I love how on the website it says suitable for “Wedding”. That’s false advertising. Imagine how sexy taking that off would be on the wedding night. “Wait, sweetheart, I must remove my silicon stilts! No take backsies!”
Never reproduce with a secret manlet (or womanlet) because your demon spawn WILL hate you and will become a Supreme Gentleman.
I’m done with all the Asian makeover stuff, can we just ban all of this? Even make-up, it’s not like I need it. I haven’t used mascara in years and eyelash extensions can make you blind. It involves putting formaldehyde (of autopsy fame) ON YOUR FACE.
Playdough noses and Aryan contacts, wtf.
The nostrils plugs though. That’s some dishonest signalling.
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.
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.”
Are Individualistic Societies Less Equal? Evidence from the Parasite Stress Theory of Values
[This is how you don’t do a study on cultural differences.]
It is widely believed that individualistic societies, which emphasize personal freedom, award social status for accomplishment, and favor minimal government intervention, are more prone to higher levels of income inequality compared to more collectivist societies, which value conformity, loyalty, and tradition and favor more interventionist policies.
And tradition doesn’t mean, what you think it means i.e. nepotism, grandpa never retires.
The results in this paper, however, challenge this conventional view.
Great, nurture people.
Drawing on a rich literature in biology and evolutionary psychology, we test the provocative Parasite Stress Theory of Values,
because low fitness =
which suggests a possible link between the historical prevalence of infectious diseases, the cultural dimension of individualism-collectivism and differences in income inequality across countries.
Specifically, in a two-stage least squares analysis, we use the historical prevalence of infectious diseases as an instrument for individualistic values, which, in the next stage, predict the level of income inequality, measured by the net GINI coefficient from the Standardized World Income Inequality Database (SWIID). Our findings suggest that societies with more individualistic values have significantly lower net income inequality.
Make your mind up.
White man bad or good.
The results are robust even after controlling for a number of confounding factors such as economic development, legal origins, religion, human capital, other cultural values, economic institutions, and geographical controls.
Oh, I brought screencap.
Shit, a diagram of people who wash their hands after.
Could this have something to do with infection? or…. IQ?
The Parasite Stress Theory of Values, which was first introduced by Thornhill and Fincher
(2014), proposes that regions with high levels of parasitic stress were more likely to naturally select personality traits such as xenophobia, neophobia, ethnocentrism, and, more generally, values that disregard the well-being of out-group members, including those at the lower
end of the economic ladder. Traits like xenophobia and neophobia, for instance, not only
reduce economic transactions between groups and across-regions, but reward conformity and obedience toward traditional order and discourage novelty
As a result, societies with high degree of pathogenic stress were more likely to develop cultural traits associated with collectivist values (Fincher et al., 2008) that view negatively ideas that can potentially threaten the established social norms.
Societies too thick to believe germ theory contaminate their water supply and get infected?
To this day?
See they wanna admit the collectivism but spin it.
From an evolutionary standpoint, these behavioral strategies were mechanisms to stop the spread of
The required amount of immigrants is zero and mercantile transportation didn’t exist for millennia.
The Chinese seemed happy to swarm America as soon as it was legal.
Where did black death come from? Which continent?
Theoretically, then, the effect of individualistic values on income inequality is ambiguous.
Since the individualism-collectivism component loads positively on values such as individual freedom, opportunity, achievement, advancement, recognition, and loads negatively on values such as harmony, cooperation, and relations with supervisors, Gorodnichenko and Roland (2012) note that, broadly defined, individualism emphasizes the values of personal freedom, affective autonomy, and achievement. In that sense, individualistic cultures award social status to personal achievements such as innovation, discoveries, or artistic achievements with high social status (Gorodnichenko and Roland, 2012).
How terrible. /s
A stylized empirical fact that emerged from a series of follow-up studies is that developed and industrialized nations are more likely to be associated with greater prevalence of individualism whereas less developed, traditional and agricultural societies are more likely to preserve collectivistic values (Hofstede et al., 1991).
“less developed” = low IQ
maybe the culture led to the economic prosperity and industry? big if true?
What is this a map of, children?
a) places people want to live
b) places white people live
c) cultures that aren’t shit-holes
d) cultures where capitalism is technically allowed
e) countries that won’t suffer comparatively in the next collapse
f) all of the above.
It’s F, for Fuck China, rates should’ve gone up decades ago.
You read the rest.
Autonomous (individualistic) cultures are ones where people are seen as autonomous and independent entities. In such cultures, people are encouraged to cultivate and express their own preferences, feelings, ideas, and abilities, and derive meaning from their own uniqueness. Embedded (collectivist) cultures, on the other hand, are ones where people find meaning by identifying with the group, participating in a shared way of life, and striving towards shared goals.
Where do you want to live?
In short, do you want to suppress, oppress and smother the smart, gifted people?
Historically they didn’t exist until recently, in the archaeological record. Recent colonialism also mingled some Euro DNA into Indians to make obvious castes but this isn’t about that, it’s about East Asians specifically and WAY before that.
They’re Mongoloid-Negroid half-breeds.
Literally. They’re the first mixed race.
I’m not kidding. Just East Asians and like I said before, the morphological similarities bear this out.
Stronger jaws, larger head overall in size and lower national IQs, huge lips.
Okay, you argue, but how do we know they actually interbred? And this wasn’t some labeling error or mistake?? Wouldn’t there be modern Africans who look Asian too? Interbreeding goes both ways, after all.
Yes, there would. Again, plenty of morphological similarities.
That’s an African girl.
Tell me there was no inter-breeding.
Asian, just to throw you off. Note the nose.
Large mouth, pronounced raised brow, pronounced nostrils, broad jaw.
The Asian one, large mouth, pronounced nostrils, raised brow, broad jaw.
I saw it before but didn’t realize we had genetic proof.
The broad flat nose with flared nostrils with characteristic dip between the eyes plus forehead bulge ALL pinged to me as African.
The profile is very African, mathematically. In profile many of the blacker ones have a very curved forehead in profile.
To test the hypotheses of modern human origin in East Asia,
because it isn’t ancient, archaeologically
we sampled 12,127 male individuals from 163 populations and typed for three Y chromosome biallelic markers (YAP, M89, and M130). All the individuals carried a mutation at one of the three sites. These three mutations (YAP+, M89T, and M130T) coalesce to another mutation (M168T), which originated in Africa about 35,000 to 89,000 years ago. Therefore, the data do not support even a minimal in situ hominid contribution in the origin of anatomically modern humans in East Asia.
A lot of weebs are gonna be pissed.
And to study the men… so that’s an African man chromosome in your waifu, she been blacked centuries ago!
To test the hypotheses of modern human origin in East Asia, we sampled 12,127 male individuals from 163 populations and typed for three Y chromosome biallelic markers (YAP, M89, and M130). All the individuals carried a mutation at one of the three sites. These three mutations (YAP, M89T, and M130T) coalesce to another mutation (M168T), which originated in Africa about 35,000 to 89,000 years ago.
An international study has found that the Chinese people originated not from “Peking Man” in northern China, but from early humans in East Africa who moved through South Asia to China some 100,000 years ago,
Based on DNA analyses of 100,000 samples gathered from around the world, a number of human families evolved in East Africa some 150,000 years ago, said Li Hui (李輝), a member of Jin’s team.
About 100,000 years ago, some of those humans began to leave Africa, with some people moving to China via South and Southeast Asia, Li said.
According to the newspaper article, it has been proven that the “65 branches of the Chinese race” share similar DNA mutations with the peoples of East and Southeast Asia.
This all explains very well why Aboriginal Australians look SO black.
Their ancestors evolved on the African continent and were the first modern humans to arrive in Asia, the work confirming they have occupied Australia continuously since that time, perhaps 70,000 years.
“Australians are truly one of the world’s great human populations and a very ancient one at that, with deep connections to the Australian continent and broader Asian region. About this now there can be no dispute.
“The study also confirms controversial claims that the ancestors of all living Eurasians interbred with the Neandertals,
Both Europeans and Asians, we’re distinct races by genetic distance studies.
Eurasian, like Caucasian, is a category error.
Asians also bred with Neanderthals, we knew this.
while past Asians/Oceanians also mated with the mysterious ancient humans from Denisova cave in Siberia. This is clear and independent validation of DNA work on both these extinct humans, confirming their deep connections to Australians and other indigenous people in our region.”
Wow so they’re like the most mixed race, like the race OF mixes.
