PDA

View Full Version : Dutch men and Latvian women are the tallest in the world, new study finds



Maciamo
26-07-16, 10:42
A new study (https://elifesciences.org/content/5/e13410) in collaboration with the World Health Organisation compares the evolution of body height by gender over a century, from 1914 to 2014. It confirms that Dutch men are still the tallest in the world at 183 cm (6ft), a status they have held for several decades. Latvian women overtook Scandinavian, Dutch and German and have become the world's tallest, at 170 cm (5ft 7in).

Here is the BBC article (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36888541).

The nations with the tallest men in 2014 (1914 ranking in brackets):


Netherlands (12)
Belgium (33)
Estonia (4)
Latvia (13)
Denmark (9)
Bosnia and Herzegovina (19)
Croatia (22)
Serbia (30)
Iceland (6)
Czech Republic (24)
Germany (34)
Slovenia (31)
Norway (2)
France (42)
Sweden (1)
Finland (25)
Slovakia (20)
Australia (15)
Lithuania (16)
Ireland (43)


It's interesting that the tallest men are found in countries with high percentages of Y-haplogroup I1 and I2, but not necessarily those with the highest WHG ancestry. I suppose that the reason why Finnish men aren't taller (despite 28% of I1) is because of their 6% of Mongoloid admixture. Likewise, the Swedes and Norwegians may have intermarried more with the Saami during the course of the 20th century, thus counteracting the growth brought by better nutrition. It would be interesting to see if there is a north-south gradient for height mirroring the percentage of Saami ancestry. It is to be expected since the Danes overtook them and lack a Saami population or Mongoloid admixture.

North Americans fell sharply in the ranking, but that is almost certainly due to to immigration from short stature countries, notably from Latin America, South Asia and East Asia. There is a good chance that Caucasian Americans grew as fast as Europeans, if not more.


The nations with the tallest women in 2014 (1914 ranking in brackets):


Latvia (28)
Netherlands (38)
Estonia (16)
Czech Republic (69)
Serbia (93)
Slovakia (26)
Denmark (11)
Lithuania (41)
Belarus (42)
Ukraine (43)
Slovenia (76)
Iceland (3)
Finland (45)
Germany (23)
Australia (29)
Bosnia and Herzegovina (46)
Sweden (1)
Croatia (135)
Norway (2)
Tonga (7)


Baltic, Slavic and Germanic countries top the list, all countries with considerable ancestry from the Corded Ware culture.

Surprising how tall Tongan women are, and how tall they already were 100 years ago!


Also of interest, the highest growth spurts in 100 years among males was observed in Iran (+16cm), followed by most of Europe (except Scandinavia), East Asia and Latin America. Iranian men were among the shortest (181st out of 200) in 1914. They now rank 67th.

Korean, Japanese and Balto-Slavic women who grew much faster than average.

Korean and Taiwanese men and women are now the tallest in East Asia, well ahead of the Japanese and Chinese.

The map below shows the change in adult height between the 1896 and 1996.

https://elife-publishing-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/13410/elife-13410-fig3-v1.jpg

bicicleur
26-07-16, 11:17
growth spurts are connected with change in food habbit
far easterners are eating more and more dairy products allthough many are lactose intolerant
I suppose meat consumtion is still rising too

Maciamo
26-07-16, 11:51
growth spurts are connected with change in food habbit
far easterners are eating more and more dairy products allthough many are lactose intolerant
I suppose meat consumtion is still rising too

I read that the Dutch were taller because of the high milk consumption (and very low lactose intolerance), but it is doubtful as Indians consume a lot of dairy product too (cream and ghee in curry, paneer cheese, lassi, raita, yoghurt, milky chai, etc.) but they haven't grown much over a century. However there are major variations between the north and south and even more between castes. I have noticed that Punjabi and Rajasthani Sikhs and upper caste Hindus can be really quite tall. That's the only place in the world with the Netherlands and northern Italy (Emilia-Romagna and northern Tuscany especially) where I have regularly met men as tall or taller than me, and I am 1m88 (6ft2). Northwest Indians have the highest Indo-Aryan ancestry in India, so genetics undoubtedly plays a role, in addition to wealth. Hindus are mostly vegetarian, but Sikhs and Muslims aren't. Dravidians and Tribal Indians are significantly shorter.

The are three main factors influencing height:

- genetics
- social class/wealth
- meat and dairy consumption

bicicleur
26-07-16, 12:49
1m88 was the height of many of the BB people
I guess they were the elite, the wealthy class
I am only 1m83, my wife 1m68.
My daughter 1m68 and my sons 1m87 and 1m93.
I'm half Belgian, half Dutch.

arvistro
26-07-16, 13:20
"It's interesting that the tallest men are found in countries with high percentages of Y-haplogroup I1 and I2, but not necessarily those with the highest WHG ancestry."
Or in case of LV/EE and LT not necessarily I1/I2 :)
It looks very dynamic and quite unclear yet.

Maciamo
26-07-16, 15:46
"It's interesting that the tallest men are found in countries with high percentages of Y-haplogroup I1 and I2, but not necessarily those with the highest WHG ancestry."
Or in case of LV/EE and LT not necessarily I1/I2 :)
It looks very dynamic and quite unclear yet.

Well Estonians have 15% of I1 (+3.5% of I2), almost as much as the Dutch and more than the Belgians. Lithuanians have 13% of haplogroup I in total, slightly more than the Scots or the Irish, and indeed Lithuania is just ahead of Ireland and Britain for male height. Only Latvians have less hg I than they 'should' based on the ranking.

