Hello. With all the talk and speculation about growth stunting during puberty because of an "imperfect" lifestyle, which normally means imperfect nutrition or not enough sleep, which is often talked about here, I wondered something else. Can this imperfect lifestyle affect your adult voice? Quite often I notice that while my dad, now in his late fifties, has a quite deep and "strong" voice, while mine is, well, not a "girl's voice", but certainly quite higher and kind of less "masculine". So I wondered if this could have to do with the lifestyle you live during your growth phase? Can imperfect diet, imperfect sleep and imperfect exercise during puberty not only affect your final height but also your adult voice, or is this aspect rather purely dependent on genetics?
Quote from: TIBIKE200 on January 22, 2016, 11:06:50 AMVoice has to do with testosterone. Testosterone is known to accelerate the growth plates maturation... If you have low testosterone (and therefore a high estrogen/testosterone ratio) you should have had reached a highier final height. Also, testosterone according to medical literature is responsible for the length of your torso (this is why men with kleineftler syndrome are known to have really long limbs compared to their torso).
Sleep does not affect testosterone levels... Exercise and nutrition, only to a certain extent
So is that a yes or no to my initial question? Would my voice be lower if I had had better nutrition, done more sports, etc. in my teenage years?
Quote from: TIBIKE200 on January 22, 2016, 11:06:50 AMVoice has to do with testosterone. Testosterone is known to accelerate the growth plates maturation... If you have low testosterone (and therefore a high estrogen/testosterone ratio) you should have had reached a highier final height.
Another question, if this is the case, why are men taller than women? Men after all have much higher testosterone levels then women, so their growth plates should close faster than women's?
Quote from: Jack1066 on February 05, 2017, 11:38:43 PMHigh testosterone signals your body to stop growing, because as you reach the last stage of puberty your testosterone levels increase.
I just don't understand - if testosterone can accelerate growth plate maturation, why are men taller than women? Why are many high T men tall? The big American high school football players you can think of - square jaw, narrow eyes, built like a tank. Why are some of them 6'3'' and over, if their high T levels accelerate growth plates closing? Is it because testosterone isn't the only aspect influencing height?
Quote from: Jack1066 on February 06, 2017, 12:26:53 AMWe don't really know how much height is influenced by environment yet. Some say as low as 10% some say as high as 40%, but even the 40% would probably only mean an inch or so. I wouldn't say 3 inches though. I mean unless your body has to shut down because it's in survival mode, it will continue to grow until your growth plates fuse, just at a slower rate if you are taking drugs or not sleeping enough for example. That's why it's so hard to stunt your growth.
I don't quite understand how the 10%, 40%, etc. calculation works. You say it could be 40%, but 40% of someone's height is easily 70 centimetres. Nobody stunts their growth by that much. 10% of 5'11'' are also 7 whole inches. So when we say that environmental factors contribute 20% of height, and I've had the worst environment possible, how much did that stunt growth?
Sorry just confused about that percentage stuff ever since I saw it.
QuoteI'm rambling at this point, but this is why I also think growth can be stunted by as much as 2-3 inches. Say you spend ages 13-16 not sleeping very well, so you don't produce much GH or IGF-1.
I personally don't believe this one since at least in America, most teens don't sleep enough. This has been reported several times by studies. So if that were true, most Americans would have stunted their growth by that much, which I don't believe.
Quote from: Jack1066 on February 06, 2017, 01:44:20 AMThe 10%, 40% thing as far as I remember is just how much your height can vary based on environment on top of genetics.
As far as I remember this variability is calculated off the average height.
So, say a 174 cm guy in Holland is 6 cm off the average, and the average is 180 cm, if his genetic heritability was 80% (varies from person to person), 80% of this deviation from the average might be explained by genetics and 20% by nutrition and environment. Which would mean his maximum "potential" was 175.2 cm but he only reached 174 due to poor nutrition.
80% is considered the average heritability for white males. I worked out once I could have been about half an inch or an inch taller myself, but then again I'm not sure as my dad has always claimed 5'8 but I am pretty sure I am already 1.5-2 inches taller than him (he is 60 though so I assume he's shrunk an inch or so by now). And as I said I did practically everything I could to stunt my growth in my teens.
I think this is all really situationally dependant though. Short people can have tall parents and families and tall people can have short parents. Random genetic mutations happen.
That's a weird way of calculation since your body doesn't know what the average height is. A kid with short parents could have the best development years possible, optimal nutrition, optimal sleep, optimal exercise, but still be under the average height, and therefore is supposed to have stunted his growth. Wouldn't a better calculation be to take the calculated height (dads height + moms height), because that one is more telling of the individual?
I'm just rambling here and it's 3 am, but let's say I'm 171 My calculated height, based on my parent's height, would have been about 177. 20% of that difference is 1.2 cm. So my bad lifestyle would only have affected my growth by that much, correct?
QuoteThey all sleep 12 inches every night
LOL! I'm off to bed, good night ya.
Quote from: Jack1066 on February 06, 2017, 01:57:44 AMYeah, I agree it's not perfect, mostly because you can't tell what heritability you have and averages are kind of bullcrap when it comes to the individual. Then again, I'm gona contradict myself and say I think there's something to it because "regression to the mean" in terms of looks and height does exist, so in that sense it's quite a sensible way of calculating this. But basically I'm gona contradict myself again and say all that stuff is junk really haha and you can't ever tell what height you would have ideally been and anyway, what's the point of it?
As far as I remember yes, averaging the parent's height and adding a little bit is the way it's normally done. I got 5'9 for myself when I did both, not sure if that's just a coincidence.
I'm going to bed too, lol.
Yep, 1.2 cm sounds right.
Just wanted to say that you're a really decent poser and I'm glad to have you here. 
You must be logged in to post a reply.