Race and athletic ability.

squashmosh

squashmosh

Member
So I don't know if other NSers ever listen to Radiolab but there last podcast explored some theories as to why Kenyan's were were so dominant in long distance and endurance running. The subject, for many scientists is an uncomfortable one, because everyone is wary of presenting findings that reify racial differences based on genetic determinants.

How do you see the relationship between athletic ability and race? Is it genetic? Is it more related to socio-cultural determinants?
 
Their black skin allows them to better absorb the suns energy and turn it into kinetic energy that helps them run faster.
 
Actually, one of the theories was kind of the opposite…it argued that Kenyans body types being extremely thin and tall allows their bodies to cool down easier- so they are less likely to "overheat" so to speak- and that this also meant that their outer limbs (i.e. legs/feet) required less energy to move because they are so small (the outer limbs are the most energy deficient because they are so far away from the bulk of the body).
 
I mean, that's a good place to start? Is this a racist question? I really don't know, I know it requires sensitivity but if you aren't saying anything derogatory or loaded with a negative evaluation is it really racist or prejudice?
 
I'd go with this. My uneducated opinion is that centuries of more rigorous & grueling living conditions in Africa has led to blacks being better in certain physical feats. I mean just compare the way Africans lived for the last 2000 years, compared to the relatively tame life of European agriculture.

That conditioning meant the stronger, faster etc... you were as an African meant you could live longer, have more kids etc... who would then get the athletic traits passed on. And the (proven) stereotype that blacks cant swim is purely based on cultural reasons.
 
kenyans train at high altitude which gives them an advantage when they race everywhere else, and black people have more fast twitch muscle fiber than white people which is why they dominate sprints mostly
 
I think I'm wit you, socio-cultural evolution almost.

Another theory presented on the show related to the African tradition of circumcision.

Both men and women are circumcised just before or at the beginning of puberty, and their ceremony is much different from the medical procedure as it is done in the West. It is EXTREMELY painful, but what's more, the one receiving the circumcision, boy or girl, is required to remain stoic the entire time. In fact, in some rituals they put mud on the face until it dries up, and if during the circumcision the mud mask cracks because someone has a reaction to the pain, they are beaten, sometimes to death.

Individuals who do not remain stoic during the circumcision do not have the same fertility rights as others (they get a lesser chance of getting the good wife(s) in the tribe), and sometimes are not allowed to have children at all. Therefore, the ones who are better at tolerating or disassociating form their pain are responsibly for more progeny. This could be a huge advantage in long distance running, where all athletes talk about having to develop a tough relationship to pain.

TL;DR: Evolutionarily speaking adolescent circumcision rituals in Africa weeded out the people who couldn't bear physical pain of long distance running.
 
The Kenyans that live in mountains.....at higher altitudes theirs less oxygen, so training there their whole lives gives them a fuckload of red blood cells, so later on in the Olympics they can absorb oxygen better. A lot of Olympians do this though when they train, so I assume after a while of living in Africa they evolved into having more red blood cells in general.
 
soon-horse.jpg
 
black people needed to run away from tigers and stuff in africa so they evolved to be faster runners?

thats why their skin is black too - african sun is stronger, wheras inuits are pale cause theyre always bundled up
 
I'm actually doing a presentation on this exact topic.

StartFragment

One

of the common beliefs is that much

of Kenyan’s success at running longer distances is because of being exposed to

altitude at birth. This is likely less of factor than

many believe, there is a strong chance that chronic exposure to

altitude would likely hinder athletic performance. When you look at Himalyian Sherpas compared to low altitude living caucasians, they found that the Sherapas actually has a lower aerobic capacity, mitochondial density and fiber size compared to the

climbers. There are quite a few studies that have looked

the contributions of living at altitude for repeated generations and its

contribution to an increased VO2max. Kenyan’s don’t have much, if

any advantage in VO2max capacity.

Nor do Kenyan's actually have no advantage in their fractional utilization, what they do have an advantage is in their running economy. They have naturally slender bodies and a low BMI allowing them to fatigue less easily.

