Agrippa: How Pygmies became short

[Planet Asia]

"In its new biotope, the Mbuti line was submitted to strong selective pressures favouring short stature. How these worked is indicated by observations on the Binga Pygmoids of the Central African Republic, described in the next selection. A team of endocrinologists studied their growth hormone and found that in the Binga adultnthere is no deficiency in its secretion, but a tissue resistance to its action. We may therefore suppose that selection in the Pygmies and Pygmoids favoured alleles which stop growth by blocking the receptivity of the cells to the human growth hormone at a certain stage of development."

Jean Hiernaux, "The People of Africa", 1975, p.118



Now how does this play out in your progressive/primitive scheme? Not all people you deem as primitive are very short.

[Planet Asia]

^^ up

[Agrippa]

"In its new biotope, the Mbuti line was submitted to strong selective pressures favouring short stature. How these worked is indicated by observations on the Binga Pygmoids of the Central African Republic, described in the next selection. A team of endocrinologists studied their growth hormone and found that in the Binga adultnthere is no deficiency in its secretion, but a tissue resistance to its action. We may therefore suppose that selection in the Pygmies and Pygmoids favoured alleles which stop growth by blocking the receptivity of the cells to the human growth hormone at a certain stage of development."

Jean Hiernaux, "The People of Africa", 1975, p.118



Now how does this play out in your progressive/primitive scheme? Not all people you deem as primitive are very short.

Well, I explained that in various threads here and elsewhere.

First of all, small doesnt mean primitive, but it can mean degeneration - but even that it must not mean, since there are DIFFERENT REASONS and LEVEL of size reduction.

However, you should just read this (did you?):
Some threads about progressive tendencies on Skadi:
forum.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=43471

forum.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=44767

forum.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=44712

Profile sketch of a potential peak type:
forum.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=44626

There are basically 3 tendencies which are partly independent from, partly interconnected with LOCAL ADAPTATION.

The basic level is archemorphic-primitive, it is closest to the archaic sapiens strata, the best example are Australids and Boskopids.

Both Boskopids and Protonegroids have one thing in common, parts of them were reduced in totally different areas and with a different change in proportions, but finally the reason was basically the same.
They were the weaker elements and pushed into areas of retreat in which their subsistence was changed and the energy input low.
Both resulted in the need to save energy:
Boskopids degenerated into Sanids
Protonegroids into Bambutids

Both show primitive tendencies from their ancient stratum (Boskopid and Protonegrid respectively) combined with infantile characteristics which are the result of their fast reduction process.

So we see two basic forms of mankind here:
Archemorphic and Paedomorphic combined.

Its possible to combine every basic tendency (archemorphic, paedomorphic, neomorphic).

F.e. some Japanese Palaemongolids combine progressive with infantile characteristics.
Some Indianids progressive with archemorphic one and the mentioned groups (Sanid and Bambutid) primitive with infantile ones (what is obviously 'the worst' combination).

[Planet Asia]

Well please explain Pygmies, aren't they're one of your "primitive" types?

[Planet Asia]

BTW, Pygmies are *NOT* a reduced people all the way. Their heads are "unreduced" in proportion with their bodies. The heads are basically big in comparison with the rest of their body.

[Agrippa]

bertrand said:

BTW, Pygmies are *NOT* a reduced people all the way. Their heads are "unreduced" in proportion with their bodies. The heads are basically big in comparison with the rest of their body.

Yes, thats because their infantilism is unbalanced a) and reduced refers in that way first to the body.

I even showed plates comparing them with normal growth of leptomorphic Europids on Skadi.

Pygmids are both primitive and infantile. But since they are altered and dont represent the typical old sapiens stratum like Australids or Boskopids, you can't call them primitive alone since they changed over time most likely - they were pushed into that area and had to adapt to the unfavourable conditions later most likely - probably even very fast which would explain their partical imbalanced appearance if compared with Negritids, which are reduced primitives too but more balanced without so close affinities to pathological nanism.

[Planet Asia]

agrippa said:

bertrand said:

BTW, Pygmies are *NOT* a reduced people all the way. Their heads are "unreduced" in proportion with their bodies. The heads are basically big in comparison with the rest of their body.

Yes, thats because their infantilism is unbalanced a) and reduced refers in that way first to the body.

I even showed plates comparing them with normal growth of leptomorphic Europids on Skadi.

Pygmids are both primitive and infantile. But since they are altered and dont represent the typical old sapiens stratum like Australids or Boskopids, you can't call them primitive alone since they changed over time most likely - they were pushed into that area and had to adapt to the unfavourable conditions later most likely - probably even very fast which would explain their partical imbalanced appearance if compared with Negritids, which are reduced primitives too but more balanced without so close affinities to pathological nanism.

According to the book I quoted from says their braincase and brain approach adult size before the chemical reaction.

