Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
mean they have all accepted the legitimacy of
Homo floresiensis
as a new
species. When it became clear that microcephaly was an indefensible
diagnosis for LB1, committed skeptics simply shifted to new pathologies.
laron syndrome
As previously mentioned, Bill Jungers has aptly (if somewhat with
tongue in cheek) called the assertions that LB1 suffered from various
diseases “sick-Hobbit hypotheses.” Curiously, each disease that has been
proposed has been even less likely to explain LB1 than its predecessors,
as you will see by the end of this chapter. For example, after the micro-
cephalic hypothesis lost favor, LB1 was claimed to have suffered from
another condition, called Laron syndrome (LS), which was named after
its discoverer, Zvi Laron, who was also a coauthor on the paper that
a form of primary growth hormone that, if untreated, leads to a distinct
Laron-type dwarfism. Because the condition is usually treated today,
the diagnosis of LB1 was based on earlier records for untreated patients.
For decades, ten skeletal features were repeatedly described in the
clinical literature as typical for patients with untreated LS. These
included a protruding forehead and short face with a pug nose. The
lower jaw was underdeveloped, and the permanent teeth grew irregu-
larly and were crowded. The circumference of the head was very small
and, when viewed from the front, was widest near the top of the skull.
Untreated patients with LS had short arms and legs compared with
their trunks. In general, their long bones were delicate, and they had
dren resembled each other; the main feature was a small face and man-
ten features that were noted most frequently in the traditional clinical
literature, Laron observed more recently that x-rays of the skulls of
untreated LS patients have revealed thin bones and small sinuses.
55