Maleth
26-07-16, 16:49
Well Estonians have 15% of I1 (+3.5% of I2), almost as much as the Dutch and more than the Belgians. Lithuanians have 13% of haplogroup I in total, slightly more than the Scots or the Irish, and indeed Lithuania is just ahead of Ireland and Britain for male height. Only Latvians have less hg I than they 'should' based on the ranking.

Swedes have over 35% of I's if not mistaken (more then Holland and Latvia) and are 17th in that list.

Angela
26-07-16, 18:22
Funnily enough I always wanted to be taller than my 5'5-6", but I never particularly liked really tall men. They usually looked overgrown to me, "American football types", and they were seldom graceful and elegant looking. (Someone like Joe Manganiello is an exception.) My husband's 6' or so is great, but height was really insignificant to me, although, as I love to dance, I liked it if a man was two to three inches taller, at least. Maybe this is something men care about a lot more than women do women.

Diet definitely has something to do with it; I must have overdone the cheese and generally the protein for my son as he's 6'3". Bizarrely, he has a preference for tiny girls, 5'2 or 3 or so. I think it looks funny, but hey, it's not my life and this kind of stuff is so trivial. As for the rest, they sort of look like me, so that makes me happy. Not that I needed that to know he sort of likes me. :)

arvistro
26-07-16, 18:32
I think is easy - project on one axis average height on other % of I1+I2. And try to see if there is any visible trend.

bicicleur
26-07-16, 19:15
I think is easy - project on one axis average height on other % of I1+I2. And try to see if there is any visible trend.

there is a mathematical formula to test 'correlation' e.g. between 2 rows on a spreadsheet
it boils down to about the same

srdceleva
26-07-16, 19:19
How tall on average are the Masai people and what haplogroups do they belong too?

Maciamo
26-07-16, 19:36
There is some correlation between height and haplogroup I in Europe, but I don't think it is caused by the Y-chromosome itself. It's a group of autosomal genes that were spread by I1 and I2 people, so the correlation is approximate. Germanic people are all quite close genetically as they expanded from a core population around Denmark and North Germany about 2500 years ago. But various Germanic groups have wide differences in Y-haplogroups due to founder effects, which resulted in the West Germanic (Dutch, Belgian, English) having very high percentages of R1b, while Central Norwegians and East Germanics were biased toward R1a, and all Scandinavians toward I1.

So I think there were essentially three groups with alleles for increased height: ancient Germanic, Baltic and Dinaric people.

Northener
26-07-16, 19:50
It happens to be that I live in Groningen, with the tallest people of the world, the average Dutchmen is 1.84m and the average Groninger is 1.86 m (I contribute a little bit to keep the average high with 1.94m ;)

Probably due to a combination of:
- Genes (for example in a small country like the Netherlands south of the Rhine the gene pool is different and the people are smaller)
- Good circumstances, welfare, good food (high milk consumption for example)
- Natural selection, preference for tallness.
See:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/08/scientists-try-to-answer-why-dutch-people-are-so-tall


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Dinarid
26-07-16, 21:45
It happens to be that I live in Groningen, with the tallest people of the world, the average Dutchmen is 1.84m and the average Groninger is 1.86 m (I contribute a little bit to keep the average high with 1.94m ;)

Probably due to a combination of:
- Genes (for example in a small country like the Netherlands south of the Rhine the gene pool is different and the people are smaller)
- Good circumstances, welfare, good food (high milk consumption for example)
- Natural selection, preference for tallness.
See:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/08/scientists-try-to-answer-why-dutch-people-are-so-tall


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)
Bosnian Croat men are 1.86m on average.

Dinarid
26-07-16, 21:48
There is some correlation between height and haplogroup I in Europe, but I don't think it is caused by the Y-chromosome itself. It's a group of autosomal genes that were spread by I1 and I2 people, so the correlation is approximate. Germanic people are all quite close genetically as they expanded from a core population around Denmark and North Germany about 2500 years ago. But various Germanic groups have wide differences in Y-haplogroups due to founder effects, which resulted in the West Germanic (Dutch, Belgian, English) having very high percentages of R1b, while Central Norwegians and East Germanics were biased toward R1a, and all Scandinavians toward I1.

So I think there were essentially three groups with alleles for increased height: ancient Germanic, Baltic and Dinaric people.
A good part of a male's height is determined by the Y chromosome. Autosomally, Dinaric people quite frequently have other autosomal influence- especially those living near the peripheries, but are still quite tall when I2a1b is frequent, so I think it is related to Y-DNA.

Northener
26-07-16, 21:59
Bosnian Croat men are 1.86m on average.
And still place 6? ;)


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Dinarid
26-07-16, 23:05
And still place 6? ;)


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)
That's the average for Bosnia and Herzegovina as a whole, which includes Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Serbs.

Northener
26-07-16, 23:15
I guess that the Catholic Frisians are the tallest of the Netherlands....;)


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Pax Augusta
26-07-16, 23:25
https://elife-publishing-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/13410/elife-13410-fig4-v1.jpg

Pax Augusta
26-07-16, 23:34
https://elife-publishing-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/13410/elife-13410-fig5-v1.jpg

Angela
27-07-16, 00:19
This has to rank as one of the more stupid remarks I've read from a supposedly educated and intelligent person:

“Our study shows the English-speaking world, especially the US, is falling behind other high-income nations in Europe and Asia Pacific,” said Majid Ezzati, a global health researcher at Imperial College London. “Together with the poor performance of these countries in terms of obesity, this emphasises the need for more effective policies towards healthy nutrition throughout life.”

A lot of Americans are obese, but does this guy have any clue how many really short Latin American migrants we have in the U.S.? I've never seen such short people as the Central Americans who have migrated to my area in the last twenty years: the men must be 5'4 and a good number of the women are under 5'. You can't compare the U.S. numbers with those of more homogeneous people. Even in terms of obesity, immigration patterns have an effect. These people, like Native North Americans, can't handle our diet and almost all of them are obese. Just from observation South Asians also get very obese here.

