03-28-09, 05:32 PM #1
This makes NO sense
How can lack of a father in one's home environment cause early puberty?
I can understand the assertion that lack of a father might contribute to early sex. A girl who misses her father may well feel the need to look elsewhere for attention to feed this emotional void, and may not always get it from appropriate sources.
But actual puberty? How can absence of a father cause the ovaries to secrete a hormone earlier than normal?
Surely early puberty is happening anyway due to other factors and, due to divorce being more common, correlation is being mistaken for causation?
(Yay...just realized I'm a lovely counterexample to this argument...I didn't grow up with a father, and I definitely didn't hit puberty early, and didn't have sex until 17....)
03-28-09, 05:44 PM #2
Let's see: Children in fatherless families tend to be in a lower economic bracket. So they drink tap water instead of bottled water. Tap water is full of hormones we ingest in our meat, dairy products and medications, which are in such low concentrations (parts per billion or less) that they aren't filtered out at the treatment plants. These hormones have been linked (although AFAIK not conclusively) to acceleration of puberty.
Now I don't know if there's really any correlation between the kids who drink tap water and the ones with premature puberty. Lots of affluent kids drink tap water too.
I also don't know if the bottling plants do any better a job of filtering out the low concentrations than the municipal plants. Especially after it was revealed that Aquafina was nothing but tap water.
03-28-09, 05:49 PM #3
They should use reverse osmosis. That will get rid of everything except H2O molecules...
03-28-09, 05:55 PM #4
03-28-09, 05:56 PM #5
Was it a US study?
AFAIK tap water is just as prevalent in the UK for general drinking as it ever was.
Bottled is more of a "when away from home" thing, isn't it?
03-28-09, 06:00 PM #6
In keeping with FraggleRock's socioeconomic theory, maybe the same reasoning extends beyond tapwater...
The Falling Age of Puberty in U.S. Girls: What We Know, What We Need to Know
Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals – Exposures to endocrine-disrupting chemicals we come into contact with regularly are also playing a role in accelerating puberty in girls. These include chemicals we are commonly exposed to in cosmetics, shampoos, cleaning products, baby bottles and children’s teething toys.
All of the stressors that appear to contribute to early puberty in girls -- obesity, television viewing, sedentariness, family dysfunction, preterm birth, formula-feeding, chemical exposures -- are higher in poor communities and communities of color where poverty, racism, unemployment, and toxic substance exposures are high and access to nourishing food and safe places to exercise is low. In particular, U.S. black children are disproportionately exposed to physical environmental stressors, and it is also this group that reaches puberty earliest among U.S. girls.
03-28-09, 06:04 PM #7
So it's likely that it's actually to do with a lot of damaging environmental circumstances, rather than purely just because the kid's father left?
Once again, people are stupid, and come to stupid and overly simple conclusions.
Then if you don't know about those things, why in the name of fuck and shit did you even mention them???????? What???!!
Quit your god damned formic-acid-in-the-skin behaviour. Just quit it.
03-28-09, 06:11 PM #8
When you hear or read something, first consider strongly that the person is a fuckin' idiot. And second, if it's at all possible, just figure that what's said or written is just plain fuckin' wrong.
Glad to see that you're learning, VI.
03-28-09, 07:01 PM #9
wouldn't it just be hereditary?
Hit puberty sooner, have irresponsible sex sooner, have babies sooner. Young teen mothers rarely get married. Young teen fathers rarely hang around.
And the cycle repeats itself.
03-28-09, 07:06 PM #10
Possibly, early developing runs in some families.
But it wouldn't necessarily mean you have irresponsible sex sooner. It's normal for girls around 13 to have boyfriends, most of these girls don't end up pregnant in their teens.
03-28-09, 07:31 PM #11
VI, I'm not at all sure anyone really has a clue.
You can find a study to back up just about any theory, including those that come to diametrically opposed conclusions:
Environmental Factors Influencing Growth and Pubertal Development, by Henriette A. Delemarre-van de Waal © 1993 abstract
...In underdeveloped countries, malnutrition plays a major role in inhibiting the growth process. Children from families of higher socioeconomic classes are taller than their coevals in the lower socioeconomic groups. Urbanization also has a positive effect on growth. Better child care is supported by sufficient food supply, appropriate health and sanitation services, and a higher level of education. Over the last century, these factors have induced a taller stature and a more rapid maturity in Europe, North America, and Australia;...
Maybe you like this theory:
Our Stolen Future
Common wisdom--but no data--suggest that the increasingly overt sexuality of popular media may stimulate earlier sexual development.
Playboy and Penthouse did it...
03-28-09, 07:37 PM #12
03-28-09, 07:40 PM #13
I think the "Nuclear Family Is Wonderful" brigade are just pushing an agenda.
03-29-09, 12:00 AM #14
03-29-09, 01:03 AM #15
Obesity in the mother may be connected with early puberty in the daughter, epigenetically.
And absence of the father, sociologically.
But the various chemical possibilities remain. Poor people get a different mix than rich people, in the US.
I recall a study that showed having a dominant male around delayed male puberty in young elephants.
03-30-09, 06:50 PM #16
If certain environmental stimuli is absent (such as being in close proximity to a father), then the body responds. Fish change genders based on sex ratios; oysters grow thicker shells when they can smell crustaceans. Why is it such a leap of reason to suggest that humans are under similar biological controls?
This, of course, is overlooking potential environmental factors that fatherless households have more of, though I would hope that the study took simple socioeconomic data into account and controlled for it.
03-30-09, 07:02 PM #17
FR, tap water is better for you in any place where the systems are as good as melbourne Bottled water doesnt currently have floride which is in the normal water surplie
VI if we assume this study is accurate there are a number of ways it could be possable. The first is indirect, ie as FR said they tend to be low SES and there for more likly to eat foods which are not as healthy, live in areas which have higher levels of polution and have generally lower health statice
The second possablility is direct, ie the mother is giving off pherimones which are encoraging pubity and the father is giving off others which inhibit it. Sort of like how the sympathetic and para-sympathetic nervious systems work. Why this would be the case i dont know but its a possability
It would be easier to determine if you had the origional journal artical rather than a news story on it
03-30-09, 11:39 PM #18
Sometimes environmental changes can cause genes to kick in. It may be that it is evolutionarily useful to begin puberty early when you lose contact with your father. Losing a father would surely be dangerous and would probably mean a sooner death. Perhaps having a child sooner because you lose a parent helps in response to your shorter average life span.
Along the same lines as Orleander and Roman, in retrospect of this thread.
03-30-09, 11:54 PM #19
03-31-09, 03:19 AM #20
By coberst in forum Human ScienceLast Post: 11-14-08, 02:08 PMReplies: 23
By Norsefire in forum Religion ArchivesLast Post: 10-06-08, 11:33 PMReplies: 37
By EmptyForceOfChi in forum Free ThoughtsLast Post: 04-15-07, 05:33 PMReplies: 5
By kriminal99 in forum General PhilosophyLast Post: 10-17-06, 05:00 AMReplies: 31
By Lawdog in forum Religion ArchivesLast Post: 06-27-05, 07:00 PMReplies: 256