TLDR Asians carry more fat than whites (in America, at least).
Well yeah, the junk food and spices diet is hell on the hormones too. They evolved for multiple famines (especially the Chinese and Indians) so they tend to weight-gain like that, too. Fat deposition isn’t the same between race (black thighs/’ass’) so why would accumulation patterns and proclivity to gain work like that either?
Results: A convenient sample of 1626 adults with BMIs ≤35 was evaluated. Independent percentage body fat predictor variables in multiple regression models included 1/BMI, sex, age, and ethnic group (R values from 0.74 to 0.92 and SEEs from 2.8 to 5.4% fat). The prediction formulas were then used to prepare provisional healthy percentage body fat ranges based on published BMI limits for underweight (<18.5), overweight (≥25), and obesity (≥30).
Conclusion: This proposed approach and initial findings provide the groundwork and stimulus for establishing international healthy body fat ranges.
But they’re not the same. Bio-logically.
The Asian ‘gym girls’ also trying to pass off the manjaw as ‘gains’ by matching on the stomach and thighs, I’ve seen white lawyer types do the same. Do NOT fall for it, men. If the jaw is square and broad as a child and pre-teen, RUN.
The small, squat (squarish) skeleton and pedomorphic features of the Asian race (historically, accurately called Mongoloid if you can search for it in anthropology) already pre-dispose their young people (teens) to lower BMI anyway, so the ‘losing weight’ excuse is bullshit, they’re building muscle to match the jaw and trap some sucker with their high T and bad temper. This lower BMI is not a consequence of health (dietary or genetic) so compared to the unhealthiest white people EVER (sorry America) they still have higher BMIs. HOW.
White women have a naturally high BMI (taller, curves) so it’s actually worse than it looks. The effect is maintained in every age group, how can one fuck up age 20? Any 20yo complaining about their metabolism needs a slap. The fat Asian hypothesis also holds true within the race, compared the Asian men to women matching age.
IF ONLY THE MANOSPHERE ACTUALLY READ THE DATA.
Every other claim about Asians it’s like  yet when I go to look…. they lied.
I expected the one claim the weebs consistently made about Asians in America (being thin) must be true but … no.
18.5 is a terrible BMI cut-off because it includes anorexics, smokers, druggies and petite women all in one. Women look wildly different at low and too-low body fats, which also varies by race. At the same BMI, Asians look more husky because the skeleton is squared-off. They’re also likelier to lay down fat than muscle.
The Asians are larger than white women pre-menopause, what EXCUSE is there?
The only time whites actually have slightly higher BMIs (ever so slightly) is in the elderly range (60-79, at which point yeah you’re excused, you can go).
I’m seeing through the model minority propaganda and there’s nothing to it. Rule #1 of moving to America – DON’T GET FAT. YOU HAD ONE JOB.
“In contrast, models for Asians predicted a different percentage body fat from that predicted for African Americans and whites. “
That’s code for ‘they evolved so much for famine that we had to invent new maths to count it’.
“For example, Deurenberg et al (35) found that American blacks had a 1.3-unit lower and Polynesians a 4.5-unit higher BMI than whites with the same body fatness (35). Even within the white cohort, the investigators observed small differences between Americans and Europeans.”
Asian placement is denser. Squat Mongoloid skeleton, anthropologically. If you disagree, it’s cope.
Americans are mixed white, generally, that’s why. German/French hybrids and other nonsense. You lose adaptive advantage from your subrace too.
They studied one of the thinnest types of Asians (japs) so I guarantee you others would be worse.
“The underlying causes of ethnic variation in relations between BMI and percentage body fat are likely due to small between-center body fat measurement differences and biological between-group differences (35).”
“The evaluation of Asians was confined to Japan and that of African Americans to the United States. Therefore, the underlying causes of observed ethnic differences in terms of measurement, environmental, and genetic factors are difficult to ascertain. Nevertheless, it appears evident that a single set of universal percentage body fat ranges cannot be easily developed without considerable additional analysis of this problem. Our equations and associated tables provide several ethnic-specific ranges as working guidelines. Because African Americans and whites differed only slightly in percentage body fat (by 1–2%) after BMI was first controlled for, we presented a combined equation (Equation 5) and table (Table 4) based on 4C percentage body fat for these 2 groups.”
That’s right, our fat deposition is more alike blacks than Asians. That’s how different the races are.
Background: Asians who have a healthy body mass index (BMI) range have been observed to have higher levels of obesity and risk of cardiovascular disease than whites, which suggests that the relation between BMI and adiposity may be different for Asians.
Objective: The primary aim of this study was to investigate the influence of childhood and adolescent exposure to a westernized environment on the relation between BMI and percentage body fat in young Asian American women.
So no, this isn’t their age. No cope here son.
Design: Secondary data from 129 Asian women, aged 20–25 y, with variable lengths of residence in the United States and 327 white women of comparable ages who had participated in the Latina and Asian Bone Health Study (1999–2000) and the Berkeley Bone Health Study (1998–2000), respectively, were analyzed by using multiple linear regression with percentage body fat as the outcome variable and place of birth, ethnicity, length of US residency, and BMI as predictor variables.
Results: Asians who lived in the United States <12 y showed the same relation between BMI and percentage body fat as did whites. In contrast, Asians who had lived in the United States ≥12 y had higher percentage body fat than did whites for BMIs (in kg/m2) <20.5 and lower percentage body fat for BMIs in the overweight and obese range.
Responding to the same stimuli wildly differently > genetic!
They’re more likely skinny-fat, aka fatal fat.
Whites evolved to eat Roman grains like processed wheat.
Conclusions: Our findings suggest that childhood environments may influence the relation between BMI and adiposity. Research is warranted on the role that childhood environments play in the accumulation and distribution of body fat and hence metabolic disease risk later in life.
There’s still a huge difference in the same environment.
Asians with more years in the United States had higher mean percentage body fat than did whites at low BMIs and lower mean percentage body fat at high BMIs with the regression lines intersecting at BMI ≈20.5 and body fat of 26.5%.
Again, Magic Dirt isn’t real. Enjoy your BBW Ting Tong for your golden years.
We are supremely jealous.
Asian-immigrant adults who were living in North America were observed to have higher adiposity levels
at the same BMI level than did whites (6). However, most of the Asian-immigrant adults studied were raised outside of North America. To our knowledge, our study was among the first studies to observe a difference in how BMI relates to percentage body fat between Asian Americans who had spent more years of childhood in the United States compared with Asian Americans who were minimally exposed to the United States during childhood and adolescence.
Lesson for weebs – do NOT move the Thai bride to America.
Stay in Asia or do NOT bother. She WILL get fat. You have been warned.
American-born Asians had a higher percentage of mothers with college degrees (59% of mothers compared with 37% of mothers in foreign-born Asians and 32% of mothers in whites).
Fat SJWs, great catch!
in our study, which suggested that obesity rates in our sample of Asians were likely lower than in the general population.
They admit it.
Is the general observation that, at the same BMI level, Asians have higher total body fat and visceral fat and higher risk of cardiovascular disease risk than do whites applicable to Asians in general,
or is this observation applicable only to Asians living in Asian societies? If the latter, does the environment during early life influence how body fat accumulates and distributes and, therefore, affects the relation between BMI and body fat? How strong a predictor of child growth and body composition is socioeconomic background and, in particular, the mother’s education? Are our findings also applicable to men?
We concluded that the early life environment may influence the relation between BMI and adiposity in later life. In particular, we speculated that Asian women substantially exposed to the American environment early in life exhibited different patterns of accumulation of body fat than did Asian women raised in Asia;
non-sig, see above
these differences may be partially attributable to environmental and lifestyle factors that affected diet and physical activity. For example, compared with Asian children raised in the United States, children who live in Asia tend to spend more time studying, whether in school or at home, and less time doing sports and engaging in recreational activities (25). In the past, diets of Asians raised in Asia also tended to be different, with a lower consumption of breakfast cereals, dairy products, and processed meats, than diets of Asians raised in the United States (26).
Yes, they do try to eat white. Silly Asians, didn’t evolve for dairy.
So your grandkids will definitely be fat, even if she isn’t by some fluke? Great, very likely to pass on your genome.
What a waste of time and resources.
However, with the rapid changes that have been taking place in Asian economies and the globalization of the food supply, we expect to see further changes in the diets of children in Asia (27) and, consequently, in body composition.
The understanding of how childhood environments influence the relation between BMI and percentage body fat has implications for the use of BMI as a screening indicator for obesity and obesity-related conditions. In addition, research to understand the influence of environmental factors on the accumulation and distribution of total body fat and metabolically active visceral fat during critical life stages will add insight into the use of clinically relevant screening tools for chronic disease risk.
Plan on growing old together, spending a loooong time with fatass.
South Asians are susceptible to insulin resistance even without obesity. We examined the characteristics of body fat content, distribution and function in South Asian men and their relationships to insulin resistance compared to Caucasians.
so no, you can’t tell by ‘looking at her’, your norms are informed by white women
Research Design and Methods
Twenty-nine South Asian and 18 Caucasian non-diabetic men (age 27±3 and 27±3 years, respectively) underwent euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp for insulin sensitivity, underwater weighing for total body fat, MRI of entire abdomen for intraperitoneal (IP) and subcutaneous abdominal (SA) fat and biopsy of SA fat for adipocyte size.
Compared to Caucasians, in spite of similar BMI, South Asians had higher total body fat (22±6 and 15±4% of body weight; p-value<0.0001), higher SA fat (3.5±1.9 and 2.2±1.3 kg, respectively; p-value = 0.004), but no differences in IP fat (1.0±0.5 and 1.0±0.7 kg, respectively; p-value = 0.4). SA adipocyte cell size was significantly higher in South Asians (3491±1393 and 1648±864 µm2; p-value = 0.0001) and was inversely correlated with both glucose disposal rate (r-value = −0.57; p-value = 0.0008) and plasma adiponectin concentrations (r-value = −0.71; p-value<0.0001). Adipocyte size differences persisted even when SA was matched between South Asians and Caucasians.
Marry those genes, go ahead.
Insulin resistance in young South Asian men can be observed even without increase in IP fat mass and is related to large SA adipocytes size. Hence ethnic excess in insulin resistance in South Asians appears to be related more to excess truncal fat and dysfunctional adipose tissue than to excess visceral fat.
in the men
harsh to call a racial adaptation to famine ‘dysfunctional’
The East Asian race has been held up as what a high “IQ” population can do and, along with the correlation between IQ and standardized testing, “HBDers” claim that this is proof that East Asians are more “intelligent” than Europeans and Africans. Lynn (2006: 114) states that the average IQ of China is 103. There are many problems with such a claim, though. Not least because of the many reports of Chinese cheating on standardized tests. East Asians are claimed to be “genetically superior” to other races as regards IQ, but this claim fails.