Don't some of these people believe in doing research before opening their mouths? Sheeesh!

RobertColumbia
27-07-16, 02:44
There is some correlation between height and haplogroup I in Europe, but I don't think it is caused by the Y-chromosome itself. It's a group of autosomal genes that were spread by I1 and I2 people, so the correlation is approximate. Germanic people are all quite close genetically as they expanded from a core population around Denmark and North Germany about 2500 years ago. But various Germanic groups have wide differences in Y-haplogroups due to founder effects, which resulted in the West Germanic (Dutch, Belgian, English) having very high percentages of R1b, while Central Norwegians and East Germanics were biased toward R1a, and all Scandinavians toward I1.

So I think there were essentially three groups with alleles for increased height: ancient Germanic, Baltic and Dinaric people.

I think so too. It's a correlation, not a causation thing. I am R1b and 190cm (6'3"). I don't know if I am as tall as I am due to Germanic admixture. It's certainly plausible.



...“Our study shows the English-speaking world, especially the US, is falling behind other high-income nations in Europe and Asia Pacific,” said Majid Ezzati, a global health researcher at Imperial College London. “Together with the poor performance of these countries in terms of obesity, this emphasises the need for more effective policies towards healthy nutrition throughout life.”

A lot of Americans are obese...Just from observation South Asians also get very obese here....

In my experience, the latest "they are fatter than us" scapegoat for Americans nowadays has become people from the South Pacific, especially Samoans.

Tomenable
27-07-16, 07:56
But various Germanic groups have wide differences in Y-haplogroups due to founder effects

Or due to assimilation of different substrate and superstrate populations.

Maciamo
27-07-16, 09:43
Or due to assimilation of different substrate and superstrate populations.

Doubtful since I1, I2a2a, R1b-S21 and R1a-L664 are all found in Netherlands, North Germany and Denmark and seem to have expanded from there, moving south from Denmark perhaps as early as 1000 BCE. The eastern Netherlands, as far south of Limburg (partly in Belgium) were Germanic by 750 BCE according to this map.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Germanic_expansion.gif

Some Scandinavian haplogroups, like R1a-Z284 and R1b-L238 were indeed assimilated by the northward expansion from Denmark to Sweden and Norway as they aren't really found outside Scandinavia, except in places settled by the Vikings like Scotland and Iceland. The question is what you define as 'Germanic'? Is it only the North German/Danish core that expanded from c. 750 BCE or all people descended from the Nordic Bronze Age from as early as 1700 BCE? I usually consider the latter as the founding of Proto-Germanic culture and ethnicity. If you look at the TMRCA of the main subclades of I1 and R1b-S21 (e.g. Z19, L217, Z7, Z319), most of them are younger than 4000 years old and could therefore be considered Germanic. That being said, it is possible that some R1b-S21 ramifications branched off just before R1b moved into Scandinavia and remained in Germany or in the Netherlands. But even so they would be closely related.

bicicleur
27-07-16, 14:44
This has to rank as one of the more stupid remarks I've read from a supposedly educated and intelligent person:

“Our study shows the English-speaking world, especially the US, is falling behind other high-income nations in Europe and Asia Pacific,” said Majid Ezzati, a global health researcher at Imperial College London. “Together with the poor performance of these countries in terms of obesity, this emphasises the need for more effective policies towards healthy nutrition throughout life.”

A lot of Americans are obese, but does this guy have any clue how many really short Latin American migrants we have in the U.S.? I've never seen such short people as the Central Americans who have migrated to my area in the last twenty years: the men must be 5'4 and a good number of the women are under 5'. You can't compare the U.S. numbers with those of more homogeneous people. Even in terms of obesity, immigration patterns have an effect. These people, like Native North Americans, can't handle our diet and almost all of them are obese. Just from observation South Asians also get very obese here.

Don't some of these people believe in doing research before opening their mouths? Sheeesh!




this man doesn't do research, he's obsessed with healthy food

bicicleur
27-07-16, 14:56
Doubtful since I1, I2a2a, R1b-S21 and R1a-L664 are all found in Netherlands, North Germany and Denmark and seem to have expanded from there, moving south from Denmark perhaps as early as 1000 BCE. The eastern Netherlands, as far south of Limburg (partly in Belgium) were Germanic by 750 BCE according to this map.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Germanic_expansion.gif

Some Scandinavian haplogroups, like R1a-Z284 and R1b-L238 were indeed assimilated by the northward expansion from Denmark to Sweden and Norway as they aren't really found outside Scandinavia, except in places settled by the Vikings like Scotland and Iceland. The question is what you define as 'Germanic'? Is it only the North German/Danish core that expanded from c. 750 BCE or all people descended from the Nordic Bronze Age from as early as 1700 BCE? I usually consider the latter as the founding of Proto-Germanic culture and ethnicity. If you look at the TMRCA of the main subclades of I1 and R1b-S21 (e.g. Z19, L217, Z7, Z319), most of them are younger than 4000 years old and could therefore be considered Germanic. That being said, it is possible that some R1b-S21 ramifications branched off just before R1b moved into Scandinavia and remained in Germany or in the Netherlands. But even so they would be closely related.

Where was the origin of the Germanic tribes?
The Jastorf culture was an Iron Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Age) material culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_culture) in what are now southern Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia) and north Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany), spanning the 6th to 1st centuries BCE, forming the southern part of the Pre-Roman Iron Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Roman_Iron_Age). The culture evolved out of the Nordic Bronze Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Bronze_Age), through influence from the Halstatt culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halstatt_culture)farther south. The cultures of the Pre-Roman Iron Age are sometimes hypothesized to be the origin of the Germanic languages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages). Herwig Wolfram (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herwig_Wolfram) locates the initial stages of Grimm's Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimm%27s_Law) here.[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
The Goths would have originated in southern Sweden, not northern Germany.
Jordanes describes the migration of the Goths from southern Scandza (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandza) (Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia)), into Gothiscandza (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothiscandza) – believed to be the lowerVistula (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistula) region in modern Pomerania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomerania) – and from there to the coast of the Black Sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea).

Angela
27-07-16, 15:58
Like I said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/health/average-height-peaked.html?smid=tw-share

"Two of the study’s authors, James Bentham and Majid Ezzati, both of Imperial College, London, speculated that the decline could be because of worsening nutrition standards for poor Americans but conceded that they had not measured the effects of immigration from, for example, Central American countries with substantially shorter citizens."

I'm not saying nutrition might not be a factor for some groups, it's just that when you're doing this kind of research factoring out such obvious things seems like a no brainer.

I'd also like to see the data broken out by ethnic group and inner city versus the rest. Given the toll that drug use and alcohol abuse during pregnancy takes on fetal development, the lack of pre-natal treatment etc., certain groups might have been more negatively impacted over time.

See also, comparing the heights or parents and children.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/science/comparing-childrens-and-parents-heights.html?action=click&contentCollection=Health&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article

Northener
27-07-16, 16:04
Doubtful since I1, I2a2a, R1b-S21 and R1a-L664 are all found in Netherlands, North Germany and Denmark and seem to have expanded from there, moving south from Denmark perhaps as early as 1000 BCE. The eastern Netherlands, as far south of Limburg (partly in Belgium) were Germanic by 750 BCE according to this map.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Germanic_expansion.gif

Some Scandinavian haplogroups, like R1a-Z284 and R1b-L238 were indeed assimilated by the northward expansion from Denmark to Sweden and Norway as they aren't really found outside Scandinavia, except in places settled by the Vikings like Scotland and Iceland. The question is what you define as 'Germanic'? Is it only the North German/Danish core that expanded from c. 750 BCE or all people descended from the Nordic Bronze Age from as early as 1700 BCE? I usually consider the latter as the founding of Proto-Germanic culture and ethnicity. If you look at the TMRCA of the main subclades of I1 and R1b-S21 (e.g. Z19, L217, Z7, Z319), most of them are younger than 4000 years old and could therefore be considered Germanic. That being said, it is possible that some R1b-S21 ramifications branched off just before R1b moved into Scandinavia and remained in Germany or in the Netherlands. But even so they would be closely related.

The longest people in the Netherlands you can find in the old Frisian area, now Friesland and Groningen. These people are close connected with the the Saxons. About 400 AD the Frisian area, due to the post Roman events, was almost empty. Some authors state you could only hear the seagulls cry! Who came into the empty "terps" indeed the Saxons, Angles, Jutes. They stick to the name Fries, but in fact genetically they were very different from the old Frisii in the Roman and pre Roman era.

In terms of genetics the Northern Netherlands so doesn't differ that much from Northwestern Germany, and in terms of food and welfare the differences are not that big. In my eyes the people of Northwestern Germany are a bit more conventional also in food stuff. So it must have something to do with natural selection, what else could explain the differences?

On thing is sure when you look at the charts the more egalitarian the society the people getting overall taller. Neoliberalism keeps the people overall small ;)






















Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Promenade
27-07-16, 21:04
Is there any actual studies that show evidence that Y-DNA Haplogroups are associated with certain traits?

I always see people mention this, but as far as I know the Y chromosome is very small and deformed. It mutates quickly and is increasingly shrinking as well. Other than determining sex I would be surprised if Y-DNA haplogroups share macro-traits, but maybe someone here knows better than me?

Dinarid
27-07-16, 21:53
Is there any actual studies that show evidence that Y-DNA Haplogroups are associated with certain traits?

I always see people mention this, but as far as I know the Y chromosome is very small and deformed. It mutates quickly and is increasingly shrinking as well. Other than determining sex I would be surprised if Y-DNA haplogroups share macro-traits, but maybe someone here knows better than me?
I do know for a fact that there is a gene important for male height, along with the aromatase gene on a chromosome which I forget.

Tomenable
27-07-16, 23:17
Where was the origin of the Germanic tribes? The Jastorf culture

Not in Jastorf, but in Nordic Bronze Age culture. There are Proto-Germanic loanwords in Sami languages:





http://www.sgr.fi/susa/91/aikio.pdf





As for Denmark, it was not uniformly Germanic, but ethnically mixed - Germanic, but also partially Celtic:





http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf





However, the Cimbri in Jutland were probably a kind of a Celtic enclave, similar to Galatians in Anatolia.

There were also Celts in Southern part of what is now the Netherlands.

Tomenable
27-07-16, 23:23
The oldest runic inscriptions in Germanic language are from the 2nd century AD.

They are mostly short inscriptions, usually just one word or a few words.

Longer runic inscriptions (several words) start to appear in the 5th century AD.

We also have the mysterious Negau B helmet from the 2nd century BC:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negau_helmet#Inscriptions

Minty
28-07-16, 08:05
While most countries banned the use of growth hormones being fed to livestock entering the human food chain, the Dutch persisted with it, accounting for the prevalence off tall men, and women, now seen. If the data is reviewed in 20 to 30 years time, you will find average height will normalise

Maciamo
28-07-16, 08:23
Is there any actual studies that show evidence that Y-DNA Haplogroups are associated with certain traits?

I always see people mention this, but as far as I know the Y chromosome is very small and deformed. It mutates quickly and is increasingly shrinking as well. Other than determining sex I would be surprised if Y-DNA haplogroups share macro-traits, but maybe someone here knows better than me?

