Limb Lengthening Forum
Limb Lengthening Surgery => Limb Lengthening Discussions => Topic started by: drtruman on April 21, 2017, 03:17:11 PM
-
http://www.lastampa.it/2016/07/27/societa/abbiamo-superato-gli-americani-ma-soltanto-in-altezza-ZFTFUVSSB46dNOYO65WUzI/amphtml/pagina.amp.html
It's Italian but you can use Google translator anyway in simple terms young Italians are 177.8 and young Americans are 177.2 on average (I guess different ethnic groups have different averages with Latinos lowering the average). Researches are FROM Imperial College of London.
So this confirmed my idea of new generations being definitely taller of the standard 175 cm which was said to be the average for Italians.
If you consider that in northern Italy people are taller than southern Italy, I think that those 177.8 cm in northern Italy (where I live) could reach the 180 cm. Also here there are a lot of Chinese and Indian or Middle eastern teens who could have lowered the average of the real Italian teens. This would confirm why girls nowadays treat you as "shorty" if you are less than 180 cm. Because you are shorter than average (and they tend to look for the guys at least slightly Above average so I guess that to be sure that height won't be a problem with any girls you have to be at least 182 cm, 6 feet). 183 cm is the new 180 cm (the standard "good height") and 180 cm is the new 177 cm (the average height), we should deal with this.
So in conclusion, if you are 177 or 176.5 (depending on the measure) like me, you Are not short, but shorty. Here.
I wish I was 180 cm I would not ask anything more. 182 would be the best. I feel my legs are shorter than how they should be. My chest is broad and muscular with large shoulders and my legs are short and very muscular. This makes them look even shorter. I think I'm a perfect candidate for LL. Could you give me some advice on the type of LL to do and maybe where? Here in Italy would be the best. Otherwise in Europe.
-
You first came to the site claiming that 183 cm was the average and called yourself short at 177.5 cm, but according to your own study you're perfectly average height over there.
-
Height growth has been pretty significant in the past 150 years, but I think it's starting to taper off as nutrition is kind of "maxing" out. Maybe that's just wishful thinking though, because I don't want to get limb lengthening and then still be short 30 years down the road. :'(
-
Mean height has started to stagnate in the Netherlands, Denmark, the US and other countries. The demographic of African-American women in the US has experienced a reduction of average height.
http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=1862.msg29608#msg29608 (http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=1862.msg29608#msg29608)
-
1) You are average height in Italy according to this research (Which exluded minorities) so stop trying to convince yourself you are short.
2) Stop to try to bring the other users here down by saying everyone are tall and that the new 180 (whatever that means) is 183.
3) I am a 171cm immigrant in Italy who had no problems with the height obssesed Italian girls.
4) You are probably incredibly ugly orr have an awful body shape (narrow shoulders, small bones or just fat) and that would explain how come that at your age you didn't have any GF
I have no more patience for incels. Get a psicologist or better surgeries to fix you face
-
Italy has about 60 million people and declining
America has around 330 million and increasing
Much easier to be 175 in Italy than America as the total number of tall and super tall people is far greater in America.
Also, I don't consider those numbers very accurate and Italy is still very very homogenous compared to America.
Average height of young caucasian males in America is significantly greater than the overall avg
You are too obsessed about height. If you were 165 I could understand but you're supposedly 177. Focus on more important issues
-
Italy has about 60 million people and declining
America has around 330 million and increasing
Much easier to be 175 in Italy than America as the total number of tall and super tall people is far greater in America.
Also, I don't consider those numbers very accurate and Italy is still very very homogenous compared to America.
Average height of young caucasian males in America is significantly greater than the overall avg
You are too obsessed about height. If you were 165 I could understand but you're supposedly 177. Focus on more important issues
So you agree with the average height is 6' for white teens in the USA?
-
British youth are probably taller because America has worse social programs and the average for British white kids (fully grown) might be closer to 6' than it is to my height (5'8) but it is no way 6'.
Maybe 5'11 max.
Anyway average height is supposed to be in decline in America.
Plus.. what you just said makes no sense. Average height in America and Italy is very similar for young white people (within a range of like 1.5 cm as far as I remember).
Given the way averages are calculated, it wouldn't make sense that there are much less super tall people in Italy.
-
Italy has about 60 million people and declining
America has around 330 million and increasing
Much easier to be 175 in Italy than America as the total number of tall and super tall people is far greater in America.
That isn't really logical. Whether a population has more tall people in numbers is irrelevant, what is relevant is only the ratio of heights. You're not gonna see 330 million people in your life, ever. You're never gonna see 60 million people as a typical Italian. You're gonna see the people at your work, at your school, at the street when you go outside, at the subway station, in a club, and so on. That's a couple of dozends people on a lonely day and a couple of hundreds on a very busy day, both in America and Italy. In a population with relatively more short people, you're gonna feel better and vice versa. The total number is irrelevant.
-
Yep and your perfectly average height as you just proved it in your post. If you want to be above average, then that's another story but I'd prefer fixing the other below-avg things first before moving on to improving the perfectly average things that as of now matter less. Could be your body shape (for that go to the gym) or improve personality.
Besides my 169 cm height, my skinny body figure and narrow shoulders are also things holding me back, not height alone.
-
Makes me feel kinda sad how some average and tall people worry about height too.
