January 23, 2009
|The little finger (your ‘pinky’ or ‘pinkie’) relates to autism:
What do we know about the ‘pinky’ or ‘pinkie’? In the past certain features of the little finger have been related to autism & various medical syndromes. New research from The Netherlands indicates that a ‘curved’ pinky is often found in the hands of people who have autism.
Psychiatry researcher Ozgen from University Medical Center in Utrecht (The Netherlands), presents the details of the research in the journal ‘Molecular Psychiatry’.
|“The presence of small physical defects and the occurrence of autism often go together”, says Dutch researcher Ozgen. Some of the physical defects reported are:
These are subtle physical defects without a specific medical significance, and cosmetic surgery is usually not necessary when these body features are present.
NOTICE: Ozgen noticed in her studies that these physical defects more often occure in patients with autistic disorders, compared to the healthy controls.
DIGIT RATIO & AUTISM:
Likely, one can understand the findings of Ozgen a little bit more in perspective of the FINGER RATIO (2D: 4D digit ratio) evidence presented by UK psychologist John T. Manning.
Manning describes in his first book DIGIT RATIO that autism is frequently featured with a ‘low 2D:4D digit ratio’ [= the ratio between the full length of the index finger (= 2th finger) & the full length of the ring finger (= 4th finger)].
READ MORE ABOUT THE LITTLE FINGER:
September 27, 2008
Take a look at your feet…
What do you see? Most of us will see 5 toes … and very likely your inner toe will be the longest, the largest, AND the biggest! As a matter of fact, this a typical characteristic of the human foot!
Now, let’s take a look at the feet of primates… (see the picture below):
Do you see the difference? The foot of these primates show quite a different picture: for, the inner toe is always the lowest set toe! This is a typical characteristic of the primate foot. And often the length of the inner toe does not pass the length of the other toes.
Another rather remarkable aspect is the fact that the ‘big toe’ of primates (the inner toe) shows quite some similarities with the thumb of our hands.
These typical characteristics in human and primate foot were already described in 1920 in the work PRINCIPLES OF ANATOMY presented by Frederic Wood Jones. Wood Jones described these characteristics through the concept: DIGITAL FORMULA.
The typical ‘digital formula’ for the human foot is: 1>2>3>4>5 – in the typical human foot the inner toe (toe 1) is usually the longest, and the little toe (toe 5) is usually the shortest.
However, the typical primate foot is characterised by the so-called ‘simian digital formula’: 3>4>2>5>1 – in the typical primate foot the middel toe (toe 3) is usually the longest, and the ‘inner toe’ (toe 1) the shortest!
Notice: Jones’ describes on page 30:
“… the digital forumula*, and it must be remembered that such a formula does not express the relative length of the digits, but the relative projection of the tip of the digits from the extremity of the limb”.
The ‘human digit formula’ for our hands…
Interestingly, the typical ‘digital formula’ for the primate foot resembles the typical ‘simian digital formula’ for the primates hand: 3>4>2>5>1 – you see the confirmation in the picture below!
As a matter of fact, the ‘digital formula’ of the human hand often resembles the typical ‘simian digital formula’: 3>4>2>5>1 – especially in the hand of human males! But also the hands of human females can often be characterized by the ‘simian digital formula’, however more often the hands of women can be described with the ‘human digital formula’: 3>2>4>5>1.
The difference is that in human males the ring finger is more often larger than the index finger (or: pointer finger) – which resembles the ‘simian digital formula’! In human females more often the index finger is longer than the ring finger – which resembles the ‘human digital formula’! These principles are visible in the picture below:
However, both in human males and females the length difference between the index finger (digit 2) and the ring finger (digit 4) is often very small. And therefore the ‘ratio’ between the length of those fingers is often close to ‘one’ (1.00) – when both fingers have the same length, the ‘ratio’ between the 2 fingers is exactly ‘1.00’.
Because of this situation scientists around the world are using the concept ‘digit ratio’ to study the relative length difference between the index finger (digit 2 = 2D), and the ring finger (digit 4 = 4D), which results in the formula: ‘digit ratio’ = 2D:4D.*
* One should notice here that the concept of Wood Jones ‘digital formula’ is related to “… projection of the tip of the digits from the extremity of the limb” -see the 3th picture in this blog post). However, the ‘digit ratio’ is related to the absolute length difference between the index finger and the ring finger – see the picture below.