The main reson kenyans dominate running is mostly culturally, and I really doubt circumsision has anything to do with it.... Sport sociologist have often wondered why blacks are over

represented in some sports and under represented in others, African

dominance is mostly dictated by how accessible and affordable a sport is. Like basketball where it was seen as an opportunity to break poverty and the

ghetto, Kenyan’s see athletes like Kip Keino winning the Olympics as an opportunity to improve their life. And one of the beautiful things about running is, everyone can

do it. The average kenyan international runner ran between 8-12km per day, since the age of 7 or 8.

It has to do with sport participation, most developed nations have access to many sport while in Kenya, the only sport people do is distance running.

I would also like to point out that most of the world is catching up to Kenya, they used represent 55% of the worlds fastest times, now its closer to 40%.

StartFragment

EndFragment

I think many of us romantize the

idea of Africa as being wild and untamed, what life would have been like before

great civilization, so the notion that Kenyan’s are superior athletes is

potentially problematic because if can go as far as suggesting that on some

level they are a different species. It discourages other races’ participation

in sports but it also suggests and almost animalistic attribute to Kenyan’s

EndFragment
 
Ha no, well kinda but thats not how evolution works. we have white skin to produce greater vitamin D in colder conditions for survival of colder winters.
 
Also their are plenty of other populations that have similar BMI and economy to kenyan runner such as India and South Africa, but they have not had they same results in Vo2max carrying capacity or they don't hold any relevance in endurance sports.

Kenyan essentially has combined all the variables to create good runners, it is very possible that many other populations could do the exact same but have not had to opportunity.
 
Combination of genetics and society.

If you leave the idea of race off, it still makes absolute sense. A group of people pretty much kept a similar blood line weeding out the genetic characteristics that were less helpful. Their bodies have changed to adapt to their environment which happens to be an optimal body for running. Their culture involves situations which require long distance travel from a very young age.

Why it is likely changing now and the rest of the world appears to be catching up isn't because the rest of the world is adapting, it's more of a cultural thing and people regardless of race that have well suited running bodies are being exposed to running at younger age and sport is becoming more popular. So it's more likely the sure volume of individuals attempting to run that is causing a shift. However if taking a population sample from Kenya vs wherever else, it's very likely that the Kenyans will be better runners.

It's essentially a regional bottleneck effect exaggerated by culture.
 
In junior high we had our first track and field classes, and the only black kid around for miles smoked everyone. impressive impressive cracka dominance. Our teacher was just stunned as we watched him lap kids in the 400m. I looked at her and i could see in her eyes that she was fuckin amazed at the unfolding supremacy.. The wind was warm that day. a late spring wind, the winds of victory sent cascading onto young Leenoyle . My teacher caught my gaze, the bewilderment still on her face.

"Its because he's black, isn't it?" I asked.

tears welled up in her eyes.

csi_miami_yeah.jpg


 
Except for the Nandi tribes have frequently part taken in inter-tribal marriages, so from what I understand, what your saying about blood line is untrue. Obviously genetics have its factors in sports, but Kenyan is a country of 44,037,656, there is no way that a single trait could be selectively passed on that makes them simply 'faster'. They do have a small BMI that gives them a more efficient stride, but if Europeans were to eat modified diet so would they. AIf 7 out of 10 kids were to run 10km to school and back every in the US then they would have a larger number of world class runners too, its really not as genetic as everyone makes it out to be.

Every study I have read that has examined the physiological aspects of running of Kenyans and compared them to other populations, there is little to no evidence that suggests its genetic.

And the world isn't adapting, we couldn't see adaptations in less than 30 years and winning races does not influence survival of one trait over the other, unless there is selective breeding.

Its the implementation of training techniques and the talent pool of Kenyan's decreasing with changing demographics. Kenya is having larger numbers of it population moving towards a more urban living with less running or walking required, therefore, the a small portion of its population is developing there aerobic system, and produce less high quality runner. Also living larger towns provides greater access to more physical activities so athletes are partaking in other sports and taking away from the talent pool.

