Is Zuckerberg Transformed by Testosterone? What No One Is Telling You About His Most Controversial Decision

In 2023, the man who controls some of the world’s most influential platforms, Mark Zuckerberg, experienced an unexpected event. While practicing mixed martial arts —a recent hobby that had piqued his interest— he suffered a severe and painful knee injury. What seemed like a common accident became the trigger for a series of events that would change his way of thinking and acting in the digital sphere, and could once again bring us all to the edge of the precipice.

Zuckerberg, known for being a somewhat reserved and meticulous figure, underwent an advanced medical procedure to speed up his recovery. During this process, an innovative treatment was introduced, sparking great curiosity. As is his custom, he decided to share it with the world in a post on his social media. The surprising part wasn’t just the treatment, but the impact it had: his post didn’t go viral. In fact, it was almost ignored. In a universe where anything has the potential to go viral, how is it possible that the creator of Meta failed to connect with his audience?

The answer to this question became the turning point. Zuckerberg was forced to launch an internal investigation, discovering that the algorithms and third-party verification systems operating on Meta’s platforms had blocked his content. The reason: the information in the post couldn’t be verified immediately. This deeply concerned Mark, who began to consider that the algorithms might be holding back a great deal of content with viral potential.

This incident led Zuckerberg to make a groundbreaking decision. Just a week ago, he announced that Meta would cease its external checks and change how the algorithms filtered content. From now on, his goal would be to allow the flow of information to be freer and less restricted, removing the barriers imposed by third-party verification. The aim is for Meta to become a major provider of controversial information, much like Elon Musk's X (formerly Twitter).

However, this decision, although seemingly liberating, has raised much concern on the global internet level. Some compare it to the policy of X, a platform where controversial, unverified, and sometimes highly dangerous information spreads uncontrollably. In a world where misinformation can quickly become truth for millions if repeated continuously, the question is: are we really prepared for this kind of freedom?

The concern is valid. Without previous restrictions, Meta’s platforms could become a breeding ground for the spread of conspiracy theories, fake news, and content that, in many cases, could be damaging to collective knowledge and lacking in critical thinking. This is the dilemma Zuckerberg faces today: allowing a free flow of content regardless of its truthfulness, or continuing to control what is shared more strictly.

However, what has attracted the most attention is a theory that has circulated among the most avid observers. According to some, Zuckerberg’s decision might be influenced by more than just a business strategy. There is talk of a possible transformation in his behavior and attitude. After his medical intervention, during which he was administered steroids (not anabolic) as part of his treatment, many claim his personality has radically changed.

For many, the alleged use of testosterone by Zuckerberg might have altered his character, reprogramming his brain, leading him to adopt a more aggressive, bold, and less moderate attitude. Some even compare him to figures like Donald Trump, who are attributed with a more dominant, aggressive, and extroverted personality, to say the least. The question that arises is: how does testosterone really influence human behavior? Could it have modified his vision on controlling information and his willingness to allow content to circulate without restrictions?

The science behind this personality change is more complex than many think. Studies have shown that testosterone does not automatically turn someone into a more "macho" or "dominant" person. In fact, studies suggest that testosterone can make a person more competitive, aggressive, and assertive, but not necessarily smarter or more capable of leading effectively. In primates, for example, testosterone does not significantly alter social hierarchies; it simply makes individuals behave more aggressively or territorially. A "beta" male will never become an "alpha" male, but the "beta" will become more cruel and ruthless toward those of lesser rank, according to scientists like Robert Sapolsky in primates.

This phenomenon has been documented on numerous occasions in the world of athletes, where the use of testosterone has been linked to erratic and aggressive behavior. A famous example is some bodybuilders who, after consuming excessive doses of testosterone, have experienced drastic changes in temperament and personality, sometimes leading to destructive and self-destructive behavior. However, this does not mean they become "superhumans" or the definitive leaders of their fields.

Mark Zuckerberg is not immune to these kinds of theories. In fact, his transition from a discreet "nerd" to a more "tough" and public figure could be seen as part of a public relations strategy, rather than a radical personality change driven by hormones. Just like Jeff Bezos, who went from a shy businessman to a corporate power icon with a physique similar to Vin Diesel, Zuckerberg may simply be following a similar path to reinforce his presence and authority in an increasingly competitive world.

What is undeniable is that this "transformation" has been carefully crafted to project an image of strong, bold, and, above all, "masculine" leadership. Big tech companies don’t just sell products; they also sell an image, a narrative that users associate with success, power, and dominance. And in this regard, Zuckerberg is playing the same game many have before him.

The problem is that this image manipulation could have much deeper repercussions. Instead of being a simple transformation of style, it could be altering the way Zuckerberg makes key decisions about the information circulating on his platforms. Is his new, more risky approach a direct response to his experience with testosterone? Or is it just a strategy to stay relevant in a digital world that no longer forgives "shy" leaders? Is the "revenge of the nerds" just about finally becoming what they once despised?

And so we come to the question many fear: if Meta allows more unverified content to circulate freely, how will this affect society as a whole? Social media platforms have immense power to shape public opinion, to construct realities, and sometimes, to destroy them. In the hands of people who prioritize profitability over responsibility, this power could be more dangerous than ever.

The future of information is at stake. Will it be a world freer from censorship, or a plague of uncontrolled misinformation?