6 ms·

Interesting correlation: Eating more meat seems to cause people to grow larger, but there is no strong evidence that being physically larger has intrinsic benef

Interesting correlation: Eating more meat seems to cause people to grow larger, but there is no strong evidence that being physically larger has intrinsic benefits outside of physical strength (which is arguably not very important). You do however need to eat more, you're more likely to get cancer, heart disease, suffer from chronic inflammation, etc. Interestingly, statistics about growing larger are often used to support more meat eating by meat advocates. There is a lot of talk about protein quality, and the implication is that smaller people are disadvantaged – as though they must be growing less by all measures, not just stature. It isn't so clear that this is true though, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest we shouldn't strive to grow larger (either in stature or in lean mass). I'm not saying there is a certain truth in there at all. I do find the correlations fascinating though. It defies a lot of what I understood about nutrition for most of my life so it's definitely something I'd like to see more data on. I'm open to a meat-based diet being superior overall (or any tasty diet, really).

_vdpp 4y ago
How is physical strength unimportant? Stronger people are harder to kill (h/t Rippetoe) and improved strength also helps to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome and neck/back pain for those of us at a computer all day.
- zacharycohn 4y ago
  Speaking as a fellow Starting Strength fan: this is only true in the modern era to the extent that being healthy is better than being unhealthy. If you look at the top X causes of death in humans, very very few of them could have been avoided "if only the deceased were stronger."
  - kzrdude 4y ago
    Falling and then breaking bones or getting ill otherwise is a common cause of death, and muscle mass and fitness helps avoid it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/
    - steve_adams_86 4y ago
      Although it would help if they were stronger, this isn't the result of them needing to begin a Starting Strength program. My original point was more so that stature and muscle mass might not benefit you beyond a certain point – I don't doubt at all that being fit is still tremendously beneficial. It's also pure speculation. I read about this stuff for fun and I know just about nothing about anything. Maybe being larger really is a net positive and I just need to be pointed to the right data.
  - spfzero 4y ago
    It helps avoid frailty and it allows you to continue exercising well into old age, for two things. It delays the downward spiral of poor fitness and weak bones that eventually does most of us in.
  - DoreenMichele 4y ago
    I'm not going to argue this with you. I'm not up for being dragged into a stupid internet fight with a random internet stranger. But this might interest you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14667430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14667430
  - steve_adams_86 4y ago
    Right, and I think an important distinction here is sheer strength from general physical fitness. If someone is relatively weak with below average lean mass, lower than average markers of muscular strength, etc. it seems like the consensus is that they are statistically likely to die or get diseases earlier in life. On the other hand, being on the other side of that seems to yield diminishing returns. It’s great to be fit, but being abnormally strong on the other hand doesn’t appear to increase your lifespan proportionally to your strength.
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  I can't think of much a human can accomplish with exceptional strength that will aid them in normal day to day life (generally speaking). There are exceptions, but those exceptions would apply only to rare circumstances. Sort of like, say you're going to be murdered by some totally jacked guy, hypothetically, and all you have to defend yourself is your bare hands. Okay great, it would be nice to be ridiculously strong. But how often does that happen to you? Or anyone? Most predators will kill us even if we're ridiculously ripped, so that's not important either. In most cases, intelligence seems a lot more useful for avoiding or navigating these situations. There's also a lot to be said for having moderate strength in a wide range of motion. That can matter a lot in a much broader variety of situations where physical strength matters, and it's far more realistic to attain and sustain. Avoiding carpal tunnel doesn't require special levels of strength so much as normal fitness. It requires regular movement and preventing weaknesses. I'm not saying we should all vegetate at a computer, I'm saying that the evidence seems good that being 5% larger/stronger (or whatever the figure was) is not particularly helpful, and instead potentially harmful. For example, regular yoga will probably resolve most (not all) people's mobility and repetitive stress issues. They will not need to be large or strong for this to work.
kzrdude 4y ago
My health-obsessed doctor friend told me that muscle mass is a good predictor for health in later life, which was surprising to me (I thought fitness, heart/lung etc was the thing). I wouldn't dismiss it. :)
- Swizec 4y ago
  [relative] Muscle mass has a very strong correlation with healthy habits. You just don't see a lot of sedentary people with poor nutrition who have a high muscle mass index.
  - BayAreaEscapee 4y ago
    It makes me think of all those reports that claim that having a single glass of wine per day makes you healthier. It's probably the case that people who have just one glass of wine are drinking socially, and therefore have friends, and having friends is an indicator of having status and health. The alcohol itself is poison but one glass is more than offset by otherwise living a good life.
    - Swizec 4y ago
      Oh they studied this! It's because if you're the kind of person who can afford a glass of wine every day, you're also the kind of person who can afford health care. In USA at least. Here's the best source I can find right now: > The study authors write that “the observed cardiac benefits of alcohol have been hypothesized to be the product of residual confounding because of favorable lifestyle, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors that tend to coincide with modest alcohol intake.” https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/health-benefits-alcohol-study-wine-heart https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/health-benefits-alcohol-st...
- e9 4y ago
  It's harder to keep muscles as you grow old. More muscles is indication of good metabolism, which correlates with good health (less chance of getting metabolic syndrome etc, somewhat relevant: https://betterbodychemistry.com/obesity/metabolic-syndrome-muscle-mass/ https://betterbodychemistry.com/obesity/metabolic-syndrome-m...)
dukeofdoom 4y ago
Humans are the longest living land mammals, beat only by whales. The bowhead whale is estimated to live to 200 years. And it's a huge animal.
- Scoundreller 4y ago
  African elephants do pretty well too at 55-60 years in the wild, but a fraction of that in captivity.
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  That's an interesting point. I'm not sure how much genetic overlap we have with whales, but I suspect it's significant. I wonder what allows them to live so long without getting cancer, for example. I can see why they wouldn't get cardiovascular diseases (in humans this seems to be mostly induced by diet and sedentary lifestyle), but it seems likely that there's more to it.
TheBlerch 4y ago
Actually remember reading that a number of studies have linked short stature with heart disease. I’m not up-to-date on the latest research on this. But whether shorter or taller you do the best you can with the factors within your control - nutrition, exercise, sleep, etc. Anecdotally two friends’ fathers in elementary school died way prematurely, both quite short of stature.
ekianjo 4y ago
You forgot the mating benefit. Taller people have better chances to find mates.
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  Is this true across all cultures?
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    I have not of any culture where shorter people are more popular but who knows...
beowulfey 4y ago
That’s also an interesting anticorrelation with how we normally relate metabolism and body size; smalller organisms tend to have faster metabolisms and live shorter lives versus much larger organisms. Maybe the key is being smaller but also having slower (or rather, “calmer”) metabolic rates.
- DFHippie 4y ago
  I believe what you want to be is a small member of a large species. Large dogs live much shorter lives than small dogs. Women tend to live longer than men (height or mass probably isn't the only factor here, but this fits the general pattern so one imagines it helps). Giants -- people well over six feet -- tend to live shorter lives than people of ordinary stature. My grandmother was about five feet with a straight spine. With a curved spine in her early hundreds she was probably less than 4'6", but she was still there. She had about two giant lifetimes. If you stacked her on top of herself you would have one giant (until her ever more flexible spine folded in two).
achenet 4y ago
> but there is no strong evidence that being physically larger has intrinsic benefits outside of physical strength (which is arguably not very important). Tall people get paid more. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/the-financial-perks-of-being-tall/393518/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/the-fin...
richcollins 4y ago
In the people that use meat’s superior satiety to stay lean, you see lower inflammation, IGF-1, insulin … etc. On a purely meat diet with loads of protein, my IGF-1 was 90, a z-score of -1.

