Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Why all the Amazon Women these days?

Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 5:24:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Oh...I forgot to add.......

Today at lunch I went down the block to a local supermarket with a killer deli, and sat there and had a sub and did some people watching. This was right after I was listening to Dr Borg talking about my OP topic.

The market was busy. It is 100 here today; people cooling off and buying beverages and stocking-up for the weekend.

In about 45 minutes I counted 12 women six-feet tall or over!

Twenty years ago--or even ten, I would guess that in the same given amount of customers in a market then, one like I was in, you would have maybe seen one or two.

WTF is goin' on, folks?

LOL
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 5:25:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 5:24:02 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Oh...I forgot to add.......

Today at lunch I went down the block to a local supermarket with a killer deli, and sat there and had a sub and did some people watching. This was right after I was listening to Dr Borg talking about my OP topic.

The market was busy. It is 100 here today; people cooling off and buying beverages and stocking-up for the weekend.

In about 45 minutes I counted 12 women six-feet tall or over!

Twenty years ago--or even ten, I would guess that in the same given amount of customers in a market then, one like I was in, you would have maybe seen one or two.

WTF is goin' on, folks?

LOL

Cheap food.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 5:26:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Also, years of government propaganda that babies need to be extra fat. Fat girls hit puberty much much faster. It aint whats in the milk, it's the milk itself.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 5:31:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 5:26:48 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
Also, years of government propaganda that babies need to be extra fat. Fat girls hit puberty much much faster. It aint whats in the milk, it's the milk itself.

Yeah, milk is terrible for you.

I have known this since I ran college track where our coach forbid it, saying "It cuts your wind."

Dr. Borg also said that the old ad campaign "Got Milk" and all the others before it from the Dairy Association is one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated upon the American public.

Check out how much sugar is in your milk? (In the form of Lactose). About half as much as in a Coke, per ounce. LOL.

Plus those nasty hormones. And let us not forget Puss. Yes---from the udders. The FDA allows a certain amount of puss in milk. (Around an ounce or two per half-gallon if i am not mistaken!)

Yek!

LOL
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:07:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 5:48:45 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I actually like the taste of almond milk.

I do too. Chocolate. I drink it after working out or a long run.

No puss! LOL.

Oh...I went to Wal-Mart after work today. I was in there for about 20 minutes. I counted seven women 6' or over. Half of them over 160 lbs. This makes today's total about 20!!

Two decades ago the same amount of time observing women in the same places and city would have probably yielded two or three women that size. Maybe not even that.

I am going to continue my observations and note them.I am considering perhaps including a section on this chapter in my Master's Thesis on Evolutionary Psychology/Biology--if I can determine a fluent and pertinent way to work it into the narrative.

Thanks.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:29:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...

It's not just American women. The men too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Overall weight gain since 1960 is slightly greater for women (18.5 percent) than for men (17.6 percent). And both sexes have gained roughly an inch in height over the same period, which accounts for some of that weight gain.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:37:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:29:35 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...

It's not just American women. The men too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Overall weight gain since 1960 is slightly greater for women (18.5 percent) than for men (17.6 percent). And both sexes have gained roughly an inch in height over the same period, which accounts for some of that weight gain.

I am not speaking of the American obesity epidemic; I am well aware of that. But this is a totally different dynamic. One borne of unknowingly ingesting substances into one's body as opposed to deliberately scarfing down a couple cheeseburgers every day. LOL

Stow the stats on the one inch average height gain. I don't care what they say--the proof is in the pudding and there for all to see. (those stats, BTW, only of course take an average, which I believe is skewed because of more short women due to a surplus of immigrants who are short by nature, such as Hispanics and Asians.

Besides **sigh** your post did not address the absurd decrease in the age of which many young women are reaching puberty.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 10:18:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:37:38 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:29:35 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...

It's not just American women. The men too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Overall weight gain since 1960 is slightly greater for women (18.5 percent) than for men (17.6 percent). And both sexes have gained roughly an inch in height over the same period, which accounts for some of that weight gain.