[human2]

agrippa said:

bertrand said:

BTW, Pygmies are *NOT* a reduced people all the way. Their heads are "unreduced" in proportion with their bodies. The heads are basically big in comparison with the rest of their body.

Yes, thats because their infantilism is unbalanced a) and reduced refers in that way first to the body.

I even showed plates comparing them with normal growth of leptomorphic Europids on Skadi.

Pygmids are both primitive and infantile. But since they are altered and dont represent the typical old sapiens stratum like Australids or Boskopids, you can't call them primitive alone since they changed over time most likely - they were pushed into that area and had to adapt to the unfavourable conditions later most likely - probably even very fast which would explain their partical imbalanced appearance if compared with Negritids, which are reduced primitives too but more balanced without so close affinities to pathological nanism.

All pygmized populations have unreduced brain sizes. That's why they are pygmies, DUH.

Otherwise, they'd be just normal people on a smaller scale.

Pygmies all over stop growing in the early teens, when the brain has fully developed. The reason is fairly obvious for why they want normal brains.

[Planet Asia]

human2 said:

agrippa said:

Yes, thats because their infantilism is unbalanced a) and reduced refers in that way first to the body.

I even showed plates comparing them with normal growth of leptomorphic Europids on Skadi.

Pygmids are both primitive and infantile. But since they are altered and dont represent the typical old sapiens stratum like Australids or Boskopids, you can't call them primitive alone since they changed over time most likely - they were pushed into that area and had to adapt to the unfavourable conditions later most likely - probably even very fast which would explain their partical imbalanced appearance if compared with Negritids, which are reduced primitives too but more balanced without so close affinities to pathological nanism.

All pygmized populations have unreduced brain sizes. That's why they are pygmies, DUH.

Otherwise, they'd be just normal people on a smaller scale.

Pygmies all over stop growing in the early teens, when the brain has fully developed. The reason is fairly obvious for why they want normal brains.

Correct me if I'm wrong but does it seem that Asiatic Pygmies have slightly more reduced heads than the African Pygmies?

[Planet Asia]

Compare African




To Malaysian Pygmy

[Planet Asia]

Another Asiatic Pygmy

[Agrippa]

Correct me if I'm wrong but does it seem that Asiatic Pygmies have slightly more reduced heads than the African Pygmies?

Yes, that seems to be true. In most depictions I recognised the same pattern.

human2: Correct, never stated that their brain is generally underdeveloped if compared to full grown individuals of other types, at least not for the reason of infantilisation primarily.

[human2]

bertrand said:

human2 said:

All pygmized populations have unreduced brain sizes. That's why they are pygmies, DUH.

Otherwise, they'd be just normal people on a smaller scale.

Pygmies all over stop growing in the early teens, when the brain has fully developed. The reason is fairly obvious for why they want normal brains.

Correct me if I'm wrong but does it seem that Asiatic Pygmies have slightly more reduced heads than the African Pygmies?

I'm just going by the literature. To be honest with you, what is "normal" brain size is relative. Two people in the same family can have different size heads. A black man generally have a smaller brain/head than an Asian.

What the literature says is that pygmies attain full maturation of the brain before they stop growing.
So, the small head woul dbe something after the fact, not directly related pygmization per se. Perhpas it's just chance or a further "reduction".. the brain and its need for fat and protein is not suitable to heavily forrested environments where it is hard to find protein.

[Agrippa]

So, the small head woul dbe something after the fact, not directly related pygmization per se.

Agreed, like I said above. No objections from my side.

Palaungids in SEA show signs of clear reduction-infantilisation, partly even as extreme (individuals), same is true for Istmids (~Maya population).
You can see similar trends (infantilisation) in many areas of the world, mainly in those which "lost" fights for better areas and were pushed into poor areas of retreat or reached a population level which couldnt provide the necessary level for proper individual development.
Usually this tendency is not associated with a general reduction of the brain, but the brain rather keeps its size with just slow, if at all, reduction. Its a saving on the costs of the body primarily.

[human2]

agrippa said:

So, the small head woul dbe something after the fact, not directly related pygmization per se.

Agreed, like I said above. No objections from my side.

Palaungids in SEA show signs of clear reduction-infantilisation, partly even as extreme (individuals), same is true for Istmids (~Maya population).
You can see similar trends (infantilisation) in many areas of the world, mainly in those which "lost" fights for better areas and were pushed into poor areas of retreat or reached a population level which couldnt provide the necessary level for proper individual development.
Usually this tendency is not associated with a general reduction of the brain, but the brain rather keeps its size with just slow, if at all, reduction. Its a saving on the costs of the body primarily.

No, Agrippa. We haven't agree on anything. All pygmies have normal human brains... meaning the body stops growing after the brain has fully matured... The brain doesn't prematurely stop growing in pygmy populations.

"Fully mature" is different from population to population and individual to individual.