How else would you explain that men are considerably taller than women? The only difference genetically is that they possess a Y chromosome. Obviously autosomal genes also explain height differences between ethnic groups and between women. But isn't that intriguing that some societies have bigger differences of height, strength or submissiveness between gender than others? Primate studies have shown that promiscuous species like chimpanzees have very little sexual dismorphism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism) (i.e. males aren't much bigger than females), while those where dominant males secured a stable harem of females had markedly larger males. Humans are intermediary, but not all ethnic groups behave in the exact same way either. Some cultures are more egalitarian and promiscuous (Scandinavians, Finns, East Asians), while others tend to favour strong alpha-male dominance with polygamy whenever possible (most Middle Eastern societies and many sub-Saharan African ones, but also Bronze Age Indo-Europeans).

Such differences in behaviour and sexual strategies are set in our genes, which in turn influences local cultures, morals and religions. That's why religions like Islam that favour female submission rather than sexual freedom became successful only in some ethnic groups, typically dominated by the same Y-haplogroups (mainly E1b and J) regardless of the linguistic or cultural affiliations. Chechens/Ingushs, Arabs and Iranians belong to completely different linguistic and ethnic groups but all share a high percentage of Y-DNA J and all have a similar attitude to women. Likewise, Nigerians, Moroccans and Saudis are completely distinct ethnic groups but all share a high percentage of Y-haplogroup E1b and similar attitudes towards women.

The Finns and Swedes have the high percentages of East/North Asian Y-DNA (N1c and Q1a) and have much more East Asian attitudes to sex. Is that a mere coincidence?

East Asian and Nordic countries have much lower sexual dismorphism than average, and not just for height. Scandinavians have been known for their gender equality at least since the Viking Age. It's not something new due to material wealth. It's deeply ingrained in the gene pool. Having lived in Japan for 4 years I noticed how Japanese women are almost as tall as men. Many Japanese couples I know are exactly the same height. The Japanese are also known for being very liberated sexually (and so are Scandinavians).

Women are particularly tall in Scandinavian, Baltic and Slavic countries, but are also known for their strong, non-submissive character. It's no wonder than ancient Slavic and Germanic women often fought alongside men - a notion that would be utterly baffling to ancient Romans, Greeks or any ancient or modern Middle Eastern society. So it's surely not all on the Y-chromosome. It is the eternal struggle between the X and Y chromosomes that Matt Ridley explained so brilliantly in Genome (https://www.amazon.com/Genome-Autobiography-Species-23-Chapters/dp/0060894083).

Maciamo
28-07-16, 08:51
These articles (Rosa et al. 1997 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9438922) and Kirsch et al. 2000 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1734648/)) mention that deletions on the long arm of the Y-chromosomes have been linked to both short stature and infertility.

Kirsch et al. 2002 (http://jmg.bmj.com/content/39/7/507.full) managed to localise the position of a growth gene (GCY (https://www.wikigenes.org/e/gene/e/2656.html), standing for 'Growth Control, Y Chromosome Influenced') implicated in sexual dismorphism on the Y chromosome, close to the centromere (Yq11). This gene is also known as STA, TS or TSY.

Rao et al. 1997 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9140395) also found that growth retardation was caused by deletions in the pseudoautosomal region (PAR1) on the tip of the short arm of the Y chromosome.

It would be interesting to check if any known SNPs are located in of of these regions and with which haplogroup and subclade they are associated. Unfortunately gene names are rarely mentioned in the SNP nomenclature (except notably for SRY), so it could be time consuming to check the locations one by one. We need a tool to automatise the search.

Northener
28-07-16, 08:57
@maciamo @mindy so the Dutch men as cow hormones driven alpha guys....no Olympics for us ;)
Seriously Maciomo the Frisian Dutch are famous for their equal position between man and women, it's was the thing that for many visitors was obvious to observe, less Latin kind of way behavior ;) So....


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Northener
28-07-16, 09:07
Not in Jastorf, but in Nordic Bronze Age culture. There are Proto-Germanic loanwords in Sami languages:





http://www.sgr.fi/susa/91/aikio.pdf





As for Denmark, it was not uniformly Germanic, but ethnically mixed - Germanic, but also partially Celtic:





http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf





However, the Cimbri in Jutland were probably a kind of a Celtic enclave, similar to Galatians in Anatolia.

There were also Celts in Southern part of what is now the Netherlands.

Thanks!!! Especially for the Cimbri, I will read it, first impression Bell Beaker influence? That influence was not only in the Southern parts of the Netherlands but also in the North.....but I will read it first!


















Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

Maleth
28-07-16, 09:22
It has something to do more with food availability and its type and the environment one lives in. Thats were our chromosomes get their instructions from. Its all about how a living thing is able to survive in different circumstances. Its what they call evolution, a process alive and well in both plants and animals as a fascinating tool for survival. Growing tall or growing short is only part of that process. Haplogroups have nothing do with this process, but rather environment and food source.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/120201_tinychameleons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insular_dwarfism

humans are not much different

Maleth
28-07-16, 09:31
Diet definitely has something to do with it; I must have overdone the cheese and generally the protein for my son as he's 6'3". Bizarrely, he has a preference for tiny girls, 5'2 or 3 or so. I think it looks funny, but hey, it's not my life and this kind of stuff is so trivial. As for the rest, they sort of look like me, so that makes me happy. Not that I needed that to know he sort of likes me. :)

I am 6ft tall (183cm) (Very tall on local standards) I used to drink and enjoy Milk when I was young as if my life depended on it. I used to drink my best friends milk too at primary school as he used to get nausea just by the smell of it (he told me).

