Solution to height [HIGH IQ ONLY] [SMARTCELS GTFIH RN]

[zxz]

THIS TBH, ENVIRONMENT IS KEY. I'm at 185 cm, just turned 15, and I can confirm that's exactly how I got way taller than what I was supposed to be (I'm 10cm taller than the tallest person in my whole family). Up until now, I grew up skinny asf exercising very rarely (I was raised in one of the biggest cities in the world), having a rich diet (latino food is literally the best) and a normal sleep schedule, but most importantly, I swam for about 6 years. Of course genetics helped a lot, since I was huge compared to the other babies, but the environment plays a huge role. It's cheating life really, but with stretching and swimming again, I'm hoping I can make it to 190cm.

At what age did you first start swimming and at what age did you stop and why? Did you sit or lay a lot instead of being active and outside?

 

[DrTony]

The Determining Factor for Height

Introduction​

It seems that if there’s anything you don’t like about yourself, you can work on it or get it fixed. If you’re fat, you can diet and exercise. If you have a uni-brow, you can pluck it. If you’re short, though… sorry, not even surgery can help you there. Teens often wonder if weightlifting will stunt their growth, as if humans are supposed to be tall and anything less is suboptimal. I believe a man that is 5’5” is neither unhealthy nor malnourished. In today’s society, however, being short is a huge disadvantage for men. Studies have shown that height is strongly correlated with income—tall men are simply granted more money and status in society. Tall men often develop a sense of superiority from the ability to literally look down on other people. And, of course, a tall man has a greater selection of women to date since most women will only date a man taller than herself. Life seems very unfair for the short man. But what if I told you height is not 100% genetic and can be nurtured? Well, it’s probably too late for you anyway.

Hypothesis​

Fact: one’s height is the sum of the lengths of their leg, torso, neck, and head. Today’s scientists say that height is determined by growth plates, which are located at both ends of a bone, and that nothing can be done to alter their growth rate. I believe these scientists have overlooked the fact that muscles surround the bones. I hypothesize that height can be manipulated through development of the leg and torso muscles. (I left out the lengths of the head and neck because they are insignificant compared to the leg and torso.) Muscles have what’s known as a contractile force. As the muscle becomes bigger/more developed, the contractile force increases. If there is no muscle then there is no contractile force:

View attachment 747925​

As you can see, this muscle’s contractile force goes the opposite direction of the growth plate force. Thus, leg and torso muscle hypertrophy should impede vertical growth. It is possible to stretch and massage a muscle into a more relaxed state and thus weakening the contractile force. To maximize height, I believe one must eliminate all the contractile forces that contribute to height. These are all the muscles with fibers that run vertically: the calves, quadriceps, hamstrings, abdominals, erector spinae, and quadratus lumborum. Any muscle development of these muscles will retard vertical growth, as my hypothesis goes.

How exactly would one maximize height? During the developmental years, one should avoid all high-intensity (i.e. muscle-building) exercises of the aforementioned muscles. This means never doing sit-ups, squats, etc. If physical activity must be done then it should be done with low-intensity (and high repetition). This means light jogging instead of sprinting, jumping rope rather than high jumping, hopscotch rather than long jump, or even carrying groceries into the house in three trips rather than one. In other words, energy should be expended with cardiovascular activities rather than in short bursts. This lifestyle will minimize muscle hypertrophy and thus maximize height. It’s hard to avoid all physical activity, however, so the second part of the equation is to frequently stretch and massage the leg and spine muscles to a relaxed state. The bridge stretch is a good example. Even sitting cross-legged for some time will stretch the leg and lower back muscles. To minimize height, one should engage in high-intensity leg and torso activities, and neglect stretching these muscles.

Lugging a heavy backpack around school every day is the worst thing a teen can do for his/her height—not because of gravity, though. The act of stabilizing all the weight shifting around will strengthen the erector spinae and quadratus lumborum muscles.

Existing Hypotheses​

Many people believe height is genetically predetermined. I definitely agree that genes are a factor. But, as with many conditions, I see the role of genes as defining an individual’s default/expected value and the possible range of deviation. I often visualize the effect of genes as a probability distribution, or a box-and-whisker plot:

I believe genes define how tall one is expected to grow. Basically, a daughter is expected to be the same height as her mother and a son is to be the same height as his father. I believe genes also define the minimum and maximum degree of deviation allowed. How far a person deviates from the projected value—how far one travels along the whiskers of the box plot—is up to nurture, I hypothesize.

So it’s genes + nurture. Most people today believe this means genes + diet, because people attribute just about every unexplained human phenomenon to diet. This is idiotic. Yes, I do believe malnutrition can stunt growth, but I believe extreme starvation is required for this to occur. I’m sure you’ve encountered short people who eat too much food, too little food, only healthy food, etc. and tall people who eat too much food, too little food, only healthy food, etc. In other words, no one has observed a correlation between height and diet. Why, then, do so many people believe diet determines height? People are simplistic. People believe that the only thing we have a choice on, in life, is what we eat. They fail to realize that there’s also “calories out”—our behavior.

Every four years, people notice that Olympic gymnasts are short and then wonder: did gymnastics make them short, or are they the best at gymnastics because they’re short? The chicken or the egg dilemma; is selection bias at play? Scientists say the growth plates cannot be affected, except from injury, therefore gymnastics cannot make a person short. I say it can. Unlike long-distance runners, gymnasts use the legs with high-intensity as they leap around in tumbling, vault, and balance beam. This induces muscle hypertrophy of the calves, quadriceps, hamstrings, abdominals, erector spinae, and quadratus lumborum, among other muscles. Thus, a large contractile force is working against growth plate expansion of the limbs involved in height.

