Ashkenazi tracked to Turkey

https://aeon.co/ideas/how-dna-traced-the-ashkenazic-jews-to-northeastern-turkey

Have you noticed three facts about DNA testing?

1.a lot of Jews are funding collection and keeping the data (FROM anyone else)

2.they admit they want to use it for ‘medical research’ (vague AF)

3.they also fund immortality and generic ‘health’ programs including GE

GE= genetic engineering if you’re not up on terms.
Including designer babies, which recently became legal in the UK with 3-parent precedent.

The paper in the Guardian about youthful blood should’ve really spiked your interest.
The Boomers will do anything to stick around kicking, they funded all this sci-fi research from the beginning, they intend to cash out.
Why ask young people exclusively to donate blood, that doesn’t make any sense. Surely all blood is good, it’s the same blood. Unless they don’t want it for transfusions. Read the terms carefully. And there’s never enough. Sounds like a sample, rather than a legitimate use.

Rhesus research is right near the top of that list of topics but I don’t know much about it.
There’s a lot of misinformation which doesn’t rustle me whatsoever.
I do know it’s most common in Whites (primal Europeans), much like the longevity studies focusing precisely on NW Europe and especially Italy (it isn’t the diet, saps) but so is Rhesus-neg. There is no such thing as coincidence in conversations of genetics and genealogy.

What’s unusual about the history of NW Europe?
It invented basically everything, in historical terms it’s the most eugenic population.
Italy for artists of the Renaissance, France for philosophers, Germany for composers and writers and Britain for scientists and inventors.

Look up anything I just said. There are too many links to post and obviously some are too dangerous for the uneducated masses so I’d be linking to a paywall. Did you know you can pirate academic papers now? I don’t think you should, but academia has been screwed along with Hollywood.

Video: Who owns your body? [DNA]

I’m not saying where you should look.

I’m not saying where you should pause this video to read carefully.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t become a guinea pig to any test, just know what the test really is about.
Taking whatever is unique about you, and buying it.

Plus, the other thing.

https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/dna-evidence-can-be-fabricated-scientists-showhttps://www.forensicmag.com/news/2015/02/dna-evidence-can-be-faked

“DNA is only as good as the records you keep.”

Avoiding the word ‘race’

http://anthropology.msu.edu/anp489-fs16/files/2012/08/Race-in-anthropology.pdf

Things a scientist wouldn’t do.

Imagine being so scared of the truth posed by harder sciences that you try to flip the cause and effect.

As in, that biology is shaped by culture.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20983/abstract

That isn’t how evolution works. That’s really what it is, evolutionary denial.

White weeaboo people don’t spontaneously give birth to an Asian kid, do they?

The harder science wins, in this case, the mathematics of genetics.
When they compare intragroup, they rarely factor in the genetic admixture of many groups e.g. Africans living in America. This contaminates their group result.

Note a trend with these papers

https://www.anthropology.northwestern.edu/documents/people/di_leonardo.pdf

No such thing as whiteness, or an ever-changing and expanding definition of White.

They’d never dare pull that with any other racial category. The term is erasure. It’s white erasure.

This isn’t some sociology hokum you can talk your way around. Yet we see attempts.

Official statements try to minimize the evidence.

Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic “racial” groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. source

Only?

ONLY?

In genetics, anything over 0.0001% is huge. That’s the medical standard of significance. They can’t call it insig. but they’re downplaying it (lying) for stupids who can’t do stats. Six percent is huge. Physical variation is the forensic meaning of race, yes, but note the labeling problem, the so-called. Okay, improve the naming convention but what you measure is still real. 94% is intended to throw you off by the anchoring effect. That’s a deliberate bias (fraud) where you fiddle with the context. For the same species, 94% is incredibly low. 

Bear in mind, we share 50-60% of our genetics with a BANANA.

The bleeding heart of the rest of that page shows you aren’t going to get an intellectually honest conversation out of the people funded by the taxpayer. Fine, don’t develop race-specific meds, it’s black people that’ll die since they’re less insured in the US. Denial of reality has fatal consequences. Deny race-specific illnesses too, since it’d be racist to diagnose and treat them, huh? Like, the original definition of scientific racism.

http://www.jewishgeneticdiseases.org/diseases/tay-sachs-disease/

But wait, there’s more!

bowing

http://whoami.sciencemuseum.org.uk/whoami/findoutmore/yourgenes/wheredidwecomefrom/whatareourclosestanimalrelatives

Our closest animal relatives are the great apes: chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas. About 98% of the DNA in your genes is exactly the same as in chimpanzees, making you as closely related to a chimp as horses are to zebras. Chimps and humans share a common ancestor, who was probably swinging through the trees about 5 million years ago. Many other species of ape around at the same time eventually became extinct.

