PDA

View Full Version : human stature heredity and milieu



MOESAN
15-01-16, 11:47
personal answer I took out of the thread about Neolithic and Bronze Ireland

without putting my foot on a slipping ground, forgotten all national proud or sociological-political-medical theory, I recall some scientists found a mean of 1m76 for Harappa people so higher than BMAC people as a whole (1m67-1m71 roughly said except a place with 1m63). Elite only? (old problem!)- the question: where they eating more meat than others? classical anthropology classified them as 'mediterranean' types of 'eurafrican' type on the way to so called 'indo-afghan' type; they were well differentiated from the steppic physical mean types of Andronovo by example.

MOESAN
05-02-16, 16:51
I'm not a specialist in bones, but I want to communicate some personal observations for the worth they are
Very often I've the impression a lot of people think stature increase is only linked to good health, good food and high social class level; none of this factors is out of imput, of course. But the qualitiy of food shows littler differences TODAY in our so called developped countries between different social classes, even if some differences are still seen.
And higher stature DOESN'T MEAN better health, as it seems to be the "religion", even kept some rare diseases aside as popularily said 'gigantismus' of every kind.
of my observations a stated or believed stating:
-head mensurations, slightly modified in internal proportions, don't increase in the same proportion than stature
-always speaking about proportions, shoulders are narrower, apparently chestcase in less voluminous, humerus (upside part of arm) is longer compared to forearm
-hands and feet seem long enough yet, compared to the whole, maybe the breadth is lesser?
As a whole, the feeling is a less robust skeleton compared to ancient generations; here I speak of the external aspect, quantitative, not the qualitative aspect of bones constitution.
at an inidividual level, I red the practice of some sports at high level during puberty period can limit the increase in length of long bones. Some effects can be judged as bad like the partial crushing of joints cartilages slowing production of chondrocytes, other effects are in fact rather better, as increase of the bone mass spite shorter length.
It seems oxygenation at some stages of skeleton formation could accelerate the process of ossification at the depend of lenghtening; by the way sport augments oxygenation.
In the 70's (?) (I'm not sure pf the date) a sport doctor of Stellenbosch studied rugbymen of diverse generations and said the younger players, more often grewed in towns than their predecessors, were higher statured but less solidly built and less strong, what obliged them to do more indoor musculation than the elders having worked in farms.
the today evidence is that motorized generations are high statured but comparatively poorly muscled.
Just for what it's worth of.

LeBrok
06-02-16, 06:06
statured but less solidly built and less strong, what obliged them to do more indoor musculation than the elders having worked in farms.
the today evidence is that motorized generations are high statured but comparatively poorly muscled.
Just for what it's worth of.
Comparison of modern/recent from 1960 to 2010 to before, could be screwed up by high level of hormones and antibiotics in animal feed, which was later consumed by people giving them toller statue than naturally they could accomplished. Recent trends of going away from these practices could shrink new generation of people for the first time. I've spent half an hour trying to find recent statistics online but couldn't. Anyway, I'm confident that we are not going to see increase of height anymore in developed countries, but most likely some shrinkage.

Interesting site:
http://ourworldindata.org/data/food-agriculture/human-height/

MOESAN
04-03-16, 20:14
Comparison of modern/recent from 1960 to 2010 to before, could be screwed up by high level of hormones and antibiotics in animal feed, which was later consumed by people giving them toller statue than naturally they could accomplished. Recent trends of going away from these practices could shrink new generation of people for the first time. I've spent half an hour trying to find recent statistics online but couldn't. Anyway, I'm confident that we are not going to see increase of height anymore in developed countries, but most likely some shrinkage.

Interesting site:
http://ourworldindata.org/data/food-agriculture/human-height/

I agree, I was thinking too in this possibility of hormones and antibiotics given to meat-cattle, but I did not know how these products were assimilated by human organism. But when we look at the obesity problem of today we can infer some types of industrial food have imput upon our body development.

LeBrok
04-03-16, 23:20
I agree, I was thinking too in this possibility of hormones and antibiotics given to meat-cattle, but I did not know how these products were assimilated by human organism. But when we look at the obesity problem of today we can infer some types of industrial food have imput upon our body development.
Not only in beef but also in poultry and pork. Basically all meat was, and to some degree still is, "contaminated" with hormones and antibiotics.
I was only thinking about the height, but you might be right, that growing fat might be related to this too.