The Han Chinese are the largest ethnic group in the world, and their origins, development, and expansion are complex. Many genetic studies have shown that Han Chinese can be divided into two distinct groups: northern Han Chinese and southern Han Chinese. The genetic history of the southern Han Chinese has been well studied. However, the genetic history of the northern Han Chinese is still obscure. In order to gain insight into the genetic history of the northern Han Chinese, 89 human remains were sampled from the Hengbei site which is located in the Central Plain and dates back to a key transitional period during the rise of the Han Chinese (approximately 3,000 years ago). We used 64 authentic mtDNA data obtained in this study, 27 Y chromosome SNP data profiles from previously studied Hengbei samples, and genetic datasets of the current Chinese populations and two ancient northern Chinese populations to analyze the relationship between the ancient people of Hengbei and present-day northern Han Chinese. We used a wide range of population genetic analyses, including principal component analyses, shared mtDNA haplotype analyses, and geographic mapping of maternal genetic distances. The results show that the ancient people of Hengbei bore a strong genetic resemblance to present-day northern Han Chinese and were genetically distinct from other present-day Chinese populations and two ancient populations. These findings suggest that the genetic structure of northern Han Chinese was already shaped 3,000 years ago in the Central Plain area.
So it’s applicable.
And some Chinese are so mixed they’re distinct from their own ancestors.
Despite the fact that the continuity of morphology of fossil specimens of modern humans found in China has repeatedly challenged the Out-of-Africa hypothesis, Chinese populations are underrepresented in genetic studies. Genetic profiles of 28 populations sampled in China supported the distinction between southern and northern populations, while the latter are biphyletic. Linguistic boundaries are often transgressed across language families studied, reflecting substantial gene flow between populations. Nevertheless, genetic evidence does not support an independent origin of Homo sapiens in China. The phylogeny also suggested that it is more likely that ancestors of the populations currently residing in East Asia entered from Southeast Asia.
East Asia is one of the few regions in the world where a relatively large number of human fossils have been unearthed–a discovery that has been taken as evidence for an independent local origin of modern humans outside of Africa. However, genetic studies conducted in the past ten years, especially using Y chromosomes, have provided unequivocal evidence for an African origin of East Asian populations. The genetic signatures present in diverse East Asian populations mark the footsteps of prehistoric migrations that occurred tens of thousands of years ago.
The timing and nature of the arrival and the subsequent expansion of modern humans into eastern Asia remains controversial. Using Y-chromosome biallelic markers, we investigated the ancient human-migration patterns in eastern Asia. Our data indicate that southern populations in eastern Asia are much more polymorphic than northern populations, which have only a subset of the southern haplotypes. This pattern indicates that the first settlement of modern humans in eastern Asia occurred in mainland Southeast Asia during the last Ice Age, coinciding with the absence of human fossils in eastern Asia, 50,000-100,000 years ago. After the initial peopling, a great northward migration extended into northern China and Siberia.
Global distribution of Y-chromosome haplogroup C reveals the prehistoric migration routes of African exodus and early settlement in East Asia.
The regional distribution of an ancient Y-chromosome haplogroup C-M130 (Hg C) in Asia provides an ideal tool of dissecting prehistoric migration events. We identified 465 Hg C individuals out of 4284 males from 140 East and Southeast Asian populations. We genotyped these Hg C individuals using 12 Y-chromosome biallelic markers and 8 commonly used Y-short tandem repeats (Y-STRs), and performed phylogeographic analysis in combination with the published data. The results show that most of the Hg C subhaplogroups have distinct geographical distribution and have undergone long-time isolation, although Hg C individuals are distributed widely across Eurasia. Furthermore, a general south-to-north and east-to-west cline of Y-STR diversity is observed with the highest diversity in Southeast Asia. The phylogeographic distribution pattern of Hg C supports a single coastal ‘Out-of-Africa’ route by way of the Indian subcontinent, which eventually led to the early settlement of modern humans in mainland Southeast Asia. The northward expansion of Hg C in East Asia started approximately 40 thousand of years ago (KYA) along the coastline of mainland China and reached Siberia approximately 15 KYA and finally made its way to the Americas.
That’s how your so-called Natives were made, so …technically, blacks were there first?
Genetic evidence of an East Asian origin and paleolithic northward migration of Y-chromosome haplogroup N.
