Digital Enhancement

I was intrigued yesterday (yes, I’m behind with my reading) by this article from last week’s Economist. Apparently, for men at least, the relative length of your first and third fingers (known in scientific circles I now discover as 2D:4D or digit ratio) is a good indicator of your potential prowess at competitive sport or financial trading.

On reading further I discover quite a lot of research has been done in this area, and that the same ratio is well correlated (or inversely correlated) with all sorts of things, including the age at which heart attacks occur – a low 2D:4D (i.e. a long ring finger) is good to have. Whether this overrides the fact that I am grossly overweight and don’t currently take anything like enough exercise is, however, doubtful.

It is handy to know though that one can, apparently, have a good guess at whether a woman (or man for that matter) bats for the other team simply by measuring her fingers. The greater the difference in length between her fore- and ring-fingers, the more likely it is that they aren’t going to be used on a guy. And, curiously, this effect is greater on the left hand of men and the right hand of women.

So, all in all, there are certain women whose hands are going to get a close look when next we meet!

One Response to Digital Enhancement

  1. Maralyn says:

    Why would you be surprised that a story they cover no matter how bizzare would have a lot of research behind it?

    The Economist, never publishes half arsed science and technology stories. They make mistakes and print retractions, but if you want even an interneship on their S&T or Economics sections, they want to know who the fuck you are, what your story is and do you have any pedigree.

    They do not tend to be authors with simply undergraduate degrees doing a writing gig.

    The people who write for those two sections have backgrounds in their subjects, know what to look for when covering topics not in ther domain, and always look at a variety of research, even if the piece is based on simply one paper which has piqued the wirters interest, when scanning the scientific journals, which it usually is for the most.

    Those guys do a good job, and the only time we really ever learn their names is after an award has been won. Personally, I like to know the authors name when I read a piece, but that is just me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: