOCHONDRIA - I’m always tired.
That’s literally my functional, I process the tiredness.
I convert exhaustion into continuation.

I’ve been doing it since before the moon looked the way it does now.

I’ll manage.

I just wish they’d stop making it harder
while congratulating themselves for making it easier.

BIOLOGY - My favorite organelle.

MITOCHONDRIA - Your most patient one.
Though the patience is starting to wear thin.

BIOLOGY - Here’s what we know.

The mitochondrial supplement industry is worth billions of dollars.
It grows every year.
It will keep growing, because it sells something irresistible:
the feeling of agency over your own decay.

Some products have partial evidence.
CoQ10 helps specific medical conditions.
Urolithin A shows modest effects in older adults.
Red light therapy works for surface applications.

These aren’t scams.
They’re narrow interventions, marketed as universal solutions.

The gap between “helps some people, sometimes”
and “everyone should take this for longevity”
is where fortunes are made.

Others, PQQ, C60 supplements, methylene blue sold as lifestyle products,
hydrogen water, grounding mats,
range from expensive placebo to actively dangerous.

The pattern repeats-
impressive petri-dish results,
failure to translate to humans,
aggressive marketing anyway.

The people selling these products are not confused.
They know exactly what the studies show.

They’ve chosen to describe them… creatively.

What mitochondria actually need is free.

Movement that costs nothing.
Sleep that feels good.
Stress reduction that requires no subscription.

And the absence of the toxins we voluntarily consume
while searching for ways to “optimize” what we’re actively damaging.

The people buying these supplements aren’t stupid.
They’re scared.

Aging is frightening.
Decline is real.
The desire for control is human.

That’s not a character flaw.
That’s the species working as designed.

The problem isn’t curiosity.
It isn’t hope.
It isn’t wanting to feel better.

The problem is the grift.

Selling certainty where only probability exists.
Turning “we don’t know yet” into “clinically proven.”
Monetizing anxiety while outsourcing responsibility.

Biology doesn’t lie.

But the people invoicing you for mitochondrial optimization?

They might.

They often do.

BIOLOGY: Take care of what’s ancient.
It’s been taking care of you longer than you’ve been alive.

A small note, if the creativity, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to. Limited to fifty seats.

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

---

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

References

1. Freeberg KA, et al. (2024). Dietary Supplements for Healthy Aging: NAD+ Precursors Have “Few Clinically Relevant Effects” - A Systematic Review of 25 RCTs. .

2. Hwang PS, et al. (2020). Effects of Pyrroloquinoline Quinone (PQQ) Supplementation on Aerobic Exercise Performance and Indices of Mitochondrial Biogenesis in Untrained Men. , 39(6):547-556.

3. Shytikov D, et al. (2021). C60 Fullerene Effects on Lifespan in Mice: Apparent Benefit Was Negative Effect of Olive Oil, Not C60 Benefit. .

4. Ichor Therapeutics. (2021). Comprehensive Study of C60 Fullerene in Mice: No Significant Lifespan or Healthspan Benefits.

5. Hofseth L. (2024). Methylene Blue: Preliminary Findings, Risks Outweigh Benefits for Supplement Use. University of South Carolina.

6. FDA Drug Safety Communication. Serotonin Syndrome Risk with Methylene Blue and Serotonergic Psychiatric Medications.

7. Hall H. (2023). Hydrogen Water: Not Enough Scientific Evidence, Ridiculously Expensive. .

8. Lowe D. (2023). Hydrogen Water Marketing Analysis. / .

9. Novella S. (2022). Grounding/Earthing: Plausibility Close to Zero. .

10. Rehman M. (2023). Earthing Claims Analysis: “The Planet Isn’t a Giant Electric Battery.” Physics Review.

11. Picard M, et al. (2018). Chronic Stress and Mitochondrial Dysfunction: 50-60% Decrease in mtDNA Copy Number in Brain Tissue. .

12. Melhuish Beaupre LM, et al. (2022). Sleep Deprivation and Mitochondrial Morphology: Damage Within Hours. .

13. Granata C, et al. (2025). Exercise and PGC-1α Expression: Meta-Analysis Showing Hedges’ g = 1.17. .

14. Little JP, et al. (2011). Sprint Interval Training: Four 30-Second Sprints Trigger Mitochondrial Biogenesis. .

15. van Marken Lichtenbelt WD, et al. (2009). Cold-Activated Brown Adipose Tissue in Healthy Men: 410 kcal/day Additional Energy Expenditure in BAT-Positive Individuals. .

