document_title: Presidents of the Board of Control for Cricket in India

question_text: who is the president of indian cricket team

root

text: The President of the Board of Control for Cricket in India is the highest post at the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI),[1] which runs Cricket in India.[2] Though the post is an honorary one, it is considered a highly prestigious post due popularity of the game in the India and the financial clout of the organisation.[3] Over the years influential politicians, royalty and businessmen have occupied the post of President.[4] The president is elected at the BCCI's Annual General Meeting with each of the 30 affiliates of the BCCI getting a vote. The outgoing president also has a vote as chairman of the meeting.[5] The post is rotated zone-wise across India and a person can hold the post of BCCI president for a maximum of three years.[6] Supreme court of India said that the most senior BCCI vice-president and the joint secretary would take over the interim roles of president and secretary respectively.[7] In April 2016, Rahul Johri was appointed first ever Chief Executive Officer of BCCI.[8] The creation of the post of the CEO was a change recommended by the three-member Lodha panel in its report in January 2016, with panel stressing the need for the BCCI to separate its governance and management duties, with the CEO taking charge of the management side and also made recommendations for a clear segregation of operational duties from the governance and policy-makers in the board.[9]

tag: p

text: List[edit]

text:
No.
Name
Took Office
Left Office
Remarks

1
R E Grant Govan
1928
1933

2
Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan
1933
1935

3
Hamidullah Khan
1935
1937

4
K S Digvijaysinhji
1937
1938

5
P Subbarayan
1938
1946

6
Anthony S D'Mello
1946
1951

7
J C Mukherji
1951
1954

8
Maharajkumar of Vizianagram
1954
1956

9
Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia
1956
1958

10
R K Patel
1958
1960

11
M A Chidambaram
1960
1963

12
Fatehsinghrao Gaekwad
1963
1966

13
Z R Irani
1966
1969

14
A N Ghose
1969
1972

15
P M Rungta[10]
1972
1975

16
Ramprakash Mehra
1975
1977

17
M Chinnaswamy
1977
1980

18
S K Wankhede
1980
1982

19
NKP Salve
1982
1985

20
S Sriraman
1985
1988

21
B N Dutt
1988
1990

22
Madhavrao Scindia
1990
1993

23
IS Bindra
1993
1996

24
Raj Singh Dungarpur
1996
1999

25
A C Muthiah
1999
2001

26
Jagmohan Dalmiya
2001
2004

27
Ranbir Singh Mahendra
2004
2005

28
Sharad Pawar
2005
2008

29
Shashank Manohar
2008
2011

30
N Srinivasan
2011
2013

31
Jagmohan Dalmiya
2013
2013
Interim

32
N Srinivasan
2013
2014

33
Shivlal Yadav
2014
2014
Interim

34
Sunil Gavaskar
2014
2014
Interim (IPL)

35
Jagmohan Dalmiya
2015
2015
Died in Office

36
Shashank Manohar
2015
2016
Resigned

37
Anurag Thakur
2016
2017
Sacked[11]

38
Vinod Rai
2017
2017

39

2017
Incumbent

tag: table


document_title: List of average human height worldwide

question_text: what is the average height of the us male

text: List of average human height worldwide

text: Below are average adult human heights by country or geographical region. The original studies and sources should be consulted for details on methodology and the exact populations measured, surveyed, or considered.

text: As with any statistical data, the accuracy of such data may be questionable for various reasons:

text:
Some studies may allow subjects to self-report values. Generally speaking, self-reported height tends to be taller than its measured height, although the overestimation of height depends on the reporting subject's height, age, gender and region.[1][2][3][4]
Test subjects may have been invited instead of chosen at random, resulting in sampling bias.
Some countries may have significant height gaps between different regions. For instance, one survey shows there is 10.8 cm (4 1⁄2 in) gap between the tallest state and the shortest state in Germany.[5] Under such circumstances, the mean height may not represent the total population unless sample subjects are appropriately taken from all regions with using weighted average of the different regional groups.
Different social groups can show different mean height. According to a study in France, executives and professionals are 2.6 cm (1 in) taller, and university students are 2.55 cm (1 in) taller[6] than the national average.[7] As this case shows, data taken from a particular social group may not represent a total population in some countries.
A relatively small sample of the population may have been measured, which makes it uncertain whether this sample accurately represents the entire population.
The height of persons can vary over the course of a day, due to factors such as a height decrease from exercise done directly before measurement (i.e. inversely correlated), or a height increase since lying down for a significant period of time (i.e. positively correlated). For example, one study revealed a mean decrease of 1.54 centimetres (0.61 in) in the heights of 100 children from getting out of bed in the morning to between 4 and 5 p.m. that same day.[8] Such factors may not have been controlled in some of the studies.

tag: ul

text: Note: Letters in grey indicate non-measured height.

text:
Country/Region
Average male height
Average female height
Stature ratio
(male to female)
Sample population /
age range
Share of
pop. over 18
covered[9][10][11]
Methodology
Year
Source

Albania
174.0 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
161.8 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–29 (N= m:649 f:1,806)
23.5%
Measured
2008–2009
[12][13]

Argentina
N/A
159.6 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
19–49
60.4%
Measured
2004–2005
[14]

Argentina
174.46 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
161.01 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.08
Healthy, 18 (N= m:90 f:97, SD= m:7.43 cm (3 in) f:6.99 cm (3 in))
2.9%
Measured
1998–2001
[15]

Armenia
N/A
158.1 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,218, SD= f:5.7 cm (2 in))
48.6%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Australia
175.6 cm (5 ft 9 in)
161.8 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.09
18+
100.0%
Measured
2011–2012
[17]

Australia
177.8 cm (5 ft 10 in)
163.8 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.09
18–24
12.4%
Measured
2011–2012
[17]

Austria
179 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
166 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–49
54.3%
Measured
2006
[18]

Austria
180 cm (5 ft 11 in)
167 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–24
7.7%
Measured
2006
[18]

Austria
178.80 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
N/A
1.07
30–34
7.8%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Austria
179.2 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
167.6 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.07
21 (N= m:53 f:69, SD= m:6.1 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.6 cm (2 in))
1.5%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Azerbaijan
171.8 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
165.4 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.04
16+
106.5%
Measured
2005
[21]

Bahrain
165.1 cm (5 ft 5 in)
154.2 cm (5 ft 1⁄2 in)
1.07
19+ (N= m:1,120 f:1,181, SD= m:9.0 cm (3 1⁄2 in) f:7.8 cm (3 in))
97.7%
Measured
2002
[22]

Bahrain
171.0 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
156.6 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.09
18
1.9%
Measured
2009
[23][24]

Bangladesh
N/A
150.6 cm (4 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:7,368, SD= f:5.5 cm (2 in))
56.2%
Self-reported
2007
[16]

Belgium
178.70 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
8.1%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Belgium
178.6 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
168.1 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.06
21 (N= m:20–49 f:20–49, SD= m:6.6 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.3 cm (2 in))
1.7%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Benin
N/A
159.3 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:11,015, SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.5%
Self-reported
2006
[16]

Bolivia
N/A
151.8 cm (5 ft 0 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:10,302, SD= f:5.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.6%
Self-reported
2003
[16]

Bolivia
160.0 cm (5 ft 3 in)
142.2 cm (4 ft 8 in)
1.13
Aymara, 20–29
N/A
Measured
1970
[25]

Bosnia and Herzegovina
183.9 cm (6 ft 1⁄2 in)
171.1 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
1.07
Students at UBL,19–32 (N= m:178 f:34, SD= m:7.11 cm (3 in) f:6.56 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
0.4%[26]
Measured
2014
[27]

Brazil
170.7 cm (5 ft 7 in)
158.8 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
18+ (N= m:62,037 f:65,696)
100.0%
Measured
2009
[28][29]

Brazil
173.0 cm (5 ft 8 in)
161.1 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–24 (N= m:8,299 f:7,938)
13.0%
Measured
2009
[28]

Brazil – Urban
173.5 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
161.6 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–24 (N= m:6,360 f:6,305)
10.9%
Measured
2009
[28]

Brazil – Rural
170.9 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
158.9 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–24 (N= m:1,939 f:1,633)
2.1%
Measured
2009
[28]

Bulgaria
175.2 cm (5 ft 9 in)
163.2 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.07
N/A
N/A
N/A
2010
[30]

Bulgaria – Sofia
178.1 cm (5 ft 10 in)
164.8 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
N/A
N/A
N/A
2010
[30]

Burkina Faso
N/A
161.6 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:7,337, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
55.5%
Self-reported
2003
[16]

Cambodia
N/A
152.4 cm (5 ft 0 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:5,081, SD= f:5.4 cm (2 in))
52.2%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Cameroon – Urban
170.6 cm (5 ft 7 in)
161.3 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.06
15+ (N= m:3,746 f:5,078)
53.6%
Measured
2003
[31]

Cameroon – Urban
172.1 cm (5 ft 8 in)
162.0 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.06
35-44 (N= m:558 f:1,156)
8.7%
Measured
2003
[31]

Canada
175.1 cm (5 ft 9 in)
162.3 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.08
18–79
94.7%
Measured
2007–2009
[32]

Canada
176.0 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
163.3 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.08
25–44
36.5%
Measured
2005
[3]

Central African Republic
N/A
158.9 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,408, SD= f:6.6 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
50.0%
Self-reported
1994
[16]

Chad
N/A
162.6 cm (5 ft 4 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,393, SD= f:6.4 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
51.9%
Self-reported
2004
[16]

Chile
169.6 cm (5 ft 7 in)
156.1 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.09
15+
107.2%
Measured
2009–2010
[33]