Maleth
28-07-16, 09:57
Most will think, this is very nasty. But we would also on certain occasion, eat reindeer meat. But it was a Swede or Finn thing. I hated it! Milk was a favorite of mine too and still drink to this day.

That is all high protein food so I am sure its very relevant. Also wild meat is low on fat (especially as it used to be). Mediterranean diets would be more carbohydrate and plant based and meat was more of a festive nature. Traditional hunting (Meat) would be small game (birds and rabbits) and some fish and chickens and roosters where killed for Sunday Lunch (traditionally) before the advents of supermarkets. Not enough pasture to support big livestock such as cows and others. Sheep and goats would be the largest you would get. Lamb was served for special occasions and milk just came from Goats with little cheeslets processed from it. Of course things would change once you get to higher altitudes in Mediterranean Europe, which would be more similar say to Central Europe in both hunting and agriculture. Today that has all changed because of modern methods, and supermarkets are looking the same where ever you go. The height is also noticeable from one generation to the other due to a higher protein diet.

bicicleur
28-07-16, 11:15
Is there any actual studies that show evidence that Y-DNA Haplogroups are associated with certain traits?

I always see people mention this, but as far as I know the Y chromosome is very small and deformed. It mutates quickly and is increasingly shrinking as well. Other than determining sex I would be surprised if Y-DNA haplogroups share macro-traits, but maybe someone here knows better than me?

IMO there are very few.
The only thing I learned is that most of East African long distance and marathon runners have haplogroup T.

bicicleur
28-07-16, 11:22
Not in Jastorf, but in Nordic Bronze Age culture. There are Proto-Germanic loanwords in Sami languages:





http://www.sgr.fi/susa/91/aikio.pdf





As for Denmark, it was not uniformly Germanic, but ethnically mixed - Germanic, but also partially Celtic:





http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf





However, the Cimbri in Jutland were probably a kind of a Celtic enclave, similar to Galatians in Anatolia.

There were also Celts in Southern part of what is now the Netherlands.

Jastorf is seen as a part of Nordic Bronze.
It is the part of Nordic Bronze where iron age started, through contacts with Halstatt.
IMO iron age and cooling climate is what triggered Germanic expansion.

And yes, many parts of the Netherlands and northern Germany were Celtic before Germanic expansion.

bicicleur
28-07-16, 11:24
While most countries banned the use of growth hormones being fed to livestock entering the human food chain, the Dutch persisted with it, accounting for the prevalence off tall men, and women, now seen. If the data is reviewed in 20 to 30 years time, you will find average height will normalise

in that case the Americans should be much taller than Europeans

Maciamo
28-07-16, 11:25
@maciamo @mindy so the Dutch men as cow hormones driven alpha guys....no Olympics for us ;)
Seriously Maciomo the Frisian Dutch are famous for their equal position between man and women, it's was the thing that for many visitors was obvious to obverse, less Latin kind of way behavior ;) So....


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

As I said, Germanic people also have taller and stronger women, which contributes to greater gender equality and higher promiscuity too. That is as valid for the Dutch as for Scandinavians.

bicicleur
28-07-16, 11:33
Homo florensis lived isolated on the Flores Islands. They were very small (1m20) and chased dwarf elephants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis
Cyprus had dwarf hippopotamus that got extinct when first HG arrived there 12.5 ka.
When a population grows on an isolated island with limited resources, the specimens tend to become smaller consuming less resources allowing to maximize the population.
Hunters on a steppe tend to become taller. Catching their prey requires strength and good physical condition. Here only the strongest survive.

bicicleur
28-07-16, 11:36
As I said, Germanic people also have taller and stronger women, which contributes to greater gender equality and higher promiscuity too. That is as valid for the Dutch as for Scandinavians.

Belgium has tall men, but not so tall women. How do you explain that?

Angela
28-07-16, 12:45
QUOTE=Maleth;485701]I am 6ft tall (183cm) (Very tall on local standards) I used to drink and enjoy Milk when I was young as if my life depended on it. I used to drink my best friends milk too at primary school as he used to get nausea just by the smell of it (he told me).[/QUOTE]

That was me; the very smell of fresh milk used to make me sick. The mouth feel also turned me off. Eggs affected me that way too, and fish, unless it was very fresh. I have a very acute sense of smell, so that may be part of it. To this day I can't imagine drinking a glass of milk; it's sick making. We were all like that in my house except my 6'3" son. He drank milk at friends' houses and so asked me for it. I used to catch him guzzling it from the container when he was little. Yuck. You can still get a lot of protein from cheese and cured meats, which is all I really liked when I was a little girl, hence part of the reason I'm 5'6 perhaps. Genetics is the other part of it, of course. My husband is about 6' tall, and he doesn't drink it at all, but he's always been a heavy protein eater.

Honestly, I don't get the fascination with this whole topic. Who cares? If dancing isn't awkward, it's all good. :) Men really do have to compete over absolutely everything it sometimes seems to me. I mean, I realize that if life is dependent on a lot of physical conflict, even a couple of inches of difference in height might have an impact all other things being equal, but that isn't the world in which we now live. You guys don't have to go out and hunt me a pizza, for goodness sakes'!

As for the rest, height is just an evolutionary adaptation to a specific environment, so a certain height gets fixed in certain populations. It's also affected by diet, within certain parameters. End of story. There's no absolute value to being taller.

Ed. Dairy consumption is definitely a big factor. Look at the Masai, and this is in comparison to what look to be northern Europeans. At least they don't get the overweight with which it's often associated. Someone above mentioned growth hormones in cow's milk. That's also definitely an issue, with effects on decreased age for the onset of menses, for example. It also has health consequences, obviously.


http://www.nathab.com/uploaded-files/carousels/TRIPS/NHE-African-Hiking/Africa-Kenya-Maasai-Hiking-2-walking.jpg

Maciamo
28-07-16, 13:51
Belgium has tall men, but not so tall women. How do you explain that?

