modernCSLewis

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Saturday, September 7, 2013

How much stronger are men than women? (In terms of maximum muscular strength)

Posted on 11:24 PM by Unknown
*

Question: If an average man competes with a hundred random women in muscle strength tests - how many from that hundred would he expect to beat? 

Answer: All of them.


- Because only about one woman per thousand is stronger than the average man.

(Subject to caveats below)

*

Until a few days ago, I did not realize that the difference between strength in men and women was quite so extreme, so qualitative.

I came across this fact referenced in a review-theory paper about sexual selection: "...less than 10% overlap between the male and female distributions, with 99.9% of females falling below the male mean."

WD Lassek, SJC Gaulin. Costs and benefits of fat-free muscle mass in men: relationship to mating success, dietary requirements, and native immunity. Evolution and Human Behaviour 2009; 30: 322-328.

*

I checked out their main references. This paper was the most striking: 

RW Bohannon. Reference values for extremity muscle strength obtained by hand-held dynamometry from adults aged 20 to 79 years  Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation  1997; 78: 26-32.

This has tables of muscle strength, with force expressed in Newtons (N) for different movements, men and women, and different age bands, dominant versus non-dominant side.

If we look at the results for dominant arm elbow flexion ('biceps' strength, more or less) - mean force in Newtons plus standard deviation in brackets - we find:

Men        age 20-29 -  285 (38) 
Men        age 70-79 -  237 (40)

Women age 20-29 -   155 (21)
Women age 70-79 -   130 (27)

And similar results are found for other muscle groups.

* 
 
What is striking is that at 20-29 the difference in average strength is 285 - 155, which is 130 Newtons difference - or that, in round numbers, men are nearly twice as strong as women. (ie. 130 is nearly as big as 155)

And the standard deviation for women is just 21 - which means that there are about six standard deviations difference, which is a huge difference and means near zero chance of overlap in strengths between men and women.

Indeed, the Men aged 70-79 were much stronger than the women aged 20-29: 237 - 155 = 82 Newtons, which means old men are still roughly half as strong again as women (i.e. 82 is about half of 155) - or young women are only about two thirds as strong as old men.

*

Now, these numbers are presented as reference values; but like almost all real-life reference values they are not truly representative of the general population, because they are (and this is clearly acknowledged in the methods section) based on a 'convenience sample' of 106 men and 125 women selected on the basis of different ages. And these subjects are not athletes in training, body-builders, or anything of that sort.

Since subjects had to go to a lab and perform strenuous tests - this sample would include only volunteers; and exclude those too ill to come to the lab or too lazy to make the exertions.

This could be significant - for example, a high proportion of men aged 70-79 would be unable to do these tests (being too ill, demented, institutionalized, or whatever) - so the reference value at best refers to that subset of ambulant old men able and willing to do these lab tests.

*

Nonetheless, the take-home message is clear: the statement "men are much stronger than women" is not just true on average, but is close to being true as a generalization (at least among un-trained subjects).

I have tried this fact out on a few people, men and women, and most - like me - were surprised at the high degree of difference in strength between men and women and especially the lack of overlap.

Since the average civilized men and women do not compete physically at full strength in the course of everyday life, and seldom go head to head on the kind of objective measures of strength being used here, the scale of sex differences in strength is consistently under-estimated - probably due to the factors discussed here:

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/sexual-dimorphism-between-men-and-women.html

*
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Attitudes and the Thought Police: opponents of Leftism cannot be subversive
    * New Leftism, post-mid-sixties Leftism, has been about shaping 'attitudes' - and this leads directly to the Thought Police For Left...
  • Who had the highest IQ: JRR Tolkien or CS Lewis?
    * http://notionclubpapers.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/tolkien-and-lewis-which-was-most.html *
  • Free will entails a plurality of gods
    * By which I mean that free will makes each Man into something very much like the God of the philosophers: an unmoved mover, an uncaused cau...
  • How to make a Patagonian Shakespeare
    ...is the name of a new blog I am intending to work on - with a view to writing a book of that name. http://patagonianshakespeare.blogspot.c...
  • The bass part of music
    * The bass part seems to be liked - even though it is seldom noticed (some unmusical people seem unable to hear it). When the bass comes in,...
  • The Left isn't winning by having good arguments - it wins because people are punished for arguing against the Left
    * This is one of the things I find most frustrating, and increasingly frustrating: not so much that it happens, but that so many people cann...
  • Free will, the torturer and the tortured
    * If free will is real - as it is - then the extreme torturer (and nobody and nothing else) really is responsible for his choice to inflict ...
  • What do 'antipsychotics' do to people?
    * An interesting quote from Robert Whitaker's Anatomy of an Epidemic: magic bullets, psychiatric drugs, and the astonishing rise of ment...
  • Free will implies/ entails pre-mortal existence
    * I find the following line of argument very convincing. Edited, and with bold emphases added, from pages 47-51 of  The God who weeps by Te...
  • Why remain a Church of England Anglican?
    * Given all my nasty (and well-deserved) criticisms of the Church of England, why am I a member? 1. I was baptized into into it, I attended ...

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (424)
    • ▼  September (22)
      • What is Leftism? Four historical phases
      • What motivates creativity?
      • The social perspective trumps creativity (in most ...
      • C.S Lewis's Trilemma as THE Christian moment
      • Being creative - the basic situation...
      • Spiritual pride and the necessity for theosis
      • What is your favourite Book of the Bible?
      • How much stronger are men than women? (In terms of...
      • An evidence-free world
      • William Boyce: a third rate, derivative composer -...
      • The Gestalt or Essence of the Bible
      • The justice of damnation
      • Parental choice determines mating/ marriage in mos...
      • Sexual dimorphism between men and women is greater...
      • Percentage shares of world populations under polit...
      • The Left isn't winning by having good arguments - ...
      • What is the Christian significance of Charles Will...
      • The 'turning' of heroic literature
      • Attitudes and the Thought Police: opponents of Lef...
      • The dangers of humility under modern conditions
      • The fictional history of The Notion Club Papers - ...
      • Deep apologetics: What blocks repentance? Need for...
    • ►  August (57)
    • ►  July (71)
    • ►  June (60)
    • ►  May (49)
    • ►  April (30)
    • ►  March (51)
    • ►  February (39)
    • ►  January (45)
  • ►  2012 (76)
    • ►  December (52)
    • ►  November (24)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile