Why are Europeans(English for eg) taller than East Asians on average today?

[annetyy3]

According to these sources, the average height of a Chinese male in 3000 BC was 168.59cm, female 159.23cm.

The average English male in 1066 AD was 171cm and the females were 156cm. It looks like the ancient English male was 3cm taller than their Chinese counterparts and the ancient English female was 3cm SHORTER than their Chinese counterparts.

But fast forward to today, the average heights for the English are 1.776 m (male) and 1.637 m (female) while that for the Chinese are 1.702 m (male) and 1.586 m female).

It seems like the Chinese have lost height over the centuries when compared to their own ancestors. Why is that so? I don’t really think it is nutrition. Is it because Westerners have been marrying taller partners over the centuries while the Chinese have been marrying shorter partners, hence, their offsprings are shorter?

English males have doubled their height advantage (7cm now) over their Chinese counterparts while English females have caught up and grown taller than their Chinese counterparts by 5 cm.

http://www.kaogu.net.cn/en/detail.asp?ProductID=2485

How much of human height is genetic and how much is due to nutrition?

How tall were humans through history?

Human height

[njtt]

I was once told, by a professor of Nutrition, that the Japanese tend to be short because their largely rice and seafood diet is low in calcium. He pointed out that pointed out that people of Japanese descent who have grown up in the United States tend to be as tall, or nearly as tall, as European Americans, and noticeably taller than Japanese raised (but not raised so far :)) in Japan. I guess similar considerations apply to Chinese and other East Asian people, especially as most East Asians are lactose intolerant, and do not like to eat dairy produce, from which Europeans get much of their calcium, of course.

The professor seemed to look upon this a a deficiency of the traditional Japanese diet, but a friend of mine who was also present, and is actually pretty tall, questioned whether being tall is necessarily a good thing.

Of course, genetics may have something to do with it too.

[Candyman74]

@njtt

I was once told, by a professor of Nutrition, that the Japanese tend to be short because their largely rice and seafood diet is low in calcium. He pointed out that pointed out that people of Japanese descent who have grown up in the United States tend to be as tall, or nearly as tall, as European Americans, and noticeably taller than Japanese raised (but not raised so far :)) in Japan. I guess similar considerations apply to Chinese and other East Asian people, especially as most East Asians are lactose intolerant, and do not like to eat dairy produce, from which Europeans get much of their calcium, of course.

The professor seemed to look upon this a a deficiency of the traditional Japanese diet, but a friend of mine who was also present, and is actually pretty tall, questioned whether being tall is necessarily a good thing.

Of course, genetics may have something to do with it too.

For the older generation, sure. The current generation is much taller, given that they eat a lot of western style food these days.

[njtt]

@Candyman74

For the older generation, sure. The current generation is much taller, given that they eat a lot of western style food these days.

That seems to confirm it then.

[annetyy3]

@njtt

I was once told, by a professor of Nutrition, that the Japanese tend to be short because their largely rice and seafood diet is low in calcium. He pointed out that pointed out that people of Japanese descent who have grown up in the United States tend to be as tall, or nearly as tall, as European Americans, and noticeably taller than Japanese raised (but not raised so far :)) in Japan. I guess similar considerations apply to Chinese and other East Asian people, especially as most East Asians are lactose intolerant, and do not like to eat dairy produce, from which Europeans get much of their calcium, of course.

The professor seemed to look upon this a a deficiency of the traditional Japanese diet, but a friend of mine who was also present, and is actually pretty tall, questioned whether being tall is necessarily a good thing.

Of course, genetics may have something to do with it too.

Americans of Japanese ancestry are hardly taller than their Japanese counterparts. They are of similar height and they are still noticeably shorter than European Americans. This applies to all Asian Americans as well.

I take it you know nothing about East Asians.

The Japanese don’t just eat rice that is ridiculous. They eat tons of meat, milk, eggs and chicken. Their schools have nutritionists who plan meals for their school kids to eat. Japan is not a poor country and they are definitely are wealthy enough to afford good nutrition. Ramen is also fortified with protein.

You might be lactose intolerant but the protein and calcium from the milk is still absorbed. And there is always soy milk or cheese for substitute.

Why is it that after 50-100 years of prosperity, the Japanese are still shorter than say the Serbians or Argentinians who live in poverty?

