4

votes

Bodyweight of today's hunter gatherers?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created February 24, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Are there any records of the weights of healthy hunter gatherers that are left in today's world (or the past 100 years or so) relative to their heights? I suspect maybe the Weston A. Price foundation probably has something along those lines somewhere but couldn't find anything. Just curious.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on April 07, 2012
at 10:31 PM

Oh sorry, Waynetta

01adafcb4dd4147c6af543f61eee60a8

(1153)

on March 25, 2012
at 08:51 AM

Im sure they can work out what a stone is.Grow up warrena

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on March 24, 2012
at 05:46 PM

The question is "Bodyweight of today’s hunter gatherers?"

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on March 24, 2012
at 05:42 PM

Kilos anybody? .

65bba2aa1de77b31c373c1a390c43ca8

(423)

on March 24, 2012
at 12:42 PM

1 stone = 14 pounds

07243c7700483a67386049f7b67d90a4

on March 10, 2012
at 04:33 PM

The southern Africans are, generally, a pretty short bunch (ignoring the whites and central africans). Whether they grew up on bush meat or maize they tend to be smaller so I would put it down to genetics.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on March 10, 2012
at 03:29 PM

Most of the world do not have a clue what a "stone" weighs.

79fc447191de75e7c178951594a43f13

(448)

on March 10, 2012
at 04:11 AM

Bodyweight is hugely influenced by climate. In the tropics, a high surface area to weight ratio is good for staying cool. Thus, those people tend to be smaller. In more temperate zones, heat loss is a problem and those people tend to be bigger.

518bce04b12cd77741237e1f61075194

(11577)

on March 10, 2012
at 03:07 AM

Yeah, I grew up with west coast First Nations, a few Cree girls, and a couple Inuit families- drastic differences in BMI. The west coast First Nations (mostly coast salish) and Inuit mostly have short, stocky body types with wider facial features, the deep soft voices, and generally carry more weight. The cree girls are little whips, very slender, little hips, flat chested, and have high cheekbones with more slender facial features. Both can have very healthy bodies, but are fundamentally built very differently. Neat to see the diversity in our one community!

8c5533ffe71bd4262fedc7e898ead1ba

(1724)

on February 28, 2012
at 01:40 PM

Where do you get that information stephenj? Here in Namibia, that is not true. Their area may have been restricted, but one tribe was only displaced within the last 20 year and the other still lives and hunts on its ancestral land in Kalahari. daz -- that's both, actually. I didn't see a lot of difference in size between genders.

7d01d86c539003eed77cf901bf037412

(1076)

on February 25, 2012
at 01:05 AM

I think it's worth noting that the San have been displaced over centuries from the best land by agriculturalists. A problem with looking today's hunter gatherers is that virtually everywhere that once supported abundant game is now farmed for crops or grazed by pastoralists, and hunters gatherers are pushed to the margins. I would be surprised if any modern hunter gatherers are as big and well nourished as their ancestors.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 24, 2012
at 10:09 PM

is that the men, women or both?

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 24, 2012
at 06:56 AM

i'm curious too. after a quick 'google image' search, i would guess that the men were/are light and muscular. a light weight boxer/martial artist look rather than a heavy body builder look. at least those tribes that have stuck to their historical way of life & diet

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 24, 2012
at 06:55 AM

i'm curious too. after a quick 'google image' search, i would guess that the men were/are light and muscular. a light weight boxer/martial artist look rather than a heavy body builder look. at least those tribes that have stuck to there historical way of life & diet

56e59609362978a9dcb390fdeb45427f

(576)

on February 24, 2012
at 02:59 AM

I probably should have made the question more clear, hunter gatherers of today, that are able to be truly measured.

  • 56e59609362978a9dcb390fdeb45427f

    asked by

    (576)
  • Views
    2.1K
  • Last Activity
    1432D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

7 Answers

1
8c5533ffe71bd4262fedc7e898ead1ba

on February 24, 2012
at 12:57 PM

I can tell you that all the San people I have met or seen (maybe 150 or so) here in Namibia are about my size or smaller. I'm 5'6" and ~124 lbs.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 24, 2012
at 10:09 PM

is that the men, women or both?