-
Avg height is not declining for caucasian males. America has a large number of Mexicans and central american men that are BELOW 165 cm
Avg height for an under 25 caucasian male in America is around 180. over 5'10. UK avg is shorter
to the other person that said only ratios matter, no, you are wrong. Absolute numbers matter because people in general and tall people specifically are not distributed evenly throughout the country
if you want to live in a major city such as los angeles or new york you will be competing against the elite not the avg. Total numbers matter in this context
Since America has a much larger number of super tall people and because they are concentrated in major cities you will feel much less avg living in a major American city.
Easier to be 176 in London than it is to be 176 in New York, and actually it's partly due to the subsidies provided by the UK govt
NYC is basically for only the wealthy now, not the poor or middle class. London on the other hand is for the wealthy, and definitely not for the middle class, but the poor can live in London as housing assistance is much more generous there
TBIKE, around 180, maybe a tad less. This would be the median for caucasian males across the nation, though I suspect higher in upper class areas such as Manhattan or Silicon Valley
British youth are probably taller because America has worse social programs and the average for British white kids (fully grown) might be closer to 6' than it is to my height (5'8) but it is no way 6'.
Maybe 5'11 max.
Anyway average height is supposed to be in decline in America.
Plus.. what you just said makes no sense. Average height in America and Italy is very similar for young white people (within a range of like 1.5 cm as far as I remember).
Given the way averages are calculated, it wouldn't make sense that there are much less super tall people in Italy.
-
Avg height is not declining for caucasian males. America has a large number of Mexicans and central american men that are BELOW 165 cm
Avg height for an under 25 caucasian male in America is around 180. over 5'10. UK avg is shorter
to the other person that said only ratios matter, no, you are wrong. Absolute numbers matter because people in general and tall people specifically are not distributed evenly throughout the country
if you want to live in a major city such as los angeles or new york you will be competing against the elite not the avg. Total numbers matter in this context
Since America has a much larger number of super tall people and because they are concentrated in major cities you will feel much less avg living in a major American city.
Easier to be 176 in London than it is to be 176 in New York, and actually it's partly due to the subsidies provided by the UK govt
NYC is basically for only the wealthy now, not the poor or middle class. London on the other hand is for the wealthy, and definitely not for the middle class, but the poor can live in London as housing assistance is much more generous there
TBIKE, around 180, maybe a tad less. This would be the median for caucasian males across the nation, though I suspect higher in upper class areas such as Manhattan or Silicon Valley
I live in the bay area and a major city san francisco. I don't notice Caucasians being that much taller they seem about 5 10. I would imagine in the Midwest that despite being less populated you would feel shorter because there is less minoritys. And op you showed how irrational you are when your own data shows that you're not short. If you were the 5 5 equivalent I would understand but you sound like that and your average height.
-
Average height for Caucasians in the US is not 180.
to the other person that said only ratios matter, no, you are wrong. Absolute numbers matter because people in general and tall people specifically are not distributed evenly throughout the country
if you want to live in a major city such as los angeles or new york you will be competing against the elite not the avg. Total numbers matter in this context
This just isn't true. Absolute numbers affect the ratio, a population with 50 million people and 20 million tall people will raise the average height, but obviously America with 300 million people will have more tall guys than Italy with 60 million people, but this is irrelevant.
And no, you won't be "competing against the elite" in a large city. This is bull . LA in particular has a very diverse population with a lot of Latins and Asians, and several people here have confirmed that living in LA as a short guy is much easier than living in the rural Mid West.
-
Sigh, not this again.
Average height has not changed in America in the past 2 generations- not if you account for the fact that people generally lose a little height with age. Some studies even say it is now decreasing.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr010.pdf#page=15
press crtl+f and search for 178.9 on this link. The sample size is small, but big enough to give a fairly solid estimate.
Quite a few other studies back that up too. From what I remember, average height is actually declining in the USA now for some groups, and stagnating for almost everyone. Maybe that's because of wealth inequality, and the rich are getting taller and the poor are getting shorter, but I think it's more likely that height has almost been maxed out. This one gives the highest estimate for young white men I know of.
In the UK it is still increasing but very slowly. If I look around I'd say 175-182 cm is average, but that's just by eye- according to the statistics though, that should be about right.
It depends on where you are, too. I live in south Wales which is renowned for having short (white, British) men. I am 173 and even I am often one of the taller people in the room when I go out here- if I'm with local people- even with the young local people I'm solidly average. But with (wealthy) students from other parts of Britain, I am short. Their average is closer to 180 cm, but I think 183 cm still looks pretty tall, and I couldn't call that average- I have a few friends that height and they are noticeably tall.
Plus average height for white Italians was 175 in about 1970-80, but since the 90s it has increased. You can see that if you look on wikipedia. I imagine seeing as Italy is quite a wealthy nation it will probably not increase much more.
-
Lol, just realised I have commented twice on this thread.
-
This generation is maybe 1-2cm (at best) more than the previous one but I am almost sure that height will not increase more in next generations.
Many countries face economical crisis (including Italy) and the strong majority of people in the world won't live wealthier than now, so future kids will be at max as tall as the current generation.
So no, 6.3 will never be the average height for men and everything above 5.10 will always be a respectable height for men anywhere in the world.