Yes, you read that right, you have more in common with a chimpanzee than some other races.

darwincontrol

Boomers plotting eternal oppression

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/08/meaning-death-will-different-society-cures-ageing/amp/

What entitlement?

from counter signal memes

Boomers approach cliff, would rather throw over youth.
How long until we tip them over? When it’s clear we’re paying for their general uselessness, I suppose.

Degeneration is damage done to and/or between the generations. Yes, social contract.

In every fairytale and fantasy story up until Harry Potter, the people demanding immortality at any cost are always the bad guy?

With every passing year I personally identify more with John Connor.

Hep B and babies

It’s been a while since I’ve beaten the immunologist’s pinata.

Spoiler: Literal baby-killers.

Immigration is putting the most vulnerable in society at risk.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4749024/Babies-protected-against-deadly-hepatitis-B.html

“Babies born from today in England will be given a routine ‘six-in-one vaccine’, health officials have announced.”
So much for consent. Really, 100% now? Who is this protecting?
“The deadly virus is deemed a ‘major global health problem’ and considered to be on the rise due to immigration, Public Health England has previously admitted.”
“Dr Mary Ramsay, the body’s head of immunisation, said: ‘Until today, only children at high risk of hepatitis B would be immunised. ‘All children will now be routinely protected against this serious infection, which is a major cause of cirrhosis and liver cancer in later life.”
Pathogenic cancer. As in, you can still get other pathogens or new strains of that one and get the cancer.
It’s common in homosexuals, hookers and drug abusers. The wages of sin.
“It comes amid serious concerns that the number of cases of the blood-borne virus are soaring, partly due to immigration. In some sub-Saharan African countries, one in seven is a carrier. East Asia and parts of Eastern Europe are also hotspots.”
You know what those have in common? Prostitution and rape. Maybe sort that out than band-aiding the problem.
“At the time it concluded: ‘Long-term infections in migrants are estimated to account for around 96 per cent of all new long-term hepatitis B infections in the UK.'”
So they don’t want to look racist. Great. Why were they let in?
“A quarter of mothers giving birth on the NHS are now foreign-born.” Way more.
“The World Health Organization recommended in 1992 that babies should be given their first dose of a hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours.”
I bet they did.

I really question why infants without an immune system require sex worker shots.
https://academic.oup.com/ije/article-pdf/45/2/441/7921281/dyv349.pdf

“Fact: It is suggested that infants get the hepatitis B shot before they leave the hospital.”
Prime time to spring important decisions on a drugged-up mother. Assuming they ask.
“It is not required. Fact: You can work out your own vaccination schedule and guidelines with your pediatrician. Fact: Drug companies have certain vaccines with fewer additives and in single doses, consult your pediatrician’s office regarding their ordering. It is your child’s life, it is your right to know. Fact: An infant’s immune system is very weak at birth. The hepatitis B vaccine can cause serious reactions if the system is already compromised.”
http://www.iansvoice.org/

System shock is common in infants, they can’t even handle a cold.

“Perfectly safe”, they lie at Public Health England.
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/348303
http://www.vaclib.org/pdf/sids/MV%20SIDS%201414_1421.pdf
“Conclusion: A systematic review of neonatal Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and other unexpected infant deaths following the initial dose of hepatitis B vaccination should be undertaken at the international level.”
At this rate, they should rename SIDS to Vaccine Death Syndrome.

It’s hard to find studies again, for some strange reason. Why aren’t they conducted and published?

Especially proper controls, how funny. The scientism crowd doesn’t want to follow accurate method when it might show a result they disagree with.

Some miscarriages caused by genetic defect

Darwin was right, what a shocker this one is.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/10/171002145008.htm

Allow me to explain.

There are three selection events in humans.

  1. Pre-birth, failed by miscarriage. Many go this way.
  2. Birth itself to infancy. Many went by malnutrition, starvation, abuse, maladaptive development or illness.
  3. Reproduction. Nowadays, this tends to be how people go. Better written up as genetic suicide, when intentional.

Parental age (both genetic contributors) does affect risk, yes, but genetics research does NOT want to EVER acknowledge the varying benchmark of genetic quality to begin with. There are teenagers who miscarry for this reason or produce children with defects, the risk is always there with every conception that the conception event goes awry, it’s simple maths. The possibility is always there.

It really goes by family. If the people in your family could be first-time parents successfully in their 30s/40s, you’re fine, the overall genetic quality level is good.