It seems that on this forum, people take the image of the central/northern European Grok as the Grok to emulate. If that's true, it's probably due to two main reasons: most of the forum members here are European or have European ancestry, and because the popular conception of this Grok is hard-muscled, tough and fits well with North American notions of masculinity. This is in contrast to the image of tropical Grok, who is not so ripped, not so able to wrestle a mammoth to death, and is maybe a touch soft around the belly (and therefore is a lesser specimen in our eyes).
Because of this bias, it seems like we don't really question how healthy European Grok was in comparison to tropical Grok. European Grok subsisted mostly on animal-based food for at least half the year, apparently, so therefore lots of meat is good for everyone. He had to deal with sub-zero temperatures, so therefore it is good for us to expose ourselves to extreme cold for a while every now and then.
But from what I've been reading, it seems like northern Groks didn't live too long and they hit the end of life a little the worse for wear. We've been inhabiting northern climes for only a few tens of thousands of years, but we've been in the tropics since before we were human. What were the lifespans of tropical Groks compared to northern ones? The state of their bodies at death? I would really like to know.
You lousy kids! Get off my savannah!