ethnically speaking are northern Ukranians paler than the southern French?

**Petalpusher** · 05-14-2024, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by cass

I trust anthropological sources more. There is no certainty that the study on 70 people is representative of the population. Were they tested in summer or winter? Were exposed or covered parts of the body examined? This method in no way reflects the difference in eye and hair pigmentation between Porto, Rome and Northern Europe.

Ah we are finally at the sample size cope. 72 individuals is an amazing sample size for that type of study. You know your next president with much less samples proportionally. The lowest is for hair, strangely doesn't concern you there (but even 43 is still very good), it's only a problem where you don't like the results.

There isn't a great correlation between skin, eye and hair. If you read TA, you would believe even the Balkans are "whiter" than the Irish. You are not far from being intermediate between Irish and Iberian/Italian in eyes. For female hair you are exactly an intermediate between Irish and Portugueses.

Italy being the only country here with a significant difference north to south and since the sample is from Rome (which is already very southern genetically), we can safely assume that N.Italy is easily lighter skin than Poles too.

**Roy** · 05-14-2024, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Oliver109

Some E Euros are very pale but there are also many who are swarthy, i would say as a whole the northern Ukranians are likely darker skinned but in numbers of actual pale individuals they are probably more numerous in north Ukranine than in southern France, this woman is Polish and the second pair are Ukranian

Poles and Ukrainians can be more pale than these women and I don't mean just those who avoid the sun.

**cass** · 05-19-2024, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Petalpusher

Ah we are finally at the sample size cope. 72 individuals is an amazing sample size for that type of study. You know your next president with much less samples proportionally. The lowest is for hair, strangely doesn't concern you there (but even 43 is still very good), it's only a problem where you don't like the results.

There isn't a great correlation between skin, eye and hair. If you read TA, you would believe even the Balkans are "whiter" than the Irish. You are not far from being intermediate between Irish and Iberian/Italian in eyes. For female hair you are exactly an intermediate between Irish and Portugueses.

Italy being the only country here with a significant difference north to south and since the sample is from Rome (which is already very southern genetically), we can safely assume that N.Italy is easily lighter skin than Poles too.

The only change to Biasutti' map should be a big red spot in place of France.

**Septentrion** · 05-19-2024, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by cass

I trust anthropological sources more. There is no certainty that the study on 70 people is representative of the population. Were they tested in summer or winter? Were exposed or covered parts of the body examined? This method in no way reflects the difference in eye and hair pigmentation between Porto, Rome and Northern Europe.

Please! Please! Don’t talk rubbish, OK! The Irish are the lightest - skinned Europeans as a whole (besides albinism). Thus do not be surprised that they are fairer than Poles. These people were tested in the unexposed parts of the body. The size doesn’t really matter here. As in physical anthropology, in sample of 10,000 Irish adult males with the average age of 35 years old. Over 90% were no darker than the von Luschan #3 which is equivalent to the Fitzpatrick skin phototype 1, this is unusually pale, lighter-skinned than anywhere in Europe and the world. I would not expect Poles to be even close. The Polish people would be in that respect closer to the Portuguese than they’d be to the Irish. Although in hair and eye colour, they are closer to the Irish than Portuguese.