快猫短视频

For most of our history, humans have been short, a study has found. Until around 150 years ago, few people grew taller than 170 centimetres 鈥� not even the most privileged individuals, who had ready access to food. This discovery adds to growing evidence that stunting 鈥� being unusually short 鈥� isn鈥檛 a wholly reliable indicator of malnutrition. Instead of being a sign of a good diet, growing taller may instead reflect competition for dominance in some societies.

at the University of Potsdam and paediatrician Michael Hermanussen in Altenhof, both in Germany, have spent several years studying the height of people from a wide range of populations. In their latest paper, they combined with multiple studies of more recent historical populations from Europe and the US. They also included their own data on 1666 modern Indonesian schoolchildren.

In the prehistoric populations, the maximum height for men was 165 to 170 cm, while women topped out at 160 cm. Today, by comparison, men in England have an average height of around 175 cm, while for women it is about 162 cm. The average heights of both men and women are several centimetres higher in Germany.

The team found that similar patterns to the prehistoric heights held in the historical populations. Even a group of upper-class German boys from the late 1800s were all significantly shorter than modern children, so much so that over half of them would be considered stunted by modern standards.

But there is significant variation between modern countries. The Indonesian schoolchildren in the study were shorter than similarly aged children from the US, despite being well-nourished.

If food availability isn鈥檛 the key to height, what is? Scheffler and Hermanussen argue that , so in societies where it is possible to move up through social classes, evolution favours individuals who grow tall. Growing tall, says Scheffler, 鈥渋s more or less associated with the hope of a better life鈥�.

at Harvard University isn鈥檛 convinced by the pair鈥檚 interpretation. His team previously showed that , indicating that height is highly heritable. This suggests the influence of other factors, such as social mobility, will be limited.

Scheffler also argues that stunting isn鈥檛 a good indicator of whether a child is malnourished. 鈥淲e don鈥檛 find any association between signs of nutritional status and height,鈥� she says.

Subramanian agrees that stunting isn鈥檛 a perfect indicator of malnutrition. After assessing nearly 163,000 children living in 55 low and middle-income countries, his team found that .

This implies there is a lot of hidden malnutrition that doesn鈥檛 reveal itself through stunting. A person鈥檚 nutritional status should be assessed by , says Subramanian.