It doesn't matter only how much is the average height in each country but what heights make a man's body looks good and not small.
And even in countries where average is close to 6ft, a 5.10 frame will never look short while in countries where average is 5.5 (like China) a 5.6 man will still be short.
So I don't care if in a country the average is 6.3 (there is not such a country of course), if someone is 5.11 he will look very good and no short even there.
If you are above 5.11, height stops to matter.
I would never feel inferior to a 6.2 man if I was 5.11 due to my height because I don't think that being taller than that has any benefit or that a 6.2 body looks better than a 5.11 body. Almost most of the times a 5.11 frame is the ideal for a man.
-
So you agree with the average height is 6' for white teens in the USA?
i'm 165 *autistic screeching* I banged an Italian girl from Italy. What's the problem at 177?
-
This generation is maybe 1-2cm (at best) more than the previous one but I am almost sure that height will not increase more in next generations.
Many countries face economical crisis (including Italy) and the strong majority of people in the world won't live wealthier than now, so future kids will be at max as tall as the current generation.
So no, 6.3 will never be the average height for men and everything above 5.10 will always be a respectable height for men anywhere in the world.
It doesn't matter only how much is the average height in each country but what heights make a man's body looks good and not small.
And even in countries where average is close to 6ft, a 5.10 frame will never look short while in countries where average is 5.5 (like China) a 5.6 man will still be short.
So I don't care if in a country the average is 6.3 (there is not such a country of course), if someone is 5.11 he will look very good and no short even there.
If you are above 5.11, height stops to matter.
I would never feel inferior to a 6.2 man if I was 5.11 due to my height because I don't think that being taller than that has any benefit or that a 6.2 body looks better than a 5.11 body. Almost most of the times a 5.11 frame is the ideal for a man.
How does wealth have to do with height overall? Everyone in my family is short, billions wouldn't change genes.
-
How does wealth have to do with height overall? Everyone in my family is short, billions wouldn't change genes.
More wealth equals less stress and more food. It is true though that it wouldn't make a huge difference, it would take generations to raise the average just a few inches.
-
More wealth equals less stress and more food. It is true though that it wouldn't make a huge difference, it would take generations to raise the average just a few inches.
Is there any evidence of mental stress affecting height? I haven't seen any.
-
i would say 6 ft gonna be average in the nearest future(20-30 years) somewhere its already average(Montenegro and Netherlands) also 6 ft 1 suppose to be more common height that now but there no question about average height like 6 ft 3 or so, this is hilarious! :)
-
Is there any evidence of mental stress affecting height? I haven't seen any.
Idk know for sure but you can google it. I think it may indirectly affect height just like how people say caffeine might stunt growth but it's really not the caffeine, it's not getting enough sleep. I'm not so sure on this though.
-
the height is an adaptation to the environment and if you are so taller you have disadvantage in this adaptation, in the sports and others situations, you are slower, clumsy, etc.
The height can,t go much more 5'11 because the nature is wise.
-
the height is an adaptation to the environment and if you are so taller you have disadvantage in this adaptation, in the sports and others situations, you are slower, clumsy, etc.
The height can,t go much more 5'11 because the nature is wise.
And cardiological, blood flow, posture problems etc.
-
you are right
-
the height is an adaptation to the environment and if you are so taller you have disadvantage in this adaptation, in the sports and others situations, you are slower, clumsy, etc.
The height can,t go much more 5'11 because the nature is wise.
Utter crap. Provide any credible source for this assertion.
Look a those slow, clumsy athletes in the NFL, NBA, Heavyweight Boxing etc. 6'6" Usain Bolt is so slow.
-
Utter crap. Provide any credible source for this assertion.
Look a those slow, clumsy athletes in the NFL, NBA, Heavyweight Boxing etc. 6'6" Usain Bolt is so slow.
Bolt is a mistery as being 6'4.5 is considered a disadvantage to sprinting (best heights were always 176-185 which are average and normal tall heights).
Comparing normal humans to elite athletes is wrong since elite athletes are not the norm.
Just like not all short guys can be elite gymnastics, not all tall guys can be good at basketball and play in the NBA.
Although it seems many NBA players are just there because they are tall (the low tier teams) and nothing else
-
Utter crap. Provide any credible source for this assertion.
Look a those slow, clumsy athletes in the NFL, NBA, Heavyweight Boxing etc. 6'6" Usain Bolt is so slow.
Not crap at all.
The men with the most athletic bodies are always average height or just 1-2 inches more than average.
Basketball players is an exception of course because height in this sport is very important.
In bodybuilding where there are athletes from every height, almost all the mr Olympias weere from 5.7 to 5.10.
That means a lot for men's aesthetics.
Paco is absolutely right. Tall people is not the future because they need more food, more space, they live less, they have more injuries and they are more clumsy.
Always average height to just a little more (5.10 to 6ft) will be the ideal height for men in every aspect and nature won't let the average man be more than that.
-
people do not shrink between 40 and 59. very rare
so the study shows caucasian americans are getting taller
right now it would be between 179 and 180. might even be 180.
bodybuilder, The vast majority of people do not consider Mr Olympia aesthetics to be appealing. Most of these guys are around 171 and 172 cm and weigh around 120 kilos with 2% bodyfat.
The men with the most pleasing physiques are swimmers and water polo players. Both are quite tall on average
Sigh, not this again.