Supporting Evidence: Comparing Urban to Rural​

I believe growing up in an urban environment causes teens to live more sedentary lives than their rural counterparts. Urbanization replaces fields and nature with high-rise buildings and computers. There is simply no space to run around and play in a city. I hypothesize that this sedentary lifestyle produces undeveloped leg and torso muscles, which results in a taller height. Kids in rural environments run around and play outside more often, which leads to well-developed leg and torso muscles, which leads to shorter overall height. Is this backed by any evidence? In 2013, CJ Paciorek published a study which found that urban children are taller than their rural counterparts in almost all of the 141 (low-income and middle-income) countries they researched:

The study’s interpretation of these findings is that the rural areas have less access to stable and affordable food supply and health care. This study is far from alone. There are countless studies that find a correlation between urbanization and height, and they all believe the same thing: better access to food and health care leads to taller humans. The truth of the matter is that there are many variables in play as humans go from a rural environment to an urban one, so using just this data will not suffice for my hypothesis. We must narrow it down to the “sedentary lifestyle” component of the urban environment as the determining factor of height.

Many studies have found that a sedentary lifestyle is strongly correlated with myopia, a.k.a. nearsightedness. The more hours you spend doing deskwork, the worse your vision will be. In fact, 80-90% of children completing high school are now myopic in urban cities in Asia. Why am I talking about myopia? Because it has a strong correlation to deskwork. Thus I am going to substitute “myopia” with “sedentary lifestyle.” In 2002, Saw SM, et al. published “Height and Its Relationship to Refraction and Biometry Parameters in Singapore Chinese Children” after finding a correlation between height and myopia. That is, Saw SM, et al. found that the taller the child was, the worse his/her vision was. Using my substitution: the taller the child, the more sedentary his/her lifestyle.

The following is not concrete evidence but rather a few things I’ve noticed over the years. One, it seems like children have been getting taller and taller. That is, a 10-year-old today seems taller than a 10-year-old from 10 years ago. Most people simply chalk this up to “better diet and nutrition” but I beg to differ. Food has been plentiful for many, many decades. Two, I’ve observed that the teenagers who are tall also seem to lack muscle development at the legs. That is, if you were to outline their legs, there would be no curves whatsoever at the calf and knee area—it’d just be straight lines from hip to foot, like a bad drawing. Shorter teenagers, on the other hand, tend to exhibit distinct calves and knees—or as I see it: muscle development.

Ideal Supporting Evidence: Teens That Did High-Intensity Legwork​

One way to gather data for my hypothesis would be to conduct a survey on full-grown adults (i.e. ages 22-40). First, I would ask them what their height is. Second, I would ask them if they participated in karate, gymnastics, weightlifting of the legs, etc. as a developing child/teenager. Third, I would ask them how many months/years they were active in these sports. I expect the data to show a strong negative relationship between years spent doing high-intensity leg activities and (final) height. Karate and gymnastics qualify as high-intensity leg workouts because they involve a lot of kicking and jumping.

Another survey possibility would be to ask how much outdoor playtime someone experienced during their developmental years. The survey would poll developing teens and full-grown adults, rural and urban. The teens would be able to give the most accurate numbers as to how long they played. I predict the rural population to have more outdoor play, and thus be shorter, than their urban counterparts. I’d say that for the majority of countries, for at least one generation now, people in rural areas have had access to the same kind of diet/calories as people in urban areas. I also predict that in mountainous regions to have more muscularly-developed legs, and thus be shorter, than people in flat plains.

The best evidence for my hypothesis would be a survey on the heights of identical twins that lived drastically different lifestyles yet shared similar diets. For example, a twin who took many years of karate or gymnastics while his/her twin did not. Unfortunately, this scenario is very rare because most parents of twins want to give their twins have an equal and fair upbringing. However, Googling clever phrases, such as: “stunt growth weight lifting ‘twin brother’,” “stunt growth gymnastics 'twin sister',” or “stunt growth working out ‘identical twin’,” yielded many anecdotes that support my hypothesis.

Comparing Heights is Tricky​

Beware of people on the internet parroting the unproven theory that working out or weightlifting does not stunt growth. These people often cite scientists that say genetically-predetermined growth plates are responsible for overall height. End of story. Truth is, there hasn’t been a study to prove one way or the other. Also beware of people sharing their personal anecdote with no control variable. Say, for example, Jamaal from the internet says he ran track and field for all four years in high school and he’s much taller than the average American man, therefore leg workouts do not hinder height at all. I hope you see that this is incredibly flawed. First of all, he doesn’t have a control variable—he is comparing himself to the average American—America is a very diverse country with many ethnicities. It would be more acceptable for him to compare his height to the average height of his ethnicity in America. More acceptable than that would be to compare to the average of his cousins. More acceptable than that would be a blood sibling. Ideal would be an identical twin that didn’t do any physical activity in high school. Secondly, running is not necessarily a high-intensity leg exercise and thus may not induce muscle growth. Sprinting is, but long-distance running is low-intensity. Among the teenagers who do work out, only a few actually work out the calves, quadriceps, hamstrings, abdominals, or erector spinae with high intensity.

There is currently no explanation as to why siblings differ in height. The genetic explanation may be that one sibling “got the bad genes.” My hypothesis says that the child who uses leg and torso muscles with high intensity will grow up to be “the short one.” But it gets tricky! Women are, by nature, about 10% smaller than men, and thus 10% shorter as well. For example, say a man is 5’10” and has a sister. It’s expected that his sister is around 5’3” because this is 10% less than 5’10”. If she turned out to also be 5’10”, I would conjecture that the man’s childhood involved intense leg usage, while hers did not. If she turned out to be 4’11”, I would speculate the other way around. Another factor to consider is that, in today’s society, physical activity is reserved for the male gender. The boy is encouraged or forced to do the physical labor, especially when it comes to strenuous (i.e. high-intensity) activities, because he is to “be a man.” The girl is discouraged or excused from doing physical activity because she is to “be a princess.” If a female is doing physical work, it’s advised to be low-intensity cardio activity. This is a moot point in a modern, urban lifestyle, however, where this physical labor is nearly nonexistent. But if a (rural) family strictly adhered to these gender roles, I would bet on the boy growing up to be shorter than his sister, or barely taller.