They test urbanites preferentially, not the rural mass. They rig it, basically.
The IQ of the samples increased by 15.0 IQ points a decade over 18-year period.
Yeah that sounds physically possible.
So almost two SD for the whole group over a generation? And we cannot replicate that here HOW?
Data are reported for intelligence of children in China assessed by the Combined Raven’s Test in 1988, 1996 and 2006. The IQ of the samples increased by 15.0 IQ points over 18-year period. The British IQ of China in 1988 and 2006 is estimated as 94.8 and 109.8, respectively.
People can think I’m a bitch about this but I’m a bitch who reads the data first and forms an opinion later.
From search engine result on the paper:
The cities of Beijing and Shanghai have IQs higher than the Chinese average by nearly a standard deviation, even when rural and urban children were graded by separate standardisations (Lynn, Cheng, & Wang, 2016). These results give inflated estimates of the Chinese IQ in the 1990s.
China is not the urbanites,, who think cheating is normal.
Remember national IQ predicts GDP so it’s important for foreign investors, they have an interest in rigging it higher to keep the CCP going.
That would put them on par with Vietnam. Do they have a reputation for being whiz kids? The Marxists are buying a reputation, wake up. They probably have the same national IQ as Kazakhstan (94), Romania (94), Armenia (94) and various other economic shit-holes nobody ever hears about, let alone considers bright and innovative. Stop cucking for cheats, that’s all I need. Portugal scores higher at 95 and look at their economy, like Romania they’re technically white.
At 100, being overly generous, that’s a solid average compared to smart, mostly NW or West European whites (the Renaissance, and Science people), and they’d be on par with Luxembourg.
The intelligence scores came from work carried out earlier this decade by Richard Lynn, a British psychologist, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish political scientist, who analysed IQ studies from 113 countries, and from subsequent work by Jelte Wicherts, a Dutch psychologist.
They also call Italy 102 despite its economy and centuries of cultural stagnation (pdf) so calling various types of chink 105-107 in recent years only (when the Marxists got free money printer) smells suspicious. Academic fraud should be a crime with heavy prison time. There is trillions in international investment riding on this.
Lynn shouldn’t be the only guy cited yet he seems to be, just with his later studies, ignoring greater quantities of historical evidence to the contrary (also collected by him).
Since when do we only listen to ONE guy on ANY topic?
(Unless it’s evolution and Darwin, since he invented it).
More data info below, scroll if short on time.
East Asian doesn’t actually exist in genetic history, there was essentially a creation of them by multiple Empires (mostly British) and stories/studies of African inflows of mtDNA (which would explain their physical similarities e.g. broad jaw, reduced nasal bridge, recessed chin, rounded forehead).
Racial computer data by Marquardt studies’ collection:
But *pronounced fluted nostrils (*compared to body size) and broad, thick lips:
Commonly considered solely African but falsely. Asians have it too.
Photographs used by Marquardt are representative of group facial averages shown in computer model.
If E Asians had such a higher IQ truly, it would be reflected in their originality and innovation e.g. genius inventors and patents.
Don’t hold your breath. IQ is one metric and only important to academia (because it can be faked).
They’re still coasting off the British Industrial Revolution.
Back to top link:
Before continuing, something must be noted about Lynn and his Chinese IQ data. Lynn ignores numerous studies on Chinese IQ—Lynn would presumably say that he wants to test those in good conditions and so disregards those parts of China with bad environmental conditions (as he did with African IQs). Here is a collection of forty studies that Lynn did not refer to—some showing that, even in regions in China with optimum living conditions, IQs below 90 are found (Qian et al, 2005). How could Lynn miss so many of these studies if he has been reading into the matter and, presumably, keeping up with the latest findings in the field? The only answer to the question is that Richard Lynn is dishonest. (I can see PumpkinPerson claiming that “Lynn is old! It’s hard to search through and read every study!” to defend this.)
title is “The effects of iodine on intelligence in children: a metaanalysis of studies conducted in China”
Although the Chinese are currently trying to stop cheating on standardized testing (even a possible seven-year prison sentence, if caught cheating, does not deter cheating), cheating on standardized tests in China and by the Chinese in America is rampant. The following is but a sample of what could be found doing a cursory search on the matter…..
In 2000, more than 2000 people protested outside of a university to protest a new law which banned cheating on tests.
When are we getting one of those?
The rift amounted to this: Metal detectors had been installed in schools to route out students carrying hearing or transmitting devices. More invigilators were hired to monitor the college entrance exam and patrol campus for people transmitting answers to students. Female students were patted down. In response, angry parents and students championed their right to cheat. Not cheating, they said, would put them at a disadvantage in a country where student cheating has become standard practice. “We want fairness. There is no fairness if you do not let us cheat,” they chanted. (Chinese students and their parents fight for the right to cheat)
Surely, with rampant cheating on standardized tests in China (and for Chinese Americans), we can’t trust the Chinese IQ numbers in light of the news that there is a culture of cheating on tests in China and in America.
Never hire them.
This has been outright stated by, for example, Lynn (1977) who prolcaims—for the Japanese—that his “findings indicate a genuine superiority of the Japanese in general intelligence.” This claim, though, is refuted by the empirical data—what explains East Asian educational achievement is not “superior genes”, but the belief that education is paramount for upward social mobility, and so, to preempt discrimination, this would then be why East Asians overperform in school (Sue and Okazaki, 1990).
They don’t believe in meritocracy, just the mobility part.
Meritocracy is a white concept. WEIRD is globally weird.
Minus Marxist so-called positive discrimination?
The success of second-generation Chinese Americans has, too, been held up as more evidence that the Chinese are ‘superior’ in their mental abilities—being deemed ‘model minorities’ in America. However, in Spain, the story is different. First- and second-generation Chinese immigrants score lower than the native Spanish population on standardized tests.
Americans: Spain is considered a shit-hole.
Findings from this study show that Chinese youth in Spain have substantially lower educational ambitions and attainment than youth from every other nationality. This is corroborated by recently published statistics which show that only 20 percent of Chinese youth are enrolled in post-compulsory secondary education, the prerequisite level of schooling for university education, compared to 40 percent of the entire adolescent population and 30 percent of the immigrant youth population in Catalonia, a major immigrant destination in Spain (Generalitat de Catalunyan, 2010).
It isn’t racist to note this, since nationality is NOT race.
US-born Chinese immigrants are shuttled toward higher education whereas in the Netherlands, the second-generation Chinese have lower educational attainment and the differences come down to national context (Noam, 2014).
nice term for child abuse (tiger mom is PR)
—in fact, the Chinese in Spain show lower educational attainment than other ethnic groups (Central Americans, Dominicans, Morrocans;Lee and Zhou, 2017: 2236) which, to Americans would be seen as a surprise.
if you’ve never worked with clingy Chinese people asking you to constantly “help” them perform basic tasks, yeah.
They stopped doing SATs here because it was showing up the thick Asians before they could cheat (to get into secondary school).
Second-generation Chinese parents match their intergenerational transmission of their ethnocultural emphasis on education to the needs of their national surroundings, which, naturally, affects their third-generation children differently. In the U.S., adaptation implies that parents accept the part of their ethnoculture that stresses educational achievement. (Noam, 2014: 53)
Teachers even favor Asian American students, perceiving them to be brighter than other students.
In our own countries. So nurture favours them too. They still vote Left.
The fact that the term “Mongoloid idiot” was coined for those with Down syndrome because they looked Asian is very telling (see Hilliard, 2012 for discussion).
Really? I never noticed.
Is there an autism study in mongrels yet? (No, not yet).
“So then you have millions of half-Asians that look more or less Asian, ethnically ambiguous, and are deeply ashamed of their Asian heritage, being raised by some weird, misogynistic, anti-feminist, anti-Islamic, anti-black guy, raising some half-Asian kid whose mother tells him that he or she is white and that it was a brilliant life choice to marry some racist asshole. …”
funny how the white race traitor feels entitled to racial respect from a mongrel of their making, weird assumption you’d think?
“These are the same people who go onto raise us. Hateful, bitter, racist white men – since white men love humiliating Asian men in order to increase their access to Asian women. Literally – the entire premise of WM/AW is that Asian men are not men – and we, their sons, look totally Asian.”
Cook the rice, pay the price. I’m only sad for the kid/s, they didn’t choose it.
So they’re not happy, whatever the parents claim to have planned. People shouldn’t cover for the parents. I hope the kids throw them in a home to rot.
Back to IQ.
But, the IQ-ists switched from talking about Caucasian superiority to Asian superiority right as the East began their economic boom (Liberman, 2001). The fact that there were disparate “estimates” of skulls in these centuries points to the fact such “scientific observations” are painted with a cultural brush. See eg table 1 from Lieberman (2001):
This tells us, again, that our “scientific objectivity” is clouded by political and economic prejudices of the time. This allows Rushton to proclaim “If my work was motivated by racism, why would I want Asians to have bigger brains than whites?” Indeed, what a good question. The answer is that the whole point of “HBD race realism” is to denigrate blacks, so as long as whites are above blacks in their little self-made “hierarchy” no such problem exists for them (Hilliard, 2012).
Weebs are cancer.
Note how Rushton’s long debunked- r/K selection theory (Anderson, 1991; Graves, 2002) used the current hierarchy and placed dozens of traits on a hierarchy where it was M > C > N (Mongoloids, Caucasoids, and Negroids respectively, to use Rushton’s outdated terminology). It is a political statement to put the ‘Mongoloids’ at the top of the racial hierarchy; the goal of ‘HBD’ is to denigrate blacks. But, do note that in the late 19th to early 20th century that East Asians were deemed to have small brains, large penises, and that Japanese men, for instance, would “debauch their [white] female classmates” (quoted in Hilliard, 2012: 91).
Asians are r-select, the most numerous race on the planet by FAR. I have covered this before. They swamp local resources and have inhumane population density. That is characteristic r-selection, with low overall group loyalty (close family doesn’t count, they’re low trust societies) and low group altruism (low altruism to animals as well).
Africa is less R than Asia.
Asians were also considered disease-ridden pet-eaters and we know how that went.
Where they go, death follows. Almost like America tried to keep them out until the 1960s…
Class is a confound for any immigrant.
From end of top link:
So if Chinese cheat on standardized tests, then we should not accept their IQ scores; the fact that they, for example, provide non-random children from large provinces speaks to their dishonesty. They are like Lynn, in a way, avoiding the evidence that IQ scores are not what they seem—both Lynn and the Chinese government are dishonest cherry-pickers. The ‘fact’ that East Asian educational attainment can be attributed to genes is false; it is attributed to hyper-selectivity and notions of class and what constitutes ‘success’ in the country they emigrate to—so what they attempt is based on (environmental) context.
lemmings at best, narcissists adopting the local mask (r-types) at worst
Common sense conclusion, the so-called redpills shall ignore it.
Then rediscover it in a decade while we’re at war with them.
A table was presented by Lynn showing 31 IQ studies on China’s population. A claim was made that “there are no samples on Chinese population citing IQ to be less than 95”. Here I will present contrary data set on China where average IQ results are less than 90 which as per Lynn’s claim do not exist. First lets look at IQ of China which is presented:-
Call out China.
Always, always call out the Commies.
Obviously when the data came into the scientific community, almost everyone was shocked not because of high results, but because of consistency of data. Average IQ in 31 different regions of China was within 10 points.
That never happens. If it sounds fake…. it probably is.
As it is noticed in IQ testing, average IQ in cities is 15 points higher than rural areas.
107-15 = 92
105-15 = 90 (assuming former number is true)
100-15 = 85 (one full SD below the UK)
94 (from old study above) -15 = 79
No wonder they have no trouble enslaving one another. What else would they be good for at that level?
On top of that, average IQ heavily depends on the people tested. If you were to test factory workers, the average will be 90. University students will show average of 110. So, the scientific community always doubted his work on China.
Uni students always score 110-115, that’s why they’re Uni students. Poor analogy. Stop relying on student scores to describe full adults, IQ people, it’s poor method (generally). US college students are like 115 at the low end.
How did he test Chinese population for IQ ?
A website was created and people were asked to take IQ tests. Unlike African samples where people were downward selected, Chinese IQ was upward sampling of population.
Chinks are renowned for forging ANY online test. Disregard Lynn.
TLDR: So Lynn lied about China’s low IQ, covering for them.
When he himself had previously taken data to that effect. Then he’s been caught fudging modern data and boosting its minimum to help them save face (and get into places like Eton).
I’m quoting most of that post in block for reference in case his site goes down:
Lastly, how easy it is to cheat on internet IQ testing. It’s quite easy. The results should not have been published as there is no control over test takers over the internet. There are many websites where even people in Latin America have reported 118 average IQs on many people.
It doesn’t really make sense to compare this IQ data on China with Thailand where most samples cited are in rural areas. Better will be to compare the data with Bangkok which shows IQ of 103.
Anyways, here are the low scoring IQ samples on China’s population :-
Hong, 2001 (Average IQ of 65-82)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/hong-2001.pdf Average IQ fluctuates between 65 and 82 for china, depending on amount of fluoride in water. Shandong province, china.
65+82 /2 =73.5
Li, 1995 (Average IQ of 79-89)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/li-1995.pdf Average iq is in between 79 and 89 for china. Guizhou province, china.
79 + 89 /2 = 84
Yang, 1994 (Average IQ of 76,81)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/yang-1994.pdf Average IQ for china is 76 and 81. Jinan, China.
76 + 81 / 2 = 78.5
An, 1992 (Average IQ of 76,84)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/an-1992.pdf Average IQ for china is 76 and 84. Guyang county, inner Mongolia.
76 + 84 / 2 = 80
Guo, 1991 (Average IQ of 76,81)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/guo-1991.pdf Average IQ for china is 76 and 81. Hunan province, china.
76 + 81 / 2 = 78.5
Lower results are in mild fluoride regions and higher results are in very optimum conditions.
Very optimum doesn’t count. Optimum would maybe but very? Anomaly.
The question arises, why did Lynn ignore these samples on China’s population. Well, if you go out with a propaganda of proving one nation smarter than another, such result manipulation is a must.
If my people had an average of IQ78, I’d make money printer go brrr too.
On top, these are the samples that are done in very optimum conditions like low fluoride, etc. and in top notch states of China.
Imagine if I cite these article which are pretty much done on rural population of China and compare it with cities in Europe, I will be able to prove that Europeans have average IQ of 105 and East Asians to be 83. Isn’t it. Its just a matter of what you want to show to the world.
aka Lynn is a liar.
and when I bitch about class and SES confounds, I’m being accurate.
Even in South East Asia, India and Iran; you get IQ data to be 103+ in cities. Urban rural gap is only due to cognitive clustering in urban areas.
IQ in Bangkok: 103, Iran(urban): 105, Lucknow: 110, Ahmedabad: 104. There are several reports covering the same which I will discuss later. If the Chinese IQ data is to be compared, comparison has to be done in urban samples on rest of the world.
Exactly it’s like measuring height when one guy jumped.
Now, it has been proven that IQ dataset of China has also been obtained by selective citation just like any other nation. A question arises as to why East Asians do better on PISA which is an unbiased sample covering entire population randomly and unbiased ?
TLDR: they don’t. They cover to avoid giving out a lot of data. Typical Marxists.
I will talk about the Chinese. I will talk about Korea, Taiwan and Japan later on. Results of Shanghai and other urban areas were published. Chinese government did not allow PISA to publish the results of other provinces. A statement was made by PISA that “we have done PISA sampling in 12 provinces in China and in some of the poorest regions, you get performance close to the OECD average.”
Its a very generalized statement which doesn’t really mean anything. “Close to the OECD average”. It can be 50 points less or 20 points. Unless, PISA results on China which are held back are released nothing can be said about average IQ of China.
Weebs always look silly.
However, results of Chinese in South East Asia are well known and they do not show high IQs.
Imagine my shock. What next? Are there not hot singles in my area?
On maths PISA:- Singapore scored 573, Malaysia scored 421, Thailand scored 427.
On reading:- Singapore scored 542, Malaysia scored 398, Thailand scored 441.
On science:- Singapore scored 551, Malaysia scored 420, Thailand scored 445.
Mean scores:- Singapore: 555, Malaysia: 413, Thailand: 437. (All in the report).
There are 3 million Chinese in Singapore which is a magnet for cognitive elites of China, 8 million Chinese in Malaysia, 10 million in Thailand.
A common argument given is that Malays and other races pull down the scores in Malaysia. It is well known that “other races do not pull down scores” in SEA and even if they do, the gaps are negligible. It is well evident in Singapore school results which I will discuss later to compare East and South Asian IQs.
For verifying whether there is multi modal distribution in PISA scores in Malaysia, I had to calculate the percentile of scores.
There is a table mentioned in PISA report which is attached above. Or detailed results can be seen here (https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfin…). Page number 308 and 309:-
In Singapore:- 10 percentile score was 432, 25 percentile: 501, 75 percentile: 650, 90 percentile was 707.
Even top 25 percent of Malaysia has an average PISA score corresponding to 98 IQ that is 87 percentile of Malaysian PISA data (520 is 100 IQ and 100 points is 1 standard deviation as discussed before). If I assume that all these are Chinese (that is each and every person of Chinese decent scored better than other races), how does it lead to high IQ and PISA scores among East Asians. This is the best case estimate.
For decent estimate, average IQ of Chinese in Malaysia: 95 IQ, Thailand: 97 IQ (according to PISA reports).
In Malaysia (a nation with moderate education system), “at the absolute maximum” 2.5% Chinese students scored in level 5 and level 6. V/S large majority of Chinese students in Singapore (“minimum 6.5% and maximum 38%”).
You can clearly see East Asian PISA score to be same as Czech Republic level once we include Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore; instead of just concentrating on Singapore which is a magnet for China’s cognitive elites.
Czechs, you know, our overt intellectual superiors, fellow whites.
Chinese IQ in SEA (based on PISA) is 98 (best estimate) and 96 (decent estimate).
And PISA is the most reliable large scale study on IQ.
So, at their expat best is still below our average. Explains the nepotism. And the expectation you NEED to cheat versus white kids to even get in.
What’s the Asian dindu nuffin?
As IQ of China is unknown and there are contrary studies (some showing very high IQs, some very low IQs)and as large scale studies like PISA on China are unavailable to public; it is resonable to assume that China’s IQ will be same as Chinese living in SEA as per PISA reports. Chinese in SEA are net importers of high skill immigration from China unlike China which is a net exporter of high skill immigrants. So, at any cost Chinese IQ cannot be more than Chinese in SEA.
Now what about the people especially the bloggers who post IQ of 115 for China. To be frank, most of them are misinformed. IQ of 115 on China is based on an assumption that presently IQ of China is 105 and China will score 115 due to optimum living conditions and first world environment. That’s not the case.
Wait, so they’re crystal-balling it?
Hard cope from the race mixers.
Muh magic dirt of the Western schools + clean air nurture theory BS.
Present IQ data available on China shows 95 IQ or 97.5 IQ as per Lynn’s work (which is based on his own calculations). 105 is the long term ceiling of IQ in China.
So not even 105 ever, let alone now.
Lynn is such a cucky little shit. Weebs keep rigging data like this to be anti-white, no wonder he keeps getting funding.
112 is the PISA IQ for Shanghai which is the highest IQ recorded in China where people are living in absolute optimum conditions. As cities generally score 15 points higher, average in China cannot be more than 105. Even the estimate of 105 comes at the cost of assuming optimum living conditions (excluding iodine deficiency, etc., etc.). Present IQ of China as per the data available is 95 as people are not living in optimum conditions. Many of the states have iodine deficiencies, many have underweight children.
But again if I start optimizing IQs for the rest of the world, most nations would score very high. To be frank, Africa and South Asia are the biggest victims of malnourishment and iodine deficiencies.
By the same logic: If China is smarter than us, so is Africa.
Talk about rationalizing a fetish.
While comparing IQ of two nations, you cannot compare an optimised number for one with an unoptimised number for another nation. Isn’t it.
“optimised” and futuristic = rigged
might as well be sodding Terminators
So, Lynn’s IQ comparisons between Europe and China by taking an optimised number for China (105) and an unoptimised number for Europe (97) is unacceptable and not in lines with the scientific methods of research.
If the data cited on other nations is un-optimised for iodine deficiencies etc. etc.; why is he comparing it with an optimized estimate for China ? Of-course if you want to propagate a racial fallacy in the public, such stuffs are required. Even nations in Europe face iodine deficiencies at par or higher than people in China and European IQ can also be adjusted to 104, or I can calculate European IQ by taking highest scoring city in Europe, Amsterdam and subtracting 7 IQ like how he is doing for China which will put Europeans at 103. Isn’t it.
Plenty of European countries are white trash. We all know it. Try living near Little Polands. Thugs.
Eastern Europe didn’t have the same selection pressures as North West and hence has no First World culture, as we’d recognize it.
And rather Europeans face much higher iodine deficiencies than East Asians and I will show the same with appropriate data later on. On top of that, East Asians do not face any mal-nourishment. In the above text, I showed a few samples on East Asia in mild fluorosis regions that the average IQ in such villages is also in low 80s, let alone 100+. If I show East Asian IQ samples where they are done on malnourished population, the results will be very very low (less than 75 IQ).