Average height has not changed in America in the past 2 generations- not if you account for the fact that people generally lose a little height with age. Some studies even say it is now decreasing.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr010.pdf#page=15
press crtl+f and search for 178.9 on this link. The sample size is small, but big enough to give a fairly solid estimate.
Quite a few other studies back that up too. From what I remember, average height is actually declining in the USA now for some groups, and stagnating for almost everyone. Maybe that's because of wealth inequality, and the rich are getting taller and the poor are getting shorter, but I think it's more likely that height has almost been maxed out. This one gives the highest estimate for young white men I know of.
In the UK it is still increasing but very slowly. If I look around I'd say 175-182 cm is average, but that's just by eye- according to the statistics though, that should be about right.
It depends on where you are, too. I live in south Wales which is renowned for having short (white, British) men. I am 173 and even I am often one of the taller people in the room when I go out here- if I'm with local people- even with the young local people I'm solidly average. But with (wealthy) students from other parts of Britain, I am short. Their average is closer to 180 cm, but I think 183 cm still looks pretty tall, and I couldn't call that average- I have a few friends that height and they are noticeably tall.
Plus average height for white Italians was 175 in about 1970-80, but since the 90s it has increased. You can see that if you look on wikipedia. I imagine seeing as Italy is quite a wealthy nation it will probably not increase much more.
-
people do not shrink between 40 and 59. very rare
so the study shows caucasian americans are getting taller
right now it would be between 179 and 180. might even be 180.
bodybuilder, The vast majority of people do not consider Mr Olympia aesthetics to be appealing. Most of these guys are around 171 and 172 cm and weigh around 120 kilos with 2% bodyfat.
The men with the most pleasing physiques are swimmers and water polo players. Both are quite tall on average
So what exactly are you proposing? Should we all get on our knees and hail tall people as our new gods? Because they're superior in every imaginable way? or what else should be the purpose of what you're trying to say?
-
people do not shrink between 40 and 59. very rare
so the study shows caucasian americans are getting taller
right now it would be between 179 and 180. might even be 180.
bodybuilder, The vast majority of people do not consider Mr Olympia aesthetics to be appealing. Most of these guys are around 171 and 172 cm and weigh around 120 kilos with 2% bodyfat.
The men with the most pleasing physiques are swimmers and water polo players. Both are quite tall on average
Crimsontide I refered to bbers to show that the most improved bodies, even with drugs, are the ones of about average heights.
Even in more aesthetic categories like fitness and all these most men are hardly ever more than 6ft.
Tall men most of the times have skinny or disproportionate bodies (too long feet etc) and also have the drawbacks I mentioned before about food, space and all these.
In no way I don't believe that tall men is the evolution of human race.
-
Bolt is a mistery as being 6'4.5 is considered a disadvantage to sprinting (best heights were always 176-185 which are average and normal tall heights).
Comparing normal humans to elite athletes is wrong since elite athletes are not the norm.
Just like not all short guys can be elite gymnastics, not all tall guys can be good at basketball and play in the NBA.
Although it seems many NBA players are just there because they are tall (the low tier teams) and nothing else
So what you are saying is people can be athletic or not regardless of height and that some people are naturally talented, I agree. Comments such as;
if you are so taller you have disadvantage in this adaptation, in the sports and others situations, you are slower, clumsy, etc.
The height can,t go much more 5'11 because the nature is wise.
...are ridiculous. Muhammad Ali was 6'3", was he clumsy or slow? No. The top tier NFL players are all well over 6 feet and incredibly athletic, running 60M sprints and setting world records. While there may be some athletic drop with height, it's certainly not locked in at 5 feet 11 inches. It would be easier if people didn't say people above 5'11" are xyz and other unproven generalizations. I assume that this persons goal is 5 feet 11 inches and wishes to feel positive about the height.
-
So what you are saying is people can be athletic or not regardless of height and that some people are naturally talented, I agree. Comments such as;
...are ridiculous. Muhammad Ali was 6'3", was he clumsy or slow? No. The top tier NFL players are all well over 6 feet and incredibly athletic, running 60M sprints and setting world records. While there may be some athletic drop with height, it's certainly not locked in at 5 feet 11 inches. It would be easier if people didn't say people above 5'11" are xyz and other unproven generalizations. I assume that this persons goal is 5 feet 11 inches and wishes to feel positive about the height.
yep. He wants to get to 5'11 as anything above isn't better in terms of looks, functionality or whatever. A totally scewed view on life and reality.
That doesn't mean I believe that someone who is 6' or 6'2 or even 5'11 is better than someone who is 5'10 as I want to do LL as well. But my view is that height as only effect on dating and once someone reaches the 5'9 range his dating pool is big enough (It's not the max height I can get with one operation. With 1 LL I can get to 5'10.7 but I dont see any real benefit for being taller than average with the majority of women.. I do see that being average is better than being short or below average since the negativity of those two far outweighs the immaginary positivity that comes with tall stature)
-
Not crap at all.
The men with the most athletic bodies are always average height or just 1-2 inches more than average.
Basketball players is an exception of course because height in this sport is very important.