I am not speaking of the American obesity epidemic; I am well aware of that. But this is a totally different dynamic. One borne of unknowingly ingesting substances into one's body as opposed to deliberately scarfing down a couple cheeseburgers every day. LOL

No, you asked about the number of 'Amazon' women around today. Increases in height and weight are obviously linked. There has been a significant average height (and consequently weight) increase in American people over the last 50 years.

Stow the stats on the one inch average height gain. I don't care what they say--the proof is in the pudding and there for all to see. (those stats, BTW, only of course take an average, which I believe is skewed because of more short women due to a surplus of immigrants who are short by nature, such as Hispanics and Asians.

So, the average American-born man and woman has experienced an even greater increase in height than 1 inch? Okay. I fail to see the differentiation between men and women which you seem to want to focus on though.

Besides **sigh** your post did not address the absurd decrease in the age of which many young women are reaching puberty.

My apologies, but the pet theory espoused by your boss seemed to be an aside to the main thrust of your OP. The earlier onset of puberty amongst American (white) girls doesn't seem to have any obvious connection to your claims about the preponderence of Amazonian women today. Did I miss something?

Or is it that you think that increasing hormone levels in our food is the common factor to explain both phenomena? This Scientific American article suggests that improved diet and nutrition are the main culprits for this recent height epidemic (which appears to be tapering off):

http://www.scientificamerican.com...
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 10:28:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 10:18:47 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:37:38 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:29:35 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...

It's not just American women. The men too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Overall weight gain since 1960 is slightly greater for women (18.5 percent) than for men (17.6 percent). And both sexes have gained roughly an inch in height over the same period, which accounts for some of that weight gain.

I am not speaking of the American obesity epidemic; I am well aware of that. But this is a totally different dynamic. One borne of unknowingly ingesting substances into one's body as opposed to deliberately scarfing down a couple cheeseburgers every day. LOL

No, you asked about the number of 'Amazon' women around today. Increases in height and weight are obviously linked. There has been a significant average height (and consequently weight) increase in American people over the last 50 years.

Stow the stats on the one inch average height gain. I don't care what they say--the proof is in the pudding and there for all to see. (those stats, BTW, only of course take an average, which I believe is skewed because of more short women due to a surplus of immigrants who are short by nature, such as Hispanics and Asians.

So, the average American-born man and woman has experienced an even greater increase in height than 1 inch? Okay. I fail to see the differentiation between men and women which you seem to want to focus on though.

Besides **sigh** your post did not address the absurd decrease in the age of which many young women are reaching puberty.

My apologies, but the pet theory espoused by your boss seemed to be an aside to the main thrust of your OP. The earlier onset of puberty amongst American (white) girls doesn't seem to have any obvious connection to your claims about the preponderence of Amazonian women today. Did I miss something?

Or is it that you think that increasing hormone levels in our food is the common factor to explain both phenomena? This Scientific American article suggests that improved diet and nutrition are the main culprits for this recent height epidemic (which appears to be tapering off):

http://www.scientificamerican.com...

Yeah...that last thing you said. The growth hormones are the culprits for both dynamics in women.

thanks for the SA article; I printed it out and will read it later tonight!
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 10:36:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 10:18:47 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:37:38 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:29:35 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...

It's not just American women. The men too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Overall weight gain since 1960 is slightly greater for women (18.5 percent) than for men (17.6 percent). And both sexes have gained roughly an inch in height over the same period, which accounts for some of that weight gain.

I am not speaking of the American obesity epidemic; I am well aware of that. But this is a totally different dynamic. One borne of unknowingly ingesting substances into one's body as opposed to deliberately scarfing down a couple cheeseburgers every day. LOL

No, you asked about the number of 'Amazon' women around today. Increases in height and weight are obviously linked. There has been a significant average height (and consequently weight) increase in American people over the last 50 years.

Stow the stats on the one inch average height gain. I don't care what they say--the proof is in the pudding and there for all to see. (those stats, BTW, only of course take an average, which I believe is skewed because of more short women due to a surplus of immigrants who are short by nature, such as Hispanics and Asians.

So, the average American-born man and woman has experienced an even greater increase in height than 1 inch? Okay. I fail to see the differentiation between men and women which you seem to want to focus on though.

Besides **sigh** your post did not address the absurd decrease in the age of which many young women are reaching puberty.

My apologies, but the pet theory espoused by your boss seemed to be an aside to the main thrust of your OP. The earlier onset of puberty amongst American (white) girls doesn't seem to have any obvious connection to your claims about the preponderence of Amazonian women today. Did I miss something?

Or is it that you think that increasing hormone levels in our food is the common factor to explain both phenomena? This Scientific American article suggests that improved diet and nutrition are the main culprits for this recent height epidemic (which appears to be tapering off):

http://www.scientificamerican.com...

Well, that article wasn't as long as I first thought! I just read it, and to be honest found it a bit lacking. They were on the right track with the notion that nutrition, i.e. dietary intake was the likely culprit, but they failed to take the extra step and say what exactly was in some of that food. Such as the growth hormones in red meat and milk mainly.

They also neglected the specific affect on females, and instead just did a sort of overall gloss on humans in general. Mostly Americans. (which too, my boss was referring to. As you might know; many countries do not even ALLOW those growth hormones to be used in their cattle and dairy!)

Did you also notice the article was 17 years old? LOL. IMHO the amount of growth hormones used in food was probably half back then what it is now. And women who were infants at the time that article was written would be of the very age where I mostly notice the Amazon Effect today.

thanks for posting!

Drew.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 10:36:35 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/19/2015 10:18:47 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:37:38 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:29:35 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:36:20 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
Hey all...

Although I have heard this theory bandied about for several years ago, and MD I work with--actually, my boss--has a theory that the propensity of big women these days as well as the earlier onset of puberty (his daughter had her first period at age 11!) is caused by the propensity of growth hormones they feed cattle, chickens, pigs, and also dairy cows.

See...women have more fat then men, so this makes for an excellent repository to store the hormones. Plus their hormones are not as adept at belaying the effects of the GH's as us mens' are. (testosterone).

You have to admit: why all these tall women? Back about 20 years ago when I was in high school a 6-foot tall woman was a rarity. A head-turner. Now, they are as common as oxygen molecules. Go out in public or to the supermarket on any given day and you will see several huge women. Six-foot, 170 lbs. is note even noteworthy anymore.

Yes...Men to have gotten taller over the decades due to improvements in health and nutrition, but not nearly to this extent. For example, myself, at 6'-2" am still taller than 80% of men out there. But these women are becoming Amazons.

Your thoughts?

Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com...

It's not just American women. The men too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Overall weight gain since 1960 is slightly greater for women (18.5 percent) than for men (17.6 percent). And both sexes have gained roughly an inch in height over the same period, which accounts for some of that weight gain.

I am not speaking of the American obesity epidemic; I am well aware of that. But this is a totally different dynamic. One borne of unknowingly ingesting substances into one's body as opposed to deliberately scarfing down a couple cheeseburgers every day. LOL

No, you asked about the number of 'Amazon' women around today. Increases in height and weight are obviously linked. There has been a significant average height (and consequently weight) increase in American people over the last 50 years.

Stow the stats on the one inch average height gain. I don't care what they say--the proof is in the pudding and there for all to see. (those stats, BTW, only of course take an average, which I believe is skewed because of more short women due to a surplus of immigrants who are short by nature, such as Hispanics and Asians.

So, the average American-born man and woman has experienced an even greater increase in height than 1 inch? Okay. I fail to see the differentiation between men and women which you seem to want to focus on though.

Besides **sigh** your post did not address the absurd decrease in the age of which many young women are reaching puberty.

My apologies, but the pet theory espoused by your boss seemed to be an aside to the main thrust of your OP. The earlier onset of puberty amongst American (white) girls doesn't seem to have any obvious connection to your claims about the preponderence of Amazonian women today. Did I miss something?

Or is it that you think that increasing hormone levels in our food is the common factor to explain both phenomena? This Scientific American article suggests that improved diet and nutrition are the main culprits for this recent height epidemic (which appears to be tapering off):

http://www.scientificamerican.com...

Well, that article wasn't as long as I first thought! I just read it, and to be honest found it a bit lacking. They were on the right track with the notion that nutrition, i.e. dietary intake was the likely culprit, but they failed to take the extra step and say what exactly was in some of that food. Such as the growth hormones in red meat and milk mainly.

