News · Nutrition & Diet
Vegan children were shorter and had lower growth-hormone markers than vegetarian peers
Plant-based diets in childhood are debated on principle and measured rarely. A German cohort compared 7,344 blood samples from 2,508 children against their height, weight and growth biology.
- Vegan children were shorter than vegetarian children after accounting for puberty.
- Vegetarian children did not differ in height from those eating meat.
- Both plant-based groups had lower growth-hormone markers than omnivores.
- Children eating meat had the highest body mass index scores of the three.
- An observational comparison, so diet and family circumstances travel together.
Raising a child without meat is now a mainstream choice, and raising one without any animal food at all is no longer unusual. The argument about it is conducted almost entirely on principle.
The measurements have lagged well behind. Whereas an increasing number of families choose a vegan or a vegetarian diet, the effects on children’s height, weight and growth biology are not entirely described.
What was measured
Writing in the European Journal of Nutrition, researchers used a long-running German cohort that has been taking blood and body measurements from the same children for years.
That gave them 7344 serum samples investigated from 2,508 healthy participants between three months and nineteen years old. They compared height, body mass index, and two hormones that carry growth hormone’s instructions to bone and tissue, across children eating meat, children eating vegetarian, and children eating vegan.
Puberty was accounted for, which matters more here than age. Two thirteen-year-olds at different pubertal stages are not comparable on height, and diet groups can differ in when puberty arrives.
The three-way split
The pattern is not simply plants against meat. It separates into three.
Vegan children were shorter than vegetarian children. Vegetarian children were not measurably shorter than children eating meat, so the height signal sits with the stricter diet rather than with avoiding meat.
Body mass index ran the other way in a sense worth noting: children eating meat had the highest scores of the three groups.
The hormone underneath
Both plant-based groups had lower levels of the main growth-carrying hormone than omnivores, with the vegan group lowest.
This is what makes the height finding more than a curiosity. The hormone responds to protein and energy intake, so finding it lower in exactly the groups eating less animal protein, in the same direction as the height difference, is internally consistent.
It is also the mechanism by which diet is thought to influence growth in the first place, which means the study is not just reporting a difference but pointing at how it could arise.
What this cannot say
Nobody randomized these children. Families who raise a child vegan differ from other families in income, education, health beliefs and much else, and none of that separates from the food.
Height in childhood is also not a verdict. It reflects nutrition, genetics, illness and timing, and a child on a lower trajectory at twelve may finish at the same adult height as a peer. The cohort has not followed these children to their final height, which is the measurement that would settle it.
And a lower body mass index is not automatically a harm in an era where childhood obesity is the dominant concern. Whether a lower score reflects a leaner build or insufficient intake is precisely what these measurements cannot distinguish.
What it is useful for
Not for settling the argument. For narrowing it.
Good childhood nutrition helps prevent obesity and weight-related diseases, such as diabetes, and it is judged on more than height. What this suggests is that the vegetarian version of a plant-based childhood looks unremarkable on growth while the vegan version shows a measurable shift, alongside a hormone change that would explain it.
That is an argument for planning rather than for prohibition, and it points at what to plan for: protein and energy sufficient to keep growth on its curve, which is the kind of thing a dietitian can check and a parent cannot eyeball.
People also ask
What did the study find?
Vegan children were shorter than vegetarians after adjustment for pubertal status (beta = -0.59, p = 0.006), while vegetarians did not differ from omnivores in height. Vegans showed lower BMI standard deviation scores than vegetarians (beta = -1.01, p = 0.009), and omnivores had the highest BMI score. Vegans had lower IGF-1 than vegetarians and omnivores (beta = -0.52, p = 0.031).
What is IGF-1?
Insulin-like growth factor 1, a hormone that carries much of growth hormone's effect on bone and tissue growth in childhood. Its level responds to how much protein and energy a child is getting, which is why it is measured alongside height.
How big is the height difference?
Modest, and expressed against what would be expected for a child of that age and pubertal stage rather than in centimeters. It is a shift in the distribution, not a description of any individual child, and plenty of vegan children will be taller than plenty of omnivores.
Is being shorter a problem?
Not necessarily, and the study does not say it is. Height reflects nutrition among many other things, and lower growth markers could indicate insufficient intake or simply a different growth trajectory. Distinguishing those requires following children to adult height.
What about the lower body mass index?
That cuts both ways. Omnivores had the highest scores in a period where childhood obesity is the dominant nutritional concern, so lower is not automatically worse. It becomes concerning only if it reflects inadequate intake rather than leaner build.
Could something other than diet explain this?
Yes, and this is the central caveat. Families who raise children vegan differ from other families in income, education and health beliefs, and an observational comparison cannot separate the food from everything that travels with it.
What should a parent do with this?
Plant-based diets in childhood need planning, particularly for protein, vitamin B12, iron and calcium, and a pediatrician or dietitian is the right person to review it. This is general information rather than medical advice.