The Y-chromosome haplogroup N-M231 (Hg N) is distributed widely in eastern and central Asia, Siberia, as well as in eastern and northern Europe. Previous studies suggested a counterclockwise prehistoric migration of Hg N from eastern Asia to eastern and northern Europe. However, the root of this Y chromosome lineage and its detailed dispersal pattern across eastern Asia are still unclear. We analyzed haplogroup profiles and phylogeographic patterns of 1,570 Hg N individuals from 20,826 males in 359 populations across Eurasia. We first genotyped 6,371 males from 169 populations in China and Cambodia, and generated data of 360 Hg N individuals, and then combined published data on 1,210 Hg N individuals from Japanese, Southeast Asian, Siberian, European and Central Asian populations. The results showed that the sub-haplogroups of Hg N have a distinct geographical distribution. The highest Y-STR diversity of the ancestral Hg N sub-haplogroups was observed in the southern part of mainland East Asia, and further phylogeographic analyses supports an origin of Hg N in southern China. Combined with previous data, we propose that the early northward dispersal of Hg N started from southern China about 21 thousand years ago (kya), expanding into northern China 12-18 kya, and reaching further north to Siberia about 12-14 kya before a population expansion and westward migration into Central Asia and eastern/northern Europe around 8.0-10.0 kya. This northward migration of Hg N likewise coincides with retreating ice sheets after the Last Glacial Maximum (22-18 kya) in mainland East Asia.
Very very mixed.
So China relates to East Asia discussions.
They moved up and into Europe, like they’re trying to do now. To be pushed back, again.
At least we didn’t have the African result like they do.
The human genetic history of East Asia: weaving a complex tapestry.
East Asia encompasses a wide variety of environments, peoples, cultures and languages. Although this review focuses on East Asia, no geographic region can be considered in isolation in terms of human population history, and migrations to and from East Asia have had a major impact. Here, we review the following topics: the initial colonization of East Asia, the direction of migrations between southeast Asia and northern Asia, the genetic relationships of East Asian hunter-gatherers and the genetic impact of various social practices on East Asian populations. By necessity we focus on insights derived from mitochondrial DNA and/or Y-chromosome data; ongoing and future studies of genome-wide SNP or multi-locus re-sequencing data, combined with the use of simulation, model-based methods to infer demographic parameters, will undoubtedly provide additional insights into the population history of East Asia.
South Asia–comprising India, Pakistan, countries in the sub-Himalayan region and Myanmar–was one of the first geographical regions to have been peopled by modern humans. This region has served as a major route of dispersal to other geographical regions, including southeast Asia. The Indian society comprises tribal, ranked caste, and other populations that are largely endogamous. As a result of evolutionary antiquity and endogamy, populations of India show high genetic differentiation and extensive structuring.
aka outbreeding depression
Linguistic differences of populations provide the best explanation of genetic differences observed in this region of the world.
No, they don’t.
Within India, consistent with social history, extant populations inhabiting northern regions show closer affinities with Indo-European speaking populations of central Asia that those inhabiting southern regions. Extant southern Indian populations may have been derived from early colonizers arriving from Africa along the southern exit route. The higher-ranked caste populations, who were the torch-bearers of Hindu rituals, show closer affinities with central Asian, Indo-European speaking, populations.
Indo-European only refers to a language, stop.
Still not European, let alone isolated Anglo. Stop.
East Asia is widely concerned as one of the important places for the dispersal and evolution of the Anatomically Modern Human (AMH). How the diverse ethnic groups in East Asia originated and diversified is also widely focused by different disciplines of Anthropology. The adoption of genetic data had provided new clues for reconstructing the genetic history of East Asian populations. Genetic studies supported the hypothesis that the AMHs originated from Africa’s Homo sapiens at about 200 kilo years ago (kya) and then migrated out of Africa at ~100 kya, followed by expansions into the whole East Asia since their arrival in Southern East Asia at 5~6 kya along the coastal route.
Early Homo Sapiens might have genetic contribution to the non-African AMHs. Early settlement, cultural assimilation, population migration and genetic exchanges are crucial in the origination and evolution of East Asia populations. Previous studies made detailed analysis for the genetic history of East Asian populations, which largely resolved the longstanding divergence between archaeology and history. However, this needs further verification by whole-genome sequencing and ancient DNA studies. Here we briefly reviewed the progresses of genetic studies in exploring the population origin, dispersal and diversification in East Asia, which improved understanding of the evolution of East Asian populations. We also prospected the future of genetic studies in revealing the prehistory of East Asians.
The main unequivocal conclusion after three decades of phylogeographic mtDNA studies is the African origin of all extant modern humans.
This is a study about Asians. No.
Title: Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basal lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago.
Stay in your lane.
