Affluent Rich Parents in USA and giving their kids HGH to make them taller

Plenty of short guys have done okay. They work, make money, and have a good life like anyone else. They just make less, have fewer dating options, and have a harder time along some pathways.

Coming from under 6' and above 80 IQ, 4" is more valuable than 40 IQ points, I would estimate, for the market value.

i worked at a boarding school and one of the students was taking it because he was really short. His parents were beyond wealthy...

short person wrote:

I do notice an inordinate amount of fear of being short on this website.

worsethings wrote:

Plenty of short guys have done okay. They work, make money, and have a good life like anyone else. They just make less, have fewer dating options, and have a harder time along some pathways.

Coming from under 6' and above 80 IQ, 4" is more valuable than 40 IQ points, I would estimate, for the market value.

At 5'8", again it was not an issue. Maybe it would have been if I aspired to date the absolute top tier mega not socialite girls in the city or something.

But yes, for dating 4" of height is probably worth more than 40 IQ pts, especially if you want someone with you for you, and not your money.

But...dating is not hard. And 40 IQ pts is massively more valuable in almost every other facet of life.

6'2", average looks, 85IQ is gonna scrape through life at the bottom of society. 5'8", average looks but 125 IQ with any sort of work ethic is gonna be cruising through life on 150k+ if he or she chooses a decent career field. He might struggle a little through life with dating especially in HS or college before he is established, but he wont struggle to find someone to marry with prospects like that. Even in college he will find a GF if he wants. Lots of 5'8" average dudes with girl friends even when young if they are normally socially adjusted.

Among young women (20-29 years old),

- 54.1% are 5'5'' or under

and

- 82.3% are 5'7'' or under.

(

https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed/tables/11s0205.pdf

)

For the sake of argument, assume that women are only interested in dating men 2 inches taller than they are. Then increasing your height from 5'7'' to 5'9'', would increase your pool of potential mates by 28.2%. (I actually think this is an underestimate.)

And there are many other societal benefits to being taller, too. Being short is like playing life on a harder difficulty setting.

I wouldn't be too quick to judge these parents. I'd consider this, too, if my son were projected to end up 5'7'' or under.

Rich people are so stupid lol

i'm not judging wrote:

For the sake of argument, assume that women are only interested in dating men 2 inches taller than they are. Then increasing your height from 5'7'' to 5'9'', would increase your pool of potential mates by 28.2%. (I actually think this is an underestimate.)

And there are many other societal benefits to being taller, too. Being short is like playing life on a harder difficulty setting.

Sure. It is like playing on a harder setting.

That's also true of having a lower IQ, being less intelligent, having worse than ideal health, having crappy upbringing, etc.

Almost nobody has it all. Everyone has their things that make life set a little harder or a little easier. As detailed above, being short is pretty far down the list of possible bad handicaps.

How did they determine that "rich parents" are the ones doing this? Are they asking people what their net worth is when they request treatment?

I get that the treatment is expensive, but someone in the upper middle class could afford it if it was important to them. They mention that the requests for treatment are common in affluent areas, but not everyone seeking treatment in an affluent area is rich.

Is it only under-height males that Rich Parents are doing the HGH-thing for? Or also daughters?

Im 5'6 and male and have netheir had an issue with it . only in real crowded places do i notice how short i am, but ive got a couple of friends that are short as me and nobody can tease them about . get the frig over it we are'nt growing !!

Yep, Science for Elites wrote:

The present HGH conundrum may be just a taste of other rapidly approaching ethical debates. With the ascendance of genetic engineering, radical life extension, and human augmentation, some experts are concerned that wealthy individuals could biologically diverge from the rest of society. Does wealth entitle someone to additional intelligence, longer life, or boosted physical prowess? Are these qualities even desirable if attained through purchased enhancement? These difficult questions could loom larger in the near future.

To answer your question from an evolutionary perspective, yes, wealth does entitle someone to additional intelligence, longer life, or boosted physical prowess. This has been happening since the dawn of man. Those with the "wealth" to gather better tools and put together a group to hunt will survive. While those who are unable to do so die off. Those that survive, and thus reproduce, are the wealthiest and smartest. Wealth hasn't always been pieces of paper. It was once spices, precious gems, metals, furs, and so on. If you are able to kill a mammoth on your own, you can use the fur and tusks to "purchase" the best stuff for your family. Your family will survive and the neighbor that was unable to kill a mammoth will die. It's the way of the world.

It's the same with this. If you have the money to spend to improve your family's life (even if it's something as shallow as 1-2 inches taller), then you have all the right to do so. If this means the poor all die off then so be it. The rich will become poor when the richer make the rich the new poor.

You assume that getting taller doesn’t eliminate potential partners on the short end of the scale. I don’t think this is true. I suspect someone 5-0 might not be as interested in a really tall dude. Also an IQ of 85 is just barely above mentally handicapped while an IQ of 125 Indicates superior intelligence (>140 = genius). No way I would sacrifice 40 IQ points for 4 inches of height.

i'm not judging wrote:

Among young women (20-29 years old),

- 54.1% are 5'5'' or under

and

- 82.3% are 5'7'' or under.

(

https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed/tables/11s0205.pdf

)

For the sake of argument, assume that women are only interested in dating men 2 inches taller than they are. Then increasing your height from 5'7'' to 5'9'', would increase your pool of potential mates by 28.2%. (I actually think this is an underestimate.)

And there are many other societal benefits to being taller, too. Being short is like playing life on a harder difficulty setting.

I wouldn't be too quick to judge these parents. I'd consider this, too, if my son were projected to end up 5'7'' or under.

Kids given growth hormone become super athletes. Bryce Harper is an example of this.

Saying “Affluent rich parents” is redundant. The elites in the USA are destroying this country.

Well they are already bribing schools to accept their children so why not!?

^Wow thanks for the lesson on evolutionary biology. Your so smart and stuff.