Chile
171.2 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
157.2 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.09
25–44
41.2%
Measured
2009–2010
[33]

Chile
171 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
159.1 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
15–24
23.7%
Measured
2009–2010
[33]

China, People's Republic of
167.1 cm (5 ft 6 in)
155.8 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.07
18+
100.0%
Measured
2012
[34]

China, Mainland
172.1 cm (5 ft 8 in)
160.1 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.07
19
2.1%
Measured
2010
[35]

China, People's Republic of – Dalian, Liaoning
177.4 cm (5 ft 10 in)
164.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
18 (Urban students)
0.5%
Measured
2012
[36]

China, People's Republic of – Rural
166.3 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
157.0 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.06
17
1.6%
Measured
2002
[36]

China, People's Republic of – Beijing
174.7 cm (5 ft 9 in)
161.3 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.08
21
0.2%[37]
Measured
2010
[38]

China, People's Republic of – Sichuan
169.2 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
158.2 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–24
0.7%[39]
Measured
2010
[40]

Colombia
170.6 cm (5 ft 7 in)
158.7 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
18–22 (N= m:1,528,875 f:1,468,110)
14.1%
Measured
2002
[41]

Colombia
N/A
155.0 cm (5 ft 1 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:22,947, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
55.8%
Self-reported
2004
[16]

Comoros
N/A
154.8 cm (5 ft 1 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:644, SD= f:5.8 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
49.8%
Self-reported
1996
[16]

Congo, Democratic Republic of the
N/A
157.7 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,727, SD= f:8.0 cm (3 in))
52.7%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Congo, Republic of the
N/A
159.0 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:3,922, SD= f:8.1 cm (3 in))
55.7%
Self-reported
2007
[16]

Croatia
180.4 cm (5 ft 11 in)
166.49 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.09
18 (N= m:358 f:360, SD= m:6.8 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.1 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.6%
Measured
2006–2008
[42]

Cuba – Urban
168 cm (5 ft 6 in)
156 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.08
15+
79.2%
Measured
1999
[43]

Czech Republic
180.31 cm (5 ft 11 in)
167.22 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
17
1.6%
Measured
2001
[44]

Denmark
180.4 cm (5 ft 11 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–20 (N= m:38,025)
5.3%
Measured
2012
[45]

Denmark
181.4 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
30
1.5%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Denmark
182.6 cm (6 ft 0 in)
168.7 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
1.08
23 (N= m:–20 f:20–49, SD= m:NA f:7.4 cm (3 in))
1.6%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Dinaric Alps
185.6 cm (6 ft 1 in)
171.8 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
1.08
17
N/A
Measured
2005
[46]

Dominican Republic
172.7 cm (5 ft 8 in)
159 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,763, SD= f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.8%
Self-reported
2014
[47]

El Salvador
N/A
160.3 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
25–49
50.9%
Self-reported
2007
[16]

Egypt
170.3 cm (5 ft 7 in)
158.9 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–24 (N= m:845 f:1,059)
16.6%
Measured
2008
[48]

Egypt
N/A
159.5 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:13,813, SD= f:6.0 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.2%
Self-reported
2008
[16]

Estonia
179.1 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
17
2.3%
Measured
2003
[49]

Ethiopia
N/A
157.6 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:3,868, SD= f:6.6 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.8%
Self-reported
1997
[16]

Europe
177.6 cm (5 ft 10 in)[50]
N/A
N/A
17–29[51]
N/A
Measured and Self-reported
2001–2012
[12]

Finland
178.9 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
165.3 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
25–34 (N= m/f:2,305)
19.0%
Measured
1994
[52]

Finland
180.7 cm (5 ft 11 in)
167.2 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
−25 (N= m/f:26,636)
9.2%
Measured
2010–2011
[52][53]

Finland
177.9 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
8.4%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

France
175.6 cm (5 ft 9 in)
162.5 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.08
18–70 (N= m/f:11,562)
85.9%
Measured
2003–2004
[54][55]

France
174.1 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
161.9 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20+
96.6%
Measured
2001
[7]

France
177.0 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
164.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
20–29
17.5%
Measured
2001
[7]

France
176.2 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
8.3%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Gabon
N/A
158.4 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,576, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.1%
Self-reported
2000
[16]

Gambia – Rural
168.0 cm (5 ft 6 in)
157.8 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.06
21–49 (N= m:9,559 f:13,160, SD= m:6.7 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.6 cm (2 in))
N/A
Measured
1950–1974
[56]

Germany
175.4 cm (5 ft 9 in)
162.8 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.08
18–79 (N= m/f:19,768)
94.3%
Measured
2007
[5]

Germany
178.9 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
166.1 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.08
18–37
29.2%
Measured
2007
[5]

Germany – Urban[57]
180.6 cm (5 ft 11 in)
168.5 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
1.08
18–37
7.1%[58]
Measured
2007
[5]

Germany
180.17 cm (5 ft 11 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
7.2%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Germany
178 cm (5 ft 10 in)
165 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
18+ (N= m:25,112 f:25,560)
100.0%
Self-reported
2009
[59]

Germany
181 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
168 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
18–25 (N= m:2,501 f:2,227)
11.3%
Self-reported
2009
[59]

Ghana
N/A
159.3 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,958, SD= f:6.7 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.4%
Self-reported
2008
[16]

Ghana
169.5 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
158.5 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
25–29
14.7%
Measured
1987–1989
[60]

Greece
177 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
165 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.07
18–49
56.3%
Measured
2003
[18]

Greece
177 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
166 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–24
8.5%
Measured
2003
[18]

Greece
178.06 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–26 (N= m:3,982, SD= m:7.05 cm (3 in))
13.7%
Measured
2006–2007
[61]

Greece
177.29 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
9.5%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Greece
178.3 cm (5 ft 10 in)
166.6 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.07
21 (N= m:20–49 f:20–49, SD= m:6.6 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.3 cm (2 in))
1.8%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Guatemala
N/A
147.3 cm (4 ft 10 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,773, SD= f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.3%
Self-reported
1998
[16]

Guinea
N/A
158.8 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,563, SD= f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.9%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Haiti
N/A
158.6 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,932, SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.8%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Honduras
N/A
152.0 cm (5 ft 0 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:11,219, SD= f:6.4 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.3%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Hong Kong
171.7 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
158.7 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.08
18 (N= m:468 f:453, SD= m:5.5 cm (2 in) f:5.7 cm (2 in))
1.4%
Measured
2006
[62]

Hong Kong
173.4 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
160.1 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.08
University students, 19–20 (N= m:291 f:200, SD= m:6.1 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.2 cm (2 in))
0.6%[63]
Measured
2005
[64]

Hungary
176 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
164 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.07
Adults
N/A
Measured
2000s
[65]

Hungary
177.3 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
18 (N= m:1,080, SD= m:5.99 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.7%
Measured
2005
[66]

India
164.7 cm (5 ft 5 in)
151.9 cm (5 ft 0 in)
1.08
20–49 (N= m:69,245 f:118,796)
69.8%
Measured
2005–2006
[67]

Iceland
181 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
168 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
20–49
43.6%
Self-reported
2007
[18]

India – Rural
161.2 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
152.1 cm (5 ft 0 in)
1.06
17+ (SD= m:7.0 cm (3 in) f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
72.1%
Measured
2007
[68]

India
166.3 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
152.6 cm (5 ft 0 in)
1.09
20
3.0%
Predicted
2005–2006
[68]

Indonesia
158 cm (5 ft 2 in)
147 cm (4 ft 10 in)
1.07
50+ (N= m:2,041 f:2,396, Median= m:158 cm (5 ft 2 in) f:147 cm (4 ft 10 in))
22.5%
Self-reported
1997
[69]

Iran
170.3 cm (5 ft 7 in)
157.2 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.08
21+ (N= m/f:89,532, SD= m:8.05 cm (3 in) f:7.22 cm (3 in))
88.1%
Measured
2005
[70]

Iran
173.4 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
159.8 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.09
21–25
17.9%
Measured
2005
[70]

Iraq – Baghdad
165.4 cm (5 ft 5 in)
155.8 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.06
18–44 (N= m:700 f:800, SD= m:5.6 cm (2 in) f:16.0 cm (6 1⁄2 in))
76.3%
Measured
1999–2000
[71]

Ireland
177 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
163 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.09
20–49
61.8%
Measured
2007
[18]

Ireland
179 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
163 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.10
20–24
10.4%
Measured
2007
[18]

Ireland
176.60 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
30
1.7%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Ireland
177.5 cm (5 ft 10 in)
163.5 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.09
21 (N= m:54 f:20–49, SD= m:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:7.6 cm (3 in))
2.4%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Israel
177 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
166 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.07
18–21
9.7%
Measured
2010
[72]

Italy
176.5 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
162.5 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.09
18
1.4%
Measured
1999–2004
[12][24][73]

Italy
174.48 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
30
1.6%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Italy
177.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
167.8 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.06
21 (N= m:106 f:92, SD= m:6.0 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.1 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.4%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Ivory Coast
170.1 cm (5 ft 7 in)
159.1 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
25–29 (SD= m:6.7 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.67 cm (2 in))
14.6%
Measured
1985–1987
[60]

Ivory Coast
N/A
159.8 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,600, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.4%
Self-reported
1998
[16]

Jamaica
171.8 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
160.8 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.07
25–74
71.4%
Measured
1994–1996
[74]

Japan
172 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
158 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.08
20–49
47.2%
Measured
2005
[18]

Japan
172.0 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
158.70 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–24 (N= m:1,708 f:1,559, SD= m:5.42 cm (2 in) f:5.30 cm (2 in))
7.2%
Measured
2004
[75]