Any source for this? Have you ever thought that you have seen more people at this height with athletic bodies is because on average most people are these heights? Now look at the NFL, combat sports etc. big men are equally as athletic. Was Ali slow and clumsy, the current heavyweight boxing champions, Tom Brady, NFL players, Shaq, Michael Jordan, Michael Phelps, Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson? Big men can and are as athletic as average height men. People can be athletic or not regardless of height and that some people are naturally talented. Why would basketball players be an exception, by this logic they should be clumsy, slow and unathletic because they are tall.
In bodybuilding where there are athletes from every height, almost all the mr Olympias weere from 5.7 to 5.10.
That means a lot for men's aesthetics.
So you chose the one 'sport' where athleticism is irrelevant. Bodybuilders aren't athletes. Most bodybuilders aren't athletic and wouldn't succeed in sport. Aesthetics are utterly irrelevant to athleticism as hypertrophy doesn't automatically mean athletic. Modern day bodybuilding favors shorter men as they appear much more muscular because they are short, not because they are more athletic.
The reality of top level pro bodybuilding now is you have to be "huge" to have a chance of winning, and a really tall guy just won't be able to look as "huge" as a short guy. It all comes down to the square cube law. Basically, as someone's height increases linearly, for them to have a proportional physique, their weight would have to increase as the cube of their height. So, a guy at 5'6" and weighing 270 would be proportionally as huge-looking as a 6' guy weighing 350 pounds (source: 270 / 5.53 * 63), which is way over what most people can handle at a stage-worthy level of leanness. So being shorter has the advantage here but how does this mean tall men are clumsy, slow and unathletic? Shorter people do better in gymnastics too, but how does this mean tall men are clumsy, slow and unathletic?
But your generalization doesn't hold true always as there are tall bodybuilders, for example;
Arnold - 6'2", Lou Ferrigno - 6'5", Paul Dilett - 6'2", Mike Katz - 6'2", Ralf Moeller - 6'8" etc. and Arnold actually won Mr Olympia.
Now let's look at weight lifting sports - strongmen, the champion power lifters. Usually 6 feet +.
Paco is absolutely right. Tall people is not the future because they need more food, more space, they live less, they have more injuries and they are more clumsy.
Always average height to just a little more (5.10 to 6ft) will be the ideal height for men in every aspect and nature won't let the average man be more than that.
I agree average height will stall but not because 'they are more clumsy', I thought we were discussing Paco's post stating 'if you are so taller you have disadvantage in this adaptation, in the sports and others situations, you are slower, clumsy, etc.' and I've provided countless examples proving otherwise. It would be easier if people didn't say people above 5'11" are xyz and other unproven generalizations.
-
682, there were short basketball players like mugsy bogues. But it is insane to not understand why basketball is not a proof that very tall men are as athletic as more average ones, because in this sport you should put the ball in a basket which is 10 feet from the ground!
If this basket was 4 feet from the ground the best basketball players would have been short men.
So basketball can't really be a proof about the athletic abilities of tall men.
You mentioned boxers. You forgot the heavyweight champion and one of the best of all times boxer Mike Tyson who is less than 5.10.
Also, the best MMA fighter alive, Conor Mc Gregor, who is 5.8 and the richest and undefeatable boxer, Floyd Mayweather who is about 5.7.
Also, in a sport that height really doesn't matter and is the most commercial in the world, football, the best player now is the less than 5.7 ft Messi and the best player ever was for the majority of people Diego Maradona, a 5.5 man.
So if you want to talk with names, I can mention much more.
But my point is not that all tall men (6.2 and more for most sports) are bad at sports, but that more average height men have more benefits in the majority of sports because they have most of the benefits of tall and short men without the drawbacks they both have.
As it is hard for a short man to be competitive in most sports, the same happens with very tall men.
-
Though you have to admit many of those shine because of weight classes. Being taller means being able to be heavier and longer reach of the arms. The best fighters are taller than average. I think that it would be near impossible for a 5'11 man to beat a 6'3 man if they are equally trained and equally built
-
At the end of the day people just say whatever height they want to lengthen to is ideal.
Most studies that have been done put the average and above average range as ideal.
Like the yougov survey in the UK, one by Swami, Graziano. They all put it as exactly average to a couple of inches above.
In the west that is probably 5'10"-6'2" where your dating pool is biggest. In that range you can get women of most heights. Probably the middle of it is the sweet spot.
Basically don't be short and don't be too tall, and you're fine.
I think objectively the people that probably really need this surgery for a better quality of life are like under 5'7". Maybe 5'7"-9" or whatever won't be perfect, but it's not bad. As for ideals, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and whatever. But stop trying to say "my post-LL height is the perfect one"!
Also the Swami study put 6'2" and 5'8" at a similar level of attractiveness. (6.5 and 6.4 points out of 9 respectively). 5'10" and 6'0" got exactly the same amount, 7.2 points.
-
But stop trying to say "my post-LL height is the perfect one"!
Also the Swami study put 6'2" and 5'8" at a similar level of attractiveness. (6.5 and 6.4 points out of 9 respectively). 5'10" and 6'0" got exactly the same amount, 7.2 points.
Any study that puts 5.8 and 6.2 as the same in attractiveness and tells that heights like 6.5 are more attractive than 6.2 are totally nonsense for me.
6.5 is way taller than average and too tall for the majority of women.
Hardly any girl would have said that 6.5 is better aesthetically than 6.2.