Implications of my Hypothesis​

Besides keeping high-intensity activity at a minimum, a less obvious way to maximize height would be a special diet devoid of protein. Since protein purportedly aids in muscle growth and recovery, kids can avoid protein-rich foods during developmental years to minimize muscle growth. Kids should also avoid getting fat, because fat is extra weight to carry around which leads to muscle hypertrophy. For example, if you took two kids—one fat, one skinny—with the same age, height, and lifestyle, the fat kid will have a more muscle mass. This is from carrying about daily activities with extra weight on. So I suppose diet does matter, but not in the way people believe it matters.

The harder you work, the shorter you will grow up to be—if work is to be defined as high-intensity physical labor. When I see a short man—especially for his race—I often think to myself, “He must have worked hard when he was young. Maybe he helped his parents carry heavy loads every day.” And when I see a really tall man, I cannot help but think, “He’s probably never pushed himself physically. Maybe he spent his childhood sitting cross-legged in front of a TV all day.” I’m not saying the equation for height is 100% nurture. Genetics still play a role. I would say that being short comes from generations of high-intensity leg and back work, and being tall comes from generations of comfortable living. Yes, this is Lamarck’s Theory of Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics. Again, before you try to disprove my hypothesis with an anecdote: you need a control variable, such as a same-sex sibling. For example, it is a mistake to compare your level of physical activity and final height to the national average, especially if that nation is racially diverse.

@copingvolcel is an example of this theory. Just look around you.

TL;DR: Working out will make your muscles stronger and bigger, this will exert force in the opposite direction of which your bones grow, limiting high-intensity low-repetition working out will make you taller, instead, low-intensity high-repetition should be done.

aka don't workout, get taller theory.


My take on this is don't work out until the age of 20.

TAG TALL-SKINNYCELS BELOW

I am legit laughing at your ridiculous low IQ post. You made my day

 

[Deleted member 2157]

My take on this is don't work out until the age of 20.

bull.shit

 

[Idontknowlol]

According to this theory, EVERY football (soccer for americucs) player should be 5'0, since they all train from very young age.

But why most of them are average, or taller than the average?

 

[Deleted member 10172]

Didn't read all but agree. I fucked myself up with starting to workout at 16, would have probably become at least 4-5cm taller if I hadn't done hardcore training at that age. Wish I had cared more about height and read this back then. Suifuel indeed, sometimes I just want to reincarnate ngl

Wait wait wait, so working out actually stunts ur growth? hmph.

 

[Need2Ascend]

Wait wait wait, so working out actually stunts ur growth? hmph.

If you do too much it could. Also you have to eat a lot more to compensate which I didn't unfortunately
Best advice someome could have given me is to not workout till 20 or maybe only do some really light exercises in your teens
Focus on your height growth in your 10s and on your body and muscles in your 20s

 

[Renaissance.Chad]

Don't buy into this. Not working out in your teens is guaranteed to turn you into a framecel.
Stereotypical Chads play sports or lift since 15.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

Height is a very simple thing for men
6ft+ = no need to worry about it you are already above the cut off just focus on your face and gymcelling, at 6ft+ height is not whats holding you back

5'9-5'11 = just fraud with lifts, way easier and cheaper than getting LL, tbh everyone getting LL at that height would probably be considered mentally ill

5'6-5'8 = at that height you wont be able to Fraud 6ft+ unless you wear ridiculous elevator shoes and lifts, but you'll still be able to Fraud to average height(5'9-5'10). Some girls may reject you cause of height but it will be just a few since average height for men is still much taller than 90% of all women
Sub 5'6 = LL is the only thing that is not cope at that height, sorry but its true


Stretchs, glucosamine, leg workout, all this shit may work, but lets be real, it wont give you more than 2cm. Its simply not enough to change anything no matter whats your height.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

The best way to heightmaxx would be to swim tbh as its low intensity and stretches everything.

Swimming is legit on puberty, my Mother is 1.59cm and my father 1.68cm, still I grew to 1.80cm and I believe it has to do with the fact that I was a swimmer at school during all my teenage years

It can only be the swimming cause my family is veeery short, all my cousins are shorter than me, even the zoomers, I strongly believe that swimming can make you reach your full height potential

 

[Deleted member 5522]

Swimming is legit on puberty, my Mother is 1.59cm and my father 1.68cm, still I grew to 1.80cm and I believe it has to do with the fact that I was a swimmer at school during all my teenage years

It can only be the swimming cause my family is veeery short, all my cousins are shorter than me, even the zoomers, I strongly believe that swimming can make you reach your full height potential

I remember knowing a very tall dude who swum. Lol at not swimmaxxing during puberty. Too late for me now but oh well.

 

[balding17yomanletcel]

 

[Mouthbreath]

My grandfather from my mother is like 6ft6 and grand father from my dad is 6ft3

jfl, there goes your theory op. two out of four of his grandparents are tall as fuck, especially considering for the time they were born, those heights are extreme outliers. People used to be shorter back then. jfl at attributing his height now to his lifestyle...

 

[Deleted member 5818]

Read the whole thing, interesting theory.

Could I still workout stuff like shoulders/biceps for example?

 

[Deleted member 5818]

Also to add another anecdote to this, father is 6’5, mother is 5’2

I am 6’2, very sedentary up until a few months ago

Brother is like 5’9, and he had an active childhood

 

[zxz]

According to this theory, EVERY football (soccer for americucs) player should be 5'0, since they all train from very young age.

But why most of them are average, or taller than the average?

First of all, it's stated in the theory that its genes + nurture. Genes determine what height you could be, but your lifestyle determines your actual height. That's why most of them are average.

 

[zxz]

Don't buy into this. Not working out in your teens is guaranteed to turn you into a framecel.
Stereotypical Chads play sports or lift since 15.

Most of them are already tall by that age and after starting to do high-intensity activities until the end of puberty the probably dont grow more than 2 inches. It's genes AND nurture, as I stated above and as is stated in the theory.

 

[zxz]

Read the whole thing, interesting theory.

Could I still workout stuff like shoulders/biceps for example?

I mean if you want to put on size, going by the theory, I would say no. This theory doesnt say be inactive and a lazy fuck. You still should be active, just don't be doing high-intesity low-repetition activities instead do low-intensity high-repetition activities, such as jumping rope, swimming, hiking, skating, everything that doesnt need you to exert your muscles.

 

[zxz]

Also to add another anecdote to this, father is 6’5, mother is 5’2

I am 6’2, very sedentary up until a few months ago

Brother is like 5’9, and he had an active childhood

What's your age? Could you describe the start of your puberty + height up until now?

 

[zxz]

If you do too much it could. Also you have to eat a lot more to compensate which I didn't unfortunately
Best advice someome could have given me is to not workout till 20 or maybe only do some really light exercises in your teens
Focus on your height growth in your 10s and on your body and muscles in your 20s

No, even if you compensate by eating a lot it will only put on more mass, wether its fat or muscle. Comparing a very fat person to a very skinny person, that fat person will "naturally" have bigger/stronger muscles, whereas the skinny one wont. It's best you just do "cardio"-like activities, just playing like a kid, not lifting heavy stuff, instead just walking, running (not sprinting necessarily), swimming hiking, everything thats low-intensity. But like you said:
Focus on height growth in your 10s and on your body and muscles in your 20s
That is going by the theory the best way, though I wouldnt neglect diet in such way you get fat or unhealthy, just eat regular, do regular average activities of a kid and eat healthy unprocessed foods, many processed foods are high in fat, which is no good. Don't focus on getting in protein and eating a lot of meat, just eat what your mother makes and keep things in balance.

 

[Deleted member 5818]

What's your age? Could you describe the start of your puberty + height up until now?

Will do it when I get home I’m at school at the moment

 

[Deleted member 3990]

Explain Wolffs law then

 

[Beast993]

If you get your posture perfectly right you could get 2-3 cm at max, all other is genetic bro, wish you good luck

 

[Mr.cope]

Not exercising is gonna maximize height?
Cope thread didn’t read after that

 

[zxz]

Explain Wolffs law then

Bones grow in width after puberty wether you work out or not. Working out will increase the bones width minimally but it will. If you could apply forces at both ends of a bone it will get "longer". Maybe thats why a lot of endurance runners are tall, the thrusting of the heel against the ground constantly creates a vibration which goes in to your shinbone and vibrates further up to your hips and even head. That might be why they have long shins.
Just a theory ^. I am no god, if I knew everything I wouldn't be on this forum.

 

[zxz]

Not exercising is gonna maximize height?
Cope thread didn’t read after that

No, you should exercise, just not by doing high-intensity low-repetition activies like lifting or exerting a lot of force by using your muscles. Instead do more low-intensity high-repetition activities like running around, and overall playing like a kid basically.

 

[Deleted member 39]

I fucked up myself bro, I'm 17 and I'm 180cm, my sister is about 167cm (she was very inactive) meaning my height should be atleast 185cm.
But I'll become a lazy fuck from now on unless someone has a good argument agains this theory.

Your height is normal. My sister is 172cm and I'm only 177cm.

 

[gaymidget]

Whole theory is horeshit. Height is 80% genetic. The biggest differences between twins is maybe 5cm, but most of them are the exact same height, even when they grow up in different families.

 

[Deleted member 5818]

What's your age? Could you describe the start of your puberty + height up until now?

I'm 17 as of a month ago or so, hit puberty at like 14 ish.

At the beginning of 2018, i measured as 5'4, would have been 14 here.

Since then, I've been going through puberty slowly, still barely have any armpit hair at 17.

Around 2months ago I started using HGH + Aromasin, I think i've grown 0.5 inch, possibly up to an inch since then

A month ago I also started roiding

 

[Deleted member 9511]

Just come to mahmud jamal nasheer allah Muhammad's shack
he will give you DIY leg lengthening surgery for free
he is good surgeon bro
View attachment 747914

sopa de heightmaxx, uma delicia

 

[randomuser2407]

There is no set age for when you should start lifting weights. I started lifting when I was 18 but I stopped growing when I was 16, so I knew I wasn't going to get any taller, however it is true that if you lift weights when you are too young, you risk stunting your growth especially if you get injured but even if you don't, guys who train hard to get muscular as a kid usually end up stunting their growth and become manlets.

I did do a bit of heavy lifting as a kid like carrying a heavy backpack and carrying my skis through long distances but it wasn't enough to say that I was really lifting heavy often. And alpine skiing was the only real sport that I did and since it can only be done during winter, I only did it for a couple of months every year during my childhood, and that sport is not intense enough to make someone muscular.


TL ; DR: Doing sports and carrying a heavy backpack as a kid is fine, as long as you don't get muscular at a young age, you won't stunt your growth.

Also, I'm not a skinnycel, I've had plenty of opportunities to get laid that I just didn't take because I didn't want to bother with it, because every time you talk to a girl to get into a relationship or even if it's just to have sex with her, you are putting in time and energy to get it and you'll still have to keep putting in time and energy to maintain that and personally, for many years, I never felt that it was worth it.

I chose the name "copingvolcel" because for many years I could have gotten laid or I could have gotten into a relationship but I just didn't want that. It was only when I felt horny that I wanted to try to get laid or get a girlfriend because my lizard brain was clouding my judgement.

The reason why I never got into a relationship is because I never met a girl that I felt was interesting enough for that, and when I said before that hot girls were checking me out, the real reason why I never approached them isn't because I was shy but because I never gave them a chance because I always thought that I would never find a girl that I liked enough to date.
Of course I was still physically attracted to many of them but I never saw them as interesting enough to become a long term partner.

If I had put some effort into it, I could still have gotten casual sex with some of those women but the truth is that I didn't see the point in talking to those women and going on dates just to have sex once and move on to the next one.

Many users here think that I am somehow autistic and can't talk to women because of this but I can assure you that this is not the case.
The reason why I am a virgin at 22 is not because I am unable to communicate with women but because I never wanted to communicate with them because I never met one who was interesting enough to talk to.
I'm a copingvolcel in the sense that I'm never sure if I want to remain single or get into a relationship, and since I'm in that constant state of doubt, I'm not a true volcel and I'm not an incel either, maybe "coping" wasn't the right word but I needed a name that fit with the subject of this forum.

 

[HurtfulVanity]

This is why you should always skip leg day. My leg day is mtb and only do calisthenics I believe this is ideal for growth and stretching I'd only legit way for height increase

 

[Blackout.xl]

Big cope

 

[zxz]

There is no set age for when you should start lifting weights. I started lifting when I was 18 but I stopped growing when I was 16, so I knew I wasn't going to get any taller, however it is true that if you lift weights when you are too young, you risk stunting your growth especially if you get injured but even if you don't, guys who train hard to get muscular as a kid usually end up stunting their growth and become manlets.

I did do a bit of heavy lifting as a kid like carrying a heavy backpack and carrying my skis through long distances but it wasn't enough to say that I was really lifting heavy often. And alpine skiing was the only real sport that I did and since it can only be done during winter, I only did it for a couple of months every year during my childhood, and that sport is not intense enough to make someone muscular.


TL ; DR: Doing sports and carrying a heavy backpack as a kid is fine, as long as you don't get muscular at a young age, you won't stunt your growth.

Also, I'm not a skinnycel, I've had plenty of opportunities to get laid that I just didn't take because I didn't want to bother with it, because every time you talk to a girl to get into a relationship or even if it's just to have sex with her, you are putting in time and energy to get it and you'll still have to keep putting in time and energy to maintain that and personally, for many years, I never felt that it was worth it.

I chose the name "copingvolcel" because for many years I could have gotten laid or I could have gotten into a relationship but I just didn't want that. It was only when I felt horny that I wanted to try to get laid or get a girlfriend because my lizard brain was clouding my judgement.

The reason why I never got into a relationship is because I never met a girl that I felt was interesting enough for that, and when I said before that hot girls were checking me out, the real reason why I never approached them isn't because I was shy but because I never gave them a chance because I always thought that I would never find a girl that I liked enough to date.
Of course I was still physically attracted to many of them but I never saw them as interesting enough to become a long term partner.

If I had put some effort into it, I could still have gotten casual sex with some of those women but the truth is that I didn't see the point in talking to those women and going on dates just to have sex once and move on to the next one.

Many users here think that I am somehow autistic and can't talk to women because of this but I can assure you that this is not the case.
The reason why I am a virgin at 22 is not because I am unable to communicate with women but because I never wanted to communicate with them because I never met one who was interesting enough to talk to.
I'm a copingvolcel in the sense that I'm never sure if I want to remain single or get into a relationship, and since I'm in that constant state of doubt, I'm not a true volcel and I'm not an incel either, maybe "coping" wasn't the right word but I needed a name that fit with the subject of this forum.

lol being skinny doesnt mean you cant get laid

 

[zxz]

This is why you should always skip leg day. My leg day is mtb and only do calisthenics I believe this is ideal for growth and stretching I'd only legit way for height increase

Could you talk about your experience? Age? Height? Lifestyle?

 

[Lolcel]

Read only some of it from the first and i get what your are saying
But then how come i have seen many construction workers (who probably have been lifting bricks and shit for most of their lives,since early life ) and still end up tall?

Another example is David laid and Jeff seid who started gymcelling in their puberty , how did they not end up short?

 

[zxz]

Read only some of it from the first and i get what your are saying
But then how come i have seen many construction workers (who probably have been lifting bricks and shit for most of their lives,since early life ) and still end up tall?

Another example is David laid and Jeff seid who started gymcelling in their puberty , how did they not end up short?

Don't know anything about Jeff except for how he looks. David Laid tho was very skinny his whole life, meaning he had almost no muscle, which going by the theory will be easier for bones to grow. David Laid was already very close to his max height before he started lifting (age 14) and didn't grow more than 2 inches until now. David Laid is a good example no muscle and fat will be optimal for bone growth.
He aslo ate very very little, meaning he supplied his body with just enough food and energy to live and grow.
Another theory that ties in with this theory is that by eating less your body is getting less important micronutrients which are needed for bones to grow. The bones will adapt to this by expanding in length (and some width too) to be able to absorb every single micronutrient you give your body.
Construction workers usually are people who are pretty lazy when young (stereotypically) and thats why they end up with such a job. Meaning they grow to their potential and start working after the age of 17-18.

 

[Madhate]

Shorter teenagers, on the other hand, tend to exhibit distinct calves and knees—or as I see it: muscle development.

No. Shorter teenagers LOOK like they have bigger leg muscles because it's an illusion, you retard.
When you are taller and have the same muscle as a shorter dude, his muscles will look bigger because they are compressed, just look at someone like Jeff Nippard vs Zyzz. Jeff Nippard's muscles look big and compressed. While Zyzz' look long and aesthetic, because he's much taller.

Also. I had a friend that was sedentary his entire life, all day at the PC, never worked out. He's 5'11. Shortest in our friend group. Meanwhile a guy that was active his entire life is 6'4.
JFL at this thread

 

[improover]

If you read all that shit to come to the revolutionary conclusion that working out early in life is gonna hurt your height you're low IQ and you're gonna do nothing with that knowledge rope as soon as you find a rope

 

[W0KESTMOTHF]

I'm 17 as of a month ago or so, hit puberty at like 14 ish.

At the beginning of 2018, i measured as 5'4, would have been 14 here.

Since then, I've been going through puberty slowly, still barely have any armpit hair at 17.

Around 2months ago I started using HGH + Aromasin, I think i've grown 0.5 inch, possibly up to an inch since then

A month ago I also started roiding

Thank your late puberty dawg that's why you're 6'2 and your bro is 5'9 imo

 

[zxz]

No. Shorter teenagers LOOK like they have bigger leg muscles because it's an illusion, you retard.
When you are taller and have the same muscle as a shorter dude, his muscles will look bigger because they are compressed, just look at someone like Jeff Nippard vs Zyzz. Jeff Nippard's muscles look big and compressed. While Zyzz' look long and aesthetic, because he's much taller.

Also. I had a friend that was sedentary his entire life, all day at the PC, never worked out. He's 5'11. Shortest in our friend group. Meanwhile a guy that was active his entire life is 6'4.
JFL at this thread

The theory states you shouldn't be inactive, it state the activities you do shouldn't be high-intensity low-repetition, like lifting weights or exerting your muscles to an extent which will make them stronger/bigger. Being sedentary and not doing high-intensity activities will grow you to your genetic potential meaning he probably grew the tallest he could. What activites was the 6'4 guy doing his entire life?

 

[Madhate]

The theory states you shouldn't be inactive, it state the activities you do shouldn't be high-intensity low-repetition, like lifting weights or exerting your muscles to an extent which will make them stronger/bigger. Being sedentary and not doing high-intensity activities will grow you to your genetic potential meaning he probably grew the tallest he could. What activites was the 6'4 guy doing his entire life?

Basketball, Football, rural work. But still, those things grow your leg muscles, he has an athletic body.

 

[zxz]

Basketball, Football, rural work. But still, those things grow your leg muscles, he has an athletic body.

How old is he now and do you know when he started playing basketball and football?

 

[Madhate]

How old is he now and do you know when he started playing basketball and football?

18
he's been active in puberty that's for sure
this doesn't disprove your theory but correlation is not equal to causation
your theory can't be proven sadly

 

[Deleted member 2632]

Anything besides injecting HGH as a teenager is Cope

 

[Deleted member 7725]

Valid theory tbh. I played video games 12 hours a day until I was 6’7” at 15 then I started playing sports and lifting and stopped growing.

 

[zxz]

Valid theory tbh. I played video games 12 hours a day until I was 6’7” at 15 then I started playing sports and lifting and stopped growing.

How tall were your parents and siblings (if you have any)? What was your diet like, how many calories would you estimate daily and were you skinny?

 

[Deleted member 7725]

How tall were your parents and siblings (if you have any)? What was your diet like, how many calories would you estimate daily and were you skinny?

Both under 5’9”. No siblings. Paternity test confirmed as well. Like 2 meals a day of light meals, salad, soup, etc. Extremely skinny.

 

[Deleted member 3270]

The Determining Factor for Height

Introduction​

It seems that if there’s anything you don’t like about yourself, you can work on it or get it fixed. If you’re fat, you can diet and exercise. If you have a uni-brow, you can pluck it. If you’re short, though… sorry, not even surgery can help you there. Teens often wonder if weightlifting will stunt their growth, as if humans are supposed to be tall and anything less is suboptimal. I believe a man that is 5’5” is neither unhealthy nor malnourished. In today’s society, however, being short is a huge disadvantage for men. Studies have shown that height is strongly correlated with income—tall men are simply granted more money and status in society. Tall men often develop a sense of superiority from the ability to literally look down on other people. And, of course, a tall man has a greater selection of women to date since most women will only date a man taller than herself. Life seems very unfair for the short man. But what if I told you height is not 100% genetic and can be nurtured? Well, it’s probably too late for you anyway.

Hypothesis​

Fact: one’s height is the sum of the lengths of their leg, torso, neck, and head. Today’s scientists say that height is determined by growth plates, which are located at both ends of a bone, and that nothing can be done to alter their growth rate. I believe these scientists have overlooked the fact that muscles surround the bones. I hypothesize that height can be manipulated through development of the leg and torso muscles. (I left out the lengths of the head and neck because they are insignificant compared to the leg and torso.) Muscles have what’s known as a contractile force. As the muscle becomes bigger/more developed, the contractile force increases. If there is no muscle then there is no contractile force:

View attachment 747925​

As you can see, this muscle’s contractile force goes the opposite direction of the growth plate force. Thus, leg and torso muscle hypertrophy should impede vertical growth. It is possible to stretch and massage a muscle into a more relaxed state and thus weakening the contractile force. To maximize height, I believe one must eliminate all the contractile forces that contribute to height. These are all the muscles with fibers that run vertically: the calves, quadriceps, hamstrings, abdominals, erector spinae, and quadratus lumborum. Any muscle development of these muscles will retard vertical growth, as my hypothesis goes.

How exactly would one maximize height? During the developmental years, one should avoid all high-intensity (i.e. muscle-building) exercises of the aforementioned muscles. This means never doing sit-ups, squats, etc. If physical activity must be done then it should be done with low-intensity (and high repetition). This means light jogging instead of sprinting, jumping rope rather than high jumping, hopscotch rather than long jump, or even carrying groceries into the house in three trips rather than one. In other words, energy should be expended with cardiovascular activities rather than in short bursts. This lifestyle will minimize muscle hypertrophy and thus maximize height. It’s hard to avoid all physical activity, however, so the second part of the equation is to frequently stretch and massage the leg and spine muscles to a relaxed state. The bridge stretch is a good example. Even sitting cross-legged for some time will stretch the leg and lower back muscles. To minimize height, one should engage in high-intensity leg and torso activities, and neglect stretching these muscles.

Lugging a heavy backpack around school every day is the worst thing a teen can do for his/her height—not because of gravity, though. The act of stabilizing all the weight shifting around will strengthen the erector spinae and quadratus lumborum muscles.

Existing Hypotheses​

Many people believe height is genetically predetermined. I definitely agree that genes are a factor. But, as with many conditions, I see the role of genes as defining an individual’s default/expected value and the possible range of deviation. I often visualize the effect of genes as a probability distribution, or a box-and-whisker plot:

I believe genes define how tall one is expected to grow. Basically, a daughter is expected to be the same height as her mother and a son is to be the same height as his father. I believe genes also define the minimum and maximum degree of deviation allowed. How far a person deviates from the projected value—how far one travels along the whiskers of the box plot—is up to nurture, I hypothesize.

So it’s genes + nurture. Most people today believe this means genes + diet, because people attribute just about every unexplained human phenomenon to diet. This is idiotic. Yes, I do believe malnutrition can stunt growth, but I believe extreme starvation is required for this to occur. I’m sure you’ve encountered short people who eat too much food, too little food, only healthy food, etc. and tall people who eat too much food, too little food, only healthy food, etc. In other words, no one has observed a correlation between height and diet. Why, then, do so many people believe diet determines height? People are simplistic. People believe that the only thing we have a choice on, in life, is what we eat. They fail to realize that there’s also “calories out”—our behavior.

Every four years, people notice that Olympic gymnasts are short and then wonder: did gymnastics make them short, or are they the best at gymnastics because they’re short? The chicken or the egg dilemma; is selection bias at play? Scientists say the growth plates cannot be affected, except from injury, therefore gymnastics cannot make a person short. I say it can. Unlike long-distance runners, gymnasts use the legs with high-intensity as they leap around in tumbling, vault, and balance beam. This induces muscle hypertrophy of the calves, quadriceps, hamstrings, abdominals, erector spinae, and quadratus lumborum, among other muscles. Thus, a large contractile force is working against growth plate expansion of the limbs involved in height.

Supporting Evidence: Comparing Urban to Rural​

I believe growing up in an urban environment causes teens to live more sedentary lives than their rural counterparts. Urbanization replaces fields and nature with high-rise buildings and computers. There is simply no space to run around and play in a city. I hypothesize that this sedentary lifestyle produces undeveloped leg and torso muscles, which results in a taller height. Kids in rural environments run around and play outside more often, which leads to well-developed leg and torso muscles, which leads to shorter overall height. Is this backed by any evidence? In 2013, CJ Paciorek published a study which found that urban children are taller than their rural counterparts in almost all of the 141 (low-income and middle-income) countries they researched:

The study’s interpretation of these findings is that the rural areas have less access to stable and affordable food supply and health care. This study is far from alone. There are countless studies that find a correlation between urbanization and height, and they all believe the same thing: better access to food and health care leads to taller humans. The truth of the matter is that there are many variables in play as humans go from a rural environment to an urban one, so using just this data will not suffice for my hypothesis. We must narrow it down to the “sedentary lifestyle” component of the urban environment as the determining factor of height.

Many studies have found that a sedentary lifestyle is strongly correlated with myopia, a.k.a. nearsightedness. The more hours you spend doing deskwork, the worse your vision will be. In fact, 80-90% of children completing high school are now myopic in urban cities in Asia. Why am I talking about myopia? Because it has a strong correlation to deskwork. Thus I am going to substitute “myopia” with “sedentary lifestyle.” In 2002, Saw SM, et al. published “Height and Its Relationship to Refraction and Biometry Parameters in Singapore Chinese Children” after finding a correlation between height and myopia. That is, Saw SM, et al. found that the taller the child was, the worse his/her vision was. Using my substitution: the taller the child, the more sedentary his/her lifestyle.

The following is not concrete evidence but rather a few things I’ve noticed over the years. One, it seems like children have been getting taller and taller. That is, a 10-year-old today seems taller than a 10-year-old from 10 years ago. Most people simply chalk this up to “better diet and nutrition” but I beg to differ. Food has been plentiful for many, many decades. Two, I’ve observed that the teenagers who are tall also seem to lack muscle development at the legs. That is, if you were to outline their legs, there would be no curves whatsoever at the calf and knee area—it’d just be straight lines from hip to foot, like a bad drawing. Shorter teenagers, on the other hand, tend to exhibit distinct calves and knees—or as I see it: muscle development.

Ideal Supporting Evidence: Teens That Did High-Intensity Legwork​

One way to gather data for my hypothesis would be to conduct a survey on full-grown adults (i.e. ages 22-40). First, I would ask them what their height is. Second, I would ask them if they participated in karate, gymnastics, weightlifting of the legs, etc. as a developing child/teenager. Third, I would ask them how many months/years they were active in these sports. I expect the data to show a strong negative relationship between years spent doing high-intensity leg activities and (final) height. Karate and gymnastics qualify as high-intensity leg workouts because they involve a lot of kicking and jumping.

Another survey possibility would be to ask how much outdoor playtime someone experienced during their developmental years. The survey would poll developing teens and full-grown adults, rural and urban. The teens would be able to give the most accurate numbers as to how long they played. I predict the rural population to have more outdoor play, and thus be shorter, than their urban counterparts. I’d say that for the majority of countries, for at least one generation now, people in rural areas have had access to the same kind of diet/calories as people in urban areas. I also predict that in mountainous regions to have more muscularly-developed legs, and thus be shorter, than people in flat plains.

The best evidence for my hypothesis would be a survey on the heights of identical twins that lived drastically different lifestyles yet shared similar diets. For example, a twin who took many years of karate or gymnastics while his/her twin did not. Unfortunately, this scenario is very rare because most parents of twins want to give their twins have an equal and fair upbringing. However, Googling clever phrases, such as: “stunt growth weight lifting ‘twin brother’,” “stunt growth gymnastics 'twin sister',” or “stunt growth working out ‘identical twin’,” yielded many anecdotes that support my hypothesis.

Comparing Heights is Tricky​

Beware of people on the internet parroting the unproven theory that working out or weightlifting does not stunt growth. These people often cite scientists that say genetically-predetermined growth plates are responsible for overall height. End of story. Truth is, there hasn’t been a study to prove one way or the other. Also beware of people sharing their personal anecdote with no control variable. Say, for example, Jamaal from the internet says he ran track and field for all four years in high school and he’s much taller than the average American man, therefore leg workouts do not hinder height at all. I hope you see that this is incredibly flawed. First of all, he doesn’t have a control variable—he is comparing himself to the average American—America is a very diverse country with many ethnicities. It would be more acceptable for him to compare his height to the average height of his ethnicity in America. More acceptable than that would be to compare to the average of his cousins. More acceptable than that would be a blood sibling. Ideal would be an identical twin that didn’t do any physical activity in high school. Secondly, running is not necessarily a high-intensity leg exercise and thus may not induce muscle growth. Sprinting is, but long-distance running is low-intensity. Among the teenagers who do work out, only a few actually work out the calves, quadriceps, hamstrings, abdominals, or erector spinae with high intensity.

There is currently no explanation as to why siblings differ in height. The genetic explanation may be that one sibling “got the bad genes.” My hypothesis says that the child who uses leg and torso muscles with high intensity will grow up to be “the short one.” But it gets tricky! Women are, by nature, about 10% smaller than men, and thus 10% shorter as well. For example, say a man is 5’10” and has a sister. It’s expected that his sister is around 5’3” because this is 10% less than 5’10”. If she turned out to also be 5’10”, I would conjecture that the man’s childhood involved intense leg usage, while hers did not. If she turned out to be 4’11”, I would speculate the other way around. Another factor to consider is that, in today’s society, physical activity is reserved for the male gender. The boy is encouraged or forced to do the physical labor, especially when it comes to strenuous (i.e. high-intensity) activities, because he is to “be a man.” The girl is discouraged or excused from doing physical activity because she is to “be a princess.” If a female is doing physical work, it’s advised to be low-intensity cardio activity. This is a moot point in a modern, urban lifestyle, however, where this physical labor is nearly nonexistent. But if a (rural) family strictly adhered to these gender roles, I would bet on the boy growing up to be shorter than his sister, or barely taller.

Implications of my Hypothesis​

Besides keeping high-intensity activity at a minimum, a less obvious way to maximize height would be a special diet devoid of protein. Since protein purportedly aids in muscle growth and recovery, kids can avoid protein-rich foods during developmental years to minimize muscle growth. Kids should also avoid getting fat, because fat is extra weight to carry around which leads to muscle hypertrophy. For example, if you took two kids—one fat, one skinny—with the same age, height, and lifestyle, the fat kid will have a more muscle mass. This is from carrying about daily activities with extra weight on. So I suppose diet does matter, but not in the way people believe it matters.

The harder you work, the shorter you will grow up to be—if work is to be defined as high-intensity physical labor. When I see a short man—especially for his race—I often think to myself, “He must have worked hard when he was young. Maybe he helped his parents carry heavy loads every day.” And when I see a really tall man, I cannot help but think, “He’s probably never pushed himself physically. Maybe he spent his childhood sitting cross-legged in front of a TV all day.” I’m not saying the equation for height is 100% nurture. Genetics still play a role. I would say that being short comes from generations of high-intensity leg and back work, and being tall comes from generations of comfortable living. Yes, this is Lamarck’s Theory of Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics. Again, before you try to disprove my hypothesis with an anecdote: you need a control variable, such as a same-sex sibling. For example, it is a mistake to compare your level of physical activity and final height to the national average, especially if that nation is racially diverse.

@copingvolcel is an example of this theory. Just look around you.

TL;DR: Working out will make your muscles stronger and bigger, this will exert force in the opposite direction of which your bones grow, limiting high-intensity low-repetition working out will make you taller, instead, low-intensity high-repetition should be done.

aka don't workout, get taller theory.


My take on this is don't work out until the age of 20.

TAG TALL-SKINNYCELS BELOW

The true reason Lifting has a chance of lowering height is because you make protein and overall nutrients go towards the muscles rather than supporting the cartilage of the growth plates to increase their cell mitosis.


Lifting may simply keep the growth plates open during younger years because that's natural, otherwise its just a small detriment.


Height ironically didn't matter as superficially as now in the old days when nearly anyone could kill eachother for stepping out of line morally. unless you were severely disabled

 

[zxz]

Both under 5’9”. No siblings. Paternity test confirmed as well. Like 2 meals a day of light meals, salad, soup, etc. Extremely skinny.

Interesting, what was your posture like?

 

[Deleted member 7725]

Interesting, what was your posture like?

Forward head gamer posture.