Japan
170.7 cm (5 ft 7 in)
158.0 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.08
17
1.2%
Measured
2013
[76]

Jordan
N/A
158.2 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,484, SD= f:6.6 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
55.6%
Self-reported
2007
[16]

Kazakhstan
N/A
159.8 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,600, SD= f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.7%
Self-reported
1999
[16]

Kenya
169.6 cm (5 ft 7 in)
N/A
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,600, SD= f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.7%
Summary
2016
[77]

Kenya
N/A
158.2 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,856, SD= f:7.3 cm (3 in))
52.5%
Survey
2016
[16][77]

Korea, NorthNorth Korea
165.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
154.9 cm (5 ft 1 in)
1.07
Defectors, 20–39 (N= m/f:1,075)
46.4%
Measured
2005
[78]

Korea, SouthSouth Korea
170.7 cm (5 ft 7 in)
157.4 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.08
20+ (N= m:2,750 f:2,445, Median= m:170.7 cm (5 ft 7 in) f:157.4 cm (5 ft 2 in), SD= m:6.40 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.99 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
96.5%
Measured
2010
[79]

Korea, SouthSouth Korea
173.5 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
160.4 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.08
20–24 (N= m:378 f:298, Median= m:174.0 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in) f:160.5 cm (5 ft 3 in), SD= m:5.16 cm (2 in) f:5.26 cm (2 in))
8.0%
Measured
2010
[79]

Korea, SouthSouth Korea
173.0 cm (5 ft 8 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–19 (N= m:339,716)
3.8%
Measured
2016
[80]

Korea, SouthSouth Korea – Seoul
173.3 cm (5 ft 8 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–19 (N= m:60,039)
0.8%
Measured
2016
[80]

Kosovo – Prishtina
179.52 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
165.72 cm (5 ft 5 in)
N/A
Conscripts, 18-20 (N= m:830 f:793, SD= m:7.02 cm, f:4.93 cm )
63.0%
Measured
2017
[81]

Kyrgyzstan
N/A
158.0 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,424, SD= f:5.8 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
55.4%
Self-reported
1997
[16]

Lesotho
N/A
157.6 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,879, SD= f:6.7 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
49.8%
Self-reported
2004
[16]

Liberia
N/A
157.3 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,281, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.8%
Self-reported
2006
[16]

Lithuania
177.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 19–25 (N= m:197 SD= m:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
14.7%
Measured
2005[82]
[83]

Lithuania – Urban
178.4 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 19–25 (N= m:91 SD= m:6.7 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
9.9%
Measured
2005[82]
[83]

Lithuania – Rural
176.2 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 19–25 (N= m:106 SD= m:5.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
4.9%
Measured
2005[82]
[83]

Lithuania
181.3 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
167.5 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
18
2.1%
Measured
2001
[84]

Madagascar
N/A
154.3 cm (5 ft 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:5,024, SD= f:6.0 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.6%
Self-reported
2003
[16]

Malawi – Urban
166 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
155 cm (5 ft 1 in)
1.07
16–60 (N= m:583 f:315, SD= m:6.0 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:9.4 cm (3 1⁄2 in))
101.1%
Measured
2000
[85]

Malaysia
166.3 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
154.7 cm (5 ft 1 in)
1.07
Malay, 20–24 (N= m:749 f:893, Median= m:166 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in) f:155 cm (5 ft 1 in), SD= m:6.46 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.04 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
9.7%[86]
Measured
1996
[87]

Malaysia
168.5 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
158.1 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.07
Chinese, 20–24 (N= m:407 f:453, Median= m:169 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in) f:158 cm (5 ft 2 in), SD= m:6.98 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.72 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
4.1%[86]
Measured
1996
[87]

Malaysia
169.1 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
155.4 cm (5 ft 1 in)
1.09
Indian, 20–24 (N= m:113 f:140, Median= m:168 cm (5 ft 6 in) f:156 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in), SD= m:5.84 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.18 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.2%[86]
Measured
1996
[87]

Malaysia
163.3 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
151.9 cm (5 ft 0 in)
1.08
Other indigenous, 20–24 (N= m:257 f:380, Median= m:163 cm (5 ft 4 in) f:152 cm (5 ft 0 in), SD= m:6.26 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.95 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
0.4%[86]
Measured
1996
[87]

Mali – Southern Mali
171.3 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
160.4 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.07
Rural adults (N= m:121 f:320, SD= m:6.6 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.7 cm (2 in))
N/A
Measured
1992
[88]

Malta
169.9 cm (5 ft 7 in)
159.9 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.06
18+
100.0%
Self-reported
2003
[89]

Malta
175.2 cm (5 ft 9 in)
163.8 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.07
25–34
17.5%
Self-reported
2003
[89]

Mexico
172 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
159 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–65
62.0%
Measured
2014
[90]

Mexico – Bajío
172 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
Adults
N/A
Measured
N/A
[91]

Mexico – Central
N/A
162 cm (5 ft 4 in)
N/A
26–39
N/A
Measured
N/A
[91]

Moldova
N/A
161.2 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,757, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
45.9%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Mongolia
168.4 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
157.7 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.07
25–34 (N= m:158 f:181)
27.6%
Measured
2006
[92]

Montenegro
183.2 cm (6 ft 0 in)
168.4 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
1.09
Students at UCG,18–37 (N= m:178 f:107, SD= m:7.06 cm (3 in) f:5.27 cm (2 in))
3.2%[93]
Measured
2011
[24]

Morocco
N/A
158.5 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:10,334, SD= f:6.0 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.7%
Self-reported
2003
[16]

Mozambique
N/A
156 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:6,912, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
55.0%
Self-reported
2003
[16]

Namibia
N/A
160.7 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:5,575, SD= f:7.1 cm (3 in))
50.4%
Self-reported
2006
[16]

Nepal
163.0 cm (5 ft 4 in)
150.8 cm (4 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:6,280, SD= f:5.5 cm (2 in))
52.9%
Self-reported
2006
[16]

Netherlands
181 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
169 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
1.07
Caucasians,16–18[94] (N= m:37 f:52, SD= m:6 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5 cm (2 in))
3.7%[95]
Measured
2003
[96]

Netherlands
182.70 cm (6 ft 0 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
7.8%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Netherlands
180.8 cm (5 ft 11 in)
167.5 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
20+
96.8%
Self-reported
2010
[9][29][97]

Netherlands
183.2 cm (6 ft 0 in)
169.9 cm (5 ft 7 in)
1.08
20–30
16.9%
Self-reported
2010
[97]

Netherlands
183.8 cm (6 ft 1⁄2 in)
170.7 cm (5 ft 7 in)
1.08
21 (N= m:74 f:50, SD= m:7.1 cm (3 in) f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.5%
Self-reported
2009
[98]

New Zealand
177 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
164 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–49
56.9%
Measured
2007
[18]

New Zealand
178 cm (5 ft 10 in)
164 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.09
20–24
9.1%
Measured
2007
[18]

Nicaragua
N/A
153.7 cm (5 ft 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49
54.1%
Self-reported
2001
[16]

Nigeria
163.8 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
157.8 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.04
18–74
98.6%
Measured
1994–1996
[74]

Nigeria
167.2 cm (5 ft 6 in)
160.3 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.04
20–29 (N= m:139 f:76, SD= m:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.7 cm (2 in))
33.2%
Measured
2011
[99]

Norway
180.0 cm (5 ft 11 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–44 (N= m:18,297)
36.0%
Measured
2011
[100]

Norway – Vest-Agder
181.7 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–44 (N= m:770)
1.33%
Measured
2011
[100]

Norway – Oslo
179.8 cm (5 ft 11 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–44 (N= m:1,297)
4.78%
Measured
2011
[100]

Norway – Finnmark
177.5 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 18–44 (N= m:218)
0.54%
Measured
2011
[100]

Norway
179.63 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
8.5%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Norway
180.3 cm (5 ft 11 in)
167 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.08
20–85 (N= m:1534 f:1743)
93.6%
Self-reported
2008–2009
[9][29][101]

Norway
182.4 cm (6 ft 0 in)
168 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.09
20–25 (SD= m:5.3 cm (2 in) f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
9.5%
Self-reported
2008–2009
[101]

Norway
181.6 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
168.2 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
26–35 (SD= m:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
17.0%
Self-reported
2008–2009
[101]

Peru
164 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
151 cm (4 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
1.09
20+
93.8%
Measured
2005
[102]

Philippines
165.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
N/A
N/A
18+
-
Measured
1980
[103]

Poland
178.7 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
165.1 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
18 (N= m:846 f:1,126)
1.6%
Measured
2010
[104]

Portugal
173.9 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
N/A
N/A
18 (N= m:696)
1.5%
Measured
2008
[12][105]

Portugal
172.30 cm (5 ft 8 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
9.7%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Portugal
171 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
161 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.06
20–50
56.7%
Self-reported
2001
[18]

Portugal
173.7 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
163.7 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.06
21 (N= m:87 f:106, SD= m:8.2 cm (3 in) f:5.3 cm (2 in))
1.9%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Qatar
170.8 cm (5 ft 7 in)
161.1 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.06
18
1.9%
Measured
2005
[24][106]

Rwanda
N/A
157.7 cm (5 ft 2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:3,202, SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.2%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Romania
172 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
157 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.10
N/A
N/A
Measured
2007
[107]

Russia
177.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
164.1 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.08
24
1.9%
Measured
2004
[24][108]

Samoa
N/A
166.6 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
N/A
18–28 (N= f:55 SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
32.6%
Measured
2004
[109]

