NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/rec/running/4023

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-24 | 3.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!news.bbn.com!news.bbn.com!fkittred
From: [e-mail] (Fletcher Kittredge)
Newsgroups: rec.running
Subject: Re: Why are Kenyans so fast (rebutal)
Date: 23 Jan 93 20:09:13
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., 10 Moulton Street, Cambridge, MA
    02138
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spchp13.bbn.com
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 23 Jan 1993 22:08:33 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>   The following is my understanding -- please correct me if I am
>wrong:
       Most Africans, including virtually all West Africans are Bantu
>peoples.  Kalenjins, the tribal group to which Chelimo, Rono, Boit,
>Keino, Kiptanui, et al belong, is Bantu, and thus they are (distantly)
>related to the Bantu people of West Africa (and thus to most American
>blacks).  The Luo and Turkana, to which Ondieki and Ereng belong,
>respectively, are not Bantu, and thus the Kalenjins are, if anything,
>more closely related to the West Africans than Ondieki and Ereng.

>Waiting for corrections . . .

Happy to oblige.  I think this is complete hogwash:

1) The designation "Bantu", "Nilotic", etc. is most accurate when
   applied to language groups, not genetic types.  By this reasoning
   because an Asian-American speaks English they must be genetically
   close to Germans because English is a germanic language ;-)  Or,
   to be more germaine, one wouldn't want to identify everyone whom
   spoke Swahili as Swahili would one?

2) Anyone whom is unaware of the considerable interbreeding of
   different tribal groups in Kenya must be equally unaware of East
   African history.  Somehow I suspect this is the case for Runner's
   World ;-). Because westerner's detailed knowledge of these
   people's is recent, we tend to see them as static groups.  This
   is far from the case, it is an enormously dynamic region with much
   cultural and physical movement and cross-pollenation.

3) The genetic argument for athletic performance is old, but quite weak.
   At this point there is an enormous body of evidence which suggests that
   athletic performance has no racial component.  I would point out
   that the genetic variation between individuals in one of these groups is
   statistically as great as the variation between individuals of different
   groups.

4) Their argument is inherently racist.It is racist because we wouldn't even
   be having this discussion if the athletes involved were not African.
   If the Germans had won a bunch of marathons in a row, we wouldn't
   be talking about how the Germans are genetically superior runners
   to the French, we would be talking about how good the German's training
   program was.  Yet there is an equal genetic distance between the
   French and the Germans as between the East Africans and West Africans.

In my estimation, the fundamental reason the Kenyans are good runners
is economic. Back me up.  You mentioned you had been to Kenya.  Think
for a moment what it would do to a Kenyan's life to win a western
marathon with the associated prize money.  Think about the other life
paths open to a Kenyan or Tanzanian.  Is it any wonder the most
dedicated and talented of them is willing to train so hard?  And yes,
I think altitude, running surface and good coaching make a difference
as well.  I know that the weeks I spent about 10,000 feet on Mount
Kenya changed my physiology forever.

Kwahari,
fletcher
--
/* Fletcher Kittredge
 * BBN Software Products
 * 150 CambridgePark Dr,  Cambridge, MA. 02140
 * 617-USE-FINK  /  [e-mail]  /  [e-mail]
 */