So, it is funny if he is optimizing East Asian data to 105 and Europe is kept constant at 97 because it is Europe that faces higher environment contamination due to iodine deficiencies, etc.
And remember, the IQ numbers of India, mid-East that is shown in his book is not optimized unlike East Asia.
The main purpose of him writing his book is to get famous in the public by propagating a racial fallacy that is far from the truth. The scientific community does not acknowledge his books which does seem to be a fiction.
I will further prove that average IQ in Iran in optimum living conditions is also 105, same as people in China (in my coming posts). And will present relevant data.
No one has typed out an explanation of this, to my knowledge. Sure there are linguistic essays but… still.
Here’s the logical explanation of certain things. Ending with collaborating science.
Adultery is a sin because it’s a pollution of bloodlines, that’s why it’s called that but the sexual action or compulsion is already covered under the coveting commandment. Fornication between two singles, while a sin, is not polluting the bloodlines of the marital couple. It doesn’t defile the marital bed, as the Bible puts it (Hebrews 13:4). It’s “and” adulterers, they’re discrete categories. The adultery involving one married party may produce a child with defects (especially with the effect of STDs from sleeping around, which they’d bring back to the marital bed, onto their own children – and might kill them), or the child maritally or the one “extra-maritally” may eventually marry their own part-sibling and then produce defect. All the sexual prohibitions are henceforth founded in an avoidance of bloodline corruption.
They’re not being ‘lame’ and killing your ‘buzz’ man, it’s babymaking. Don’t make broken babies!
The sterile view of reproduction is like a Marxist’s view of labour – delusional.
re Deut 23:2 and the mistranslation in later editions: Legitimacy is based on bloodlines more than marital status but under the parent-approved marriage model the former suitability led to the latter ceremony. They’d have veto power on funding the wedding and allowance of inheriting anything should the child try to brattishly insist on an adulterous match. Banishment (disowning) is the parental right should the child “dishonour” (commandment) their parent’s standards. A bastard didn’t refer to unmarried parents back then but moreso what we’d call politely a hybrid, Darwin a mongrel. Later editions mistranslated the concept of ‘bastard’ for ((reasons)). Logically, unmarried parents could feasibly marry at any point in the next 18 years and 9 months, the insult cannot be based on something so easily remedied. Instead it’s “in the blood”, it’s about the “seed”, it’s genetic. It’s the existence of the kid itself which is the affront, the offense to the holy, and that’s why ‘bastard’ is levied at the child – not the parents! They brought shame on their pre-existing family (bloodline) by virtue of their dishonourable existence, of a blemish. The OT often condemns men who mate with ‘foreign women’, the archetype of demonic seductress. That’s why usually understanding God (who forgives individuals) forbade the child to enter the church, holy ground, sacred temples, unto the 10th generation, because it was a perversion of his creation and divine, famous plan for separation of peoples; its existence was Satanic, a testament to playing God. Its existence was an insult to God, directly, it was an ABOMINATION.
Now we have the medical stats to back this up from the individualist perspective, from mental problems to organ death from child cancer, nobody mentions it…? Why? Why not? Who’s behind that cultural ignorance? https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Race-Mixing/
The sins of the father onto the child i.e. you produce an unnatural thing, it suffers unnaturally.
So bad marital discernment (selection) relates to the reprobate mind. Selection is the ONE job of men looking for a wife. The Bible gives plenty of advice on men seeking a wife, what to look for.
Cast not ye pearls among swine, neither spill your seed, it’s very simple conceptually. Don’t waste a breeding opportunity with a bad match or selfishness. You want societal shame back? Start with masculine self-control (Lev 22:4) because you’ll be healthier for it. This isn’t just spiritually good but physically too. Like don’t stick your dick in crazy. At least a woman’s period isn’t alive for all the stigma, there’s nothing to kill. God designed women to self-clean the baby oven, there’s no shame in it. Poor analogy to the modern Onans. You have a specific story about sexual continence, sexual hygiene, call it whatever, it’s being a man. https://www.openbible.info/topics/spilling_your_seed https://biblereasons.com/evil-women-and-bad-wives/
If you marry badly, that doesn’t absolve you of responsibility for her sins. You’re the man, you’re responsible, be she some Polish whore (they’re mostly marrying Arabs and Japs) or an ABG/LBFM thot (mostly autists).
Prov 22:14 The mouth of an adulterous woman is a deep pit; a man who is under the LORD’s wrath falls into it.
I’m picturing the conceited weebs who start lecturing the rest of us (projection in ego defense of their error) on how white people in the West should become more Asian. You eat the bugs first, bug boy. Such cucking is, as you can see, Biblically predicted as God’s wrath upon the reprobate mind. Insecurity breeds insecurity, misery loves company, fuck-ups want you to copy them.
If everyone fails, the sexual Marxists reason, then nobody fails!
They want no holy (wholesome, pure) group to be able to compare poorly to.
why be envious of people you claim to be doing better than? Why talk about the West at all after you left? Why are you obsessing over it, if it’s inferior culturally? Racial deserters should STFU and stay in their jungle. We don’t want to hear from you, stay gone. There’s a rise in snarky gammas online giving weeb “commentary” that sounds like CCP propaganda. It’s anti-white, sod off. Why should we care what you think? You ran away from the problems, drop them. It’s like a Boomer who retired to France complaining about UK immigration. No Susan. You don’t get to.
Stats show up their forum anecdotes as fantasies. They wanted mixed bloodlines, right, they’ll be happy with the black grandkids I presume (since mixed dates other mixed, statistically).
In Deut 7:3 even the unequal yoking between the races is forbidden, before the prospect of children is mentioned. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%207&version=KJV
Cultures are intended to be sovereign. Interconnection is weakness.
7:4 says how mixed marriages are insults because of cultural cucking i.e. your child will adopt foreign ways.
Learn to tell your kids no, Boomer. JUST SAY NO.
Otherwise, unchecked, they “invent new forms of evil” like the conceited weebs that are becoming the new Fedora Boy.
insolent, arrogant, boastful….
It’s like the Gap Year story that never ends.
And we’re all expected to listen to it.
One word: why?
Do evil, fine, don’t be boastful though. I shouldn’t be socially expected to listen to some woman’s sob story about how she married a Muslim either. Tough tits, bitch. You knew they was a snake. You signed up for shit. It’s like the thots joining Islamic State, I no longer feel loyal to you either. I owe you nothing.
Our results confirm that there are ethnic and racial differences in the incidence of childhood leukaemia. These differences indicate that some genetic and/or environmental/cultural factors are involved in aetiology of childhood leukaemia.
American diet means you should compare to European whites for accuracy. Twinkies are thots, not food groups.
The highest risk of ALL was observed for children with a combination of Hispanic ethnicity and White race compared with non-Hispanic whites (OR=1.27, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.44).
Deny the lies of the spiteful mutants, anti-natalists aren’t so toxic to the zero sum of Darwinian competition. To actively encourage our genocide is evil.
Funny that the cuckservatives slagging off the Boomers want a free pass to act just like them despite decades of data now. That didn’t exist for them. You’re living in the experiment.
And yes, the Boomers should’ve been disowned by their parents for marrying wrong or too often.
They’ll deport, sorry “return” tortoises for their own good – but not humans.
A new study of Chinese-Caucasian, Filipino-Caucasian, Japanese-Caucasian and Vietnamese-Caucasian individuals concludes that biracial Asian Americans are twice as likely as monoracial Asian Americans to be diagnosed with a psychological disorder.
Zane and his co-investigator, UC Davis psychology graduate student Lauren Berger, found that 34 percent of biracial individuals in a national survey had been diagnosed with a psychological disorder, such as anxiety, depression or substance abuse, versus 17 percent of monoracial individuals. The higher rate held up even after the researchers controlled for differences between the groups in age, gender and life stress, among other factors.
1/3. Over a THIRD of them are literally mentally diseased at the intensity to diagnose.
The study included information from 125 biracial Asian Americans from across the U.S., including 55 Filipino-Caucasians, 33 Chinese-Caucasians, 23 Japanese-Caucasians and 14 Vietnamese-Caucasians.
Stop listening to spiteful mutants.
Nobody’s jealous, they’re clinically evil. Shun the reprobate mind.
nb. The edgy anti-natal rhetoric worked on the Boomers first, ask the dead half of Gen X. However, there’s more than one way to skin a cat and clearly more than one way to commit genetic suicide.
The womb is a very sophisticated form of printer. It prints people. That’s why women hate being conflated for one, it’s an appliance. Don’t defile the womb of your people, that’s treason. Do not corrupt the seed.
Plato’s natural slaves, do not follow. Degenerates are compulsive liars e.g.
High levels of infection in these groups are found in most sub-Saharan African and South-East Asian countries. There is a high rate of concurrent infection for HIV and other well known STDs in patients. Rates as high as 70% of HIV infection are found in African patients with STD, whereas the rates are reaching 15–20% in patients with STD in Thailand [9,10].
Ting Tong has HIV. 1 in 5, roll the die to die. Is it really cheaper to live there with pozz med bills?
If you wanna larp as a gay guy, at least do fun things with your prostate.
Over the course the study, Hahm unmasked some myths common about Asian Americans. She said, “There’s a perception that Asian Americans in particular aren’t practicing sexually risky behaviors. But we found that Asian American young women are at risk of high STDs. For instance, Asian American women had a higher prevalence of STDs than White women in both 1995 (10.4% vs. 7.7) and 2001 (13.5% vs. 8.3%). The incidence of STDs (not diagnosed with STDs in 1995, but developed STIs in 2001) among Asian American women was also higher than that of White women.” Moreover, the power dynamic between genders became immediately clear. Asian American women were four times more likely to have a STD than their male counterparts. “This was shocking,” said Hahm, “It was so much higher than the males.” Accounting for the gender disparity, Hahm suggested that…“Asian and Pacific Islander women also have broader interracial dating patterns than Asian American men. This might explain why these women are exposed to higher rates of STDs.”
when you mix, expect an itch
I think these findings definitely go against some prior conceptions about Asian Americans and sexually transmitted diseases. The 4:1 ratio of STDs among Asian American women to men is astounding. To see what this means, I looked up some global data of STD rates around the world, broken down by gender. In East Asia, and on every other continent, women have slightly higher STD rates than men, however nothing comes remotely close to the 4:1 ratio among Asian Americans.