Saudi Arabia
168.9 cm (5 ft 6 1⁄2 in)
156.3 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.08
18
3.0%
Measured
2010
[24][110]

Senegal
N/A
163 cm (5 ft 4 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,533, SD= f:6.7 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.4%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

Serbia
182.0 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
166.8 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.09
Students at UNS,18–30 (N= m:318 f:76, SD= m:6.74 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.88 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
0.7%[111]
Measured
2012
[112]

Singapore
171 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
160 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.07
Chinese students at TP,16–18[113] (N= m:52 f:49, SD= m:6 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5 cm (2 in))
0.3%[114][115]
Measured
2003
[96]

Slovakia
179.4 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)
165.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
18
2.0%
Measured
2004
[116]

Slovenia – Ljubljana
180.3 cm (5 ft 11 in)
167.4 cm (5 ft 6 in)
1.08
19
0.2%[117]
Measured
2011
[118]

South Africa
168 cm (5 ft 6 in)
159 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.06
19 (N= m:121 f:118)
3.6%
Measured
2003
[119]

Sri Lanka
163.6 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
151.4 cm (4 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
1.08
18+ (N= m:1,768 f:2,709, SD= m:6.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.4 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
100.0%
Measured
2005–2006
[120]

Sri Lanka
165.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
154.0 cm (5 ft 1⁄2 in)
1.08
18–29 (N= m:312 f:427, SD= m:7.1 cm (3 in) f:5.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
30.7%
Measured
2005–2006
[120]

Spain
173.1 cm (5 ft 8 in)
N/A
N/A
18–70 (N= m:1,298 [121][122] )
88.2%
Measured
2013–2014
[123][124]

Spain
N/A
159.6 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
18–70 (N= f:8,217 [125][126] )
83.5%
Measured
2007–2008
[29][122][123][126]

Spain
175.3 cm (5 ft 9 in)
N/A
N/A
18–34 (N= m:554-1,061 [122][127] )
26.8%
Measured
2013–2014
[123][124][128][129]

Spain
N/A
162.6 cm (5 ft 4 in)
N/A
18–19 (N= f:656 [126][130] )
2.4%
Measured
2007–2008
[122][123][126]

Spain
175.5 cm (5 ft 9 in)
N/A
N/A
30–34
11.1%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Spain
174 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
163 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.07
20–49
57.0%
Self-reported
2007
[18]

Spain
176 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
166 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.06
20–24
7.5%
Self-reported
2007
[18]

Spain
178 cm (5 ft 10 in)
166.2 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.07
21 (N= m:111 f:94, SD= m:6.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.8%
Self-reported
2001
[20]

Swaziland
N/A
159.1 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,612, SD= f:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
51.0%
Self-reported
2006
[16]

Sweden
181.5 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
166.8 cm (5 ft 5 1⁄2 in)
1.09
20–29
15.6%
Measured
2008
[131]

Sweden
180.4 cm (5 ft 11 in)
N/A
N/A
30
8.0%
Estimates
1976–1980
[19]

Sweden
177.9 cm (5 ft 10 in)
164.6 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
20–74
86.3%
Self-reported
1987–1994
[132]

Switzerland
178.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
N/A
N/A
Conscripts, 19 (N= m:12,447, Median= m:178.0 cm (5 ft 10 in), SD= m:6.52 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
1.5%
Measured
2009
[133]

Switzerland
175.4 cm (5 ft 9 in)
164 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20–74
88.8%
Self-reported
1987–1994
[132]

Taiwan
171.4 cm (5 ft 7 1⁄2 in)
159.9 cm (5 ft 3 in)
1.07
17 (N= m:200 f:200)
1.7%
Measured
2011
[134][135][136]

Tanzania
N/A
156.6 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:6,033, SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
52.8%
Self-reported
2004
[16]

Thailand
170.3 cm (5 ft 7 in)
159 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.07
STOU students, 15–19 (N= m:839 f:1,636, SD= m:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
0.2%[137]
Self-reported
2005
[138]

Togo
N/A
159.0 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,728, SD= f:6.1 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.4%
Self-reported
1998
[16]

Tonga
176.1 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
165.3 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.07
40 (N= m:241 f:299)
1.5%
Measured
2001
[139]

Turkey
173.6 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
161.9 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.07
20-22 (N= m:322 f:247)
8.3%
Measured
2007
[12][24][140]

Turkey – Ankara
174.1 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
158.9 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.10
18–59 (N= m:703 f:512, Median= m:169.7 cm (5 ft 7 in) f:157.5 cm (5 ft 2 in), SD= m:6.9 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:6.4 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
5.1%[141]
Measured
2004–2006
[142]

Turkey – Ankara
176.1 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
162 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.09
18–29 (N= m:390 f:163, Median= m:173.9 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in) f:164.5 cm (5 ft 5 in), SD= m:6.3 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:7.0 cm (3 in))
2.0%[141]
Measured
2004–2006
[142]

Turkey
N/A
156.4 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,393, SD= f:5.6 cm (2 in))
54.5%
Self-reported
2003
[16]

Uganda
N/A
159.2 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:1,666, SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
53.4%
Self-reported
2006
[16]

United Arab Emirates
173.4 cm (5 ft 8 1⁄2 in)
156.4 cm (5 ft 1 1⁄2 in)
1.11
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
[143]

United Kingdom – England
175.3 cm (5 ft 9 in)
161.9 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.08
16+ (N= m:3,154 f:3,956)
103.2%[144]
Measured
2012
[4]

United Kingdom – England
177.8 cm (5 ft 10 in)
164.5 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
25–34 (N= m:415 f:611)
17.2%[144]
Measured
2012
[4]

United Kingdom – Scotland
175.0 cm (5 ft 9 in)
161.3 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.08
16+ (N= m:2,512 f:3,180, Median= m:174.8 cm (5 ft 9 in) f:161.2 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in))
103.0%[144]
Measured
2008
[145]

United Kingdom – Scotland
178.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
163.5 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.09
25–34 (N= m:286 f:413, Median= m:178.0 cm (5 ft 10 in) f:163.9 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in))
15.7%[144]
Measured
2008
[145]

United Kingdom – Wales
177.0 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
162.0 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.09
16+
103.2%[144]
Self-reported
2009
[146]

United States
175.7 cm (5 ft 9 in)
161.8 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in)
1.09
All Americans, 20+ (N= m:5,232 f:5,547, Median= m:175.6 cm (5 ft 9 in) f:161.9 cm (5 ft 3 1⁄2 in))
69%
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

United States
176.4 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in)
162.9 cm (5 ft 4 in)
1.08
All Americans, 20–29 (N= m:937 f:928, Median= m:176.2 cm (5 ft 9 1⁄2 in) f:162.9 cm (5 ft 4 in))
13.9%
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

United States – African Americans
177.4 cm (5 ft 10 in)
163.6 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in)
1.08
African Americans, 20–39 (N= m:405 f:418, Median= m:177.2 cm (5 ft 10 in) f:163.7 cm (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in))
3.4%[148]
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

United States – Hispanic and Latino Americans
172.4 cm (5 ft 8 in)
158.9 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.08
Hispanic/Latino Americans, 20–39 (N= m:385 f:428, Median= m:172.3 cm (5 ft 8 in) f:159.1 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in))
4.4%[148]
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

United States – Mexican Americans
172.2 cm (5 ft 8 in)
158.4 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.09
Mexican Americans, 20–39 (N= m:233 f:247, Median= m:172.1 cm (5 ft 8 in) f:158.7 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in))
2.8%[148]
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

United States – Asian Americans
172.3 cm (5 ft 8 in)
158.4 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
1.09
Non-Hispanic Asians, 20–39 (N= m:260 f:272, Median= m:172.2 cm (5 ft 8 in) f:158.1 cm (5 ft 2 in))
1.3%[148]
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

United States – Non-Hispanic whites
178.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
165.0 cm (5 ft 5 in)
1.08
Non-Hispanic White Americans, 20–39 (N= m:715 f:689, Median= m:178.3 cm (5 ft 10 in) f:164.8 cm (5 ft 5 in))
17.1%[148]
Measured
2011–2014
[147]

Uruguay
170 cm (5 ft 7 in)
158 cm (5 ft 2 in)
1.08
Adults (N= m:2,249 f:2,114)
N/A
Measured
1990
[149]

Uzbekistan
N/A
159.9 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:2,635, SD= f:6.1 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.6%
Self-reported
1996
[16]

Vietnam
162.1 cm (5 ft 4 in)
152.2 cm (5 ft 0 in)
1.07
25–29 (SD= m:5.39 cm (2 in) f:5.39 cm (2 in))
15.9%
Measured
1992–1993
[60]

Vietnam
165.7 cm (5 ft 5 in)
155.2 cm (5 ft 1 in)
1.07
Students, 20–25 (N= m:1,000 f:1,000, SD= m:6.55 cm (2 1⁄2 in) f:5.32 cm (2 in))
2.0%[150]
Measured
2006–2007
[151]

Zambia
N/A
158.5 cm (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,091, SD= f:6.5 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
54.2%
Self-reported
2007
[16]

Zimbabwe
N/A
160.3 cm (5 ft 3 in)
N/A
25–49 (N= f:4,746, SD= f:6.2 cm (2 1⁄2 in))
47.3%
Self-reported
2005
[16]

text: Notes

text: Jump up ^ In this case, data that are representative of the majority of the country or region's adult population are those that factor in over 50% of the country or region's population aged 18 or over.