I would say that this survey was not so fault if it compared 6.5 to 5.8 as both heights being not very attractive.
But saying than enormously tall heights like 6.5 are more attractive than 6.2 is insane.
Almost in any study suggests that above 6.2 height starts to become a negative and this study says that 6.5 is better. Maybe in Scandinavia, nowhere else in the world. And even there it is very weird for me. But after all Scamdinavian men are not famous for their attractiveness. :D
But you mentioned that anyone thinks that his height post LL is the best.
Who said that?
Personally, I believe that my current height is the best for bbing the ideal height for a man's attractiveness is 6 to 6.1 ft and for the majority of sports the best is 5.10 to 6.1ft.
My post LL height will be about 5.11.
Am i some of the ones you mentioned about post LL height?
-
Why on the hell a 5'10 ( or almost ) guy would like to do LL . I'm sorry to say that but you are just aiming for the luxe to become taller that is not a neccesity cause height neurosis at this height is simply ridiculous . Trust me don't take this way just focus on the other parts of your life become a better person and never come back on this site . 5'10 is a very good height the one who says the opposite is complete idiot and probably has a crapty life and just try to reassure him-self .
-
Guichethope don't be surprised. I know I was when I noticed I was the shortest LL in months with Guichet at a little less than 5'5. Most of them had starting heights of 5'7 and above. The tallest was 6 feet tall. Another fact, after suffering one lengthening surgery, people forget very fast about the pain and plan another!!
-
Even I admit I was a little bit too carefree putting so much at risk just for vanity... I think to do this surgery you have to be at least a little mentally unstable. You can't deny there is something wrong with you if you break 2 healthy legs and go through surgery! Very dangerous indeed.
-
Guichethope don't be surprised. I know I was when I noticed I was the shortest LL in months with Guichet at a little less than 5'5. Most of them had starting heights of 5'7 and above. The tallest was 6 feet tall. Another fact, after suffering one lengthening surgery, people forget very fast about the pain and plan another!!
A 6ft person doing ll? Wow
-
A 6ft person doing ll? Wow
Nothing strange,cause 6 ft is below average height nowadays (just kidding)
Maybe those guys just wanna get luxurious 6 ft 2 range
-
Why on the hell a 5'10 ( or almost ) guy would like to do LL . I'm sorry to say that but you are just aiming for the luxe to become taller that is not a neccesity cause height neurosis at this height is simply ridiculous . Trust me don't take this way just focus on the other parts of your life become a better person and never come back on this site . 5'10 is a very good height the one who says the opposite is complete idiot and probably has a crapty life and just try to reassure him-self .
As I told before in some other topic ,5 ft 10 is okay but people are different,5 ft 10 good enough for enjoying life and most of dating but I don't feel comfortable when other people are taller than me ,and I'm not gonna feel 100 satisfied with my life unless I will be 6 ft 2
-
YungGud there will always be people taller than you. Why does it bother you? Do you feel inferior if there is someone taller?
-
As I told before in some other topic ,5 ft 10 is okay but people are different,5 ft 10 good enough for enjoying life and most of dating but I don't feel comfortable when other people are taller than me ,and I'm not gonna feel 100 satisfied with my life unless I will be 6 ft 2
Even at 6'2'' you will see people taller than you. Being shorter than other people is a natural part of life, it shouldn't bother you. Accepting it and still embracing yourself is part of growing up. (heh heh)
-
5.10 is the limit for me for someone to do LL.
Personally, if I was a solid 5.10 I wouldn't consider another LL.
People over that height who do LL are imo mentally unstable.
Any psychologist would have easily recognize that so I can't understand how doctors who have psychologists to evaluate these patients still do LL on them.
Guichet is a greedy doctor and it isn't weird for me that he did LL to a 6ft person.
But any doctor who does LL to so tall people is not respectable for me.
These people are mentally ill, their height is their last problem.
Yunggud, so you want to lengthen 4 inches? Because that means two LL except you risk a lot to lengthen so much in one segment.
In both cases, what you plan is nonsense at your starting height. I could unterstand to lengthen about 6cm and be a strong 6ft but wanting to lengthen 10cm at your initial height which is very good is completely a fault.
Please think more wise because LL is not a game.
-
The study said 6'5 was much less attractive than 6'2
5'8 - 6'2 range good
5'10-6'0 ideal
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.532.1096&rep=rep1&type=pdf
There you go, page 10 ish
-
Guichet is a greedy doctor and it isn't weird for me that he did LL to a 6ft person.
What are you expecting from a doctor that says you can lengthen even 11cm at one segment.
-
For me doing this surgery when you are 5 feet 9 or above is ridiculous. But it's their body to do as they wish. At any starting height this is a crazy surgery, and you have to be a little bit mentally unstable to even consider doing it. It applies for us all, me included.
-
Even if you are under 5'7 limb lengthening should be the last resort no matter what.
-
People view on height is really scewed..
10 minutes ago I spoke with a guy I rent a room in my appartment to. He said he lives in the netherlands so I said wow people are really tall there no? He said yes but since I am 188 I feel average. I said that yeah they are indeed said to be around that but that in my home country I am average. He responded "yes.. your home country average is 180 or so right? Because since you are 180 and you are average there..."
