The original questions about milk consumption that started thie whole line
of Q and Rs.
Copilot:
Are there societies that do not consume animal milk? How tall do people grow to in those societies?
Yes — several traditional societies historically consumed little or no animal milk, and their average adult heights vary widely. The key takeaway is that avoiding milk does not automatically make a population short; height depends far more on overall nutrition, disease burden, and genetics than on dairy alone.
Current research shows that milk consumption can increase stature in populations with lactase‑persistence genes, but many non‑dairying groups have been either short, medium, or tall depending on their broader environment.
🌍 Societies With Little or No Traditional Milk Consumption
Below are major examples of populations that historically did not rely on animal milk:
1. East Asian populations (China, Japan, Korea)
Traditionally very low dairy consumption.
High prevalence of lactose intolerance.
Average adult height (modern):
Japan: ~171 cm men, ~158 cm women
China: ~169 cm men, ~158 cm women
(Heights rose sharply in the 20th century due to improved nutrition, not dairy.)
2. Indigenous peoples of the Americas
No dairy animals before European contact.
Diets based on maize, beans, squash, game.
Average adult height (historical):
Many pre‑Columbian groups were surprisingly tall for agriculturalists — often around 168–172 cm for men, depending on region (inferred from skeletal data; consistent with research showing stature depends on overall diet and disease load rather than milk).
3. Southeast Asian populations (Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia)
Traditionally minimal dairy.
Average adult height (modern):
Vietnam: ~168 cm men, ~156 cm women
Philippines: ~165 cm men, ~154 cm women
(Heights strongly influenced by childhood nutrition and infection rates.)
4. Hunter‑gatherer groups (Hadza, San, Andamanese)
No dairy animals.
Average adult height:
San (Southern Africa): ~158–163 cm men, ~148–155 cm women
Hadza (Tanzania): ~162–168 cm men, ~150–155 cm women
(These heights reflect genetics and energy availability, not dairy absence.)
🧬 What Research Says About Milk and Height
Archaeological and genetic studies show:
Populations that adopted milk and evolved lactase persistence (e.g., Northern Europeans, some East African pastoralists) became taller on average.
This effect appears in skeletal data from the last 7,000–8,000 years, where milk consumption “turbo‑charged” growth in some regions.
But non‑dairying agriculturalists were not uniformly short; many maintained stable stature over thousands of years.
Conclusion:
Milk can enhance growth in populations genetically adapted to digest it, but it is not required for achieving normal or even tall stature.
📌 Summary Table
If you want, I can also:
Compare these heights to high‑dairy populations (e.g., Dutch, Maasai).
Explain why some non‑dairy societies are tall while others are short.
Map global lactose‑intolerance patterns and how they relate to height.
Would you like a comparison with high‑milk societies next?
Do people who do not drink have weaker bones?
Short answer:
People who avoid milk do not automatically develop weaker bones — but people who avoid calcium and vitamin D do. Milk is just one convenient source. The real issue is nutrient intake, not milk itself.
🟣 What the research actually shows
1. Avoiding milk can lead to lower calcium intake → lower bone density
Studies consistently show that people who avoid dairy often consume much less calcium, and this is what affects bone strength.
Lactose‑intolerant individuals may have reduced bone density and higher fracture risk when dairy avoidance leads to low calcium intake.
Large observational studies also found that low milk consumers had increased fracture risk, though evidence quality varies.
People avoiding milk due to allergy or intolerance had significantly lower calcium intake and lower BMD (bone mineral density) in the wrist and ankle.
2. Lactose intolerance itself does not harm bones
The enzyme issue (lactase deficiency) does not reduce calcium absorption in adults. The problem is simply that many lactose‑intolerant people avoid calcium‑rich foods.
3. Low calcium intake → hormonal changes → bone loss
In lactose‑intolerant individuals with low calcium intake:
Parathyroid hormone (PTH) rises
Bone turnover increases
Bone mass decreases
This was shown in a study of 66 lactose‑intolerant adults with low calcium intake.
🟢 So do non‑milk drinkers have weaker bones?
Only if they fail to replace the calcium and vitamin D that milk normally provides.
People who avoid dairy but consume enough calcium from other sources (e.g., fortified plant milks, leafy greens, tofu, canned fish with bones, supplements) can maintain normal bone density.
People who avoid dairy and do not compensate tend to have:
Lower calcium intake
Lower bone mineral density
Higher fracture risk
This pattern appears across multiple studies.
🟩 Practical takeaway for you, Louise
If someone doesn’t drink milk, they should ensure:
1000–1200 mg calcium/day (diet or supplements)
Vitamin D (sunlight or supplements)
Protein intake
Weight‑bearing exercise
With these in place, bone strength can be just as good as in milk drinkers.
If you want, I can also calculate your ideal daily calcium intake, or help you build a non‑dairy bone‑strengthening meal plan.
No comments:
Post a Comment