6 ms·

https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a20814362/50-years-ago-kenya-established-its-distance-running-dominance/ https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a20814362/50-years-

by papln 7y ago

https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a20814362/50-years-ago-kenya-established-its-distance-running-dominance/ https://www.runnersworld.com/news/a20814362/50-years-ago-ken... "50 Years Ago, Kenya Established Its Distance Running Dominance The African country became a medal-winning power at the British Empire and Commonwealth Games in August 1966, and hasn’t looked back." Obviously (1) getting invited to the event and (2) learning the rules of a particular event are major selection factors when drawing conclusions from event results.

foldr 7y ago
The dominance of Kenyan athletes in these events is probably mostly due to altitude rather than genes. There's certainly no direct evidence of any significant genetic component, whereas we know that growing up at higher altitudes confers certain advantages.
- EForEndeavour 7y ago
  It's both. High-altitude populations do show genetic adaptations. There is in fact plenty of evidence of genetic adaptation to altitude. If you grew up at high altitude and are not of Kenyan/Ethiopian descent, you'd be pretty well-adapted, but not as well on average. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_humans#Ethiopians_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_hu...
  - foldr 7y ago
    Maybe, but that's largely speculative. We haven't identified any particular combination of genes that (a) is almost unique to the Kenyan population and (b) has been shown to have a significant effect on long-distance running performance. All we really know is that - not surprisingly - people who grow up at high altitudes tend to use oxygen a bit more efficiently than people who don't.
    - EForEndeavour 7y ago
      But such genomes exist: they literally define the people who have lived in the high-altitude regions around the Rift Valley for many generations. And the genetic component to Ethiopian and Kenyan dominance in long-distance running is well-researched. Far more is known than your comment suggests, for example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037248/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037248/ Of course, genetics interact strongly with environment. That's precisely why someone raised in a high-altitude Ethiopian community but whose ancestors are from, say, the Netherlands would not be expected to be as well-adapted to altitude (or long-distance running) compared to their historically Ethiopian neighbours, all else being equal.
      - foldr 7y ago
        There's no consensus in the literature about the role of genetic factors in Kenyan dominance. For any X you can find journal articles arguing that X is genetically determined. See e.g. https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/7/2/article-p92.xml https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/7/2/a... for a more balanced perspective. >That's precisely why someone raised in a high-altitude Ethiopian community but whose ancestors are from, say, the Netherlands would not be expected to be as well-adapted to altitude (or long-distance running) compared to their historically Ethiopian neighbours, all else being equal You say "would not be expected to be" because, of course, no-one has actually done this experiment and no-one knows what would actually happen. Nor indeed would we be able to verify that any given individual from the Netherlands does in fact lack the putatively relevant genes, since we don't know what they are.
        EForEndeavour 7y ago
        There's continuing scientific inquiry into determining how much of Kenyan and Ethiopian dominance (specifically, dominance by members of the Kalenjin tribe) in long-distance running is due to genetic factors. However, the point still stands that genetics are certainly a factor, by an amount that is unknown (and possibly unknowable given how hard it is to design interventional experiments). There is no scientific debate on this front that I'm aware of. For example, here's an article published in 2012 that summarizes research (and controversies) surrounding the genetic component of distance running: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/why-kenyans-make-such-great-runners-a-story-of-genes-and-cultures/256015/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/wh... The abstract to which you linked points out that "Kenyan and Ethiopian distance-running success is not based on a unique genetic or physiological characteristic." That seems like a strawman, as I don't think anyone ever claimed that any single characteristic or gene has been making all the difference. The abstract calls out "favorable somatotypical characteristics lending to exceptional biomechanical and metabolic economy/efficiency." Sure, but how much of these characteristics and exceptionally favourable response to training and living at altitude is potentiated by genetics? The answer of "none" would be an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. > You say "would not be expected to be" because, of course, no-one has actually done this experiment and no-one knows what would actually happen. Nor indeed would we be able to verify that any given individual from the Netherlands does in fact lack the putatively relevant genes, since we don't know what they are. I'm not aware of any interventional study that, say, separates high-altitude-native twins so that one twin grows up at low altitude but with everything else being equal. That sounds completely impractical. However, there exists observational evidence from human migrations to and from high altitude. Some examples: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4201282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4201282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17329275 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17329275 Finally, to address your earlier comment that "all we really know is that - not surprisingly - people who grow up at high altitudes tend to use oxygen a bit more efficiently than people who don't," this is a grossly inaccurate summary of scientific understanding of the multiple examples of convergent evolution that have produced genetically altitude-adapted populations in Kenya/Ethiopia, the Andes, and Tibet.

by papln 7y ago

foldr 7y ago

The dominance of Kenyan athletes in these events is probably mostly due to altitude rather than genes. There's certainly no direct evidence of any significant genetic component, whereas we know that growing up at higher altitudes confers certain advantages.