It’s unclear what the study means by “power dynamic,” whether it means sexual power/demand, or power within the culture. One can speculate on a wide variety of reasons for why the STD rates are the way they are. I’ll refrain from doing so, but nevertheless I thought it was noteworthy to bring up, as a point of discussion. How does this strike you?
it means they culturally celebrate and enable whores – like the childbearing geisha
There are four main blood types: O, A, B, and AB and two Th factors, positive or negative. Most people are either A positive or O positive and the fewest are AB negative. Because blood types are genetic, they are inherited from the parents, blood types have different racial and ethnic differences. The majority of people in the world and across various ethnicities have Rh+ blood type. Subsaharan African populations have a 97-99% Rh+ factor. East Asian communities have 93-97% Rh+ blood. Rh factor is a big determinant in both fertility and pregnancy. If you’re Rh-negative, you will need to take certain precautions during your pregnancy because an Rh positive fetus can conceivably be affected
wait so does Nature abort hybrid babies?
if the RH negative mother has previously been exposed to Rh positve blood and creates antibodies that cross the placenta and attack the fetus’ RH positive blood.
It isn’t our fault Asians need IVF more and more often fail at it, it’s literally in their blood. What are they implying otherwise, a curse?
Unfortunately, many Asian couples face challenge trying to conceive naturally or using fertility treatment. The decline in natural fertility and the lower success of IUI and IVF in Asian women is documented in The US, UK, China, Japan, Korea and other Asian countries.
Fertility in Asian countries has declined to the population replacement rate 2.1 or lower. Many factors contribute to decline in natural fertility in Asian women;
Not our fault. Not our problem. Nature tends to curb the over-population of r-types by introducing more threats to thin the herd.
It happens to Asians who never lived in the West, stop blaming whites.
Repost on the Asian female infertility problem:
When compared to Caucasian women, Asian women undergoing IVF significantly produce less eggs at all Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels, even in women with high AMH. AMH is the most accurate marker for ovarian reserve.
Gynecologic and medical disorders that impairs fertility: PCOS, endometriosis and Systemic lupus (SLE) are more common in Asian women.
Vaginismus : may interfere with regular intercourse in some Asian women.
Environmental Factors: Asian women has more exposure to methyl Mercury and vitamin D deficiency.
Culture : surveys of Asian women and men indicate that they are less likely to consent to be contacted for fertility research, are fatalistic about failure to conceive, less informed about fertility issues, only 36 percent knew that chances of getting pregnant declined with age, and are less likely to suspect a male factor.
Asian women are commonly late at seeking care for infertility and overestimate the chance for getting pregnant.
Look at the national IQs, hardly surprising.
Genetics : Many genes are likely involved. FMR1 is a gene on X chromosome responsible for Fragile X syndrome and its variants. High repeats at this gene may reduce ovarian reserve.
It’s literally genetic. R-selection doesn’t keep those repeats low in the populace.
Did pesky white women interfere with their genes?
Yeah we tinkered with the Ts, the Gs, the As, all of it!
Fertility Treatment Outcomes in Asian Couples
Pregnancy and delivery rates are lower in Asian women following ovarian stimulation and IUI compared to white women
IVF: when compared to white women in the US, 31 per cent of the Asian women gave birth successfully compared to 48 per cent of the white women. Asian women were also less likely to become pregnant; 43 percent against 59 per cent even after control for many fertility factors. Endometrial lining was thinner in Asian women compared to Caucasian women.
Shit, is white supremacy real but only for women? We did need to weather the Ice Age.
I think endometrial lining has a connection to T-levels, it gets thinner with higher T, if memory serves.
I didn’t find enough conclusive data on white men v Asian when I linked sperm quality studies. A little but not as clear. There are fewer studies like that on men in general.
Asian women should be aware that fertility treatment may be less successful and seek care of a reproductive endocrinologist and fertility specialist as early as possible.
In addition there are other factors that require attention in Asian women during fertility treatment especially the higher prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection.
After conception, asian women at are a higher risk for gestational diabetes.
That’s why anglos, who have a lot of Rh-neg, have so many historic geniuses.
Blood type by race/ethnicity:
O-positive is the most common blood type. Blood types vary by ethnic group. More Hispanic people, for example, have O blood type, while Asian people are more likely to be type B. In 2014, Oklahoma Blood Institute saw this ethnic diversity and blood types in its donors.
The O stats for whites are shockingly different.
Limited by who donated, wish I could find broader data.
Some patients require a closer blood match than that provided by ABO positive/negative blood typing. For example, the risk of a reaction to transfused blood can sometimes be reduced if a patient receives blood that is from a donor with the same ethnicity. That’s why African-American donors may be the best hope for patients with sickle cell disease, 98 percent of whom are of African-American descent.
What the MSM never talks about in the West. Bet you never heard about it.
Don’t worry, most people haven’t.
Every time I tell people Russia and China are officially in bed (making the Russia accusation really Chink ones), people don’t believe me until I show them. Russia outsourced its Marxism to China, like everything else.
The Soviet Union never died, it simply changes premises.
China + India = 2819328161 (inc. most planetary fighting-age men)
Minus the feeble and elderly from the Western figures in your mind so….
3,254,462,713 = 3.25 billion members before considering entering members.
Check my stats.
World population when I checked: 7791849800 or 7.79 billion for short later.
41.767% before counting other nation members.
Over half of the world’s population, practically speaking, are in one full union and …. you didn’t even know about this?
So no you can’t 2.2 kids fuck your way out of this from the comfy little suburbs, even including the genetic suicides like MGTOW and dregs of spiteful mutants like SJWs. You could force every single fertile white woman to marry every equivalent man (forcing men to marry) and it still won’t outcompete them in quantity because they’re r-types.
Whites are the global minority, in extremis. I have long since covered this. Go forth and multiply Boomers, you had ONE job. Proof if one generation drops the ball (abortion, inc the Pill) we all suffer. Especially if they enable the super-boosting of the birth rate of the out-group too. The NWO types were breeding us all like cattle for a war, yet to happen. Nothing short of a full Malthusian trap and mass deportations would work now.
Asia is the most r-select continent and race, Africa is also the least of our problems.
4.6 billion and counting, the global MAJORITY. Weebs BTFO. Most of the planet is Asian, they’re such blatant r-strategists. You’ve been cucked genetically already by the bleeding heart of your forebears’ “charity” (really pathological altruism).
4.6/7.79 = 59% Asian. The planet is 59% Asian. Stop ignoring this.
You can’t discuss a future for the West until you address this. It’s redpill reality.
I included my maths, you have NO excuse. What’s the SCO called, again?
They know. They also told white men getting married was ‘too risky’. Boo hoo princess, grow up. Do you get in a car? Don’t do it, it might crash! You sicken me.
For once, the cover models are all-white.
Celebrate the barren life!
If you don’t believe me, you’ve seen that one, have you seen this?
Yay! We’re dead-ends genetically!
MGTOW are pure Establishment propaganda at this point. Whatever the origins, it’s now a weapon.
Why do you think they’re still around financially? They haven’t been “cancelled” on all socialist media?
The so-called ‘incel’ violence (really bachelor is the historic term until age 35) is just a white person version of a terror cell, an anti-white terror cell. Their forums are a cult where nobody is allowed to leave or be happy with a family. Happiness in a family unit doesn’t exist, don’t believe the studies!
So noble, so intelligent.
Because dehumanising white women and only whites as ‘females’ makes you cultured. Nothing like those evil SJWs, who don’t believe in the word ‘woman’! Can you imagine being that easily triggered by the word ‘woman’?
Like fine don’t marry, celibacy has always existed, fairy. It isn’t special. Bragging about something you haven’t done is worse than bragging about something you were born. It isn’t even a thing. At least Africans were born black, they did something.
I have run the numbers.
Try to look young forever, rather than be a breeder, ew!
I covered the circumcision/viagra connection.
Member states plus three observers:
+ Iran, Belarus, Afghanistan = 3,386,833,331
Bumps it up to 43% of the whole world population, so far. As white Westerners are dying apace.
Tell me: why isn’t this in our news?
Why is the white minority stuff never ever ever mentioned to be already here?
Well, I foresee this ending well. Signed, Malthus.
Stop getting surgery and using skin bleach or STFU.
I don’t see how that deluded girl’s use of make-up and apps is any different than yours.
They’re just jealous that she’s naturally prettier. Die mad about it. You’re not pale with blue eyes and blonde hair and a gracile jaw, suck it.
She’s responding to market forces.
Actors have done this for centuries, you’re not special. Asian minstrels larping as white didn’t exist until you had white people larping on stage to copy off of, it’s like trannies stealing “drag make-up” from the stage.
If the transrace thing is a thing maybe everyone is just not racist enough to self love?
Asians are also hilarious when they try historic, famously white vintage make-up styles. Say, like that tragic cat eye flick.
You don’t look like Marilyn, you look like a cartoon about the opium war.
Who u foolin?
Her pretending Asians don’t wanna look white is funny when they’re literally bleaching their skin*, hair, eyebrows, getting lip surgery, jaw surgery, eye surgery, breast, ass and hip fat implants/injections and then deliberate, daily make-up looks of classic white beauties, all to look white.
Cat-eye flick only looks good with white girl eyes, just accept it and stay in your lane.
It’s like how Africans claim to be blonde because of one island of inbreds. Yeah, no shit they’re recessive?? Anomalies mean nothing. A few Europeans look Asian, it means nothing. Maybe an ancestor had an affair, probably?
*The REAL reason they have to wear tons of high SPF, it’s medical. With the ongoing treatment, their skin is as damaged as a chemo patient. That’s why they wear SPF indoors where there’s no sun. The light through the window would cause burns on the bleached skin. Look it up. It’s known about the “treatment” for things like the patchy thing, vitiligo?
It’s either “racist” or “privileged” – just deflect the criticisms, right? We’re sick of it.
Privilege appeals to white supremacy – to call white people “privileged” on the basis of genetics is literally pushing a white supremacy argument, coupling with shame instead of pride. It’s still the same exact theory. It implies there’s nothing we can do about it and to pity the brown and yellow people for being genetically impoverished.
Shit, sorry make-up techniques designed by us, for us, look better on us?
Funny how that works, and applies to EVERYTHING.
I have seen the funny spectacle of Japanese men who thought they looked white by wearing our suits.
It doesn’t work on them. It wasn’t meant for them.
Sure, this girl looks like Ditto – but she’ll grow out of it and appreciate being hotter than these cunts.
It is awkward that some Asians actually look like that, just with a broader flatter nose.
It would be like pretending the Jeremy Kyle people don’t exist.
People are allowed to have a range of features, must we patronise Asians like we pander to blacks now, pretending they’re all cute?