They also neglected the specific affect on females, and instead just did a sort of overall gloss on humans in general. Mostly Americans. (which too, my boss was referring to. As you might know; many countries do not even ALLOW those growth hormones to be used in their cattle and dairy!)

Did you also notice the article was 17 years old? LOL. IMHO the amount of growth hormones used in food was probably half back then what it is now. And women who were infants at the time that article was written would be of the very age where I mostly notice the Amazon Effect today.

thanks for posting!

Drew.

Hmmm. Hadn't noticed the age of the SA article.

Ironically enough, the link you may be looking for is rising obesity levels in children rather than hormones in our food. If I understand things correctly, animals are injected with growth hormones. Simply ingesting hormones, as we do when we eat meat, won't do anything as the hormones are broken down by our digestive system. They couldn't have any biological effect.

Why elevated childhood obesity can trigger early onset puberty:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 5:51:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM, dee-em wrote:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."

Lol, nobody trusts my short answers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 5:58:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 5:51:54 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM, dee-em wrote:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."

Lol, nobody trusts my short answers.

Sorry GP, I missed your post #5. Yep, you are spot on. I've seen this correlation between obesity in young girls and earlier puberty from several sources. Cheap food and lack of exercise are the problem.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 3:34:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 5:58:27 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:51:54 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM, dee-em wrote:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."

Lol, nobody trusts my short answers.

Sorry GP, I missed your post #5. Yep, you are spot on. I've seen this correlation between obesity in young girls and earlier puberty from several sources. Cheap food and lack of exercise are the problem.

But is is straying off-topic and does not even come close to explaining the Amazon Women Effect that has been undeniable to anybody who will take the time to do some observation of the American public. Go to your local mall or supermarket or anywhere crowded and just sit and observe for half an hour.

Count how many women you see 6' or taller.

And then remember that in 1980 only one in 50 women was that tall.

It is now at least five times that.

500% in a mere three decades?

LOL--and then use Occam's Razor when factoring in the fact that we use more growth hormones in cattle and dairy than ever before.

And the fact women's bodies are physiologically pre-disposed to better harbor these hormones in their systems.

And then tally all that up and see what conclusion you arrive at.

Thanks.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 3:38:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
From a Consumer Nutrition article............

Almost all beef cattle entering feedlots in the United States are given hormone implants to promote faster growth. The first product used for this purpose " DES (diethylstilbestrol) " was approved for use in beef cattle in 1954. An estimated two-thirds of the nation's beef cattle were treated with DES in 1956 (Marcus, 1994, cited in Swan et al., 2007).

Today, there are six anabolic steroids given, in various combinations, to nearly all animals entering conventional beef feedlots in the U.S. and Canada:

* Three natural steroids (estradiol, testosterone, and progesterone), and
* Three synthetic hormones (the estrogen compound zeranol, the androgen trenbolone acetate, and progestin melengestrol acetate).

Anabolic steroids are typically used in combinations. Measurable levels of all the above growth-promoting hormones are found at slaughter in the muscle, fat, liver, kidneys and other organ meats. The Food and Drug Administration has set "acceptable daily intakes" (ADIs) for these animal drugs.

Questions and controversy over the impacts of these added hormones on human development and health have lingered for four decades. In 1988 the European Union banned the use of all hormone growth promoters. The ADIs on the books for years are based on traditional toxicity testing methods and do not reflect the capacity of these drugs, which are potent endocrine disruptors, to alter fetal and childhood development. According to Swan et al. (2007) "

".the possible effects on human populations exposed to residues of anabolic sex hormones through meat consumption have never, to our knowledge, been studied. Theoretically, the fetus and the prepubertal child are particularly sensitive to exposure to sex steroids."

This gap in research is remarkable, given that every beef-eating American for over 50 years has been exposed to these hormones on a regular basis. To begin to explore possible impacts, Swan et al. (2007) carried out a study assessing the consequences of beef consumption by pregnant women on their adult male offspring. The families included in the study were recruited from the multicenter "Study for Future Families" (SFF).
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 3:43:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'm not sure this is born out by data, SoM. A quick hunt of US height trends found this blog-site (I haven't fully checked method or source data, but the references look right.)
http://ahundredyearsago.com...

A relevant gender comparison is at the bottom:
By age, 21, males now are, on average, more than 1 1/2 inches taller than they were a hundred years ago. In 1912 the average 21-year-old male was 68.25 inches (5 feet 8.25 inches) tall. Now the average male in the US is 69.9 inches (5 feet 9.9 inches) tall.

Females are about 1/2 inch taller now than they were a hundred years ago. In 1912 the average 21-year-old female was 63 .75 inches (5 feet, 3.75 inches) tall. Now the average 21-year-old female in the US is 64.3 inches (5 feet 4.3 inches) tall.

That doesn't mean the variance has remained the same, and the blog didn't include variance analysis. But it's possible that variance has increased, and factors might include diet, epigenetics due to changes in the way women live, or a different demographic mix.
dee-em
Posts: 6,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 7:38:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 3:34:31 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:58:27 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:51:54 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM, dee-em wrote:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."

Lol, nobody trusts my short answers.

Sorry GP, I missed your post #5. Yep, you are spot on. I've seen this correlation between obesity in young girls and earlier puberty from several sources. Cheap food and lack of exercise are the problem.

But is is straying off-topic and does not even come close to explaining the Amazon Women Effect that has been undeniable to anybody who will take the time to do some observation of the American public. Go to your local mall or supermarket or anywhere crowded and just sit and observe for half an hour.

Count how many women you see 6' or taller.

Why do you assume that a single explanation is needed for both phenomenon? You complain that we are off-topic but you berated me for not addressing the issue of early onset female puberty!

Also, I live in Sydney, Australia. It will be somewhat difficult for me to conduct your little experiment in an American shopping mall. Lol.

And then remember that in 1980 only one in 50 women was that tall.

It is now at least five times that.

500% in a mere three decades?

Source (other than anecdotal)?

LOL--and then use Occam's Razor when factoring in the fact that we use more growth hormones in cattle and dairy than ever before.

Correlation is not necessarily causation. Growth hormones are typically administered by injection or by an insertion of a slow-release capsule under the skin. Ingestion does not work as I explained in an earlier post, neither in domesticated animals nor in humans. You haven't addressed this but continue to assert your claim regardless.

And the fact women's bodies are physiologically pre-disposed to better harbor these hormones in their systems.

Perhaps, if the hormones went through the digestive tract unchanged and could be absorbed. However, that is not biologically possible from my reading.

And then tally all that up and see what conclusion you arrive at.

I see a leaping to conclusions without any solid evidence. Sorry.

Thanks.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 8:12:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 7:38:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/20/2015 3:34:31 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:58:27 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:51:54 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM, dee-em wrote:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."

Lol, nobody trusts my short answers.

Sorry GP, I missed your post #5. Yep, you are spot on. I've seen this correlation between obesity in young girls and earlier puberty from several sources. Cheap food and lack of exercise are the problem.

But is is straying off-topic and does not even come close to explaining the Amazon Women Effect that has been undeniable to anybody who will take the time to do some observation of the American public. Go to your local mall or supermarket or anywhere crowded and just sit and observe for half an hour.

Count how many women you see 6' or taller.

Why do you assume that a single explanation is needed for both phenomenon? You complain that we are off-topic but you berated me for not addressing the issue of early onset female puberty!

Also, I live in Sydney, Australia. It will be somewhat difficult for me to conduct your little experiment in an American shopping mall. Lol.

And then remember that in 1980 only one in 50 women was that tall.

It is now at least five times that.

500% in a mere three decades?

Source (other than anecdotal)?

LOL--and then use Occam's Razor when factoring in the fact that we use more growth hormones in cattle and dairy than ever before.

Correlation is not necessarily causation. Growth hormones are typically administered by injection or by an insertion of a slow-release capsule under the skin. Ingestion does not work as I explained in an earlier post, neither in domesticated animals nor in humans. You haven't addressed this but continue to assert your claim regardless.

And the fact women's bodies are physiologically pre-disposed to better harbor these hormones in their systems.

Perhaps, if the hormones went through the digestive tract unchanged and could be absorbed. However, that is not biologically possible from my reading.

And then tally all that up and see what conclusion you arrive at.

I see a leaping to conclusions without any solid evidence. Sorry.

Thanks.

