d y s g e n i c s
-
-
ধন্যবাদ। আপনার সময়রেখাকে আরো ভালো করে তুলতে টুইটার এটিকে ব্যবহার করবে। পূর্বাবস্থায়পূর্বাবস্থায়
-
-
-
Correlations as high as 0.6??? Sounds extremely unlikely to me.
-
When I see correlations this high between indices such as these, I immediately think of inflation through multiple testing, or collinearity.
@lakens@david_colquhoun thoughts? -
Not sure it should be that surprising. The earlier you start having kids, the more kids you can have, no?
-
Real question. I really have no clue about this beyond high school knowledge about evolutionary biology and my gut feelings.
-
It's the other correlations as well. Around 0.25-0.3 just seems way too high an association for those variables.
-
Ha. I am with you there and that makes me rethink my gut feeling for the other correlation.
কথা-বার্তা শেষ
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
-
-
ধন্যবাদ। আপনার সময়রেখাকে আরো ভালো করে তুলতে টুইটার এটিকে ব্যবহার করবে। পূর্বাবস্থায়পূর্বাবস্থায়
-
-
-
James Flynn pointed this out a decade ago.https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10450313 …
ধন্যবাদ। আপনার সময়রেখাকে আরো ভালো করে তুলতে টুইটার এটিকে ব্যবহার করবে। পূর্বাবস্থায়পূর্বাবস্থায়
-
-
-
If I read it correctly younger age at first birth goes against reproductive success. It's in negative. The positive things for women are Waist-hip ratio and Age at first period. But not age at first birth.
-
Nope. You’re reading it wrong. The older a woman is at birth of her first child, the fewer children she will have.
-
Got it. Thanks.
কথা-বার্তা শেষ
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
-
-
Actually, as per the graph, all metrics that relate to larger body size are selected in *both* males and females - it's just that the selection is stronger it in males.
-
Is that higher BMI in muscle, or fat? Also, it's damn hard to find a guy who's not fat, so is that choice, or just tough luck?
-
BMI doesn't care if you're jacked or fat, so it's both. It's not exactly the smartest measure, honestly.
-
It’s about 80% accurately correlated with body fat percent I think. I can’t find the study from (I think the) CDC released a few years ago, which is bugging me, but it showed about 18% are either skinny fat or lean and “overweight” but all others are in line with the categories.
-
So if you take BMI & look at Waist to hip as well as BF% and other risk factors it gives you a good handle on things. I think someone should make a tool that scores those things and gives CVD correlation on number of positive scores.
-
ACSM basically does this though in their CVD risk appraisal but a score sheet with something like a 0-10 risk assessment to show low, moderate, or high risk of mortality or CVD would be interesting. More statistically complex than my current skillet however.
-
BF% alone is a better score, whereas BMI could only be used as a guidance for already fat people, imho. My partner went to the Dr, weighed a 100kg and was BMId as obese, when it was all muscle.

-
This also changes with age as those with slightly higher scores have better blood panels after a certain age. This is likely due to higher total muscle mass and thus ability to perform activities of daily living. Why muscle loss is a big key to aging.
- 1টি আরও উত্তর
নতুন কথা-বার্তা -
লোড হতে বেশ কিছুক্ষণ সময় নিচ্ছে।
টুইটার তার ক্ষমতার বাইরে চলে গেছে বা কোনো সাময়িক সমস্যার সম্মুখীন হয়েছে আবার চেষ্টা করুন বা আরও তথ্যের জন্য টুইটারের স্থিতি দেখুন।
; higher BMI in
Traits being selected against: Intelligence; educational achievement (!)
Figure: