Peter Attia, M.D.

From an evolutionary perspective, I get it.

The desire to have as many partners as possible increases your probability of success.

And is that rooted in evolution of reproduction or is that rooted in the evolution of status in a way that is distinct from reproduction?

Which is interesting.

So this is the first time we're basically talking about sex independent of reproduction.

Is there any other species that does what we do as humans, which is, so you and your husband have a 16-year-old and- That's it.

Okay.

So in two years or three years when he's off in college- Oh, boo-hoo, don't talk about it.

I know, I know, it's terrible, right?

So you guys will have done your job as parents.

Okay, but my point is the love you will have for each other, the support you will have for each other is really not in the service of making sure your genes survive anymore.

Are there other examples of animals that continue in that behavior, which is when they're past their reproductive age, when their offspring are gone, they stay together?

So elephants and all these other long-lived mammals stay together?

This is kind of another human socialization then.

Is there an evolutionary reason for why humans specifically stay monogamous even after it's not necessary for the survival of their offspring?

And they're still acting that way.

The same genes are being transcribed as though they had kids.

So again, going back to testosterone and estrogen, I want to talk a little bit about estrogen now.

So obviously estrogen is a very important hormone for men and women.

It's appreciated more, I think, in women than men.