This is getting quite weird. Only a tiny proportion of British, American or German people were ever in prison camps (and, to the best of my knowledge, those in prisoner of war camps, on all sides, were usually adequately fed). Britain and America were never occupied by anyone, and Germany was not occupied until very late in the war. I am pretty sure that considerable efforts were made to ensure that soldiers on battlefields (possibly excepting Germans toward the very end) were well nourished. It is true that food for civilians in Britain was rationed, but not to the extent of causing malnutrition.
Presumably becuase they have the same average diet.
Why do South Koreans not have the same average height as these three groups, despite being sandwiched between China and Japan., while South Koreans are 7 centimetres shorter again?
Sigh.
Yes, and how old does a person in Hong Kong have to be for this NOT to have been true when they were growing up?
What are you proposing, that there is a geographic factor dictating height in China?
It seems like you are ignoring the facts, cherrypicking data points and inventing other “facts” with no basis whatsoever.
WTF?
That doesn’t even make any sense.
The people who have managed to avoid actual death from starvation are 7cm shorter than people living literally a few miles away on the southern border, so this tells us that if they weren’t starving the difference would only be 3 cm, which is still 6 cm shorter than people living literally inches away on the northern border.
If anybody can make sense of this then please feel free to do so. I have no idea what point he is trying to make. I can only assume that he is arguing that there is some intrinsic geological factor about the Korean peninsula that makes people short.
Because if the people of Korea are shorter than the people east, west, north and south of them, and nutrition and income play no role in that difference, the only possible explanation would seem to lie in edaphic factors.
D’oh!:smack: And of course, I meant Korn is the the finance minister, not the foreign minister.
This may sound like a dumb question, but why do you think the 3000 BC Chinese is the “counterpart” of the 1066 AD Englishman? The two are further apart in time from each other than the 1066 AD guy is away from us - by a factor of more than four.
In that case, you don’t understand what “chronic caloric restriction” means. The chronically caloric-restricted diets promoted as increasing lifespan aim for an intake of about 1800 calories per day. The average daily caloric intake for the nations you claim to be “poor”—Albania, Argentina, and Vietnam—are 2874, 2959, and 2617, respectively.
What is the source of your claim that North Koreans are starving to death? The country had terrible famines in the 1990s, and food remains scarce, though I haven’t heard any credible reports that starvation is a major cause of death there lately.
What do you mean by South Koreans are 7cm shorter??
The Koreans do not have the same height as the Singaporeans, HKers or Chinese probably because they are of a totally different race and gene pool.
The very same age as almost everyone in continental Europe (less Britain which was never occupied) has to be to avoid the malnutritional effects of German occupation. Almost the entire contitnental Europe was occupied by the Germans for years.
You are obviously confused and not making much sense here. The Nkoreans (who are being starved to death everyday of their life) are on average 4-7 cm shorter than the South (who have decent food and healthcare). It is as simple as that.
Near starvation and going hungry EVERYDAY only produces a 4-7cm difference in height between those of the exact same gene pool. Supposed the N.koreans weren’t going hungry everyday and have enough basic food to fill their stomaches but still have very bad nutrition (rice, vege and little meat every meal), the difference would probably only be 0-2 or 3cm at most.
People always place so much empahsise on nutrition correlating with height but difference in nutrition in the modern society only affects very little of height, probably only 1-3 cm at most.
Europeans were well fed in prison camps and occupied areas? :dubious::rolleyes:
Europeans – young and old – were starving to death in Europe under Nazi occupied areas. In prison camps, it is even worse.
This is very interesting as well. I supposed you can say that HKers and Sporeans have somewhat comparable standards of nutrition and healthcare; but the same definitely cannot be said for mainland China.
All three countries have different diets especially Singapore. Their diets do share some “Chinese foodfare” but that is where the similarities end. The average HKer and Sporean are certainly much better fed vis a vis the mainland Chinese, and yet they ALL have the same average height of 170cm plus minus 1cm.:eek:
More evidence that height is almost entirely inherited?
