Economist traces height trends

How about immigration?

America is now home to millions of genetically shorter Asians, in addition there are large Hispanic groups that are now starting to have the physical growth that was denied in their home country.

Scandinavia's population is not as heterogeneous as America, they have a single genetic background which serves to popagate this notion of growth by metrics of Health systems etc.

Look at the mix and determine the growth patterns on a differential basis not a total as normative.

Why should they mention global warming? What does that have to do with it? Good point about the Asians etc in our population. They could be bringing our numbers down. B.I.O.T.A - Booze is the only answer. Mixed with generous helpings of pot.

The political agenda in Komlos’ study is obvious. Blame capitalism! According to Komlos, if the USA had socialized medicine and shared wealth, everyone would be tall??? Shame on Hundley for failing to bring an opposing view.

This article offers no definitive data to support Komlos' conclusions which are so obviously flawed. Heights vary by nationality in this country so to be anywhere near accurate, he would have to break down his comparisons by both ethnic group and geography, which he apparently did not do. Further, it takes no scientific study to know that there are many girls today over 6 feet tall and many men over 6-5, both a rarity 30 years ago. Just visit any high school to see how tall the students are. Even if you're 6 feet, you're looking up to many. There are 7th and 8th graders over 6 feet now. Check with teen clothing manufacturers to see their comparisons with sizes years ago if you want to see the increase in demand for longer sizes. Reasons for this growth have less to do with health care than with nutrition with more youngsters having access to large quantities of milk than in years past, helping to build their bones, and much more variety in food choices to ensure a balanced diet.

Wait!!! An economist "weighing in" on young people's height? And then determining that health care is the prime factor? Where'd he ever find this subject in the Economists' Handbook? He'd better to go back to doing what economists do the most: mis-analyzing the economy.

"Some critics of Komlos' previous work suggested that U.S. heights may have skewed downward because the national statistics he used included significant numbers of immigrants and their children, who tend to be shorter."

Duh.

America's population in the 50's was, IIRC, something like 43% Germanic. Which is still at the top of the height list (Dutch is just north Germany).

Now it's what? 43% Hispanic? Who are generally at the low end of the height scale (I know I know but we're talking averages aren't we?)?

This guy is a statistician? It's not so much the set as the set's composition that matters. The composition is changing, so what?

Ditto black women changing over time. What exactly is a 'black woman' today? Black like South American or Carribean black or black African black? There have been changes in the composition of the group. Has that been accounted for?

Even the fat part of his study is open to composition-effects. I believe, but I'm no geneticist, that Hispanics generally are more prone to obesity just because they come from a feast-or-famine background where storing fat in lean times was a survival mechanism; and so those in their ancestoral lines that survived were selected for that characteristic. You see this in Pacific Islander populations as well. So the population of America has changed proportions? Again, so what?

It makes no sense to compare the height of Americans to Europeans. They use the metric system over there. It is comparing apples to oranges. Geez, what a stupid article.

We're still growning taller, but horizontally.

Europe is much more ethically homogenous than the USA. Because of this, using nationality as a data type is junk science. Give back your PhD...

This guy has a PhD (polish hot dog)?!? Incredible lack of statistical sophistication in this piece of junk science. Similarly flawed "data" is presented on infant mortality, which does not take into account 1) the number of premature babies "saved" in the US vs. other countries, or 2) large infant mortality rate differences based on socioeconomic status

[QUOTE How about immigration?
America is now home to millions of genetically shorter Asians, in addition there are large Hispanic groups that are now starting to have the physical growth that was denied in their home country.
Scandinavia's population is not as heterogeneous as America, they have a single genetic background which serves to popagate this notion of growth by metrics of Health systems etc.
Look at the mix and determine the growth patterns on a differential basis not a total as normative.[/QUOTE]

Good point.

Ah, yes but we Americans are the widest population on the planet. So take that, European snobs. Besides, if you turn us on our sides we will also be the tallest.

Seriously, the loss of stature in the world is more than a physiological manifestation. All empires eventually decline and this loss of height is but one example of the decline of the American Empire. American arrogance, imperialism, hedonism and all-around wretched excess will only speed the decline.

Plus, we have those darn Oompah Loompah's pulling down the curve.

Let's see, Einstein, the tall Watusis are flush with wealth, while the short Pygmies are impoverished - is that correct?
I think Komlos kind of misses the demographic changes of the US which has skewed its growth toward genetically shorter Mexicans.

This guy's PhD obviously stands for Piled high and Deep.

There's an old line about there being three kinds of lies, lies, damned lies, and statistics...this miserable excuse of an economist proves it.

Take a look around. Even the genetically shorter Asian kids are taller than their parents.

This study was pretty dumb. But I still agree with Randy Newman

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/SongUn...

Komlos is an idiot--as others have noted, the infusion of immigrants--almost all from notably shorter ethnic groups from Asia and Latin America--are obviously the source of any "downturn" from earlier U.S. height averages.

As for Jeff from Libertyville--it's sad to see someone so enamored of their own prejudices and political pathologies that they would gobble up this sort of trash as support for their twisted worldview. But then again, even the enlightened population of 1930s Germany leapt at the chance to embrace eugenics for their own purposes....

Interesting how a number of people seem to take a pretty innocuous study personally. Regarding a bit of geographic misrepresentation, "Dutch" is not a country but an adjective for a sovereign country, the Netherlands (to the West of Germany, not "just north Germany")- for that matter, "Dutch" does not pertain to Denmark (to the North of Germany), as many people mistakenly believe! Also interesting that it is supposedly not possible to compare feet and meters ...

Liberal politcs never win at the voting booth, so in comes the activist judges and the junk science.

What next? A slide show movie talking about how because of Wal Mart, Global Warming, and lack of universal health care, we are all going to die!!!

Socialisn Now!

I wish they would quit treating us like idiots.

These people are becoming parodies of themselves.