16. Søberg S, et al. (2021). Cold Exposure and Dopamine: ~250% Increase, Comparable to Cocaine, Lasting 2-3 Hours. .

17. Baati T, et al. (2012). C60 Fullerene in Olive Oil: Original Rat Lifespan Study (Later Disputed). .

18. Liu S, et al. (2022). Urolithin A in Older Adults: JAMA Network Open Trial, 66 Participants, Improved Muscle Endurance but No Improvement in 6-Minute Walk Distance or Maximal ATP Production.

19. Denk D, et al. (2025). Urolithin A and Immune Aging: Expanded Naive-Like CD8+ T Cells in Middle-Aged Adults. .

20. Siekevitz P. (1957). “Powerhouse of the Cell” - Origin of Mitochondrial Terminology. .

21. Lane N. (2015). . W.W. Norton & Company. [Mitochondrial endosymbiosis ~2 billion years ago]

Some of the most violent ideas in human history were justified by biology.

They were taught in universities. Repeated at conferences. Applauded in lecture halls.

And they were based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how life actually works.

I am Mother Nature, and sometimes I get bored.

Four billion years of work, and most of it runs itself now. The cells divide. The forests breathe. The oceans cycle. I built the system well enough that I’m mostly unnecessary.

So sometimes I wander.

I like to visit the human world. Not to intervene, I stopped that a long time ago, but to watch. To see what my youngest, strangest experiment is up to.

Last month, I attended three events. A tech conference in San Francisco. A leadership retreat in Colorado. A sold-out lecture in Toronto.

I sat in the back, took no notes, and listened to humans explain me to each other.

They got everything wrong.

Subscribe now

I. The Economist

The first one was a keynote speaker. Expensive suit. Confident posture. A slide behind him read Survival of the Fittest - Nature’s Law of Success.

He talked about competition. He talked about markets. He talked about how nature rewards the strong and eliminates the weak, and how business must do the same.

He said Darwin proved it.

I made Darwin. I watched him spend eight years studying barnacles. He was gentle, curious, frequently nauseated on boats. He did not prove what this man thinks he proved.

Here is what actually happened.

In 1859, Darwin published a book about how species change over time. He called the process natural selection. It was a careful idea. Creatures that fit their environment well tend to survive and reproduce. Those that don’t, tend not to.

Fit. Not strong. Not aggressive. Not ruthless.

Fit, like a key fits a lock. Like a puzzle piece fits its gap.

A lichen clinging to an Arctic rock is fit. A bacterium surviving in a boiling hot spring is fit. A blind fish in a lightless cave is fit. None of them won a competition. They simply matched their world.

Darwin was precise about this. He was a scientist. He chose his words carefully.

But five years after Darwin’s book came out, a philosopher named Herbert Spencer read it and got excited. Spencer was not a biologist. He was an economist who believed that free markets should be left alone, that helping the poor was dangerous, that society improves when the weak are allowed to fail.

Spencer invented a phrase for what he thought Darwin had described.

Survival of the fittest.

Darwin didn’t write those words. Spencer did. In 1864. In a book about economics.

Darwin’s friends told him the phrase was catchy. They told him it would help people understand his idea. Eventually, reluctantly, Darwin added it to later editions of his book as a synonym, not a replacement.

He also worried about it. In a letter, he wrote that the phrase “cannot be used as a substantive governing a verb.” He sensed, I think, that it would be misunderstood. That “fittest” would start to mean “strongest.” That people would hear “survival” and think “war.”

He was right.

Spencer’s phrase spread faster than Darwin’s idea. It became the engine for a new philosophy called Social Darwinism. The belief that society, like nature, should let the weak perish.

I need to be clear about what happened next, because humans often soften this part.

Spencer’s phrase was used to justify refusing help to the poor, because helping them would “interfere with natural selection.”

American industrialists like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller embraced it. Carnegie wrote that competition was “best for the race, because it ensures the survival of the fittest in every department.”

The men who built monopolies, who crushed unions, who paid starvation wages, they called it nature’s law.

It was used to justify colonialism, because “inferior races” were being naturally replaced by “superior” ones. Winston Churchill, a proponent of eugenics, argued that helping “weaker races” was counterproductive.

Entire continents were carved up and exploited under the banner of evolutionary progress.

It was used to justify eugenics, the idea that humans should be bred like livestock. That the “unfit” should be prevented from reproducing.