tag: ol


document_title: The Sponge

question_text: who does not want to wear the ribbon

question_tokens: who does not want to wear the ribbon

text: The Sponge

text: Plot[edit]

text: Jerry, Elaine, and Kramer are at Monk's Café and they mention that Jerry still wears a size 31 pair of jeans. Kramer also mentions the female contraceptive sponge is being taken off the market. Kramer passes both of them an AIDS Walk sheet for them to sign. While reading the list of signatures Jerry sees the name of a girl (Lena, played by Jennifer Guthrie) whom he once met, but does not know her unlisted number. Jerry takes down the number and calls the girl. George and his fiancée Susan get into a fight about sharing their secrets; in order to get back into her good graces, George tells her that Jerry does not actually wear size 31 jeans.

text: Meanwhile, Elaine goes on a 25-block radius hunt to find the contraceptive sponges. When she finally arrives at a pharmacy which still carries them, she purchases a full case at Pasteur Pharmacy from a pharmacist named Roger Hoffman (David Byrd), who acts a little suspicious since Elaine wants a whole case. Her limited supply requires that she restrict her usage. She puts her current boyfriend, Billy (Scott Patterson), through a rigorous examination to make sure he is "sponge-worthy". Jerry tells George that he found his new girlfriend on the AIDS Walk list. George then tells Susan against Jerry's wishes. Susan then tells her friend, who tells a friend until the phone tree reaches Lena. When George comes to Jerry's apartment, Jerry tells him that he is "out of the loop" because he told Susan about Jerry. When Jerry later learns from Lena that she doesn't mind him taking her number from the AIDS Walk list, he gets turned off from her being "too good" and that he doesn't want to be with someone who is "giving and caring and genuine concerned about the welfare of others."

text: When Kramer takes part in the AIDS Walk, he refuses to wear an AIDS ribbon in opposition to "ribbon bullies", led by Bob and Cedric from "The Soup Nazi" episode. (The storyline appeared to be based on the real-life controversy of Days of Our Lives actress Deidre Hall, who (in 1993) publicly refused to wear AIDS ribbons at public events, such as the Daytime Emmys. Hall claimed that the volunteers who passed out the ribbons bullied celebrities into wearing the ribbons.) When they and several walkers confront Kramer about the ribbon, he states he doesn't want to wear it since he lives in America, culminating in the group to attack Kramer; he attempts to flee up a fire escape, but is dragged down and attacked.

text: At Lena's, Jerry finds out that she has a lifetime supply of contraceptive sponges (assuming the boxes shown are all she has, there are approximately 720 sponges) and realizes that "she is depraved." While trying to disguise that he has seen the sponges, he tells her his secret about his jeans and she dumps him - she figures he is not "sponge-worthy". Later at the AIDS Walk, Jerry and George see Kramer (disheveled after getting attacked by the "ribbon bullies") stumble across the finishing line; Jerry, however, assumes this was because Kramer had exhausted himself (from running up several flights of stairs and having a poker game the night before the Walk). George then asks Kramer where his ribbon is, causing Kramer to look up at him in despair.

text: At Elaine's, she presumably ends her relationship with Billy since she still plans on conserving her sponges.

text: Original story ideas[edit]

text: When Peter Mehlman originally wrote this episode, it included several storylines which never made it into the final episode. These included a story in which Kramer and Newman bought stock in a company that sells over-the-counter contraceptive devices because Kramer had heard that the sponge was going out of business, and that this other company would capitalize on this. Then, in order to improve on their investment, Kramer and Newman go to Wall Street in order to start a buyout rumor on their company by whispering loudly about it at brokerage houses, so that their stock would go five or 10 points before they sell. It was at this point in the show's original story that Kramer shared his scheme with Elaine and told her about the sponge; she immediately panics and rushes off to buy as many sponges as possible. However their plan backfires when they have a fight with an obnoxious guy in an elevator at Wall Street and a negative rumor about the company they've invested in is immediately generated.

text: George's story was originally different too, and was later modified to fit in with season seven's story arc of his engagement to Susan. In its original conception George meets a girl who argues that she and George are so like each other, that if they dated, they would have great sex for about ten days and then hate each other and split up. George, seizing the opportunity, wonders out loud if there would be any problem if they stayed with each other for a week and then, by mutual consent, they would call it quits. That way they could have all the pleasure without any of the pain. George is on the edge of victory when he learns that the girl likes a certain type of contraceptive and the entire West Side has been cleared of the product by Elaine.

text: Jerry's story was much the same as it is in the final episode, except when his girlfriend asks him if he donates to AIDS charities, he says he does and blurts out the name of Kramer and Newman's company. Jerry's girlfriend, believing in his ramblings about this terrific company and its AIDS research capacity, buys 5,000 shares, just in time for the negative rumors to take hold, and Kramer and Newman's stock's price falls through the floor.[1]

text: Option pricing[edit]

text: A paper by Avinash Dixit used this episode to explore an option value problem in determining the "spongeworthiness" of potential partners.[2][3]


document_title: Thin-layer chromatography

question_text: where is thin layer chromatography used in industry

text: Thin-layer chromatography

text: Plate preparation[edit]

text: TLC plates are usually commercially available, with standard particle size ranges to improve reproducibility. They are prepared by mixing the adsorbent, such as silica gel, with a small amount of inert binder like calcium sulfate (gypsum) and water. This mixture is spread as a thick slurry on an unreactive carrier sheet, usually glass, thick aluminum foil, or plastic. The resultant plate is dried and activated by heating in an oven for thirty minutes at 110 °C. The thickness of the absorbent layer is typically around 0.1 – 0.25 mm for analytical purposes and around 0.5 – 2.0 mm for preparative TLC.[4]

text: Technique[edit]

text: The process is similar to paper chromatography with the advantage of faster runs, better separations, and the choice between different stationary phases. Because of its simplicity and speed TLC is often used for monitoring chemical reactions and for the qualitative analysis of reaction products. Plates can be labeled before or after the chromatography process using a pencil or other implement that will not interfere or react with the process.

text: To run a thin layer chromatography plate, the following procedure is carried out:[5]

text:
Using a capillary, a small spot of solution containing the sample is applied to a plate, about 1.5 centimeters from the bottom edge. The solvent is allowed to completely evaporate off to prevent it from interfering with sample's interactions with the mobile phase in the next step. If a non-volatile solvent was used to apply the sample, the plate needs to be dried in a vacuum chamber. This step is often repeated to ensure there is enough analyte at the starting spot on the plate to obtain a visible result. Different samples can be placed in a row of spots the same distance from the bottom edge, each of which will move in its own adjacent lane from its own starting point.
A small amount of an appropriate solvent (eluent) is poured into a glass beaker or any other suitable transparent container (separation chamber) to a depth of less than 1 centimeter. A strip of filter paper (aka "wick") is put into the chamber so that its bottom touches the solvent and the paper lies on the chamber wall and reaches almost to the top of the container. The container is closed with a cover glass or any other lid and is left for a few minutes to let the solvent vapors ascend the filter paper and saturate the air in the chamber. (Failure to saturate the chamber will result in poor separation and non-reproducible results).
The TLC plate is then placed in the chamber so that the spot(s) of the sample do not touch the surface of the eluent in the chamber, and the lid is closed. The solvent moves up the plate by capillary action, meets the sample mixture and carries it up the plate (elutes the sample). The plate should be removed from the chamber before the solvent front reaches the top of the stationary phase (continuation of the elution will give a misleading result) and dried.
Without delay, the solvent front, the furthest extent of solvent up the plate, is marked.
The plate is visualized. As some plates are pre-coated with a phosphor such as zinc sulfide, allowing many compounds to be visualized by using ultraviolet light; dark spots appear where the compounds block the UV light from striking the plate. Alternatively, plates can be sprayed or immersed in chemicals after elution. Various visualising agents react with the spots to produce visible results.

text: Separation Process and Principle[edit]

text: Different compounds in the sample mixture travel at different rates due to the differences in their attraction to the stationary phase and because of differences in solubility in the solvent.[6] By changing the solvent, or perhaps using a mixture, the separation of components (measured by the Rf value) can be adjusted. Also, the separation achieved with a TLC plate can be used to estimate the separation of a flash chromatography column. (A compound elutes from a column when the amount of solvent collected is equal to 1/Rf.)[7] Chemists often use TLC to develop a protocol for separation by chromatography and they use TLC to determine which fractions contain the desired compounds.

text: Separation of compounds is based on the competition of the solute and the mobile phase for binding sites on the stationary phase.[3] For instance, if normal-phase silica gel is used as the stationary phase, it can be considered polar. Given two compounds that differ in polarity, the more polar compound has a stronger interaction with the silica and is, therefore, better able to displace the mobile phase from the available binding sites. As a consequence, the less polar compound moves higher up the plate (resulting in a higher Rf value).[6] If the mobile phase is changed to a more polar solvent or mixture of solvents, it becomes better at binding to the polar plate and therefore displacing solutes from it, so all compounds on the TLC plate will move higher up the plate. It is commonly said that "strong" solvents (eluents) push the analyzed compounds up the plate, whereas "weak" eluents barely move them. The order of strength/weakness depends on the coating (stationary phase) of the TLC plate. For silica gel-coated TLC plates, the eluent strength increases in the following order: perfluoroalkane (weakest), hexane, pentane, carbon tetrachloride, benzene/toluene, dichloromethane, diethyl ether, ethyl acetate, acetonitrile, acetone, 2-propanol/n-butanol, water, methanol, triethylamine, acetic acid, formic acid (strongest). For C18-coated plates the order is reverse. In other words, when the stationary phase is polar and the mobile phase is non-polar, the method is normal-phase as opposed to reverse-phase. This means that if a mixture of ethyl acetate and hexane as the mobile phase is used, adding more ethyl acetate results in higher Rf values for all compounds on the TLC plate. Changing the polarity of the mobile phase will normally not result in reversed order of running of the compounds on the TLC plate. An eluotropic series can be used as a guide in selecting a mobile phase. If a reversed order of running of the compounds is desired, an apolar stationary phase should be used, such as C18-functionalized silica.