It may take centuries or even millennia for natural selection to affect the genes for height. It could be due to the behaviour of our Bronze Age ancestors. It might also have to do with the Roman or Alpine Celtic ancestry, which is considerably higher in Belgium than in the Netherlands.

Minty
28-07-16, 15:26
in that case the Americans should be much taller than Europeans

Americans' reaction to hormones foods is growing vertically rather than horizontally. 7895

Oh by the way I said only the Dutch not all the Europeans.

Dutch 80.7%, EU 5%, Indonesian 2.4%, Turkish 2.2%, Surinamese 2%, Moroccan 2%, Caribbean 0.8%, other 4.8% (2008 est.)

http://www.indexmundi.com/netherlands/demographics_profile.html

white 79.96%, black 12.85%, Asian 4.43%, Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate)
note: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean persons of Spanish/Hispanic/Latino origin including those of Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Dominican Republic, Spanish, and Central or South American origin living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.); about 15.1% of the total US population is Hispanic

http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states/demographics_profile.html

7893

As you can see in the states they have more non European descent people who have shorter genes, the other ethnics also tend to suffer lactose intolerance more than European descendants ppl.

Moreover, the lower class in the states probably suffer malnutrition more too, since they are a capitalist society and none of the health care is funded by the government, it has to be paid from their own pocket.

Until Obama came along, and made the middle class pay for the lower class, my relatives over in the States are not happy with that, but that is another story unrelated to this...

So I took some time to read more into this subject:

According to this https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/08/scientists-try-to-answer-why-dutch-people-are-so-tall

Natural selection in addition to good environmental conditions may help explain why the Dutch are so tall,” said the study published Wednesday in the Royal Society journal Proceedings B.

“Height is very heritable – taller parents tend to have somewhat taller children than shorter parents,” Stulp said. “Because taller individuals would have more offspring in the next generation who would be taller, the average height in that generation would a bit taller on average than the preceding generation, if all else is equal.”

There seems to be a cultural preference as well.

Stulp pointed to figures showing that, in the United States, shorter women and men of average height have the most reproductive success.

“There is much variation in what men and women want,” he said. “When it comes to choosing a mate, height tends to have (only) a small effect, which is not very surprising given the many other, more important, traits people value in their mate.”

Maleth
28-07-16, 21:38
Ed. Dairy consumption is definitely a big factor. Look at the Masai, and this is in comparison to what look to be northern Europeans. At least they don't get the overweight with which it's often associated. Someone above mentioned growth hormones in cow's milk. That's also definitely an issue, with effects on decreased age for the onset of menses, for example. It also has health consequences, obviously.


http://www.nathab.com/uploaded-files/carousels/TRIPS/NHE-African-Hiking/Africa-Kenya-Maasai-Hiking-2-walking.jpg

Ditto

"To a large extent, the Maasai live on the milk from their cattle",

http://sciencenordic.com/maasai-keep-healthy-despite-high-fat-diet

Minty
29-07-16, 08:57
70% of the world population is lactose (non-mother’s milk) intolerant. Certain ethnics such as those of African descents, those of North East Asian descents, those of South East Asian descents namely: Malay, Filipino, and those from Native American descents, even those of Southern European descents, Australian Aboriginal and Hispanic or mixed ethnic background are known not to produce this enzyme or have such low levels of lactase, that this leads to adult lactose intolerance.

90% of adult blacks are lactose intolerant and 20-30% of Caucasians. In societies where milk consumption is highest, lactose intolerance can develop after the age of 4-5 years. Those of Caucasian or Northern European genetic background usually have no problem with lactose intolerance.

For all this, milk may not even be as rich in calcium as we have been led to believe. Amy Lanou, Ph.D., Nutrition Director for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine in Washington, D.C., says, “The countries with the highest rates of osteoporosis are the ones where people drink the most milk and have the most calcium in their diets. The connection between calcium consumption and bone health is actually very weak, and the connection between dairy consumption and bone health is almost non-existent.”

Northener
29-07-16, 12:50
70% of the world population is lactose (non-mother’s milk) intolerant. Certain ethnics such as those of African descents, those of North East Asian descents, those of South East Asian descents namely: Malay, Filipino, and those from Native American descents, even those of Southern European descents, Australian Aboriginal and Hispanic or mixed ethnic background are known not to produce this enzyme or have such low levels of lactase, that this leads to adult lactose intolerance.

90% of adult blacks are lactose intolerant and 20-30% of Caucasians. In societies where milk consumption is highest, lactose intolerance can develop after the age of 4-5 years. Those of Caucasian or Northern European genetic background usually have no problem with lactose intolerance.

For all this, milk may not even be as rich in calcium as we have been led to believe. Amy Lanou, Ph.D., Nutrition Director for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine in Washington, D.C., says, “The countries with the highest rates of osteoporosis are the ones where people drink the most milk and have the most calcium in their diets. The connection between calcium consumption and bone health is actually very weak, and the connection between dairy consumption and bone health is almost non-existent.”

Indeed, in the Netherlands milk consume was heavily promoted, due to the agricultural lobby, to get rid of the high milk production.....see this old video clip:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gaXI5jMnla4






























Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=89698)

MOESAN
31-07-16, 22:31
Before doing too much remarks I 'll need to know how these states are made?
is the 2014 or the 1914 height the height of a generation (say: people born in 1994 and 1894? or the mixt of several generations? I saw that there were always variations in the same countries from years to years and that a mean based upon 5 or 10 year-generation was more reliable that the ones based upon one year only...
I' ve hard work to believe Scandinavian BY ORIGIN are begun dwarves in so little years. And I KNOW Western Balkans people was already taller in 1914 than their supposed rank given by Maciamo (I know it's not Maciamo's imagination in cause);
concerning causes, I still add the physical (body) activity, too often forgotten by people and so important, even if food is a very important mesologic element. the "social class" is not a cause, it only goes along with "better" food (I put better between "-" because too much growth hormones" are not always the better food for true health), less stress, and often enough, less physical activity.
since a long time I saw Dutch people as high statured people, but these last years, in France camping places, I observed they were higher and higher, but lesser athletic, loosing proportional shoulder breadth, without speaking of the women loosing aesthetic quality...
&: like Angela, I think these health" studies about stature does not separate people by ethnic and geographic origins and does not provide sensible matter for comparisons between past and present (and future!) and the to quick conclusions made about genetic and mesologic influences.

Coriolan
01-08-16, 09:17
the "social class" is not a cause, it only goes along with "better" food (I put better between "-" because too much growth hormones" are not always the better food for true health), less stress, and often enough, less physical activity.

How do you know that social class is not an active determinant of height or vice versa? It's been proven that taller men are more dominant, better paid and more likely to be in managerial positions. Conversely CEOs tend to be much taller than average. If tall people get better jobs, then natural selection will quickly make the upper class taller. It's not just about nutrition. People unconsciously give positions of power to taller, more dominant men. Both height and dominance are fuelled by testosterone. That's why women prefer taller men. Higher testosterone also means higher fertility. Men don't necessarily prefer tall women because they are seen as more manly and aggressive. As Maciamo said Germanic and Slavic women are taller and these are cultures where women used to go to war alongside men. (Anyone has watched Vikings around here? The actress playing Lagertha the shield maiden is Ukrainian)

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

MOESAN
01-08-16, 23:38
How do you know that social class is not an active determinant of height or vice versa? It's been proven that taller men are more dominant, better paid and more likely to be in managerial positions. Conversely CEOs tend to be much taller than average. If tall people get better jobs, then natural selection will quickly make the upper class taller. It's not just about nutrition. People unconsciously give positions of power to taller, more dominant men. Both height and dominance are fuelled by testosterone. That's why women prefer taller men. Higher testosterone also means higher fertility. Men don't necessarily prefer tall women because they are seen as more manly and aggressive. As Maciamo said Germanic and Slavic women are taller and these are cultures where women used to go to war alongside men. (Anyone has watched Vikings around here? The actress playing Lagertha the shield maiden is Ukrainian)

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

You are right: I wrote that a bit too quickly and I forgot this aspect of social/professional selection I was aware of. I was focalized on mesologic aspects and I did not think in human choices selection. In some way we could say that in this precise case, at first, social appartenance is more the result than the cause, to split hairs. In this example, a first genetic cause can add to "social" ones and magnify them.
Concerning woman, it seems social organisation (by instance monogamy vs polygamy, apology of viril strength ...) can have some influence upon stature:general increase in the population with a stronger effect upon male stature than upon female stature,. It seems, according to some readings (Coon and others), that some so called "archaïc" forms of 'europoids' showed bigger differences in stature between men and woman: it would have been the case among Western Norwegians. I don't know if these affirmations are confirmed today.
The case of tall "warrior" women is unclear to me; it supposes that every sex had its own genetic basis for stature (Y vs X?) and that we could select tall women in a population where males could keep the same mean stature or even could become smaller??? I need more knowledge here.

Nik
19-08-16, 12:39
Macedonians are taller than Montenegrins? Wow, that's new.

Is this study really conducted in 2014? Seems like they're using old figures from the 90s.

I think the best way to determine the height of various ethnic groups is to measure people form only one region (USA for instance) and consider obviously only the non-mixed people born in US.

This is the only way to find the real potential height by highly minimizing the chances of nutrition, weather, etc. influencing the average height. To bring it a step forward, I would say considering the income level too.

MOESAN
21-08-16, 21:58
This has to rank as one of the more stupid remarks I've read from a supposedly educated and intelligent person:

“Our study shows the English-speaking world, especially the US, is falling behind other high-income nations in Europe and Asia Pacific,” said Majid Ezzati, a global health researcher at Imperial College London. “Together with the poor performance of these countries in terms of obesity, this emphasises the need for more effective policies towards healthy nutrition throughout life.”

A lot of Americans are obese, but does this guy have any clue how many really short Latin American migrants we have in the U.S.? I've never seen such short people as the Central Americans who have migrated to my area in the last twenty years: the men must be 5'4 and a good number of the women are under 5'. You can't compare the U.S. numbers with those of more homogeneous people. Even in terms of obesity, immigration patterns have an effect. These people, like Native North Americans, can't handle our diet and almost all of them are obese. Just from observation South Asians also get very obese here.

Don't some of these people believe in doing research before opening their mouths? Sheeesh!




Agree. Kind of tabloid science...

MOESAN
21-08-16, 22:02
Macedonians are taller than Montenegrins? Wow, that's new.

Is this study really conducted in 2014? Seems like they're using old figures from the 90s.

I think the best way to determine the height of various ethnic groups is to measure people form only one region (USA for instance) and consider obviously only the non-mixed people born in US.

This is the only way to find the real potential height by highly minimizing the chances of nutrition, weather, etc. influencing the average height. To bring it a step forward, I would say considering the income level too.

Agree partly. And I even think USA are too large. This sort of studies need division by ethnic origin and regional localization to make some sense, without forget seriation by years of birth. That said, a study by origin cannot discard effects of way of life, climate, food, social class (all interacting in fact) and so on.