7d01d86c539003eed77cf901bf037412

(1076)

on February 25, 2012
at 01:05 AM

I think it's worth noting that the San have been displaced over centuries from the best land by agriculturalists. A problem with looking today's hunter gatherers is that virtually everywhere that once supported abundant game is now farmed for crops or grazed by pastoralists, and hunters gatherers are pushed to the margins. I would be surprised if any modern hunter gatherers are as big and well nourished as their ancestors.

8c5533ffe71bd4262fedc7e898ead1ba

(1724)

on February 28, 2012
at 01:40 PM

Where do you get that information stephenj? Here in Namibia, that is not true. Their area may have been restricted, but one tribe was only displaced within the last 20 year and the other still lives and hunts on its ancestral land in Kalahari. daz -- that's both, actually. I didn't see a lot of difference in size between genders.

07243c7700483a67386049f7b67d90a4

on March 10, 2012
at 04:33 PM

The southern Africans are, generally, a pretty short bunch (ignoring the whites and central africans). Whether they grew up on bush meat or maize they tend to be smaller so I would put it down to genetics.

0
Feb3ec454129bb3c5f13a6c58e16cbaf

on March 24, 2012
at 05:22 PM

It depends on their enviroment and activities. we can actually make some educated guesses as to the size and weight of prehistoric man. Namely by measureing the muscle attachment points allows us to extrpulate .uscle size sand as such atleast guess weight.you should also remember weight is actually meaning less. It is highly probable that they were alot heavier than we are, due largely to much larger muscles, but also their irregular diet would have meant that they had much higher glycogen stores, and generally higher mineral storage. Further more due to the rougher life they hadarger joints and denser bones, as they went largely barefoot they also had much more developed calves that what we see today. Furthermore in the north they were bigger anyway. As such comparing Caucasians to tropical hunter gathers is missleading

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on March 24, 2012
at 05:46 PM

The question is "Bodyweight of today’s hunter gatherers?"

0
01adafcb4dd4147c6af543f61eee60a8

on March 10, 2012
at 01:51 AM

Around 9 stone id guess

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on March 10, 2012
at 03:29 PM

Most of the world do not have a clue what a "stone" weighs.

65bba2aa1de77b31c373c1a390c43ca8

(423)

on March 24, 2012
at 12:42 PM

1 stone = 14 pounds

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on March 24, 2012
at 05:42 PM

Kilos anybody? .

01adafcb4dd4147c6af543f61eee60a8

(1153)

on March 25, 2012
at 08:51 AM

Im sure they can work out what a stone is.Grow up warrena

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on April 07, 2012
at 10:31 PM

Oh sorry, Waynetta

0
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on February 24, 2012
at 09:57 PM

There are plenty of examples of hunter-gatherers on Youtube The men have fairly low bodyfat and a good amount of muscle.

0
E753cf7753e7be889ca68b1a4203483f

on February 24, 2012
at 04:33 PM

In general they are small and skinny (Exceptions include some Indian tribes and inuits). Their BMI are typically in the low range of normal (18-23).

518bce04b12cd77741237e1f61075194

(11577)

on March 10, 2012
at 03:07 AM

Yeah, I grew up with west coast First Nations, a few Cree girls, and a couple Inuit families- drastic differences in BMI. The west coast First Nations (mostly coast salish) and Inuit mostly have short, stocky body types with wider facial features, the deep soft voices, and generally carry more weight. The cree girls are little whips, very slender, little hips, flat chested, and have high cheekbones with more slender facial features. Both can have very healthy bodies, but are fundamentally built very differently. Neat to see the diversity in our one community!

0
06935be03aaa3cc589afb3b5e01268ad

(158)

on February 24, 2012
at 06:06 AM

Are there anything wrong in assuming that its the same as it is for the few tribes that still exists in the world today?

could this link give a hint ?: http://www.healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/health-risks/nutrition/reviews/our-review

0
5e5ff249c9161b8cd96d7eff6043bc3a

(4713)

on February 24, 2012
at 02:51 AM

I would be pretty immediately skeptical of any data like this. Unless there's a way to tell from a skeleton that I just don't know about and probably don't entirely believe in anyway.

56e59609362978a9dcb390fdeb45427f

(576)

on February 24, 2012
at 02:59 AM

I probably should have made the question more clear, hunter gatherers of today, that are able to be truly measured.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!