It’s annoying as a woman when a moron from another race asks “how you did” something…. with your face. It isn’t make-up. Most people don’t contour their face to oblivion and draw on new eyes. Like, what do you say? It’s a race thing, you can’t say anything! You could literally get arrested for admitting you have an eye shape. Oh, but they can ask offensive questions, and we can’t ask why they try it on with us…. uhuh.
Aaaand, here it is: (((Every. Single. Time.)))
“Charles M. Lieber (born 1959) is an American chemist and pioneer in the field of nanoscience … In 2012 Dr Lieber, was awarded Israel’s Wolf prize in Chemistry. He, along with 40% of the recipients, is Jewish.”
It’ll get to the point where we need to put a Satan star after their fake names.
Neon Revolt writes: Holy Crap: Federal Agents arrested Dr. Charles Lieber, chair of Harvard University’s Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, with lying to the Department of Defense about secret monthly payments of $50,000.00 paid by China and receipt of millions more to help set up a chemical/biological “Research” laboratory in China. Also arrested were two Chinese “students” working as research assistants, one of whom was actually a lieutenant in the Chinese Army, the other captured at Logan Airport as he tried to catch a flight to China — smuggling 21 vials of “Sensitive Biological Samples.”
The research lab the good professor had helped set up? It’s located at the Wuhan University of Technology. Wuhan China is ground zero to the potentially global pandemic known as the “Coronavirus”.
(Edited) commenters there:
Read up on his primary research focus and then compare that with publications of RNA and ACE2 receptors.
This guy is likely responsible for thousands of deaths and will be responsible for hundreds of thousands more. The R-naught or reproductive number of the virus, the number of people who catch it from an infected person, is 4. R0 = 4. That is like the old shampoo commercial. But they don’t tell two friends. They tell four, and so on and so on and so on. That makes it worse than SARS. This is just the numbers the Chinese government permits so far to be known from a non-peer reviewed study. Early days yet. Another study places the latest published peer-reviewed epidemiology for the mortality of the Wuhan coronavirus at 11%. Yes, not a typo — Eleven Percent. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30211-7/fulltext
He was getting $50k monthly, then another yearly $150k on top of that, then they also promised him $1.5M to set up his own new lab in *WUHAN*. Can you believe that? And the handler of his Chinese Army Lt. student was a COLONEL and prof at China’s prominent Defense Tech University.
Hate China yet?
They want you dead, America.
…The medical knowledge is important for treatment of disease but Ethel Rosenberg Lieber gave a complete recipe for creating a deadly coronavirus to the Chinese military for money.
96% of the novel coronavirus is giant fruit bat coronavirus, with half of it totally novel in placement — meaning bioengineered to target the human ACE2 receptor… Where other coronavirus were weaker in this ACE2 receptor reuptake, this one is highly receptive. If it quacks like a bioengineered duck, it’s bioengineered.
And the Chinese military messed up bad and let this crap out in their backyard it looks like.
The Chinese are dunces.
Likely a bat just flew out of a lab that they had exposed to the militarized coronavirus. Whoopsies. Then, someone caught the bat in order to sell it in the wild game trade. Yummeh. Those darn bats fly pretty good for soup meat.
The Masons know, apparently one has a youtube channel and has been hinting at depopulation but I forgot to get the name.
Recall the Jan 14 2020 highly unusual briefing of Kansas legislature by DHS. Kansas State University is building a biosecurity lab with a price tag of 1.2 billion. Also story out about a professor there being federally indicted for secretly working for a Chinese University. What was that briefing really about?
And a man with experience of “superior Asian IQ” chimes in:
“If it is a bioweapon that got loose China’s government just got a little darker. Why create a bioweapon that affects your own men more than anyone else.”
War with Japan, Korea, India (still under Queen’s rule/loyalty, legally), etc.
Kill off their impossible math pension population.
Lots of reasons.
You are making the very rash assumption that the Chinese bioweapons research scientists (and I use the term very loosely there) have any more understanding of bio-engineering than does a 5-year-old child with his first paint-by-number kit has any understanding of composition and painting technique used by The Old Masters….
Once you understand that for millenium after millenium, the Chinese government has ruthless stomped out non-conformity, and thereby also stomped out creativity and inventiveness.
They are literally some of the dumbest people alive but they always were, the most r-select race, huge mutation burden. They were using hand tools when the Victorians had steam-powered tractors. Literally.
Historically they trail so far behind Europe it’s funny people try to rewrite history, like with the Muslims. Look at their medicine, it’s still superstitious bullshit. In the 21st century.
It’s rice farmer DNA and rice is full of lead, arsenic, mercury.
Stop giving them your clean food and eating their soy stained poison.
Like, when a chimp can use an iPad, that doesn’t mean the chimp is smart, it just means the iPad was designed with subhuman IQs in mind.
What do you think low iq is code for? Why can’t there be negative?
What is mental age in the paradigm of evolution?
Give a Chinaman some books on a subject, and ask him to write a new book for you, and he will simply run to the photocopy shop, and slap together copies of various chapters from the books you gave him, then put his name on the front and tell you he wrote it all himself.
Rule 1 of geopolitics: assume the Chinese always lie.
In contrast, an Indian would memorize one of he books, or get a bunch of friends, and each of them memorize a chapter. Then he or they would write it out again, word for word, and after all of that, still not have the slightest clue about what the book is talking about or what it means.
Credentialism supports parasitism.
People who shit in the streets and refuse to wash their hands will catch something, at some point. They are not your intellectual superiors.
The Chinese massacre of 1871 was a race riot that occurred on October 24, 1871, in Los Angeles, California, when a mob of around 500 white and mestizo persons entered Chinatown and attacked, robbed, and murdered Chinese residents.
The Tong Wars were a series of violent disputes beginning in the late 1800s among rival Chinese Tong factions centered in the Chinatowns of various American cities, in particular San Francisco.Tong wars could be triggered by a variety of inter-gang grievances, from the public besmirching of another tong’s honor to failure to make full payment for a “slave girl” to the murder of a rival tong…
The San Francisco plague of 1900-1904 was an epidemic of bubonic plague centered on San Francisco’s Chinatown.It was the first plague epidemic in the continental United States. The epidemic was recognized by medical authorities in March 1900, but its existence was denied for more than two years by California’s Governor Henry Gage.
A comparison between eight individual samples demonstrated that the Asian male one has an extremely large number of ACE2-expressing cells in the lung. This study provides a biological background for the epidemic investigation of the 2019-nCov infection disease, and could be informative for future anti-ACE2 therapeutic strategy development.
We may dub it The Elliot gene.
…..We also noticed that the only Asian donor (male) has a much higher ACE2-expressing cell ratio than white and African American donors (2.50% vs. 0.47% of all cells). This might explain the observation that the new Coronavirus pandemic and previous SARS-Cov pandemic are concentrated in the Asian area….
Almost like the Chinese wanted to wipe out most of their own race IF there were a war.
Mini post. Kinda. Why is Benedict Cumberbatch so ugly?
No really. If we’re doing red pill observations, humour me.
I mentioned before about old world superstitions forgotten in recent years. As recently as my parent’s generation, they considered ugly children the product of sin, that God was punishing their parents for their sin. You can still find this info around if you look but they rarely dive into it.
You could say it’s about STDs but back then people rarely travelled and slept around enough to frequently catch them. The modern microbiome of the slut is more taxed. So what?
Back to the school mocking. If a child had always married parents but became ugly in the teens, questions would be asked openly and they would get teased about whether one or both parents had ever cheated. This is where we get the term bastard. It isn’t actually about bastards, it’s about ugliness. The ugliness of parental deceit.
You can pretty much tell when there’s a birth defect in a baby, the eyes look dull if it’s mental. It’s a known indicator of fatal defects.
2015 Birth Defects in the Newborn Population: Race and Ethnicity
Overall birth defect prevalence was 29.2 per 1000 in a cohort of 1,048,252 live births, of which 51% were Caucasians.
Full white or mongrelised? Let’s assume pureblood despite America (mixed white, mostly). American whites are on average less attractive as white blended than single nation counterparts, even living in America. Models tend to come from homogeneous national areas, (i.e. subrace) a finding that is known to apply to white settlers in Brazil to this day, they send scouts. Specifically.
Compared with Caucasians, the risk of overall birth defects was lower in African–Americans (relative risk = 0.9, confidence interval 0.8–0.9) and Hispanics (relative risk = 0.9, confidence interval 0.8–0.9).
Failure to consider abortions for “no” reason or gender as defective. Selection bias. A lot of those already had abortions because they’re high abortion groups!
The risk of overall birth defects was similar in Caucasians and Asians. Relative to the Caucasians, African–Americans had a lower risk of cardiac, genitourinary, and craniofacial malformations but a higher risk of musculoskeletal malformations. Hispanics had a lower risk of genitourinary and gastrointestinal malformation. Asians had a higher risk of craniofacial and musculoskeletal malformations.
Didn’t control for proportion in the population, then non-whites are way ahead.
Craniofacial = ugly.
Musculoskeletal = ugly. Well, dumpy.
Unless you’re going to argue a big is beautiful for literal birth defects?
And “similar” isn’t same. It isn’t statistical. This is like IVF success studies again (see below).
Why did some old world men witness the birth? All babies look like those reddish potatoes, it can’t be a resemblance. You can tell a resemblance to one parent over another by middle childhood to puberty.
We’re told that it’s about adultery and it might be true if you suspect a man with certain features e.g. skin colour, an extra finger.
Yet, what can you tell at birth? Ugliness.
Whether or not the man in question remembers that reason.
Cinderella effect also applies to genetic but ugly kids (lookism, it’s aka). The parents reject them, even if one genetically caused their fug.
Take Cumberbatch, product of a union involving adultery.
Fugly. Nice voice, but his father is the looker. Mother is a looker too. The issue cannot be genetic.
Some superstitions have a basis in fact.
Why did old ladies peer into a pram to judge the ugliness of the babe?
To see if you’re a SINNER!
[inc Thou shalt not adulterate]
Picking on an ugly white guy wouldn’t be totally kosher. I have other evidence.
We’re looking for spiteful mutants.
Now the post gets huge.
To more data, ever more data, smother the liars in data:
“Please may I request the following information, records and documentation under the Freedom of Information Act:
Information in regard to people of mixed race parentage- often called ‘white and black Caribbean’, ‘white and black African’, ‘white and Asian’, ‘other mixed’- being at increased risk of being born with a birth defect, stillborn, or of suffering from fertility problems in their adult lives, which is related to their mixed race parentage
Information regarding NHS policy and practice on the advising of interracial couples, who are prospective parents, about the increased risk of their child being born with a birth defect, stillborn, or infertile in adult life, which would be connected to their, the child’s, mixed race parentage
Please may I also request statistical information and records which display the following:
The percentage of overall cases of babies born with a birth defect, which is attributable to each ethnic group
The percentage of overall cases of babies still born, which is attributable to each ethnic group
The percentage of overall cases of infertility, which is attributable to each ethnic group
The percentage of overall births, which is attributable to each ethnic group”
“In Tables 8 and 10, mixed race is included in a single category of Mixed, Chinese and any other ethnic group. This is because the numbers in these groups are sufficiently low to risk being disclosive, and follows agreed statistical guidelines.
a) being born with a birth defect – this information is shown in Table 10.
b) being still born – this information is not published. However, you could request a special extract (further details of how to do this are explained below).
c) we do not hold any information on infertility, and are therefore not able to answer your question about adults suffering from fertility problems, connected to their mixed race parentage.”
“Some research suggests that Black and Asian women have shorter gestation than White European women, and that this may be due to earlier fetal maturation (Patel et al., 2004). The discrepancies in gestation by ethnicity may also be explained by socio-economic, behavioural and physiological differences among the different ethnic groups (Gray et al., 2009).”
In an ONS report. They know.
“Table 10 (184.5 Kb Excel sheet) shows that for four of the five combined ethnic groups analysed, the most common cause of infant death was immaturity related conditions
Mixed, Chinese and any other group, 44%;
For a majority, that’s incredibly low.
and those where ethnicity was
not stated, 49%).
For the Asian group, the most common cause was congenital anomalies (41%). A higher incidence of congenital anomalies in Asian populations is well-documented (Gray et al. 2009).”
“Low birthweight and prematurity are both measures of fetal development. Another measure is the baby’s size in relation to its gestational age. Babies whose birthweight lies below the tenth percentile for their gestational age are known as ‘small for gestational age’ (SGA).
Not all babies who are SGA have a pathological growth restriction; they may just be constitutionally small.
This may explain why babies of Bangladeshi, Indian or Pakistani origin are more likely to be SGA than White British babies.”
Smaller brains too. Inbreeding depression but also group average by nation. Look at national IQ.
https://www.photius.com/rankings/national_iq_scores_country_ranks.html Bangladesh 82
Over one whole standard deviation below. According to the likes of Peterson, useless to a Western economy. The average Bangladeshi. India 82
Recall regression to the mean. Also, friendliness correlates more to low IQ. Do not be fooled. Pakistan 84
Jamaica 71, where we’re picking up new NHS nurses.
Enjoy that decline.
Tables 8 and 10 mentioned in FOI request not listed, have to know it’s there.
Under Downloadable Tables:
“Table 8: Live births, neonatal and infant mortality by ethnic group and gestational age at birth, 2012 birth cohort, England and Wales
Table 10: Infant mortality by ONS cause groups and broad ethnic group, 2012 birth cohort, England and Wales”
For future reference, write your FOI requests as “concern for services provided to BAME women” and “progressive need for up-to-date medical guidance for mixed race couples and the biracial in family planning”.
You have to download the excel, click to tables 8 and 10, then read the footnote of superscript 1 to know to scroll right.
Table 8: All others^1 7.1% under 37wks 9.2% SGA
Black SGA: 9.2 and 12.3%.
Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani only SGA: 17%, 16.3%, 14.2%.
White SGA: 7.2%, 6.2%.
ALL SGA average: 8.2%.
Pre-term neonatal deaths
B,I,P: 9, 30, 47
Black: 39, 13
White: 549, 63
Unknown, not stated: 32
All others^1: 87
For such a vanishingly small percentage of the population, how is it 87? 10% of pre-term deaths were “1 Chinese, Other Asian, Other black, Other and all Mixed groups.”
Do you see what I see?
For non-statistically minded people:
Infant death, pre-term
Black African: 62
Black Caribbean: 20
W native 750
W other 86
Not stated 48
All others^1: 138
See it yet? If you controlled for population ratio, it’d be more dramatic by far.
This is why they hide it and I have to make my own charts.
Term infant deaths
All others^1: 102.
That’s 11.4% from a tiny group of mixed.
Table 10 screen-capped, do your own charts.
Related studies, I do have a point about measurement error.
From one of the links, can’t find which. Calm down. Either they’re abstaining from having kids once here, infertile, the neonate dies or it’s retarded. Being here is actually a curse since they’re held to the standards and economy of a higher IQ nation. They’re voter birds here for a season or tax chattel and they’ll leave when it’s convenient to.
“How a patient’s ethnic background affects her chance of pregnancy, especially with IVF, is a fascinating yet poorly studied area of research. According to a 1995 national survey of family growth, non-Caucasian married women were more likely to experience infertility than Caucasian married women, yet these same non-Caucasian women were less likely to receive any type of infertility treatment—especially treatment with assisted reproductive technologies.
There is very little data in the literature examining ethnicity and its affect upon pregnancy rates with in vitro fertilization (IVF). Ethnic minorities compose a small percentage of patients in the nation’s IVF programs, making it relatively difficult to examine how they respond to various infertility treatments. In the few studies that have examined the affect of ethnicity on IVF pregnancy rates, differing outcomes have been found.
There have been only a few studies specifically comparing IVF success rates between African Americans and Caucasians. The results of two of these studies contradict each other, with one showing that African Americans had decreased pregnancy rates with IVF as compared to Caucasians, and the other finding no difference in pregnancy outcomes with IVF between these two ethnic groups.
Likewise, there are only a few studies directly comparing IVF pregnancy outcomes between Indians and Caucasians. One shows a trend towards decreased pregnancy rates in Indian women and finds that Indian women were significantly more likely to have their cycle cancelled as compared to Caucasian women. In comparison, another study found no significant difference in IVF pregnancy rates between Indians and Caucasians. A more recent study has shown that Asian ethnicity was an independent predictor of poor outcome with IVF. There have been no studies examining IVF pregnancy outcomes in Hispanics in comparison to any other ethnic groups.
We’ll see why.
When I was in training, I published the first study comparing IVF outcomes among multiple ethnic groups. It was a retrospective study utilizing a data set that was the result of the collaboration between three IVF centers in the Boston area: Boston IVF, Brigham and Women’s Hospital IVF Center, and Reproductive Science Center.
We retrospectively reviewed the cycles of 1,135 women undergoing IVF between 1994 and 1998. Only the first IVF cycle for each couple was reviewed. Ethnicity was self-reported. Women who categorized themselves as having a mixed ethnic background were excluded.
Seriously. Measurement bias much?
….In order to better understand how ethnicity affects IVF outcome, it will be necessary to study a larger number of minority patients. In these studies, it is important that all ethnicities be included. If racial differences do exist, IVF treatment protocols could be adjusted to improve the success rates for patients of all ethnic backgrounds. Therefore, further exploration in this area is necessary and very important.”
“After adjusting for certain factors including the age of the patient at time of treatment, cause of female or male infertility, and type of treatment (ICSI vs IVF), the study found that White Irish, South Asian Indian, South Asian Bangladeshi, South Asian Pakistani, Black African, and Other Asian women had a significantly lower odds of a live birth than White British women. For example, the live birth rate for White British women was 26.4% compared to 17.2% for White Irish women and 17.4% for Black African women.
The study also found that some groups of women including South Asian Bangladeshi, Black African, Middle Eastern, have a significantly lower number of eggs collected than White British women.
Moreover, South Asian Indian, South Asian Bangladeshi, South Asian Pakistani, Black British, Black African, Black Caribbean and Middle Eastern women were at a higher risk of not reaching the embryo transfer stage.
The paper explores the possible reasons behind the variation and states that while genetic background could be a potential determinant of egg and sperm quality, variation in environmental exposures relating to lifestyle, dietary factors, socio-economic and cultural factors could be influencing egg and sperm quality, accessibility of fertility treatment and behaviour towards seeking medical care and consequently reproductive outcomes.
No, they were living in the same place. Muh Magic Dirt.
Genetics is the ONLY difference now.
You have NOTHING.
DNA causes germline DNA, really? Maybe?
Furthermore, the increased prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) in South Asian women may have an impact on egg quality and lower implantation rates.
Shit tier WHR tipped us off on that one, see end.
Dr Kanna Jayaprakasan, Consultant subspecialist in Reproductive Medicine, Derby Fertility Unit, Royal Derby Hospital; Honorary Associate Professor in Gynaecology, University of Nottingham and senior author of the paper, said:
“The data suggests that ethnicity is a major independent factor determining the chances of IVF or ICSI treatment success.
“While the reason for this association is difficult to explain, the potential factors could be the observed differences in cause of infertility, ovarian response, fertilisation rates and implantation rates, which are all independent predictors of IVF success.
“The main strengths of the study are the use of the UK HFEA national database which includes a large number of women treated in all UK units. However, the numbers in some of the sub-ethnic minorities, such as Bangladeshi women, were low in the study.”
Professor Adam Balen, spokesperson for the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and Chair of the British Fertility Society (BFS) said:
“Infertility affects 10-15% of the population and more people are seeking fertility treatment.
“This interesting study looking at maternal ethnicity provides useful data based on a large number of women undergoing fertility treatment. The reasons behind the variation need to be looked at in more detail but in the future could potentially help improve success rates amongst all groups of women.”
“Black and South Asian women were found to have lower live birth rates compared with White women” “Black and South Asian women seem to have the poorest outcome, which is not explained by the commonly known confounders. Future research needs to investigate the possible explanations for this difference and improve IVF outcome for all women.”
Almost like Anglo women evolved to breed in the Anglo climate?
“Variation in risk factors and outcomes was found in infants of White mothers by paternal race/ethnicity.”
I wonder which way.
Inbreeding or outbreeding depression?
“Status exchange hypothesizes that in a marriage market framework, minority men marry less-desired White women (e.g., of lower education) in exchange for higher social status. The second hypothesis, in-group preference, simply suggests that people prefer members from their own group, and thus, intermarriage is the less desirable scenario.”
Dudebros like “where’s da studies?”
I’m like “Have you even looked?”
“Together they found that mixed-race couples differed significantly with respect to their sociodemographic characteristics from the endogamous couples. After control for those variables, biracial infants were found to have worse birth outcomes than infants with 2 White parents but better than infants with 2 Black parents.6,8–12 (Henceforth, infant’s race/ethnicity will be referred to by the notation “maternal race/ethnicity–paternal race/ethnicity” [e.g., White–Black].)”
DING DING DING DING DING
TIL Wombs iz white supremacist.
“Consistent with Table 1, infants in the White–unreported group had the worst birth outcomes in each category.”
Trans. mixed. Likely Asian since S. America and Black are already covered.
Learn to read, weebs.
“In general, I found substantial variation in birth outcomes within the group of infants with White mothers and fathers of different racial/ethnic groups. This is interesting because it shows that the common practice of using maternal race/ethnicity to refer to the infant’s race/ethnicity, regardless of father’s race/ethnicity, can be problematic.
aka nice way of calling out deception
For example, it is not uncommon for a study to refer to infants of White mothers as “White infants,” even though “White infants” may imply that the fathers are White. In this study, I demonstrated that infants of a White mother and a White father, the real “White infants,” have the better birth outcomes than do those infants of a White mother and a non-White father. Therefore, the practice of using “White mother” to refer to White infants will yield lower estimation of the birth outcomes because there are infants of non-White fathers in the sample.”
They know. It’s a cover-up.
Category errors galore.
“The infants in the White–White group had the most-advantaged birth outcomes, followed by infants in the 3 Hispanic-father groups. Infants in the White–Black group had the second-most-disadvantaged birth outcomes; the differences in birth outcomes between White–Black and White–White infants were statistically significant: White–White infants had a 2% (70 g) higher average birthweight, 26% lower LBW rate (4.64% vs 6.26%), and 39% lower infant mortality rate (0.43% vs 0.71%) than did White–Black infants. Infants in the White–unknown group had the most-disadvantaged outcomes in each category. These heterogeneities within White mothers show that the common practice of using maternal race/ethnicity to refer to the race/ethnicity of the infant is problematic: White–White infants had the best birth outcomes among the groups studied, so any other paternal race/ethnicity pulls down the averages for all White mothers. That is, the birth outcomes of White–White infants are actually underestimated by researchers who use mothers’ race/ethnicity to refer to infants’ race/ethnicity, and thus, the racial/ethnic disparities between White and any other race/ethnicity may be underestimated accordingly as well.”
“…Clearly, the unreported father is a proxy for more-noteworthy factors, because if unreported fathers were merely missing from certificates, their infants’ outcomes should not be so much worse.”
“Biracial status of parents was associated with higher risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes than both White parents but lower than both Black parents, with maternal race having a greater influence than paternal race on pregnancy outcomes.”
Evolution is racist or instincts evolved for reasons? Pick ONE.
Your Third World surrogate plan may need retouching.
If it fails or dies or gets retarded, you still gotta pay up! What are the odds?
“Maternal age, education level, race and ethnicity, smoking during pregnancy, and parity were significant risk factors associated with PTB.”
It’s mentioned along with smoking.
“…The analysis of interactions between maternal characteristics and perinatal health behaviors showed that Asian women have the highest prevalence of PTB in the youngest age group (< 20 years; AOR, 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28-1.54).”
I want more studies about them. I’m not scared of reality.
That suggests a genetic predisposition to be present so young. I’d compare PTB to WHR, personally.
“Pacific Islander, American Indian, and African American women ≥40 years of age had a greater than two-fold increase in the prevalence of PTB compared with women in the 20-24 year age group.”
Their own women.
Pre-term study and IQ:
“RESULTS: Across all assessments, VP/VLBW individuals had significantly lower IQ scores than term-born controls, even when individuals with severe cognitive impairment (n = 69) were excluded. IQ scores were found to be more stable over time for VP/VLBW than term-born individuals, yet differences in stability disappeared when individuals with cognitive impairment were excluded. Adult IQ could be predicted with fair certainty (r > 0.50) from age 20 months onward for the whole VP/VLBW sample (n = 260) and from 6 years onward for term-born individuals (n = 229).
CONCLUSIONS: VP/VLBW individuals more often suffer from cognitive problems across childhood into adulthood and these problems are relatively stable from early childhood onward. VP/VLBW children’s risk for cognitive problems can be reliably diagnosed at the age of 20 months. These findings provide strong support for the timing of cognitive follow-up at age 2 years to plan special support services for children with cognitive problems.”
So it doesn’t cause but it is associated. Humans evolved long gestation for the brain.
“A total of 9079 patients were reviewed, of which 3956 patients had complete data. Of these, 839 (21.2%) were azoospermic. After adjusting for age, African-Canadians (odds ratio [OR] 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.25) and Asians (1.34; 95% CI 1.11-1.62) were more likely to be azoospermic compared to Caucasians.”
Some of us form opinions AFTER reading. White men are literally more fertile and most fertile with white women.
“Similarly, African Canadians (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.33-2.29) were more likely to be oligospermic and Asians (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.97) less likely to be oligospermic. Low volume was found in African-Canadian (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.05-1.91), Asians (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and Indo-Canadians (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.01-2.13). Furthermore, Asians (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.93) and Hispanics (OR 0.58; 95% CI 034-0.99) were less likely to have asthenospermia. Asians (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.94) and Indo-Canadians (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.35-0.99) were less likely to have teratozospermia. No differences were seen for vitality. No differences were seen for FSH levels, however, Asians (p<0.01) and Indo-Canadians (p<0.01) were more likely to have lower testosterone.”
It’s always the damn Asians.
Magic Dirt won’t fix your shitty sperm.
Maybe if we spend more on the NHS! The evolution fairy may visit!
The lower sexual dimorphism of Asians makes them functionally partially infertile. This is why they marry so young (it isn’t traditionalism) and despite this, have a low birth count per person, and are the most populous race on Earth. They’re actually the most r-selected, Mother Nature holds them back from fertilization with mutations. Along with r-selection, more total fertility issues in the male/offspring (azoospermia, infant death), lower volume AND lower testosterone, it all fits!
Is that my fault? No. Stop blaming me for reading. I’m not, in fact, God.
Hey, we have our own group with shitty sperm. Theirs is just bigger and more characteristic of the whole.
“AR-CAG repeat length was longer in infertile men in Asian, Caucasian, and mixed races (SMD = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.08-0.43, P <0.01; SMD = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.02-0.25, P <0.05; SMD = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.15-0.63, P <0.01).
Notice p-value difference is so loose for white it doesn’t meet the medical standard? 0.05 is too high. Absurdly.
The overall study shows that increased AR-CAG repeat length was associated with male infertility. The subgroup study on races shows that increased AR-CAG repeat length was associated with male infertility in Asian, Caucasian, and mixed races. Increased AR-CAG repeat length was also associated with azoospermia. This meta-analysis supports that increased androgen receptor CAG length is capable of causing male infertility susceptibility.”
“Sixty-four PCOS patients and 40 women served as the control group were studied. The two groups were subdivided according to the body mass index (BMI) into two obese and non-obese groups. Waist:hip ratio (WHR), plasma epinephrine level was estimated, sympathetic skin response (SSR); postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, heart rate variability (HRV), and valsalva ratio were measured in both groups.” “Compared to the control group, obese PCOS patients demonstrated higher BMI and WHR, reduced palmar SSR latency and higher amplitude, altered HRV, higher plasma epinephrine level, and rapid pulse rate. Moreover, non-obese patients show reduced palmar SSR latency and higher amplitude, higher plasma epinephrine level, and higher pulse rate. BMI and WHR of the patients were positively correlated with plasma epinephrine level; while the HRV was negatively correlated WHR.” “The BMI and WHR were significantly higher in the PCOS patients compared to the control group 36.63±4.23 kg/m2 vs. 34.14±3.39 kg/m2 (p=0.041) and 0.88±0.05 compared to 0.79±0.11 (p=0.001), respectively.”
“We demonstrated high plasma epinephrine level during lying and standing positions in PCOS patients. This could be of obesogenic origin as we noticed a positive correlation between plasma epinephrine level and both of BMI and WHR. PCOS patients of this study exhibited central abdominal obesity and the mechanisms by which central obesity drive an increase in sympathetic activity are not entirely clear. Yet, the fat cells have increased sensitivity to lipolytic agents and/or the factors inducing fat mobilization are turned on (16). This was further supported that adipocytes isolated from the visceral fat depot of women with PCOS had increased catecholamine-stimulated lipolysis (17).”
Nice boy hips. Don’t try for kids. (Goes for all races, Spartans forced girls to be lightly athletic to be ready for childbirth as a woman, that broadens hips beyond racial average).
And when the NHS totally fails, picture the fatal correction to reality when these women expect childbirth interventions. No waist? No taste.
It’s genetic. They’re gonna get fat – or the kids will. We’ve all seen them. I’m just saying, the signs were there. Choosing a woman with a shit tier WHR is like electing for a manlet over the average height. It could rarely work out for health, but rarely. Don’t get angry at me.
“RESULTS: Women with WHR ≥0.8 had higher concentration of glucose and insulin (both fasting and after 120 min of oral administration of 75 g glucose), as well as HOMA-IR value, than women with WHR value < 0.8. Also, abdominal obesity disorders hormonal parameters.Higher free androgen index and lower concentration of sex hormone binding globulin and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate were found in female with WHR ≥ 0.8.
There’ll still be guys like “WHR doesn’t matter, medically”.
Muh dudebros going, “at least they’re skinny”. But they’re not?
“Women with WHR ≥0.8 had… abdominal obesity disorders hormonal parameters.”
They’re literally not. Chemically. You can biopsy the tissue and test it.
“the fat cells have increased sensitivity to lipolytic agents and/or the factors inducing fat mobilization are turned on”
My feels have zero to do with that, dude. It’s genes?
NOBODY is jealous. You keep your secret fatty.
I implore you to marry the future whale and learn the hard way. They’re a puffer-fish.
Whatever their race. But the shorter they are, the worse it is. Short women should have an even SMALLER waist, since it’s skeletal. My own is far smaller than most Asians, for instance, despite being taller than most of them as white. If you want to piss them off, say (honestly) that men like small waists. Just generally. Gets them every time, although most people wouldn’t say they had a large one (not really looking and they don’t dress for it). They know they’re broad and they hate women who dress to show any different, including lucky exceptions in their own race, since it’s a countersignal. Namely: I can afford to have a smaller midsection, less running and foraging is required.
[If I want to dress to piss off a group of women, bodycon but for the waist only. It’s subtle and you’d imagine as a man they would neither notice nor care. Great way to tell a woman’s natural WHR – do they like bodycon? It needn’t be tight on T&A, actually that’s better, it’s actually about waist fit. Pill women also get larger round the middle, any weight gain is there and ruins WHR so it’s visual slut shaming too. Love it.]
Follicular stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, androstenedione, and 17-beta-estradiol, were on similar level in both groups. Elevation in triglycerides, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein levels, as well as decrease in high density lipoprotein level in serum of women with WHR value ≥0.8, were found when compared to women with WHR < 0.8. A statistically significant correlation was found between WHR value and glucose, insulin, sex hormone binding globulin, free androgen index and lipid profile parameters.”
Hips don’t lie because biochemistry.
“CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal obesity causes additional disorders in metabolic and hormonal parameters in PCOS women, which confirmed changes in analyzed parameters between PCOS women with WHR < 0.8 and WHR ≥ 0.8 and statistically significant correlations between WHR value and analyzed parameters.”