EForEndeavour 7y ago
It's both. High-altitude populations do show genetic adaptations. There is in fact plenty of evidence of genetic adaptation to altitude. If you grew up at high altitude and are not of Kenyan/Ethiopian descent, you'd be pretty well-adapted, but not as well on average. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_humans#Ethiopians_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_hu...
- foldr 7y ago
  Maybe, but that's largely speculative. We haven't identified any particular combination of genes that (a) is almost unique to the Kenyan population and (b) has been shown to have a significant effect on long-distance running performance. All we really know is that - not surprisingly - people who grow up at high altitudes tend to use oxygen a bit more efficiently than people who don't.
  - EForEndeavour 7y ago
    But such genomes exist: they literally define the people who have lived in the high-altitude regions around the Rift Valley for many generations. And the genetic component to Ethiopian and Kenyan dominance in long-distance running is well-researched. Far more is known than your comment suggests, for example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037248/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037248/ Of course, genetics interact strongly with environment. That's precisely why someone raised in a high-altitude Ethiopian community but whose ancestors are from, say, the Netherlands would not be expected to be as well-adapted to altitude (or long-distance running) compared to their historically Ethiopian neighbours, all else being equal.
    - foldr 7y ago
      There's no consensus in the literature about the role of genetic factors in Kenyan dominance. For any X you can find journal articles arguing that X is genetically determined. See e.g. https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/7/2/article-p92.xml https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/7/2/a... for a more balanced perspective. >That's precisely why someone raised in a high-altitude Ethiopian community but whose ancestors are from, say, the Netherlands would not be expected to be as well-adapted to altitude (or long-distance running) compared to their historically Ethiopian neighbours, all else being equal You say "would not be expected to be" because, of course, no-one has actually done this experiment and no-one knows what would actually happen. Nor indeed would we be able to verify that any given individual from the Netherlands does in fact lack the putatively relevant genes, since we don't know what they are.
      - EForEndeavour 7y ago
        There's continuing scientific inquiry into determining how much of Kenyan and Ethiopian dominance (specifically, dominance by members of the Kalenjin tribe) in long-distance running is due to genetic factors. However, the point still stands that genetics are certainly a factor, by an amount that is unknown (and possibly unknowable given how hard it is to design interventional experiments). There is no scientific debate on this front that I'm aware of. For example, here's an article published in 2012 that summarizes research (and controversies) surrounding the genetic component of distance running: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/why-kenyans-make-such-great-runners-a-story-of-genes-and-cultures/256015/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/wh... The abstract to which you linked points out that "Kenyan and Ethiopian distance-running success is not based on a unique genetic or physiological characteristic." That seems like a strawman, as I don't think anyone ever claimed that any single characteristic or gene has been making all the difference. The abstract calls out "favorable somatotypical characteristics lending to exceptional biomechanical and metabolic economy/efficiency." Sure, but how much of these characteristics and exceptionally favourable response to training and living at altitude is potentiated by genetics? The answer of "none" would be an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. > You say "would not be expected to be" because, of course, no-one has actually done this experiment and no-one knows what would actually happen. Nor indeed would we be able to verify that any given individual from the Netherlands does in fact lack the putatively relevant genes, since we don't know what they are. I'm not aware of any interventional study that, say, separates high-altitude-native twins so that one twin grows up at low altitude but with everything else being equal. That sounds completely impractical. However, there exists observational evidence from human migrations to and from high altitude. Some examples: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4201282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4201282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17329275 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17329275 Finally, to address your earlier comment that "all we really know is that - not surprisingly - people who grow up at high altitudes tend to use oxygen a bit more efficiently than people who don't," this is a grossly inaccurate summary of scientific understanding of the multiple examples of convergent evolution that have produced genetically altitude-adapted populations in Kenya/Ethiopia, the Andes, and Tibet.