_vdpp 4y ago

How is physical strength unimportant? Stronger people are harder to kill (h/t Rippetoe) and improved strength also helps to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome and neck/back pain for those of us at a computer all day.

zacharycohn 4y ago
Speaking as a fellow Starting Strength fan: this is only true in the modern era to the extent that being healthy is better than being unhealthy. If you look at the top X causes of death in humans, very very few of them could have been avoided "if only the deceased were stronger."
- kzrdude 4y ago
  Falling and then breaking bones or getting ill otherwise is a common cause of death, and muscle mass and fitness helps avoid it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/
  - steve_adams_86 4y ago
    Although it would help if they were stronger, this isn't the result of them needing to begin a Starting Strength program. My original point was more so that stature and muscle mass might not benefit you beyond a certain point – I don't doubt at all that being fit is still tremendously beneficial. It's also pure speculation. I read about this stuff for fun and I know just about nothing about anything. Maybe being larger really is a net positive and I just need to be pointed to the right data.
- spfzero 4y ago
  It helps avoid frailty and it allows you to continue exercising well into old age, for two things. It delays the downward spiral of poor fitness and weak bones that eventually does most of us in.
- DoreenMichele 4y ago
  I'm not going to argue this with you. I'm not up for being dragged into a stupid internet fight with a random internet stranger. But this might interest you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14667430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14667430
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  Right, and I think an important distinction here is sheer strength from general physical fitness. If someone is relatively weak with below average lean mass, lower than average markers of muscular strength, etc. it seems like the consensus is that they are statistically likely to die or get diseases earlier in life. On the other hand, being on the other side of that seems to yield diminishing returns. It’s great to be fit, but being abnormally strong on the other hand doesn’t appear to increase your lifespan proportionally to your strength.
steve_adams_86 4y ago
I can't think of much a human can accomplish with exceptional strength that will aid them in normal day to day life (generally speaking). There are exceptions, but those exceptions would apply only to rare circumstances. Sort of like, say you're going to be murdered by some totally jacked guy, hypothetically, and all you have to defend yourself is your bare hands. Okay great, it would be nice to be ridiculously strong. But how often does that happen to you? Or anyone? Most predators will kill us even if we're ridiculously ripped, so that's not important either. In most cases, intelligence seems a lot more useful for avoiding or navigating these situations. There's also a lot to be said for having moderate strength in a wide range of motion. That can matter a lot in a much broader variety of situations where physical strength matters, and it's far more realistic to attain and sustain. Avoiding carpal tunnel doesn't require special levels of strength so much as normal fitness. It requires regular movement and preventing weaknesses. I'm not saying we should all vegetate at a computer, I'm saying that the evidence seems good that being 5% larger/stronger (or whatever the figure was) is not particularly helpful, and instead potentially harmful. For example, regular yoga will probably resolve most (not all) people's mobility and repetitive stress issues. They will not need to be large or strong for this to work.