No problem. I fully understand your reticence to believe the idea of my OP.

But ask yourself this: Would your government admit to you if they indeed discovered that the growth hormones in meat and dairy DID effect our physiology?
Given the fact that congress is totally inundated with lobbyists from those concerns? And also the fact that due to the sheer meat- and dairy-consuming U.S. populace that there is absolutely no way the farmers could meet demand without using these additives?

Also, why did the EU band ALL US meat exports some 20 years ago? Exactly. because of those hormones. (I have visited Europe five times in the past 10 years--you do not see nearly as many Amazons over there.

And there is this..........

http://healthyeating.sfgate.com...
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,494
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 8:34:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 8:12:25 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:38:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/20/2015 3:34:31 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:58:27 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/20/2015 5:51:54 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/19/2015 10:58:29 PM, dee-em wrote:

"It is more likely that what is needed is a shift of body composition, with an increase in the percentage of body fat. The percentage of body fat in children (16.0%) needs to rise to 23.5% for puberty to initiate. This actually makes a lot of sense: The purpose of sexual development is (in nature) reproduction; until the child achieves a certain level of fat reserves, it is pointless and would be dangerous to attempt reproduction and thus puberty is delayed."

Lol, nobody trusts my short answers.

Sorry GP, I missed your post #5. Yep, you are spot on. I've seen this correlation between obesity in young girls and earlier puberty from several sources. Cheap food and lack of exercise are the problem.

But is is straying off-topic and does not even come close to explaining the Amazon Women Effect that has been undeniable to anybody who will take the time to do some observation of the American public. Go to your local mall or supermarket or anywhere crowded and just sit and observe for half an hour.

Count how many women you see 6' or taller.

Why do you assume that a single explanation is needed for both phenomenon? You complain that we are off-topic but you berated me for not addressing the issue of early onset female puberty!

Also, I live in Sydney, Australia. It will be somewhat difficult for me to conduct your little experiment in an American shopping mall. Lol.

And then remember that in 1980 only one in 50 women was that tall.

It is now at least five times that.

500% in a mere three decades?

Source (other than anecdotal)?

LOL--and then use Occam's Razor when factoring in the fact that we use more growth hormones in cattle and dairy than ever before.

Correlation is not necessarily causation. Growth hormones are typically administered by injection or by an insertion of a slow-release capsule under the skin. Ingestion does not work as I explained in an earlier post, neither in domesticated animals nor in humans. You haven't addressed this but continue to assert your claim regardless.

And the fact women's bodies are physiologically pre-disposed to better harbor these hormones in their systems.

Perhaps, if the hormones went through the digestive tract unchanged and could be absorbed. However, that is not biologically possible from my reading.

And then tally all that up and see what conclusion you arrive at.

I see a leaping to conclusions without any solid evidence. Sorry.

Thanks.

No problem. I fully understand your reticence to believe the idea of my OP.

But ask yourself this: Would your government admit to you if they indeed discovered that the growth hormones in meat and dairy DID effect our physiology?

A conspiracy theory? You know, the children of government officials eat the same food as we do.

Given the fact that congress is totally inundated with lobbyists from those concerns? And also the fact that due to the sheer meat- and dairy-consuming U.S. populace that there is absolutely no way the farmers could meet demand without using these additives?

There is room for concern, sure. Perhaps farmers could meet demand without using growth hormones if Americans ate less?

Also, why did the EU band ALL US meat exports some 20 years ago? Exactly. because of those hormones. (I have visited Europe five times in the past 10 years--you do not see nearly as many Amazons over there.

Neither do you see the levels of obesity that exist in the USA amongst both men and women. Could diet (too much fatty fast food and processed food) possibly be a factor?

And there is this..........

http://healthyeating.sfgate.com...

From the article:

A study published in the November 2011 issue of the journal "The Science of the Total Environment" found that a chemical growth promoter used in cattle may affect growth rates in girls. The compound, called zeranol, is an endocrine disruptor that blocks estrogen, resulting in growth rate abnormalities. In the study, 78.5 percent of the girls had measurable levels of zeranol. These girls were shorter, on average, and showed slower rates of breast development than girls with no detectable levels of the chemical.

You linked to an article, not a proper study.