Yesterday, I was taking the piss out of friend's rubbish swimming.
When he said that it's because of his denser bones. To which I cried 'bollocks', but sadly I was wrong- people of black african descent tend to have far more mineral-dense bones than caucasians. You live and learn.
tl;dr: When people say big boned, they may mean dense boned.
(
Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:50,
Reply)
Really?
Doesn't it depend on diet? And does it make that much of a difference?
I'm open to the suggestion that there might be minor differences, but I'm sceptical of the idea that they're sufficient to outweigh the effects of environment and habit, and of the idea that it neatly follows ethnic lines (which is to say: even if there's an observable difference at the margins, it doesn't follow that there'll be one for any bog-standard individual). I'd like to hear more: do you have any references?
It could just be that he's not a very good swimmer.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:57,
Reply)
I was extremely sceptical too (and he is a shit swimmer).
I was also (sadly) away from access to the internet: there's been a huge number of studies on it...much to my chagrin. Just google "bone density race differences"
(
Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 10:29,
Reply)
Hmmm... I shall check out some of those papers.
All the same, the idea that it makes a difference to swimming ability for the bog-standard is one that intuitively seems debateable. It might make a difference at the elite level; but elite swimmers of any ethnicity are so abnormal that they're hardly a good guide. Human populations simply aren't that diverse.
But I shall read more...
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 10:43,
Reply)
Sorry- I should clarify. I'm not concerned about swimming:
I'm just amazed that there's a marked difference in mineral bone density dependant on ethnic heritage, to the extent that's it's caused academic debate.
(
Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 11:27,
Reply)
It could point to all kinds of things.
For example, it might have to do with cultural norms that are more strongly associated with one ethnic group than another and make a difference to lifestyle. That way, it wouldn't be ethinicity per se that carries the load.
As I said, I shall read further. Google Scholar has its uses...
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 11:33,
Reply)
There was a case of an African girl dismembered and sent down a river (the Thames I think) several years ago as part of a voodoo thing
They managed to find her killers by tracing the minerals in her bones to a remote area in Africa. Mental.
(
Turquoise Hexagon Sun has just dropped acid on, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 11:47,
Reply)
Yup.
But that has to do with diet: if you eat veg from one area, then elements from the local soil will find their way into your body. I've been wondering ever since that case whether that particular line of forensic investigation closes with increased urbanisation, since people's diets wouldn't be so localised.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 12:55,
Reply)
Almost half an hour? What kept you?
Too busy fucking dead muslim kids?
(
Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 10:50,
Reply)