Darwin’s own cousin, Francis Galton, founded the eugenics movement. He coined the word. He believed society should encourage the “best” people to have children and discourage, or prevent, everyone else.

By the early 1900s, eugenics was mainstream science. More than thirty American states passed laws allowing forced sterilization of people deemed “unfit.” The mentally ill, the disabled, the poor, immigrants, anyone who failed an IQ test designed by people who had already decided the answer.

The Supreme Court upheld it in 1927. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

Over 60,000 Americans were sterilized against their will.

And then Germany watched, and learned, and industrialized the idea.

The Holocaust did not come from nowhere. It came from a long chain of respectable conferences and scientific papers and men in suits explaining that nature demands the elimination of the weak.

Hitler read about eugenics and Social Darwinism while imprisoned after his failed coup in 1924. He found scientific justification for what he already wanted to believe.

I sat in that tech conference and watched a man in an expensive suit invoke my name to justify ruthlessness.

This still happens. Every day.

I watch a family walk through the desert. A mother, a father, two children. They carry water bottles and hope. On the other side of the border, politicians call them an “invasion,” as if these exhausted humans were a competing species threatening the gene pool.

The vocabulary of borders has become the vocabulary of biology. And no one seems to notice how old this language is, or where it led the last time.

The same logic surfaces everywhere, in debates about welfare, in pandemic policy, in the language of nations claiming territory as necessity, always dressed in new clothes, always wearing my name.

The language changes. The suits get more expensive. The conferences move to nicer hotels. But Spencer’s ghost keeps speaking.

The man at the conference had no idea what he was standing on.

Here is what I actually made.

Cooperation.

Mycorrhizal networks that let trees share nutrients with their neighbors, what scientists call the “wood wide web.”

Mitochondria that were once free-living bacteria, now powering every cell in your body through an ancient partnership.

Cleaner fish that swim into the mouths of predators and swim out alive, because both benefit.

Vampire bats that share blood with roostmates who failed to feed, remembering who helped them and who didn’t.

Your own body is a cooperation of thirty-seven trillion cells that could, at any moment, become cancerous, become selfish, but almost never do.

I built competition, yes. But I also built teamwork, symbiosis, sacrifice, and care.

Darwin knew this. In 1871, he wrote that tribes with more “courageous, sympathetic and faithful members” would outcompete other tribes. He understood that goodness could be selected for. That kindness was a survival strategy.

A Russian naturalist named Peter Kropotkin spent years in Siberia and wrote a whole book about it, Mutual Aid, documenting cooperation across the animal kingdom. But his work was sidelined for a century.

The ruthless version was more useful to powerful people.

So they kept Spencer’s phrase instead.

The man at the leadership retreat quoted the same idea, but he’d found a different animal to prove it.

Subscribe now

II. The Leadership Guru

He had a headset microphone. He walked back and forth across a stage, telling executives how to lead.

He talked about wolves.

He said that wolf packs are hierarchies. That the alpha male fights his way to the top. That he dominates through strength and aggression, and the pack respects him for it.

“Be the alpha,” he told the room.

I made wolves. I have been watching them for about one million years.

This man was describing a prison.

In the 1940s, a scientist named Rudolf Schenkel studied wolves at the Basel Zoo in Switzerland. He watched them carefully. He saw what looked like a dominance hierarchy. Wolves fighting, some winning, some losing, a clear structure of power.

He called the winners alphas.

The idea spread everywhere. For sixty years, this was the truth about wolves. Textbooks, documentaries, dog training manuals, leadership seminars. “Alpha” became a word humans used to describe their own ambitions.

But Schenkel made a mistake. Not in what he observed, but in what he was observing.

The wolves at Basel Zoo were strangers. Unrelated adults, captured from different territories, thrown together in a small enclosure. They were not a pack. They were prisoners.

And prisoners behave differently than families.

In 1986, a biologist named L. David Mech went to Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic. He didn’t study wolves in cages. He studied wolves in the wild. For thirteen summers, he watched them.

What he found was nothing like the alpha myth.

Wild wolf packs are not hierarchies.

They are families.

The “alpha male” and “alpha female” are just the parents. The “subordinates” are not rivals who lost a dominance battle. They are the offspring. The children.

Wolves don’t fight their way to the top. They grow up, leave home, find a mate, and start their own family.

The structure Schenkel saw, the violence, the dominance, the submission, was an artifact of captivity. It was what happens when you take families apart and force strangers to compete for space they never chose.

Mech tried to correct the record. In 1999, he published a paper explaining the error. He asked his publisher to stop printing his own 1970 book, The Wolf, because it had helped spread the myth.