kzrdude 4y ago

My health-obsessed doctor friend told me that muscle mass is a good predictor for health in later life, which was surprising to me (I thought fitness, heart/lung etc was the thing). I wouldn't dismiss it. :)

Swizec 4y ago
[relative] Muscle mass has a very strong correlation with healthy habits. You just don't see a lot of sedentary people with poor nutrition who have a high muscle mass index.
- BayAreaEscapee 4y ago
  It makes me think of all those reports that claim that having a single glass of wine per day makes you healthier. It's probably the case that people who have just one glass of wine are drinking socially, and therefore have friends, and having friends is an indicator of having status and health. The alcohol itself is poison but one glass is more than offset by otherwise living a good life.
  - Swizec 4y ago
    Oh they studied this! It's because if you're the kind of person who can afford a glass of wine every day, you're also the kind of person who can afford health care. In USA at least. Here's the best source I can find right now: > The study authors write that “the observed cardiac benefits of alcohol have been hypothesized to be the product of residual confounding because of favorable lifestyle, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors that tend to coincide with modest alcohol intake.” https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/health-benefits-alcohol-study-wine-heart https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/health-benefits-alcohol-st...
e9 4y ago
It's harder to keep muscles as you grow old. More muscles is indication of good metabolism, which correlates with good health (less chance of getting metabolic syndrome etc, somewhat relevant: https://betterbodychemistry.com/obesity/metabolic-syndrome-muscle-mass/ https://betterbodychemistry.com/obesity/metabolic-syndrome-m...)

dukeofdoom 4y ago

Humans are the longest living land mammals, beat only by whales. The bowhead whale is estimated to live to 200 years. And it's a huge animal.

Scoundreller 4y ago
African elephants do pretty well too at 55-60 years in the wild, but a fraction of that in captivity.
steve_adams_86 4y ago
That's an interesting point. I'm not sure how much genetic overlap we have with whales, but I suspect it's significant. I wonder what allows them to live so long without getting cancer, for example. I can see why they wouldn't get cardiovascular diseases (in humans this seems to be mostly induced by diet and sedentary lifestyle), but it seems likely that there's more to it.

TheBlerch 4y ago

Actually remember reading that a number of studies have linked short stature with heart disease. I’m not up-to-date on the latest research on this. But whether shorter or taller you do the best you can with the factors within your control - nutrition, exercise, sleep, etc. Anecdotally two friends’ fathers in elementary school died way prematurely, both quite short of stature.

ekianjo 4y ago

You forgot the mating benefit. Taller people have better chances to find mates.

steve_adams_86 4y ago
Is this true across all cultures?
- ekianjo 4y ago
  I have not of any culture where shorter people are more popular but who knows...

beowulfey 4y ago

That’s also an interesting anticorrelation with how we normally relate metabolism and body size; smalller organisms tend to have faster metabolisms and live shorter lives versus much larger organisms. Maybe the key is being smaller but also having slower (or rather, “calmer”) metabolic rates.

DFHippie 4y ago
I believe what you want to be is a small member of a large species. Large dogs live much shorter lives than small dogs. Women tend to live longer than men (height or mass probably isn't the only factor here, but this fits the general pattern so one imagines it helps). Giants -- people well over six feet -- tend to live shorter lives than people of ordinary stature. My grandmother was about five feet with a straight spine. With a curved spine in her early hundreds she was probably less than 4'6", but she was still there. She had about two giant lifetimes. If you stacked her on top of herself you would have one giant (until her ever more flexible spine folded in two).

achenet 4y ago

> but there is no strong evidence that being physically larger has intrinsic benefits outside of physical strength (which is arguably not very important). Tall people get paid more. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/the-financial-perks-of-being-tall/393518/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/the-fin...

richcollins 4y ago

In the people that use meat’s superior satiety to stay lean, you see lower inflammation, IGF-1, insulin … etc. On a purely meat diet with loads of protein, my IGF-1 was 90, a z-score of -1.