It’s pretty much impossible to gain additional height after puberty, but it does happen on occasion.  As far as making it happen, I don’t have a clue.  I would make sure I ate plenty of protein because new bone and lean tissue are primarily protein and it’s hard to grow without it.

MRE

Interesting chart.  Thanks for posting.  You’re right, the U.S. doesn’t jump out at you.

The paper addresses this issue and corrects for it. 

I was a late bloomer…wasn’t allowed much soda growing up (my parent’s were ahead of their time) but I was a big milk drinker. Still am though I know it’s not making me any skinnier. Anyway, while all of my male classmates were getting hairier, bigger, and stronger I was always lagging behind. My voice change came later in high school and I would say it wasn’t until my early to mid twenties that I finally filled out.

I don’t see those people much anymore, but on the rare occasion that I do, I’m always surprised to find how small and frankly sickly looking they are. Sure there could be any number of factors affecting these people, and it’s not across the board, but interesting none the less.

On another note, I lived in the Netherlands for a few years and I can tell you that they are a) big dairy consumers, and b) quite tall. I’m almost 6’3″ and I was barely average out there. I’m used to seeing over the tops of people’s heads, but not in that country. You could easily tell what one’s ancestry was by their stature. Typically the Turks and Moroccans who immigrated there were almost comically short compared to their Dutch countrymen.

Nonetheless, in my ten years living in Europe, I found that sodas became more and more prevalent. Early on I noticed that when you asked for a soda in a restaurant you would get it in a very small glass, and typically it would be warm. Your choice was pretty much Coke or Diet Coke. Most people had wine or beer with their meals. Even in McDonalds the cups they gave you were half the size of American servings and you had to pay for refills. Eventually though (and honestly I didn’t even notice it while I was there) the soda servings became larger and so did the flavor choices. A few years before I left, they started putting the soda fountains in the front and refills became free at most fast food joints.

You’ve spent some time over in Europe haven’t you Doctor? Any observations from your perspective?

Michael

Hi Michael–

Yes, I’ve spent some time there.  In fact, I’m going back in a few days for three weeks.

I’ve noticed pretty much the same thing you have: the McDonald’s-ization of Europe.  I don’t ever, ever drink soft drinks, so I haven’t really paid much attention to the evolution of the soft drink sizes there.  I will take a look at it when I’m there, however.   I do know that most of the McDonald’s food in Europe is much, much better than what they serve here.  There are all kinds of good coffee there (espresso drinks, mainly), whereas the coffee here is pretty wretched. 

I’ll report during my upcoming trip.

Cheers–

MRE 

Who knows what the maximum potential growth as dictated by the environment are?  I certainly don’t.

For example, I consider myself white, caucasian, european american etc but my grandmother is from north africa.
And, I’m quite certain many other “european americans” are part hispanic, asian, etc.

This is less of a factor in europe; the genetic height potential of an englishman is similar to an irishman or someone from wales etc.
However the genetic height potential of someone of european ancestry is MUCH different than someone of pure mexican, latin american ancestry.

Now I’m not saying nutrition or environment doesn’t play a role…

… but do you know why why are we shorter?
Probably because we’ve got a bigger family now, with different genes.

Most of this was corrected for in the study.  Read the whole thing to see what I mean.

Cheers–

MRE 

This could also be a contributing factor?

Hi Cindy–

If anything, the hormone-loaded meats and dairy products that we get in the US would make us taller.  I don’t think that’s what it is that’s making them continue to increase in height while we stay the same.

Best–

MRE 

Let me say first that I don’t dispute that diet and nutrition are probably more immediate causes of differences in height than social policy. The study would have been more illuminating if the authors could have included dietary factors.

However, let me make a couple points:

1. Social Science Quarterly is not exactly the most prestigious journal in Sociology. This story was picked up by news outlets because it’s a “fun” sound byte. Reading the article (the SSQ article, not the NYT article), left me with a number of questions as well.

2. No one is denying that nutrition is related to height. But it would also be grossly ignorant to think that social factors don’t affect nutrition (and I don’t just mean education and income, which is what the authors controlled for). The disconnect here is that social scientists are interested in social factors, and doctors are interested in physiological factors.

I don’t think any sane social scientist would say that social policy has a larger effect on height than nutrition. It’s just that we’re social scientists, and we’re more interested in the impact of social variables. It’s what we study. Any idiot can say, it’s obviously diet and nutrition that affect height. A doctor might be interested in specifically what kinds of diets are resulting in vertical growth. But a social scientist is curious about which social factors affect what diet people follow and why. (Which, admittedly, the authors of this study did not do a fantastic job of, but nevertheless.)

Obviously, some synthesis of the two is needed to get a more accurate depiction of what’s causing height differences, but it’s not always easy to cross disciplinary boundaries. Therefore, social scientists do work and come to conclusions that doctors think are ridiculous, and sometimes doctors do research and make policy recommendations that social scientists find absurd because they are unrealistic or are targeting irrelevant social factors.

3. I’m disappointed that you would hold up this study as evidence that all sociologists are stupid. There are a great many people in your field that you (and I) disagree with about nutrition, but I don’t look at doctors who say that 100g of protein a day is unhealthy and think, “Man, all doctors are stupid.”

As a graduate student (and TA) in Sociology, I can verify firsthand that we get much of the dregs of the undergraduates. But the dregs are certainly not the people who go into PhD programs and do research like this. Nor is it only Sociology undergrads who go into sociological research. I myself have a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science from an Ivy League university and worked several years in the industry before joining the Sociology PhD program I’m in now.

4. I think you are overstating the degree to which these sociologists are saying that welfare states creates tall people. They are merely suggesting it might be one of the causal factors. Like all “good” social scientists, they’ve even phrased it as a question (as you’ve quoted above):

“Is it possible that the western European welfare states are able to provide better healthcare to children and youth than the more market-oriented U.S. one? Or is there something about the quality of healthcare that is responsible for these results?”

They admit in their concluding paragraph that it’s just conjecture since their study is more descriptive. Their study is attempting to answer the question, what are the differences in height between Americans and Europeans over time controlling for education and income? They are not trying answer the question, what is the impact of social policy on height? If they had tried to answer that question, they would have looked at very different data.

Their consideration of these questions is an opening point for future research and for discussion, which I am glad to see in abundance in your blog and commenters. So consider this diatribe an addition to the discussion.

Hi syl–

Thanks for the sociologist’s perspective.  But, just for the record, I did not write that sociologists are stupid.  I didn’t even imply it.  I carefully crafted my sentences to not be judgmental, but to allow the readers’ opinions of sociology majors to lead them to their own judgments.

My take on the study is that the authors merely threw a bone at the idea that nutrition could be causal, then spent pages looking at all the social variables as the root cause.  Some nutritional change should be the most obvious driving factor, and only after nutrition is eliminated as a cause by intensive analysis (which it wasn’t) should other much less likely factors be considered.

I’m glad you’ve joined the debate.

Cheers–

MRE