The whole spine=height conversation is one I'd like to try to clarify. One's spinal column is considerably more of one's anatomy than just the "back" or "torso" we think of.
View attachment 62128
I can't find anything telling me what percentage of body height the spine is, but it runs from the base of the skull (actually, up inside the skull to some degree) to practically one's anus. The only part of your height that is not included in your spine length is from about the line at the tip of your nose to the top of your head and the length of your legs, from where they attach to your buttocks.
Remove skin and fat and a spine looks even longer. Add a pelvis or a skull and it looks even longer than that. Lie it down on the ground and it looks longer still. Remove weight from it (as in an alive person standing or sitting) and it will spread out to look even longer.
The difference in height of a person whose spine is 3 ft, 6 in. long versus the height of a person whose spine is 3 ft., 7 in. long will be several inches. I don't think someone looking, probably for the first time, at a "naked" spinal column possibly a skull attached and maybe even a pelvis (the only way they would be able to determine by sight the gender) would have any way of knowing if that were a "tall" person (by their own definition of tall) or a "short" person (by their own definition of short).
So, IMO, take the "tall" or "long" spine with a huge grain of salt (more palatable that way, right?).