A guy who is basically at max 3 inches taller than me said he is 188 and that I am 180. Wow... Just wow
-
Lol i know guys add 2-4cm to their heights but 10cm damn
-
Lol i know guys add 2-4cm to their heights but 10cm damn
It wasn't the first time people told me I must be 180/5'11.
-
People view on height is really scewed..
10 minutes ago I spoke with a guy I rent a room in my appartment to. He said he lives in the netherlands so I said wow people are really tall there no? He said yes but since I am 188 I feel average. I said that yeah they are indeed said to be around that but that in my home country I am average. He responded "yes.. your home country average is 180 or so right? Because since you are 180 and you are average there..."
A guy who is basically at max 3 inches taller than me said he is 188 and that I am 180. Wow... Just wow
I've also had this experience. Either people lie about their height or they don't know how to accurately estimate height.
Then there's us who can tell if there's a 1 cm difference lol
-
Haha I literally measured my face when my height neurosis was worst so I could see how tall other people were by where my eyes went up to on their face... :(
-
Men also have the mentality with height like many women do with weight. i.e. the taller the better (unconditionally). It's not true, of course.
-
And yeah, spaceboyfriend, what I said before- you are right, even people under 5'7" should try it last of all other possibilities.
-
It wasn't the first time people told me I must be 180/5'11.
Lol 5 7 being 5 11 they must be really blind.
-
Lol 5 7 being 5 11 they must be really blind.
Cm are small compared to inches so people will tend to overestimate when using cms.
-
Most people lie too by an inch or two which distorts their idea about height a lot
-
I don't know how to explain it ,this is can be some kind of mental stuff
Of course at 6 ft 2 will be some people taller but the percent of such people will be very low
-
5.10 is the limit for me for someone to do LL.
Personally, if I was a solid 5.10 I wouldn't consider another LL.
People over that height who do LL are imo mentally unstable.
Any psychologist would have easily recognize that so I can't understand how doctors who have psychologists to evaluate these patients still do LL on them.
Guichet is a greedy doctor and it isn't weird for me that he did LL to a 6ft person.
But any doctor who does LL to so tall people is not respectable for me.
These people are mentally ill, their height is their last problem.
Yunggud, so you want to lengthen 4 inches? Because that means two LL except you risk a lot to lengthen so much in one segment.
In both cases, what you plan is nonsense at your starting height. I could unterstand to lengthen about 6cm and be a strong 6ft but wanting to lengthen 10cm at your initial height which is very good is completely a fault.
Please think more wise because LL is not a game.
Yes ,I will think about it for year or two ,as i can't get 4 inches in one segment,also gonna think about it in general if I need it or not
-
People view on height is really scewed..
10 minutes ago I spoke with a guy I rent a room in my appartment to. He said he lives in the netherlands so I said wow people are really tall there no? He said yes but since I am 188 I feel average. I said that yeah they are indeed said to be around that but that in my home country I am average. He responded "yes.. your home country average is 180 or so right? Because since you are 180 and you are average there..."
A guy who is basically at max 3 inches taller than me said he is 188 and that I am 180. Wow... Just wow
One could think some people don't care much about height.
-
1) You are average height in Italy according to this research (Which exluded minorities) so stop trying to convince yourself you are short.
2) Stop to try to bring the other users here down by saying everyone are tall and that the new 180 (whatever that means) is 183.
3) I am a 171cm immigrant in Italy who had no problems with the height obssesed Italian girls.
4) You are probably incredibly ugly orr have an awful body shape (narrow shoulders, small bones or just fat) and that would explain how come that at your age you didn't have any GF
I have no more patience for incels. Get a psicologist or better surgeries to fix you face
I am sorry for late reply. Anyway I have a nice face and a very fit body. I am not saying I'm generally short but everyone knows that girls tend to look to the guys above average which means being above average in height is much better than being only average.
All the normal girls i dated in these years, even the short ones, said something about my height, maybe in a pretty way (last one yesterday said: don't worry I don't like guys too tall)
-
Most people from this forum who are above 5'9" don't do LL. You can look at diaries, most of them are shorter because they have real reason to be insecure.
-
people do not shrink between 40 and 59. very rare
so the study shows caucasian americans are getting taller
right now it would be between 179 and 180. might even be 180.
bodybuilder, The vast majority of people do not consider Mr Olympia aesthetics to be appealing. Most of these guys are around 171 and 172 cm and weigh around 120 kilos with 2% bodyfat.
The men with the most pleasing physiques are swimmers and water polo players. Both are quite tall on average
The document says that in the 20/40 years area Caucasian males average in USA (and on my opinion is very similar to the average here in Italy for white Italians but I don't find accurate data like that) is 178.9. Basically 180 cm is the standard for being average. Girls are very picky on height believe me and they notice even the 2 cm less. It's not my idea. I said one i was 179 cm and she insisted I was less. In fact I am 177.5 in the morning.
-
682, there were short basketball players like mugsy bogues. But it is insane to not understand why basketball is not a proof that very tall men are as athletic as more average ones, because in this sport you should put the ball in a basket which is 10 feet from the ground!
If this basket was 4 feet from the ground the best basketball players would have been short men.
So basketball can't really be a proof about the athletic abilities of tall men.
You mentioned boxers. You forgot the heavyweight champion and one of the best of all times boxer Mike Tyson who is less than 5.10.
