How much height could a man possibly stunt with the worst diet and lifestyle?

Edit Post

In my opinion you should get the surgery.

Edit Post

Get the surgery man, you can practice martial arts at a low level but you can. Analize if you can reach a top level in martial arts un two or three years, if you cant, just get the surgery.

Edit Post

Exactly that's what I would recommend as well.

Edit Post

I was reading some articles today and found this tidbit. I don't think anyone should extrapolate it out of an excerpt, but of course I felt like sharing it here:

QuoteA special feature of the human pattern is that between birth and puberty the legs grow relatively faster than other post-cranial body segments. For groups of children and youth, short stature due to relatively short legs (i.e., a high sitting height ratio) is generally a marker of an adverse environment.
QuoteFrom the perspective of developmental plasticity, leg length, both in terms of absolute size and relative to total stature, is an indicator of the quality of the environment for growth during infancy, childhood and the juvenile years of development.

The reason for this is the general principle that those body parts growing the fastest will be most affected by a shortage of nutrients, infection, parasites, physical or emotional trauma, and other adverse conditions. The cephalo-caudal principle of growth as applied to the human species means that the legs, especially the tibia, are growing faster relative to other body segments from birth to age 7 years. Relatively short LL in adolescents and adults, therefore, is likely to be due to adversity during infancy and childhood leading to competition between body segments, such as trunk versus limbs and between organs and limbs. In the simplest case, such competition may be for the limited nutrients available during growth [31,56,61]. More complex explanations for competition relate to aspects of the thrifty phenotype hypothesis [75,76], the intergenerational influences hypothesis [77,78], the fetal programming hypothesis [79], and the predictive adaptive response hypothesis [80,81]. Discussion of these hypotheses is beyond the scope of this review [see reference 31, and other articles in the same issue, for such discussion], but in essence each of these hypotheses predicts that the vital organs of the head, thorax, and abdomen of the body will be protected from adversity at the expense of the less vital tissues of the limbs.
Source.

(Mind you this seems to be about children and adolescents only, but it has ambiguous reading in some parts: "Relatively short LL in adolescents and adults".)



Also a few extra interesting excerpts for people interested in height, leg length, proportions and sitting height.

Height:

QuoteDiscrete populations of living humans, however, present a diversity of body sizes and shapes. Mean stature for populations of adults varies from minimum values for the Efe Pygmies of Africa at 144.9 cm for men and 136.1 cm for women [43] to the maximum values for the Dutch of Europe at 184.0 cm for men and 170.6 cm for women [44].
Sitting Height and leg length:

QuoteThe sitting height ratio (SHR) is a commonly used measure of body proportion. Measured stature minus sitting height may also be used to estimate leg length but this measure does not standardize for total height making it difficult to compare individuals with different statures. Mean SHR for populations of adults varies from minimum values, i.e., relatively longest legs, for Australian Aborigines (SHR = 47.3 for men and 48.1 for women) to the maximum SHR values, i.e., relatively shortest legs, for Guatemala Maya men and Peruvian women ( SHR = 54.6 and 55.8 ).
Proportions:

QuoteAlthough white and black adults in the United States have the same average stature, when education, income and other variables are controlled, the body proportions of the two groups are different. Krogman [58] found that for the same height, blacks living in Philadelphia, USA had shorter trunks and longer extremities than whites, especially the lower leg and forearm. Hamill et al. [59] found that this was also true for a national sample of black and white youths 12 to 17 years old, and it is the case for adults 20−49 years old measured for the NHANES III survey, 1988–1994 [9]. A genomic contribution to the body proportion differences between blacks and whites seems likely, as the blacks tend to have more sub-Sahara African genomic origins than the whites.

Few if any specific genes for human body proportions are known. In a statistical pedigree analysis of two human samples, Liv s et al. [60] estimate that between 40% and 75% of inter-individual variation in the body proportions they studied (adjusted for age and sxx) are attributable to “genetic effects”. These may be better described as familial effects because the authors analyzed families and also because they found significant common environmental effects for siblings as well as significant sxx by age interactions. The range of the sources of variation in the analysis makes it difficult to compute simple genetic variance.

Edit Post

Quote from: myloginacct on February 07, 2018, 12:56:29 PMI was reading some articles today and found this tidbit. I don't think anyone should extrapolate it out of an excerpt, but of course I felt like sharing it here:

Source.

(Mind you this seems to be about children and adolescents only, but it has ambiguous reading in some parts: "Relatively short LL in adolescents and adults".)



Also a few extra interesting excerpts for people interested in height, leg length, proportions and sitting height.

Height:

Sitting Height and leg length:

Proportions:

Interesting. So it's like an official confirmation of what we've been worrying.

Edit Post

Quote from: BruceWayne on February 08, 2018, 05:57:06 AMInteresting. So it's like an official confirmation of what we've been worrying.

I hardly see a confirmation that growth can be massively stunted by normal upbringing in these text bits, tbh.

Edit Post

Quote from: IwannaBeTaller on February 08, 2018, 10:50:04 AMI hardly see a confirmation that growth can be massively stunted by normal upbringing in these text bits, tbh.

A confirmation that poor quality of environment such as shortage of nutrients, infection, parasites, physical or emotional trauma, and other adverse conditions can stunt one's growth which can be judged from the short leg lengths.

Edit Post

Quote from: IwannaBeTaller on February 08, 2018, 10:50:04 AMI hardly see a confirmation that growth can be massively stunted by normal upbringing in these text bits, tbh.

I looked up better papers and I'll go through them all during the next few days, but it wouldn't surprise me at all that growth is stunted by a bad childhood. A bad youth, specially a bad childhood, affects everything in your life, from future health and psychological conditions to the very shape and wiring of your brain. I agree it can't massively stunt one's growth to the level of Psychosocial Short Stature, but it probably does affect it a little bit, specially if stress levels remain elevated until 18.

Edit Post

How this topic is still debatable baffles me. Just take into account the story of 13 children held captive in California and you pretty much got your answer.

Edit Post

Quote from: myloginacct on February 08, 2018, 04:40:04 PMI looked up better papers and I'll go through them all during the next few days, but it wouldn't surprise me at all that growth is stunted by a bad childhood. A bad youth, specially a bad childhood, affects everything in your life, from future health and psychological conditions to the very shape and wiring of your brain. I agree it can't massively stunt one's growth to the level of Psychosocial Short Stature, but it probably does affect it a little bit, specially if stress levels remain elevated until 18.

What do you mean by "a little bit"?

Thank you for this article. Now I am more convinced that my upbringing has caused my short stature.

I think it's fking tragic that I am short due to the stress and lack of sleep caused by school and problems associated with it. I mean there is no reason for this. It's not like I grew up in a war situation or my parents were poor in which I didn't have any choice. By in fact, I DID have choice. But I chose to struggle and suffer.

Quote from: Auron on February 08, 2018, 04:59:52 PMHow this topic is still debatable baffles me. Just take into account the story of 13 children held captive in California and you pretty much got your answer.

I'm not sure how it's relevant. The children are still growing by this time.