text: Analysis[edit]

text: As the chemicals being separated may be colorless, several methods exist to visualize the spots:

text:
fluorescent analytes like quinine may be detected under blacklight (366 nm)
Often a small amount of a fluorescent compound, usually manganese-activated zinc silicate, is added to the adsorbent that allows the visualization of spots under UV-C light (254 nm). The adsorbent layer will thus fluoresce light-green by itself, but spots of analyte quench this fluorescence.
Iodine vapors are a general unspecific color reagent
Specific color reagents into which the TLC plate is dipped or which are sprayed onto the plate exist.[8][9][10]

Potassium permanganate - oxidation
Bromine

In the case of lipids, the chromatogram may be transferred to a PVDF membrane and then subjected to further analysis, for example mass spectrometry, a technique known as Far-Eastern blotting.

text: Once visible, the Rf value, or retardation factor, of each spot can be determined by dividing the distance the product traveled by the distance the solvent front traveled using the initial spotting site as reference. These values depend on the solvent used and the type of TLC plate and are not physical constants.

text: Applications[edit]

text: Characterization[edit]

text: In organic chemistry, reactions are qualitatively monitored with TLC. Spots sampled with a capillary tube are placed on the plate: a spot of starting material, a spot from the reaction mixture, and a cross-spot with both. A small (3 by 7 cm) TLC plate takes a couple of minutes to run. The analysis is qualitative, and it will show if the starting material has disappeared, i.e. the reaction is complete, if any product has appeared, and how many products are generated (although this might be underestimated due to co-elution). Unfortunately, TLCs from low-temperature reactions may give misleading results, because the sample is warmed to room temperature in the capillary, which can alter the reaction—the warmed sample analyzed by TLC is not the same as what is in the low-temperature flask. One such reaction is the DIBALH reduction of ester to aldehyde.

text: In one study TLC has been applied in the screening of organic reactions,[11] for example in the fine-tuning of BINAP synthesis from 2-naphthol. In this method, the alcohol and catalyst solution (for instance iron(III) chloride) are placed separately on the base line, then reacted, and then instantly analyzed.

text: A special application of TLC is in the characterization of radiolabeled compounds, where it is used to determine radiochemical purity. The TLC sheet is visualized using a sheet of photographic film or an instrument capable of measuring radioactivity. It may be visualized using other means as well. This method is much more sensitive than the others and can be used to detect an extremely small amount of a compound, provided that it carries a radioactive atom.

text: Isolation[edit]

text: Since different compounds will travel a different distance in the stationary phase, chromatography can be used to isolate components of a mixture for further analysis. The separated compounds each occupying a specific area on the plate, they can be scraped off (along with the stationary phase particles) and dissolved into an appropriate solvent. As an example, in the chromatography of an extract of green plant material (for example spinach) shown in 7 stages of development, Carotene elutes quickly and is only visible until step 2. Chlorophyll A and B are halfway in the final step and lutein the first compound staining yellow. Once the chromatography is over, the carotene can be removed from the plate, extracted into a solvent and placed into a spectrophotometer to determine its spectrum. The quantities extracted are small and a technique such as column chromatography is preferred to separate larger amounts.

text:
Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

Step 6

Step 7


document_title: Black Death

question_text: where did the bubonic plague start in europe

text: Black Death

text: Chronology

text: Origins of the disease

text: The plague disease, caused by Yersinia pestis, is enzootic (commonly present) in populations of fleas carried by ground rodents, including marmots, in various areas including Central Asia, Kurdistan, Western Asia, Northern India and Uganda.[10] Due to climate change in Asia, rodents began to flee the dried out grasslands to more populated areas, spreading the disease.[11] Nestorian graves dating to 1338–1339 near Lake Issyk Kul in Kyrgyzstan have inscriptions referring to plague and are thought by many epidemiologists to mark the outbreak of the epidemic, from which it could easily have spread to China and India.[12] In October 2010, medical geneticists suggested that all three of the great waves of the plague originated in China.[13] In China, the 13th-century Mongol conquest caused a decline in farming and trading. However, economic recovery had been observed at the beginning of the 14th century. In the 1330s, a large number of natural disasters and plagues led to widespread famine, starting in 1331, with a deadly plague arriving soon after.[14] Epidemics that may have included plague killed an estimated 25 million Chinese and other Asians during the 15 years before it reached Constantinople in 1347.[15][16]

text: The disease may have travelled along the Silk Road with Mongol armies and traders or it could have come via ship.[17] By the end of 1346, reports of plague had reached the seaports of Europe: "India was depopulated, Tartary, Mesopotamia, Syria, Armenia were covered with dead bodies".[18]

text: Plague was reportedly first introduced to Europe via Genoese traders at the port city of Kaffa in the Crimea in 1347. After a protracted siege, during which the Mongol army under Jani Beg was suffering from the disease, the army catapulted the infected corpses over the city walls of Kaffa to infect the inhabitants. The Genoese traders fled, taking the plague by ship into Sicily and the south of Europe, whence it spread north.[19] Whether or not this hypothesis is accurate, it is clear that several existing conditions such as war, famine, and weather contributed to the severity of the Black Death.

text: European outbreak

text:
The seventh year after it began, it came to England and first began in the towns and ports joining on the seacoasts, in Dorsetshire, where, as in other counties, it made the country quite void of inhabitants so that there were almost none left alive.
... But at length it came to Gloucester, yea even to Oxford and to London, and finally it spread over all England and so wasted the people that scarce the tenth person of any sort was left alive.

Geoffrey the Baker, Chronicon Angliae

tag: div

text: There appear to have been several introductions into Europe. The plague reached Sicily in October 1347, carried by twelve Genoese galleys,[20] and rapidly spread all over the island. Galleys from Kaffa reached Genoa and Venice in January 1348, but it was the outbreak in Pisa a few weeks later that was the entry point to northern Italy. Towards the end of January, one of the galleys expelled from Italy arrived in Marseille.[21]

text: From Italy, the disease spread northwest across Europe, striking France, Spain, Portugal and England by June 1348, then turned and spread east through Germany and Scandinavia from 1348 to 1350. It was introduced in Norway in 1349 when a ship landed at Askøy, then spread to Bjørgvin (modern Bergen) and Iceland.[22] Finally it spread to northwestern Russia in 1351. The plague was somewhat less common in parts of Europe that had smaller trade relations with their neighbours, including the majority of the Basque Country, isolated parts of Belgium and the Netherlands, and isolated alpine villages throughout the continent.[23][24]

text: Modern researchers do not think that the plague ever became endemic in Europe or its rat population. The disease repeatedly wiped out the rodent carriers so that the fleas died out until a new outbreak from Central Asia repeated the process. The outbreaks have been shown to occur roughly 15 years after a warmer and wetter period in areas where plague is endemic in other species such as gerbils.[25][26]

text: Middle Eastern outbreak

text: The plague struck various regions in the Middle East during the pandemic, leading to serious depopulation and permanent change in both economic and social structures. As it spread from China with the Mongols to a Chinese trading post in Crimea, called Kaffa, used by the Republic of Genoa. From there the disease, infected rodents infecting new rodents, entered the region from southern Russia also. By autumn 1347, the plague reached Alexandria in Egypt, through the port's trade with Constantinople, and ports on the Black Sea. During 1347, the disease travelled eastward to Gaza, and north along the eastern coast to cities in Lebanon, Syria and Palestine, including Ashkelon, Acre, Jerusalem, Sidon, Damascus, Homs, and Aleppo. In 1348–1349, the disease reached Antioch. The city's residents fled to the north, However most of them ended up dying during the journey.[27]

text: Mecca became infected in 1349. During the same year, records show the city of Mawsil (Mosul) suffered a massive epidemic, and the city of Baghdad experienced a second round of the disease.

text: Signs and symptoms

text: Contemporary accounts of the plague are often varied or imprecise. The most commonly noted symptom was the appearance of buboes (or gavocciolos) in the groin, the neck and armpits, which oozed pus and bled when opened.[28] Boccaccio's description is graphic:

text: In men and women alike it first betrayed itself by the emergence of certain tumours in the groin or armpits, some of which grew as large as a common apple, others as an egg...From the two said parts of the body this deadly gavocciolo soon began to propagate and spread itself in all directions indifferently; after which the form of the malady began to change, black spots or livid making their appearance in many cases on the arm or the thigh or elsewhere, now few and large, now minute and numerous. As the gavocciolo had been and still was an infallible token of approaching death, such also were these spots on whomsoever they showed themselves.[29]

text: The only medical detail that is questionable in Boccaccio's description is that the gavocciolo was an 'infallible token of approaching death', as, if the bubo discharges, recovery is possible.[30]

text: This was followed by acute fever and vomiting of blood. Most victims died two to seven days after initial infection. Freckle-like spots and rashes,[31] which could have been caused by flea-bites, were identified as another potential sign of the plague.

text: Some accounts, like that of Lodewijk Heyligen, whose master the Cardinal Colonna died of the plague in 1348, noted a distinct form of the disease that infected the lungs and led to respiratory problems[28] and is identified with pneumonic plague.

text: It is said that the plague takes three forms. In the first people suffer an infection of the lungs, which leads to breathing difficulties. Whoever has this corruption or contamination to any extent cannot escape but will die within two days. Another form...in which boils erupt under the armpits,...a third form in which people of both sexes are attacked in the groin.[32]

text: Causes

text: Medical knowledge had stagnated during the Middle Ages. The most authoritative account at the time came from the medical faculty in Paris in a report to the king of France that blamed the heavens, in the form of a conjunction of three planets in 1345 that caused a "great pestilence in the air".[34] This report became the first and most widely circulated of a series of plague tracts that sought to give advice to sufferers. That the plague was caused by bad air became the most widely accepted theory. Today, this is known as the miasma theory. The word plague had no special significance at this time, and only the recurrence of outbreaks during the Middle Ages gave it the name that has become the medical term.

text: The importance of hygiene was recognised only in the nineteenth century; until then it was common that the streets were filthy, with live animals of all sorts around and human parasites abounding. A transmissible disease will spread easily in such conditions. One development as a result of the Black Death was the establishment of the idea of quarantine in Dubrovnik in 1377 after continuing outbreaks.[35]

text: The dominant explanation for the Black Death is the plague theory, which attributes the outbreak to Yersinia pestis, also responsible for an epidemic that began in southern China in 1865, eventually spreading to India. The investigation of the pathogen that caused the 19th-century plague was begun by teams of scientists who visited Hong Kong in 1894, among whom was the French-Swiss bacteriologist Alexandre Yersin, after whom the pathogen was named Yersinia pestis.[36] The mechanism by which Y. pestis was usually transmitted was established in 1898 by Paul-Louis Simond and was found to involve the bites of fleas whose midguts had become obstructed by replicating Y. pestis several days after feeding on an infected host. This blockage results in starvation and aggressive feeding behaviour by the fleas, which repeatedly attempt to clear their blockage by regurgitation, resulting in thousands of plague bacteria being flushed into the feeding site, infecting the host. The bubonic plague mechanism was also dependent on two populations of rodents: one resistant to the disease, which act as hosts, keeping the disease endemic, and a second that lack resistance. When the second population dies, the fleas move on to other hosts, including people, thus creating a human epidemic.[36]

text: The historian Francis Aidan Gasquet wrote about the Great Pestilence in 1893[37] and suggested that "it would appear to be some form of the ordinary Eastern or bubonic plague". He was able to adopt the epidemiology of the bubonic plague for the Black Death for the second edition in 1908, implicating rats and fleas in the process, and his interpretation was widely accepted for other ancient and medieval epidemics, such as the Justinian plague that was prevalent in the Eastern Roman Empire from 541 to 700 CE.[36]

text: An estimate of the mortality rate for the modern bubonic plague, following the introduction of antibiotics, is 11%, although it may be higher in underdeveloped regions.[38] Symptoms of the disease include fever of 38–41 °C (100–106 °F), headaches, painful aching joints, nausea and vomiting, and a general feeling of malaise. Left untreated, of those that contract the bubonic plague, 80 per cent die within eight days.[39] Pneumonic plague has a mortality rate of 90 to 95 per cent. Symptoms include fever, cough, and blood-tinged sputum. As the disease progresses, sputum becomes free-flowing and bright red. Septicemic plague is the least common of the three forms, with a mortality rate near 100%. Symptoms are high fevers and purple skin patches (purpura due to disseminated intravascular coagulation). In cases of pneumonic and particularly septicemic plague, the progress of the disease is so rapid that there would often be no time for the development of the enlarged lymph nodes that were noted as buboes.[40]

text: A number of alternative theories – implicating other diseases in the Black Death pandemic – have also been proposed by some modern scientists (see below – "Alternative Explanations").

text: DNA evidence

text: In October 2010, the open-access scientific journal PLoS Pathogens published a paper by a multinational team who undertook a new investigation into the role of Yersinia pestis in the Black Death following the disputed identification by Drancourt and Raoult in 1998. They assessed the presence of DNA/RNA with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques for Y. pestis from the tooth sockets in human skeletons from mass graves in northern, central and southern Europe that were associated archaeologically with the Black Death and subsequent resurgences. The authors concluded that this new research, together with prior analyses from the south of France and Germany,[41] "ends the debate about the cause of the Black Death, and unambiguously demonstrates that Y. pestis was the causative agent of the epidemic plague that devastated Europe during the Middle Ages".[42]

text: The study also found that there were two previously unknown but related clades (genetic branches) of the Y. pestis genome associated with medieval mass graves. These clades (which are thought to be extinct) were found to be ancestral to modern isolates of the modern Y. pestis strains Y. p. orientalis and Y. p. medievalis, suggesting the plague may have entered Europe in two waves. Surveys of plague pit remains in France and England indicate the first variant entered Europe through the port of Marseille around November 1347 and spread through France over the next two years, eventually reaching England in the spring of 1349, where it spread through the country in three epidemics. Surveys of plague pit remains from the Dutch town of Bergen op Zoom showed the Y. pestis genotype responsible for the pandemic that spread through the Low Countries from 1350 differed from that found in Britain and France, implying Bergen op Zoom (and possibly other parts of the southern Netherlands) was not directly infected from England or France in 1349 and suggesting a second wave of plague, different from those in Britain and France, may have been carried to the Low Countries from Norway, the Hanseatic cities or another site.[42]

text: The results of the Haensch study have since been confirmed and amended. Based on genetic evidence derived from Black Death victims in the East Smithfield burial site in England, Schuenemann et al. concluded in 2011 "that the Black Death in medieval Europe was caused by a variant of Y. pestis that may no longer exist."[43] A study published in Nature in October 2011 sequenced the genome of Y. pestis from plague victims and indicated that the strain that caused the Black Death is ancestral to most modern strains of the disease.[44]

text: DNA taken from 25 skeletons from the 14th century found in London have shown the plague is a strain of Y. pestis that is almost identical to that which hit Madagascar in 2013.[45][46]

text: Alternative explanations

text: The plague theory was first significantly challenged by the work of British bacteriologist J. F. D. Shrewsbury in 1970, who noted that the reported rates of mortality in rural areas during the 14th-century pandemic were inconsistent with the modern bubonic plague, leading him to conclude that contemporary accounts were exaggerations.[36] In 1984 zoologist Graham Twigg produced the first major work to challenge the bubonic plague theory directly, and his doubts about the identity of the Black Death have been taken up by a number of authors, including Samuel K. Cohn, Jr. (2002 and 2013), David Herlihy (1997), and Susan Scott and Christopher Duncan (2001).[36]

text: It is recognised that an epidemiological account of the plague is as important as an identification of symptoms, but researchers are hampered by the lack of reliable statistics from this period. Most work has been done on the spread of the plague in England, and even estimates of overall population at the start vary by over 100% as no census was undertaken between the time of publication of the Domesday Book and the year 1377.[47] Estimates of plague victims are usually extrapolated from figures from the clergy.

text: In addition to arguing that the rat population was insufficient to account for a bubonic plague pandemic, sceptics of the bubonic plague theory point out that the symptoms of the Black Death are not unique (and arguably in some accounts may differ from bubonic plague); that transference via fleas in goods was likely to be of marginal significance; and that the DNA results may be flawed and might not have been repeated elsewhere, despite extensive samples from other mass graves.[36] Other arguments include the lack of accounts of the death of rats before outbreaks of plague between the 14th and 17th centuries; temperatures that are too cold in northern Europe for the survival of fleas; that, despite primitive transport systems, the spread of the Black Death was much faster than that of modern bubonic plague; that mortality rates of the Black Death appear to be very high; that, while modern bubonic plague is largely endemic as a rural disease, the Black Death indiscriminately struck urban and rural areas; and that the pattern of the Black Death, with major outbreaks in the same areas separated by 5 to 15 years, differs from modern bubonic plague—which often becomes endemic for decades with annual flare-ups.[36]

text: McCormick has suggested that earlier archaeologists were simply not interested in the "laborious" processes needed to discover rat remains.[48] Walløe complains that all of these authors "take it for granted that Simond's infection model, black rat → rat flea → human, which was developed to explain the spread of plague in India, is the only way an epidemic of Yersinia pestis infection could spread", whilst pointing to several other possibilities.[49] Similarly, Green has argued that greater attention is needed to the range of (especially non-commensal) animals that might be involved in the transmission of plague.[50]

text: A variety of alternatives to the Y. pestis have been put forward. Twigg suggested that the cause was a form of anthrax, and Norman Cantor thought it may have been a combination of anthrax and other pandemics. Scott and Duncan have argued that the pandemic was a form of infectious disease that they characterise as hemorrhagic plague similar to Ebola. Archaeologist Barney Sloane has argued that there is insufficient evidence of the extinction of a large number of rats in the archaeological record of the medieval waterfront in London and that the plague spread too quickly to support the thesis that the Y. pestis was spread from fleas on rats; he argues that transmission must have been person to person.[51][52] This theory is supported by research in 2018 which suggested transmission was more likely by body lice and human fleas during the Second Pandemic.[53]

text: However, no single alternative solution has achieved widespread acceptance.[36] Many scholars arguing for the Y. pestis as the major agent of the pandemic suggest that its extent and symptoms can be explained by a combination of bubonic plague with other diseases, including typhus, smallpox and respiratory infections. In addition to the bubonic infection, others point to additional septicemic (a type of "blood poisoning") and pneumonic (an airborne plague that attacks the lungs before the rest of the body) forms of the plague, which lengthen the duration of outbreaks throughout the seasons and help account for its high mortality rate and additional recorded symptoms.[28] In 2014, scientists with Public Health England announced the results of an examination of 25 bodies exhumed from the Clerkenwell area of London, as well as of wills registered in London during the period, which supported the pneumonic hypothesis.[45]

text: Consequences

text: Death toll

text: There are no exact figures for the death toll; the rate varied widely by locality. In urban centres, the greater the population before the outbreak, the longer the duration of the period of abnormal mortality.[54] It killed some 75 to 200 million people in Eurasia.[1][2][3] According to medieval historian Philip Daileader in 2007:

text: The trend of recent research is pointing to a figure more like 45–50% of the European population dying during a four-year period. There is a fair amount of geographic variation. In Mediterranean Europe, areas such as Italy, the south of France and Spain, where plague ran for about four years consecutively, it was probably closer to 75–80% of the population. In Germany and England ... it was probably closer to 20%.[55]

text: A death rate as high as 60% in Europe has been suggested by Norwegian historian Ole Benedictow:

text: Detailed study of the mortality data available points to two conspicuous features in relation to the mortality caused by the Black Death: namely the extreme level of mortality caused by the Black Death, and the remarkable similarity or consistency of the level of mortality, from Spain in southern Europe to England in north-western Europe. The data is sufficiently widespread and numerous to make it likely that the Black Death swept away around 60 per cent of Europe's population. It is generally assumed that the size of Europe's population at the time was around 80 million. This implies that around 50 million people died in the Black Death.[56]

text: The most widely accepted estimate for the Middle East, including Iraq, Iran and Syria, during this time, is for a death rate of about a third.[57] The Black Death killed about 40% of Egypt's population.[58] Half of Paris's population of 100,000 people died. In Italy, the population of Florence was reduced from 110,000–120,000 inhabitants in 1338 down to 50,000 in 1351. At least 60% of the population of Hamburg and Bremen perished,[59] and a similar percentage of Londoners may have died from the disease as well.[45] In London approximately 62,000 people died between the years between 1346 and 1353.[11] While contemporary reports account of mass burial pits being created in response to the large numbers of dead, recent scientific investigations of a burial pit in Central London found well-preserved individuals to be buried in isolated, evenly spaced graves, suggesting at least some pre-planning and Christian burials at this time.[60] Before 1350, there were about 170,000 settlements in Germany, and this was reduced by nearly 40,000 by 1450.[61] In 1348, the plague spread so rapidly that before any physicians or government authorities had time to reflect upon its origins, about a third of the European population had already perished. In crowded cities, it was not uncommon for as much as 50% of the population to die.[36] The disease bypassed some areas, and the most isolated areas were less vulnerable to contagion. Monks and priests were especially hard-hit since they cared for victims of the Black Death.[62]

text: Persecutions

text: Renewed religious fervour and fanaticism bloomed in the wake of the Black Death. Some Europeans targeted "various groups such as Jews, friars, foreigners, beggars, pilgrims",[63] lepers,[63][64] and Romani, thinking that they were to blame for the crisis. Lepers, and other individuals with skin diseases such as acne or psoriasis, were singled out and exterminated throughout Europe.

text: Because 14th-century healers were at a loss to explain the cause, Europeans turned to astrological forces, earthquakes, and the poisoning of wells by Jews as possible reasons for the plague's emergence.[65] The governments of Europe had no apparent response to the crisis because no one knew its cause or how it spread. The mechanism of infection and transmission of diseases was little understood in the 14th century; many people believed the epidemic was a punishment by God for their sins. This belief led to the idea that the cure to the disease was to win God's forgiveness[66]

text: There were many attacks against Jewish communities.[67] In February 1349, the citizens of Strasbourg murdered 2,000 Jews.[67] In August 1349, the Jewish communities in Mainz and Cologne were annihilated. By 1351, 60 major and 150 smaller Jewish communities had been destroyed.[68]

text: Recurrence

text: The plague repeatedly returned to haunt Europe and the Mediterranean throughout the 14th to 17th centuries.[69] According to Biraben, the plague was present somewhere in Europe in every year between 1346 and 1671.[70] The Second Pandemic was particularly widespread in the following years: 1360–1363; 1374; 1400; 1438–1439; 1456–1457; 1464–1466; 1481–1485; 1500–1503; 1518–1531; 1544–1548; 1563–1566; 1573–1588; 1596–1599; 1602–1611; 1623–1640; 1644–1654; and 1664–1667. Subsequent outbreaks, though severe, marked the retreat from most of Europe (18th century) and northern Africa (19th century).[71] According to Geoffrey Parker, "France alone lost almost a million people to the plague in the epidemic of 1628–31."[72]

text: In England, in the absence of census figures, historians propose a range of preincident population figures from as high as 7 million to as low as 4 million in 1300,[73] and a postincident population figure as low as 2 million.[74] By the end of 1350, the Black Death subsided, but it never really died out in England. Over the next few hundred years, further outbreaks occurred in 1361–1362, 1369, 1379–1383, 1389–1393, and throughout the first half of the 15th century.[75] An outbreak in 1471 took as much as 10–15% of the population, while the death rate of the plague of 1479–1480 could have been as high as 20%.[76] The most general outbreaks in Tudor and Stuart England seem to have begun in 1498, 1535, 1543, 1563, 1589, 1603, 1625, and 1636, and ended with the Great Plague of London in 1665.[77]

text: In 1466, perhaps 40,000 people died of the plague in Paris.[78] During the 16th and 17th centuries, the plague was present in Paris around 30 per cent of the time.[79] The Black Death ravaged Europe for three years before it continued on into Russia, where the disease was present somewhere in the country 25 times between 1350 and 1490.[80] Plague epidemics ravaged London in 1563, 1593, 1603, 1625, 1636, and 1665,[81] reducing its population by 10 to 30% during those years.[82] Over 10% of Amsterdam's population died in 1623–1625, and again in 1635–1636, 1655, and 1664.[83] Plague occurred in Venice 22 times between 1361 and 1528.[84] The plague of 1576–1577 killed 50,000 in Venice, almost a third of the population.[85] Late outbreaks in central Europe included the Italian Plague of 1629–1631, which is associated with troop movements during the Thirty Years' War, and the Great Plague of Vienna in 1679. Over 60% of Norway's population died in 1348–1350.[86] The last plague outbreak ravaged Oslo in 1654.[87]

text: In the first half of the 17th century, a plague claimed some 1.7 million victims in Italy, or about 14% of the population.[88] In 1656, the plague killed about half of Naples' 300,000 inhabitants.[89] More than 1.25 million deaths resulted from the extreme incidence of plague in 17th-century Spain.[90] The plague of 1649 probably reduced the population of Seville by half.[91] In 1709–1713, a plague epidemic that followed the Great Northern War (1700–1721, Sweden v. Russia and allies)[92] killed about 100,000 in Sweden,[93] and 300,000 in Prussia.[91] The plague killed two-thirds of the inhabitants of Helsinki,[94] and claimed a third of Stockholm's population.[95] Europe's last major epidemic occurred in 1720 in Marseille.[86]

text: The Black Death ravaged much of the Islamic world.[96] Plague was present in at least one location in the Islamic world virtually every year between 1500 and 1850.[97] Plague repeatedly struck the cities of North Africa. Algiers lost 30,000–50,000 inhabitants to it in 1620–1621, and again in 1654–1657, 1665, 1691, and 1740–1742.[98] Plague remained a major event in Ottoman society until the second quarter of the 19th century. Between 1701 and 1750, thirty-seven larger and smaller epidemics were recorded in Constantinople, and an additional thirty-one between 1751 and 1800.[99] Baghdad has suffered severely from visitations of the plague, and sometimes two-thirds of its population has been wiped out.[100]

text: Third plague pandemic

text: The third plague pandemic (1855–1859) started in China in the mid-19th century, spreading to all inhabited continents and killing 10 million people in India alone.[101] Twelve plague outbreaks in Australia between 1900 and 1925 resulted in well over 1,000 deaths, chiefly in Sydney. This led to the establishment of a Public Health Department there which undertook some leading-edge research on plague transmission from rat fleas to humans via the bacillus Yersinia pestis.[102]

text: The first North American plague epidemic was the San Francisco plague of 1900–1904, followed by another outbreak in 1907–1908.[103][104][105][106][107][108][109] From 1944 through 1993, 362 cases of human plague were reported in the United States; approximately 90% occurred in four western states: Arizona, California, Colorado, and New Mexico.[110]

text: Modern treatment methods include insecticides, the use of antibiotics, and a plague vaccine. The plague bacterium could develop drug resistance and again become a major health threat. One case of a drug-resistant form of the bacterium was found in Madagascar in 1995.[111] A further outbreak in Madagascar was reported in November 2014.[112] In October 2017 the deadliest outbreak of the plague in modern times hit Madagascar, killing 170 people and infecting thousands.[113]

text: Names

text: The 12th-century French physician Gilles de Corbeil's On the Signs and Symptoms of Diseases (Latin: De signis et sinthomatibus egritudinum) uses the phrase "black death" (atra mors) to refer to a pestilential fever (febris pestilentialis).[114]

text: Writers contemporary with the plague referred to the event as the "Great Mortality"[115] or the "Great Plague".[65]

text: The phrase "black death" (mors nigra) was used in 1350 by Simon de Covino or Couvin, a Belgian astronomer, who wrote the poem "On the Judgment of the Sun at a Feast of Saturn" (De judicio Solis in convivio Saturni), which attributes the plague to a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn.[116] In 1908, Gasquet claimed that use of the name atra mors for the 14th-century epidemic first appeared in a 1631 book on Danish history by J. I. Pontanus: "Commonly and from its effects, they called it the black death" (Vulgo & ab effectu atram mortem vocatibant).[117] The name spread through Scandinavia and then Germany, gradually becoming attached to the mid 14th-century epidemic as a proper name.[118] In England, it was not until 1823, that the medieval epidemic was first called the Black Death.[119]