Also, the best MMA fighter alive, Conor Mc Gregor, who is 5.8 and the richest and undefeatable boxer, Floyd Mayweather who is about 5.7.
Also, in a sport that height really doesn't matter and is the most commercial in the world, football, the best player now is the less than 5.7 ft Messi and the best player ever was for the majority of people Diego Maradona, a 5.5 man.
So if you want to talk with names, I can mention much more.
But my point is not that all tall men (6.2 and more for most sports) are bad at sports, but that more average height men have more benefits in the majority of sports because they have most of the benefits of tall and short men without the drawbacks they both have.
As it is hard for a short man to be competitive in most sports, the same happens with very tall men.
Sorry but i have to correct you on football since I live in Italy 😁 and it is the national sport.
The portoguese CRonnie7 is the best player in the world.In fact due to his very good height(strong 185 cm) he is a great header,jumper (40 cm) and scores a lot of head-gols.Because of his physical stamina,pace and strenght he holds contrast and the physicality of modern defenders.He is way mooore complete than Messi.The modern football is physical.
In fact CRonnie7 at 32 years is gonna win his 5 Golden Ball and he is having a great moment while Messi is clearly declinig,although being younger and technically better.
I have a friend which is taller than me.We have equal ball handling and skills but he is stronger because having longer legs implies a lot of vantages:faster in wide space,more powerful shoot (due to longer levers,it's physics),better header and physically syronger.
Today a guy with 185 cm and mediocre skills can find a position in a team easier than a 170 cm guy with good technique.The smaller guy wins only if he posses a remarkable technique.
-
However i wrote CRonnie7 " the portoguese".Don't know why it was replaced with "Cronnie7" 😂😂😂
C'monn i wanted to write r-o-n-a-l-d-o
-
Dreamer, the best player in the world right now is the 1.69 Messi and that's a fact for anyone that likes football.
Also he is maybe the best player ever or second to 1.65 Diego Maradona.
Anyway, you are right that an 1.85 player can find easier a team than an 1.70 because height favors nediocre players. But players with high technique are rarely more than average height.
-
Dreamer, the best player in the world right now is the 1.69 Messi and that's a fact for anyone that likes football.
Also he is maybe the best player ever or second to 1.65 Diego Maradona.
Anyway, you are right that an 1.85 player can find easier a team than an 1.70 because height favors nediocre players. But players with high technique are rarely more than average height.
That's one of the good things with soccer. You can be good if your short or tall as long as you have skill.
-
That's one of the good things with soccer. You can be good if your short or tall as long as you have skill.
that's actually the same everywhere. Allen Iverson had a best career than Manute Bol for exemple. The sport heightism is bullcrap, and especially in volley ball or basketball where most tall guys have career but most of the time not a good one.
-
Dreamer, the best player in the world right now is the 1.69 Messi and that's a fact for anyone that likes football.
Also he is maybe the best player ever or second to 1.65 Diego Maradona.
Anyway, you are right that an 1.85 player can find easier a team than an 1.70 because height favors nediocre players. But players with high technique are rarely more than average height.
Absolutely no way.CRonnie7 is better and will dominate also in the future.He has a perfect body and though trainings had made up a robot,a machine goal.Ambidextrous(Messi is single foot),best header in the world with the best elevation,between the fastest players in the world,powerfull shootings,great technique,man of the match,good dribbler(Messi is better due to a lower center of gravity),huge physicall power.
I don't know if you watch football.Have you seen the last spanish supercup and r-o-n-a-l-d-o-s performance ? His performance in the current Champions League ?
Messi outdside Barcelona is an average player(see Argentinian National Team)
CRonnie7 dominated the Premier League and also the spanish league,plays very good with Portugal(and Portugal is way weaker than Argentina).He shines in every team.
Messi in Premier League would be destroyed after two contrast and attempted dribbles.
-
CRonnie7 is 32-33 yo and Messi almost 3 years younger.
So CRonnie7 can't do anything more in the future as he has at max 2 years more in the top class due to his age while Messi 4.
And it is critically acclaimed that Messi is the best footballer in the world so it is stupid to argue with you about that.
Anyway, on football most of the good players are average height or a little more.
But top players (not just good, TOP) are many times less than average height because low gravity centre is the best for players with high technique.
So height in football does not play a major role, on the contrast some times short height favour players.
-
I keep having to remember that when you guys say football, you are talking about soccer. ;D
-
I keep having to remember that when you guys say football, you are talking about soccer. ;D
Sorry Bander, but there is only one football and it is played with a round ball :D
-
Sorry Bander, but there is only one football and it is played with a round ball :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW2bCpf1WSI
-
Let's go back to the topic please
-
2014 data shows 20 year old male average in Denmark is 181 cm, which is an increase from the official number of 178 cm. Not sure when that number is from.
As a 172/73 cm male from Denmark, I can't see why you would do LL at 177 cm when the average in your country is 177.8 cm.
Women are picky about height, but you will never get rejected for being average height alone.
On the other hand being about 10 cm under average will get you rejected for that reason alone.
-
Lol 5 7 being 5 11 they must be really blind.
probably he did not even care at all so he did not stop and stared accurately to extimate his height... if the guy was 188 cm, everyone for him was just short and he did not pay attention to the individual differences...