It’s obvious at this point that annetyy3 has absolutely no intention of providing evidence to back up his (or her) assertions, even when challenged, and ignoring other posters’ well-documented evidence to the contrary. He already had his mind made up about the answer to his question before he even posted it.
annetyy3, can you answer my questions or not?
I have no intention of engaging you if you are being disingenuous.
The references you provide are either wiki articles or websites that don’t even load. Well documented? I think not. Spare me your nonsensical views and pedantry.
What are you driving at then? Nutrition determines most of your height like what the average man on the street seems to think?
The N/S Korea and SG/HK/CHN example already shows that nutrition only determines very little of your height. In a modern society where everyone has access to food and water, the difference is negligible and probably 1-3cm AT MOST.
Scientists have also proven time and again that 80% of height is inherited. 20% is environmental. In most modern societies, this 20% is lessened to much lower percentage when the masses has access to basic food and healthcare.
Do I look like Google or your father?
What is it in your brain that tells you I intend to indulge you by answering your posts, nonsensical arguments that indicates your inability to apply reason or direction.
What world do you live in son? :o
So you are totally unable to support your outrageous claims with any sort of evidence.
I think that tells us all exactly what we need to know about the content of your posts. No further input from us is required.
Many Europeans starved, yes, but you specifically said that Germans, British and Americans lived under occupation, or in prison camps, and starved. That is what I said was wrong, because it is wrong. Only tiny numbers of prisoners of war from any of those nations were ever in prison camps, and even those who were prisoners of the Germans were not subjected to the horrific conditions of the concentration camps and death camps. No part of America was ever occupied, the only parts of Britain that were ever occupied were the tiny Channel Islands, and no part of Germany was occupied by an enemy until very close to the end of the war.
You do not seem to be able to keep track of your own assertions, let alone follow the arguments any of the rest of us are making.
Anyway, I am not sure what you are doing here. You asked a question and you have been given an answer, and by now, quite a lot of supporting evidence, but you refuse to accept it, and keep making incoherent and baseless objections.
… and I am not sure what type of answer the OP is aiming for. East Asians are shorter than Europeans, on average, mostly. So?
Even with equal nutrition, East Asians (on average) are a smaller people than those big-nosed, hairy Europeans. So?
People from different areas tend to be of different sizes, just like every other measurable physical trait and the intra-group diversity is greater than the inter-group diversity. So?
Again, what type of answer is being looked for here?
[Moderator Note]
annetyy3, insults are not permitted in General Questions. Since you’re new here, I suggest you read the board and forum FAQs and rules before continuing to post. I’m not issuing a formal warning this time, but please tone it down.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Blake, for the second time now, was not talking about East Asians drinking or not drinking milk. He was saying that whether people who are lactose intolerant can absorb calcium or whatever other nutrients from milk is irrelevant, because people who are lactose intolerant avoid drinking milk.
He also provided cites that milk consumption in East Asia is 1/10 that of Europe.
I have quite a few Thai friends and from my own observation it is quite remarkable how much their taller their American born children are than their parents. I see many kids that tower over their parents at 10 or 12 years old.
. The professor could be correct in terms of the traditional Japanese diet being a cause of lowered height. They are getting higher as their animal protein intake has increased. From the New York Times.
That’s a difference of 13.6 cm.
I notice you are from Singapore, and many people from there are not aware that the term “Japs” is considered to be a racially offense, especially in the US.
Please see the quote above.
The 80% seems to be for white men. From the article you quoted
The article seems to undermine your argument.
Now, going back to your OP.
Here is something interesting. The average height of a young English male in the 1850s (1.659 m) was actually shorter than the average in 1066 by 5.4 cm, but then rebounded since.
Boy, what a disaster of a thread. I thought this was general questions?
Anyway, as for the OP, according to your cites I believe you are taking the the average height of 3000 b.c. chinese from a sample of 35/34 (23 male, 11 female). I doubt, that this really is enough of a sample size to conclusively state the average height of 3000 b.c. Chinese is greater than 1066 AD Europeans. For all we know the direct descendant of these 34 people is Yao Ming.