Hong Kong and Singapore are both mainly of Chinese ancestry. They are both amongst the richest countries in the world.

Mainland China has an average height of 170cm for males. The Hong Kongers who are much more well off than the Mainland Chinese surprising have the same average height.

Singaporean males, who are again much well off and much better fed compared to the mainland Chinese also surprising have the same average height of 170cm.

In Singapore, school kids are given free milk and food is so darn cheap. Western food are staple diet in Singapore as well with most kids eating fish and chips, macdonalds etc daily. Food and protein is definitely not the problem here.

The Singaporeans, Hong Kongers and Japanese don’t suffer from bad nutrition. They have the longest life span in the entire world, higher than most Western nations, so their nutrition can’t be worst than Western nations. If that was the case, their life span would be a lot shorter, like Mainland China or Peru for example.

I think height is probably 80% genetics.

But in ancient times, the Chinese women were actually taller than English females. Now, it seems like the English have grown while the Chinese have not grown at all after so many centuries.

What happened?

[psychonaut]

@annetyy3

Americans of Japanese ancestry are hardly taller than their Japanese counterparts. They are of similar height and they are still noticeably shorter than European Americans. This applies to all Asian Americans as well.

Cite?

The Japanese don’t just eat rice that is ridiculous. They eat tons of meat, milk, eggs and chicken. Their schools have nutritionists who plan meals for their school kids to eat. Japan is not a poor country and they are definitely are wealthy enough to afford good nutrition.

No one in this thread has claimed that the Japanese eat nothing but rice, or that they can’t afford to eat nutritious food. The difference in diet can be attributed to tradition (i.e., what was typically locally available in the past remains popular in the present) and (as you yourself later point out) physiological concerns, such as lactose intolerance.

You might be lactose intolerant but the protein and calcium from the milk is still absorbed.

Ain’t going to be a lot of absorption if your lactose intolerance means you’re not drinking the milk to begin with.

Why is it that after 50-100 years of prosperity, the Japanese are still shorter than say the Serbians or Argentinians who live in poverty?

Serbians and Argentinians do not live in poverty (at least not relative to most other nations).

Western food are staple diet in Singapore as well with most kids eating fish and chips, macdonalds etc daily… The Singaporeans, Hong Kongers and Japanese don’t suffer from bad nutrition.

Spotting the egregious contradiction in the above quotation is left as an exercise for the reader.

[Blake]

@annetyy3

Americans of Japanese ancestry are hardly taller than their Japanese counterparts. They are of similar height and they are still noticeably shorter than European Americans. This applies to all Asian Americans as well.

Can you please show me the statistics upon which you base this claim?

The Singaporeans, Hong Kongers and Japanese don’t suffer from bad nutrition. They have the longest life span in the entire world, higher than most Western nations, so their nutrition can’t be worst than Western nations. If that was the case, their life span would be a lot shorter, like Mainland China or Peru for example.

Can you please provide a reference for this claim that chronic calorie deficiency to a reduced life expectancy? All the animal research tells us exactly the opposite, that chronic deficiency prolongs lifespan.

The jury is still out one whether that applies to humans, but I have never before seen anybody suggest that it *reduces *lifespan. :eek:

So please, provide your references for this claim. I am eager to see them.

I think height is probably 80% genetics.

Since you are new, you may not know that in this forum we deal with facts, not what we think.

Do you have any facts to support your opinion that it is 80% genetics?

But in ancient times, the Chinese women were actually taller than English females. Now, it seems like the English have grown while the Chinese have not grown at all after so many centuries.

What happened?

As noted, the diet in England improved, that in China has not improved to the same degree.

I’m not sure that you realise that, within the life of most people alive today, literally tens of millions of Chinese actually died from starvation. To suggest that all, or even most, modern Chinese, had adequate nutrition during childhood is stretching credulity.

[code_grey]

if one group eats mostly rice (poor Chinese peasants) and another group eats lots of meat and milk products, why wouldn’t you expect it to influence height? To cite a more extreme example, have you heard of what nutrition over the last two decades in North Korea did to their young people’s height?

Also, British seem to be a northern European group and northern Europeans traditionally were taller than south Europeans. For a more obvious example, Danes are taller than Italians and people from Baltic states are taller than Russians. In China, meanwhile, you get a height average of both shorter southerners and taller northerners if you look at statistics for the entire country. So an across-the-board height comparison of all white Europeans to all Han Chinese would make more sense.

[annetyy3]

@psychonaut

Ain’t going to be a lot of absorption if your lactose intolerance means you’re not drinking the milk to begin with.

Lactose intolerant people still absorb ALL the nutrients in milk except the lactose ie carbohydrate sugar.

@psychonaut

Serbians and Argentinians do not live in poverty (at least not relative to most other nations).

They do, relative to the Japanese or Hong Kongers. Look at their per capita GDP.

@Blake

Can you please provide a reference for this claim that chronic calorie deficiency to a reduced life expectancy? All the animal research tells us exactly the opposite, that chronic deficiency prolongs lifespan.

Why don’t the Africans or Indians have the longest life spans then huh? Look at this list, the Hkers, Japs, Swiss, Swedes, Aussies, Canadians are at the top of the list and they are hardly “calorie restricted”.

List of countries by life expectancy

@Blake

As noted, the diet in England improved, that in China has not improved to the same degree.

Any reference for that? I can’t believe that statement can hold true given that there has been a few thousand years in between.

Even if the diet in China has not improved, what about Singapore or Hong Kong? No has ever starves to death in these countries but the guys are still averaging 170cm. Surely their diet and medical care is a huge step up from what their Chinese ancestors consumed in the AD period when they where 169cm tall!

@Blake

I’m not sure that you realise that, within the life of most people alive today, literally tens of millions of Chinese actually died from starvation. To suggest that all, or even most, modern Chinese, had adequate nutrition during childhood is stretching credulity.

True that. The “great leap forward” ended up being the great leap backwards.

[annetyy3]

@code_grey

if one group eats mostly rice (poor Chinese peasants) and another group eats lots of meat and milk products, why wouldn’t you expect it to influence height? To cite a more extreme example, have you heard of what nutrition over the last two decades in North Korea did to their young people’s height?

That makes a very good comparison indeed. One is totally impoverished and starving to death (literally), the other has decent food and medical care. Both are from the exact same gene pool.

But it looks like the difference between an adult North Korean male and an adult South Korean male is only 6cm. The difference between the females is only 4 cm.

Not that much is it? This is probably the most drastic example of how difference in nutrition can affect a person’s height, and it is only a 4-6cm difference.

If you compare the Japs or Singaporeans with the Brits, certainly the Singaporeans/Japs are not starving and certainly the nutritional differences are not that pronounced! But they have a whopping 7cm average height difference!

North Korea is failing to meet growth target

[Opinion] Tall South, Short North

[njtt]

I never said anything about poverty, or even about the general nutritional quality of diets. I said, very specifically, a diet low in calcium compared to the European one. I am well aware that Japan, and some other parts of East Asia, such as Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea, is wealthy. That is not the point.

And I happen to live in a city in California where a majority of my neighbors are Chinese Americans, most of them quite prosperous. They consume very little in the way of dairy produce (which is much higher in calcium than almost any other food). The Chinese owned convenience store at the end of my block does not even stock milk (which is about the only think I would ever normally want to buy at a convenience store). Lactose intolerant people may be able to absorb calcium from dairy produce, but they do not in fact get any calcium from dairy because they do not like to eat or drink it, because it makes them ill.

[Blake]

@annetyy3

Lactose intolerant people still absorb ALL the nutrients in milk except the lactose ie carbohydrate sugar.

That wasn’t the point. The point is that people with lactose intolerance avoid milk altogether. They don’t drink milk.

To keep it real simple: If I won’t place milk in my mouth, then how can I absorb any nutrients from milk?

Why don’t the Africans or Indians have the longest life spans then huh? Look at this list, the Hkers, Japs, Swiss, Swedes, Aussies, Canadians are at the top of the list and they are hardly “calorie restricted”.

I didn’t ask you this.

You made a claim that calorie restricted diets reduced lifespans. I am asking for evidence for that extraordinary claim.

And I call the claim extraordinary because it contradicts all the evidence we have from animal studies, all the preliminary human studies, and because if any evidence for the claim existed I am certain I would have seen it.

So, simple question annetyy3. Do you or do you not have any evidence for your claim that if people are on a calorie restricted diet they will have reduced lifespans?

Once we have cleared up that simple point, then we can move onto more complicated subjects, such as the fact that lifespan never, ever, ever depends on just a single factor, despite what you seem to believe

Any reference for that? I can’t believe that statement [that English nutrition has improved faster than Chinese] can hold true given that there has been a few thousand years in between.

A few thousand years between what? What are you talking about? English nutrition has improved in the last 200 years.

Even if the diet in China has not improved, what about Singapore or Hong Kong? No has ever starves to death in these countries but the guys are still averaging 170cm.

Starves to death? Who is talking about starving to death? We are discussing chronic malnutrition. It’s kind of hard to measure the height of the people to starved to death.

And you can’t possibly be arguing that nobody ever starved in Singapore or Hong Kong.

Do you understand what chronic nutrient deficiency means?

annetyy3, I’m not getting the sense that you know as much about this subject as you believe you do.

Surely their diet and medical care is a huge step up from what their Chinese ancestors consumed in the AD period when they where 169cm tall!

Huh?
We are in the AD period now.
And I am still waiting for the reference for your claim that “Americans of Japanese ancestry are hardly taller than their Japanese counterparts”. When you provide the evidence for your claim that chronic calorie restriction decreases lifespan, can you just pop that in there as well?

[njtt]

Incidentally, I do not know if it is relevant to height, but I do know that, due to epigenetic effects, poor nutrition in one generation can sometimes still have deleterious effects two or three generations down the line. Even though Japan and some other East Asian countries are wealthy now, a couple of generations ago they were poor and/or war-ravaged. (I guess Japan was already fairly wealthy before WWII, but I believe things were quite tough for a while in the immediate aftermath.) The present generation may still be suffering from some of the effects of that.

[Blake]

@annetyy3

But it looks like the difference between an adult North Korean male and an adult South Korean male is only 6cm. The difference between the females is only 4 cm.

Can we have a reference for this claim please?

Because all the evidence I am finding says that the difference is ~7cm

Not that much is it?

Well, 7cm is more than the difference between the US and urban China.

[Blake]

@njtt

Incidentally, I do not know if it is relevant to height, but I do know that, due to epigenetic effects, poor nutrition in one generation can sometimes still have deleterious effects two or three generations down the line.

Like most such things, it’s hard to say definitively with humans, but certainly this true for all other mammal species tested. The factors that seem to cause this effect inpeople, especially lower maternal body mass and volume leading to lower birth weights and lower milk production, would seem to be at least as applicable to humans. So it would be astonishing if it weren’t true of people.

[annetyy3]

@Blake

That wasn’t the point. The point is that people with lactose intolerance avoid milk altogether. They don’t drink milk.

East Asians do drink milk and they do drink quite a lot of it as well. You don’t know what you are talking about here.

@Blake

You made a claim that calorie restricted diets reduced lifespans. I am asking for evidence for that extraordinary claim.

I never said that.

@Blake

Starves to death? Who is talking about starving to death? We are discussing chronic malnutrition. It’s kind of hard to measure the height of the people to starved to death.

You were talking about chronic caloric restriction WITHOUT MALNUTRITION, that according to your wikipedia, might prolong life. CHRONIC MALNUTRITION certainly cuts short your lifespan by quite a lot.

But I doubt that calorie restriction is the case for the Japanese or Hong Konger having long life span because as I have quoted previously, the Swiss, Swedes, Aussies, Canadians have the same life span as the Japs and HKers, plus minus one year. And the Japs and HKers are not really skinny, many are quite fat.

If chronic caloric restriction leads to longer life, then why don’t the Vietnamese, Albanian, or a hundred other impoverished countries have long life span since most of their populace are probably calorie restricted as well.

@Blake

And you can’t possibly be arguing that nobody ever starved in Singapore or Hong Kong.

I am talking about during NORMAL times, not during a war. The British, Germans and Americans etc were starving to death like flies as well during WW2 in prison camps, occupied territories or battlefields.

Gtg sleep, very sleepy now.

[Askance]

Some relevant data, fortuitously published in my local paper’s Health and Science section today:

• A 2002 New Zealand study found that children who avoided milk over a long period were shorter and heavier.
• A 1997 Japanese study showed that those who drank big amounts of cow’s milk grew 2.5cm taller over 3 years than those who didn’t.
• The late British Paediatrician James Tanner showed that 90% of adult height is inherited, but immigrant groups like Italians and Japanese in the US acquired at least some of the physical proportions of their new home, mainly in their legs.

Make of those what you will.

[Siam_Sam]

The new generations of East Asians are taller than their ancestors, and as others have mentioned, it seems to come down to improved nutrition in the past half century or so. Southeast Asians, too. And the Thais are not only growing taller, they’re growing rounder, thanks to all the Western fast-food chains setting up shop here.

The present Thai foreign minister, Korn Chatikavanij, one of the few good guys in Thai politics, is supposedly my height, 6’3", but I have been in the same room with him, and it feels like he’s taller. An odd sensation whenever I encounter a Thai like that. It does not happen often. I’ve heard he has some Dutch ancestry in his background, like a grandparent or great-grandparent, but I don’t know if that’s true.

[annetyy3]

More curiously,

why are the Mainland Chinese, Hong Kong Chinese and Singaporean Chinese of exactly the same average height - 170cm?

Hong Kong has a per capita GDP 7-8 times that of the Mainland and Singapore has a per capita GDP 9-10 times that of the mainland. Both Hong Kong and Singapore have far better nutrition and healthcare. There are certainly no farmers half starving in HK and SG vis a vis the Mainland but their average heights are almost the same.

It seems like nutrition does not really play a big part at all.

I doubt the value of nutrition is that much in height. The North Koreans who are STARVING TO DEATH ie no food are only 4-7cm shorter than the South Koreans. If the N.Koreans weren’t starving to death but had poorer nutrition, they would probably just be 0-3cm shorter.

[Blake]

@annetyy3

East Asians do drink milk and they do drink quite a lot of it as well.

Do they? Yet another claim that we need a reference for.

Because the statisticians and nutritionists of the world all seem to believe that total milk consumption (as fluid milk and processed products) per person varies widely from highs in Europe and North America to lows in Asia. the same experts believ that in those tall Northern European countries milk consumption averages 115l/person/annum, while in those short countries like China the amount is less than 1/10 of that.

So, can you please produce your references that East Asians do quite a lot of milk. Because the experts say that you are wrong, and that they consume less than 1/10th the amount of those tall Northern Europeans.

You don’t know what you are talking about here.

No, I agree, I don;t. I am just relying on what the experts from actual universities and reliable census organisations tell me.

Can you now tell us what you are relying on?

I never said that [calorie restricted diets reduced lifespans]

Ahem

@annetyy3

The Singaporeans… have the longest life span in the entire world… so their nutrition can’t be worst than Western nations. If that was the case, their life span would be a lot shorter,

Yeah, you did say that calorie restricted diets reduced lifespans. That is exactly what you said.

So I repeat, any evidence for this claim that if Singaporean nutrition was chronically calorie deficient it would result in shorter lifespans?

You were talking about chronic caloric restriction WITHOUT MALNUTRITION, that according to your wikipedia, might prolong life. CHRONIC MALNUTRITION certainly cuts short your lifespan by quite a lot.

So you have gone from the blanket “If a diet were deficient it would lead to shorter lifespans” to “If a diet were deficient enough to produce malnutrition it would reduce lifespans.”

OK, now I want to see the evidence for this new claim. Please provide a reference that chronic (not acute mind) calcium deficiency leads to a reduced lifespan.

I am talking about during NORMAL times, not during a war.

No you aren’t. You have been using national average figures.

Perhaps you don’t realise that national average figures also include people who lived during wartime.

The British, Germans and Americans etc were starving to death like flies as well during WW2 in prison camps, occupied territories or battlefields.

:rolleyes:

The difference, in case you really didn’t notice, is that only the European and American soldiers were starving to death, and only a tiny, tiny, tiny minority of them. And in case you also overlooked the point, soldiers are all adults who have reached >95% of their adult height already, and their height is thus not affected by malnutrition.

Moreover, while food resources were scarce for a few years in Europe, and never at all in America, they rapidly returned to pre-war levels of oversupply. In contrast in the Asian examples the food was extremely scarce during the war and then returned to pre-war levels of chronic malnutrition.

Or do you really believe that Hong Kong in 1948 had the same level of nutrition and the United States or Germany?

Gtg sleep, very sleepy now.

So you can’t provide any references at all for your claims.