 
Oddly enough, i just read a study on this. Most runners from 1st world countries time/gauge their distance, plan their runs according to the distance of a marathon. Kenyans and other countries without access to watches and tools like google maps or cars to distance out their run will just run until they get tired. its a mental issue.
 
Some good stuff here but I actually did a lot of research on this back in the day. Some high points about the Kenyan program:

-The native Kenyan diet is a perfect runner's diet. Perfect. They grow up eating very well and diet is a huge part of an athlete's development.

-The Kenyans train in the 5-7k' altitude range which is commonly accepted as the ideal altitude to train at. Higher than that and you can't do the same quality workout and the returns of training diminish relative to at lower altitudes. They also run on dirt and grass which is great for development and form.

-The biggest reason I think the Kenyans do so well is the way their program is structured. The young guys run with the best in the world from day one. They obviously can't keep up at full tilt pace initially but they have the advantage of training to it first hand. They also spend a significant first portion of their runs at an easy conversational pace before they push it up for the workout (I started training that way halfway through high school and I LOVE it, a good long warm up like that is priceless). So basically they have a close knit team that all run together and warm up at a pace everyone can enjoy.

Essentially the Kenyans are bred to be incredible runners in every way, and their team has perfected a training program that is proven and effective.
 
Are you talking about Kenyans specifically not benefitting? You definitely get benefits from training at altitude. I think a problem with studies comparing people from third world countries and exercise performance is there are so many variables that make up how someone performs. You can't compare a malnourished sherpa to anyone who is eating better.

I'm 99.9% sure that training at altitude gives you benefits but just because you have a higher V02 max doesn't mean you are going to be a better athlete/performer than someone else, there are just too many other variables.

Ya know what I'm saying?

 
Well I'm sorry, but odds were defied and the .01 was incorrect :p. To the best of my knowledge,training at altitude will not improve your aerobic capacity, but resting at altitude might. So you should in theory train low, sleep high. hyperbaric chamber

I know comparing a sherpa to runners isn't ideal, it was just making a point that altitude is pretty minimal overall, physiologically that sherpa may not have the same capilary density of fiber types. But he sure as hell was probably in better shape overall, but was compensating. But his gains were from lifestyle, not the environment.

And I totally get what you're saying, but the implied physiological gains that everyone assumes comes with altitude is vo2max related. ' Some studies have suggested that altitude does improve your economy, slightly very very slightly,

High alititude training in my opinion is over hyped, with limited results, because your body adapts so quickly that in the longterm you wont see much for results.

 
There are no tigers in Africa, nor have there ever been. Perhaps there were Sabre Tooth tigers in Africa very long ago, but certainly no tigers as we know them today.
 
Do you links to some of the studies?

Sounds like you know what you are talking about but I grew up at 7500 ft. The benefits were pretty real for me when I would go down to sea level, running was just....different, seemed easier. Olympic teams would travel around the world to come train in the bum fuck middle of nowhere New Mexico, where I grew up, to train at altitude.
 
There is some truth to what you're saying, but the gains to training at altitude would be very minimal and unless you're an olympic athlete not worth it, because you can get much more volume and quality training at sea level. If you've done that already it could be worth it to train at alititude, then compensate, and then race at sea level. But in the longterm you would adjust. So the alttitude training is kinda just the icing on the cake. It would be for sure easier running in at sea level than in your home town, but from a training perspective it would be better off going somewhere so you can run more and have better quality. THen resting at high levels to get the potnetial gains.

THe pure science of this is a bit beyond me, but I think thats how it goes

My info on the kenyans comes from, if you want to type their titles in google scholar, most of them should pop up

StartFragment

Saltin, B., Larsen, H., Terrados, N., Bangsbo, J., Bak, C.K., Kim et al. (1995). Aerobic exercise capacity

at sea level and at altitude in Kenyan boys, junior and senior runners compared

with Scandinavian runners. Scandinvian Journal of Sports & Medicine, 5, 209-221.

StartFragment

Saltin, B., Kim, C. K., Terrados, N., Lasen, H., Svedenhag, J., & Rolf, C. J., (1995a). Morphology, enzyme

activities and buffer capacity in leg muscles of Kenyan and Scandinavian

runners. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in

Spots, 5, 222-230.

EndFragment

StartFragment

Weston, A. W., Mbambo, Z., & Myburgh, K. H. (2000). Running economy of African and

Caucasian distance runners. Journal of the American College of Sports

Medicine, 1130- 1134.

EndFragment

StartFragment

Saltin, B., Larsen, H., Terrados, N., Bangsbo, J., Bak, C.K., Kim et al. (1995). Aerobic exercise capacity

at sea level and at altitude in Kenyan boys, junior and senior runners compared

with Scandinavian runners. Scandinvian Journal of Sports & Medicine, 5, 209-221.

Saltin, B., Kim, C. K., Terrados, N., Lasen, H., Svedenhag, J., & Rolf, C. J., (1995a). Morphology, enzyme

activities and buffer capacity in leg muscles of Kenyan and Scandinavian

runners. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in

Spots, 5, 222-230.

EndFragmentLarsen, H. B. (2003). Kenyan dominance in distance

running. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A:

Molecular & Integrative Physiology, 136 (1), 161-170.

StartFragment

EndFragment

Larsen, H. B., Nolan, N., Borch, C., & Sondergaard, H. (2005).

Training response of adolescent Kenyan town and village boys to endurance

running. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in

Sports, 15, 48-57. DOI: 10.1111/j.16000-0838.2004.00304.x

StartFragment

EndFragment

Hamilton, B. (2000). East African dominance: what is

behind it? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 34, 391-394.

EndFragment
 
Solid posting here. Are you willing at all to go in a more general direction with the topic of race and athletics? The Kenyan's were a jumping off point. How about other sports?

Why are winter sports like skiing mostly dominated by white athletes? Is this a socio-economic issue or a geo-historical one (i.e. it seems to me that most of the areas in the world, specifically for our purpose here the U.S., that have the kind of climate and altitude for skiing are racially homogenous, and that blacks in the U.S. historically didn't spread into the northern states/higher altitude locations in large numbers).

 
I'd assume winter sports are white dominated precisely for the reasons you said. They also originated in areas of the world that are 100% white natively. Winter sports are generally extremely expensive relatively as well, and it's a fact that hispanics and blacks are generally not as financially affluent as their white or asian counterparts in the US and Europe.
 
I could make some assumptions, white people have money is likely the largest factor.

Physiologically, there is no reason why black people cannot be good skiers, but many are from low income families, therefore, would not have the access you or I may have had to the sport (assuming you're white).

i'm sure there are some studies that could argue that white people are more physioligcally adjusted to exercise at colder temperatures, but I don't think that is that large of an influence.

Your success in sport is mostly dictated by type I and type II muscle fibres distribution, otherwise in my opinion the only thing that stops one specific race or population from success is accessibility.

Which is why poorer countries or people can succeed at running, soccer, or basketball. While rich people do have these opportunites, the talent pool is spread over many sports, and gives us the perception that white people are less athletic.
 
I only read this one but WTF they were testing 14 year old subjects? I personally think this is not the best test subject to gauge fitness but each to his own.

It seems like you are right the benefit is minimal but their is a lot of contradicting studies out there. This study talks about both what you mention. 1)Training via rest 2)Training via exercise.

(http://sriechman.tamu.edu/649/JSS%202004%20altitude.pdf)

 
Absolutely, nothing is conclusive, but hey thats science.

I believe the testing of younger subjects was to try and how big of role the nature vs nurture is. But the tests i don' t think was unethical, nothing more than a prick on the finger for blood samples if my memory is right.
 
yeah, I totally agree. I'm working on publishing some of my own research right now and you learn to appreciate others work. It's fuckin hard jumping through all the hoops and back tracking your steps to make sure you're data is accurate and ethical.
 
Working Title: Paleo Climate Analysis of Regional and Local Processes of Lower Bluebird Fen, Dry GulchI'm studying a sediment core that dates back 16,000 years ago from the Uinta mountains in UT. I spend most of my time in a lab doing microscope work.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8h5kg5f8Im0?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top