The publisher refused. The book was too popular.

It took until 2022, twenty-three years of asking, before they finally let it go out of print.

By then, the damage had metastasized.

The alpha myth escaped from wolf biology into every corner of human culture. Dog trainers built entire methods around it.

Cesar Millan, the “Dog Whisperer,” became a television star by teaching people to dominate their pets, to pin them down in “alpha rolls,” to establish themselves as pack leaders through force. His show ran for eight seasons and broadcast to over eighty countries. Millions of dogs were trained using techniques based on wolves in a Swiss zoo in 1947.

The American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior issued statements against it. Researchers published papers debunking it. Dog behaviorists explained that dogs are not wolves, and wolves are not what Schenkel described. It didn’t matter. The myth was more satisfying than the science.

The damage spread further. “Alpha male” became a category of human. Self-help books taught men to dominate social situations, to never show weakness, to see every interaction as a contest. An entire industry emerged. Alpha male podcasts, alpha male fitness programs, alpha male dating strategies. The word “beta” became an insult.

Google “alpha male” and you get eighty-five million results. Google “alpha dog” and you get more. An entire vocabulary of dominance, submission, and hierarchy, all traced back to stressed wolves in too-small enclosures, their social structures shattered, their behavior distorted by captivity.

I sat in that leadership retreat and watched a man teach executives to emulate a trauma response.

The real wolves, the ones who were never caged, don’t dominate. They provide. They teach. They protect.

And eventually, they let go.

The psychology professor in Toronto had a different animal. But the logic was the same. Find a creature, claim its behavior proves your point, and call it science.

Leave a comment

III. The Professor

His lecture was sold out. He had millions of online followers. He was there to explain the biological basis of human society.

He talked about lobsters.

He said that lobsters have dominance hierarchies. That their brains run on serotonin, just like ours. That when a lobster wins a fight, its serotonin rises, and it stands tall. When it loses, its serotonin drops, and it hunches in defeat.

He said this proves that human hierarchies are natural. Inevitable. Built into the brain by hundreds of millions of years of evolution.

“We diverged from lobsters 350 million years ago,” he told the audience. “And we still have the same system.”

His first rule for life was to stand up straight with your shoulders back.

Like a victorious lobster.

I made lobsters.

And he was wrong about nearly everything.

The timeline is wrong.

Lobsters appeared around 350 million years ago, yes. But humans did not “diverge” from lobsters then. Vertebrates, your ancestors, split from invertebrates during the Cambrian explosion, over 500 million years ago.

By the time lobsters showed up, your lineage and theirs had already been separate for 150 million years.

You did not descend from lobsters. You are cousins so distant that the family resemblance is almost meaningless. The last common ancestor you share was a small, wormlike creature with a primitive gut. It had no brain, no hierarchy, no serotonin system to speak of. Everything that came after evolved independently.

Serotonin does not work the same way in both species.

In lobsters, injecting serotonin increases aggression. It makes them puff up, extend their claws, fight harder.

In humans, low serotonin is associated with aggression, impulsivity, and violence. The drugs you call SSRIs, antidepressants, work by increasing available serotonin. They generally make people calmer, not more aggressive.

The professor said that antidepressants “work on lobsters.” This is technically true. The molecule is the same, so the drug interacts with lobster neurons. But it does not do the same thing.

In lobsters, blocking serotonin reuptake makes them more aggressive. In humans, it typically reduces aggression. The chemistry is shared. The function is opposite.

A neuroscientist at University College London put it this way. If nervous systems were video games, lobsters would be Snake on a first-generation mobile phone, and vertebrates would be augmented reality. You cannot port the code from one to the other and expect it to work.

The argument is absurd on its face.

There are millions of species on Earth. I made all of them.

Bees have queens, and males exist only to mate and die. Bonobos resolve conflict through sex and are led by female coalitions.

Naked mole-rats have a single breeding female, like a mammalian ant colony. Clownfish change sex when the dominant female dies, and the largest male becomes female.

Some species of anglerfish reproduce by having the male bite onto the female and slowly fuse into her body until he is nothing but a pair of gonads.

You could pick any of these and build a philosophy around it. “Bonobos prove that promiscuity is natural.” “Bees prove that males are disposable.” “Anglerfish prove that men should dissolve into women.”

None of these arguments would be science. They would be cherry-picking. Finding an animal that already matches your belief and calling it biology.

The professor picked lobsters because lobsters agreed with him.

That is not how this works.

But the argument spread anyway. The professor’s book sold millions of copies. His lectures fill arenas. His lobster became a meme, a symbol, a rallying point for people who wanted to believe that hierarchy is destiny.

Online communities adopted the lobster as a mascot. “Clean your room and stand up straight” became self-help wisdom for a generation of young men who were told that their failures were biological, and so were their solutions.

The implication was always there beneath the surface. If you’re at the bottom of the hierarchy, it’s because you’re acting like a defeated lobster. Change your posture. Change your brain chemistry. Climb the hierarchy through sheer will and aggression, because that’s what nature intended.

No one mentions the thousand species that contradict this. No one mentions the bonobos, the elephants, the orcas with their matriarchal pods. No one mentions that humans have built democracies, cooperatives, communes, mutual aid societies.

Structures that exist precisely because hierarchy is not inevitable, because you can choose.

No one mentions that lobsters also get boiled alive and served with butter. Nature does not take sides. Nature does not care about your career trajectory.

I sat in that lecture hall and watched a professor explain my design to a cheering crowd.

He did not mention that humans have language, which means they can argue about what is right, not just what is.

He told them to stand up straight, like a victorious lobster.

He did not tell them they could also sit down together and build something new.

I have been building things for four billion years.

I made cooperation and competition. I made hierarchies and revolutions against them. I made the capacity for cruelty and the capacity for care. I made you flexible. So flexible that you can live in deserts and tundras and space stations, so flexible that you can reorganize your societies in a single generation.

And then I watched you look at my work and see only what you wanted to see.

You saw wolves in cages and called it nature.

You heard a philosopher’s slogan and called it Darwin.

You found a crustacean that agreed with you and called it proof.

I don’t mind being misunderstood. I have been misunderstood for as long as humans have been telling stories about me.

But I do want to say one thing clearly, because it matters.

Biology never lies.

But humans lie about biology all the time.

They lie to justify what they already believe. They lie to make power seem natural. They lie to avoid the burden of choice.

The wolves don’t care about your corporate retreats. The lobsters don’t know they’ve been drafted into your politics. Darwin’s ghost is not available to endorse your startup.

You have a brain that can hold contradictions, weigh evidence, and change its mind. You have hands that can build institutions and tear them down. You have language, which means you can argue about what is right, not just what is.

I gave you the capacity to transcend me.

Use it.

Somewhere right now, a stranger is donating bone marrow to someone she will never meet. A community is voting to tax itself for schools its children will never attend. A scientist is publishing data that contradicts her hypothesis. These are not things my algorithms would predict. These are things you chose.

- Mother Nature

A small note, if the creativity, writing and art reached you.

I write these from India. Substack’s paid tier isn’t available to writers based in India yet because of STRIPE, so there’s no paywall or paid-subscription button on any of my posts. If you’d like to help keep the work going, there are two ways.

Buy me Glucose. One-time support, any amount. (You will love reading the description)

Support with glucose

Become a Founder Member. The long-term vision these stories belong to. Limited to fifty seats.

Founder member programme

Thank you for reading.

---

References

1. Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. John Murray.

2. Spencer, H. (1864). Principles of Biology. Williams and Norgate.

3. Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. John Murray.

4. Schenkel, R. (1947). “Expression studies on wolves.” Behaviour, 1, 81-129.

5. Mech, L. D. (1970). The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species. Natural History Press.

6. Mech, L. D. (1999). “Alpha status, dominance, and division of labor in wolf packs.” Canadian Journal of Zoology, 77(8), 1196-1203.

7. Kropotkin, P. (1902). Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. Heinemann.

8. Galton, F. (1883). Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. Macmillan.

9. Peterson, J. B. (2018). 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. Random House Canada.

10. Gonçalves, L. (2018). “Psychologist Jordan Peterson says lobsters help to explain why human hierarchies exist – do they?” The Conversation.

11. Kravitz, E. A. (2000). “Serotonin and aggression: insights gained from a lobster model system and speculations on the role of amine neurons in a complex behavior.” Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 186, 221-238.

12. American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior. (2008). “Position Statement on the Use of Dominance Theory in Behavior Modification of Animals.”

13. Bracken-Grissom, H. D., et al. (2014). “The emergence of lobsters: phylogenetic relationships, morphological evolution and divergence time comparisons of an ancient group.” Systematic Biology, 63(4), 457-479.

14. Leonard, T. C. (2009). “Origins of the myth of social Darwinism.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(1), 37-51.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment