Search results

This is an Open Access Article. It is published by E Schweizerbart Science Publishers under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Licence (CC BY-NC). Full details of this licence are available at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ; ABSTRACT: Background: We define migrants as people who move from their place of birth to a new place of residence. Migration usually is directed by "Push-Pull" factors, for example to escape from poor living conditions or to find more prosperous socio-economic conditions. Migrant children tend to assimilate quickly, and soon perceive themselves as peers within their new social networks. Differences exist between growth of first generation and second generation migrants. Methods: We review body heights and height distributions of historic and modern migrant populations to test two hypotheses: 1) that migrant and adopted children coming from lower social status localities to higher status localities adjust their height growth toward the mean of the dominant recipient social network, and 2) social dominant colonial and military migrants display growth that significantly surpasses the median height of both the conquered population and the population of origin. Our analytical framework also considered social networks. Recent publications indicate that spatial connectedness (community effects) and social competitiveness can affect human growth. Results: Migrant children and adolescents of lower social status rapidly adjust in height towards average height of their hosts, but tend to mature earlier, and are prone to overweight. The mean height of colonial/military migrants does surpass that of the conquered and origin population. Conclusion: Observations on human social networks, non-human animal strategic growth adjustments, and competitive growth processes strengthen the concept of social connectedness being involved in the regulation of human migrant growth.

Socially, economically, politically and emotionally (SEPE) disadvantaged children are shorter than children from affluent background. In view of previous work on the lack of association between nutrition and child growth, we performed a study in urban schoolchildren. We measured 723 children (5.83 to 13.83 years); Kupang, Indonesia; three schools with different social background. We investigated anthropometric data, clinical signs of malnutrition, physical fitness, parental education, and household equipment. Subjective self-confidence was assessed by the MacArthur test. The prevalence of stunting was between 8.5% and 46.8%. Clinical signs of under- or malnutrition were absent even in the most underprivileged children. There was no delay in tooth eruption. Underprivileged children are physically fitter than the wealthy. The correlation between height and state of nutrition (BMI_SDS, skinfold_SDS, MUAC_SDS) ranged between r = 0.69 (p < 0.01) and r = 0.43 (p < 0.01) in private school children, and between r = 0.07 (ns) and r = 0.32 (p < 0.01) in the underprivileged children. Maternal education interacted with height in affluent (r = 0.20, p < 0.01) and in underprivileged children (r = 0.20, p < 0.01). The shortness of SEPE disadvantaged children was not associated with anthropometric and clinical signs of malnutrition, nor with delay in physical development. Stunting is a complex phenomenon and may be considered a synonym of social disadvantage and poor parental education.