In addition, a southern coastal route has been argued for to explain the Eurasian colonization of these African pioneers.
new term for rapist, exotic
Based on the age of macrohaplogroup L3, from which all maternal Eurasian and the majority of African lineages originated,
doesn’t make sense, if ALL humans are from them, ALL humans would have that…
the out-of-Africa event has been dated around 60-70 kya. On the opposite side, we have proposed a northern route through Central Asia across the Levant for that expansion and, consistent with the fossil record, we have dated it around 125 kya. To help bridge differences between the molecular and fossil record ages, in this article we assess the possibility that mtDNA macrohaplogroup L3 matured in Eurasia and returned to Africa as basal L3 lineages around 70 kya.
So you’re comparing Asian fossils to African DNA, nothing to do with Europeans.
The coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African (L3 ) lineages, both around 71 kya, are not significantly different.
Different enough to call different.
The oldest M and N Eurasian clades are found in southeastern Asia instead near of Africa as expected by the southern route hypothesis. The split of the Y-chromosome composite DE haplogroup is very similar to the age of mtDNA L3. An Eurasian origin and back migration to Africa has been proposed for the African Y-chromosome haplogroupE. Inside Africa, frequency distributions of maternal L3 and paternal E lineages are positively correlated. This correlation is not fully explained by geographic or ethnic affinities. This correlation rather seems to be the result of a joint and global replacement of the old autochthonous male and female African lineages by the new Eurasian incomers.
See pictures above.
The reservation “Americans”, genetic Asians were also well known for gang rape up until the 19th century, even of little girls.
These results are congruent with a model proposing an out-of-Africa migration into Asia, following a northern route, of early anatomically modern humans carrying pre-L3 mtDNA lineages around 125 kya, subsequent diversification of pre-L3 into the basal lineages of L3, a return to Africa of Eurasian fully modern humans around 70 kya carrying the basal L3 lineages and the subsequent diversification of Eurasian-remaining L3 lineages into the M and N lineages in the outside-of-Africa context, and a second Eurasian global expansion by 60 kya, most probably, out of southeast Asia. Climatic conditions and the presence of Neanderthals and other hominins might have played significant roles in these human movements. Moreover, recent studies based on ancient DNA and whole-genome sequencing are also compatible with this hypothesis.
So more using the Eur- of Eurasian without a shred of proof to include white people.
People with dark skin at those altitudes die of Vit D deficiency. Even in England, the NHS warn about this, let alone Sweden with even FEWER rays. How did their cranial morphology magically evolve, then?
Africans have zero Neanderthal DNA so pretty easy to test for. They have it? Not black.
There is plenty of proof of African-Asian mixing, however.
This explains their lower IQs in many nations, larger overall heads and stronger jaws.
HUGE lips, too.
Naturally the page tries to lie about white people as all magic albinos BUT the Asian part has this:
And morphology considerations:
Of the three crania Upper Cave 101, the “old man”, has been studied in more detail primarily due to its better preservation and clearly adult status. In comparison to modern East Asians the cranial vault is extremely long and low, with a receding frontal squama and marked angulation in the occipital region. The forehead is broad and the supercilliary region well developed. The nasal bones are pinched, with a high bridge, and the nose must have been more prominent than is common amongst living East Asians. The orbits are relatively low and rectangular, which is a common feature in terminal Pleistocene and Neolithic crania from many parts of the world. The lower border of the nasal aperture is gutted, which is customary amongst East Asians, Australian Aborigines and sub-Saharan Africans.
East Asians are just mongrels. They simply didn’t exist as we know them today and the modern Indian is typically a halfbreed with a Brit a century or two ago. This caused their ‘caste’ system.
All analysis of “Early Humans” in China, agree that the Mongoloid type Humans currently inhabiting the area, did not start to appear until quite recently.
But here the devil is in the definitions; we know that modern Chinese (Mongols) are a Mulatto/Mixed Race of Mongol featured Blacks like the San, their Albinos, the Albinos of Central Asians (who later became Europeans), and Blacks like the Jomon in Japan. But understanding just when these admixtures took place requires we know exactly what was meant by “Primitive Mongoloid” or “Evolving Mongoloid” and how is that different from Eskimo? (Not saying that Eskimo are primitive).
Any admixture was usually rape.
As was shown with the Peking man nonsense, many Albino and Mulatto Chinese are loath to admit that they derive from Africans. But the fact is that the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and South Asians, have all been scientifically proven to be Africans. Albeit, as is true in many places i.e. the Americas, the Middle East, etc. They are a mixture of Albino people and the original Native Blacks.
I don’t believe albino is a race, it’s a mutant and they’re often sterile.
But Asians do have substantial African morphology, you can see it in their face.
A few years ago, a Brahmin coworker openly admitted to me that he was quite happy to take advantage of me and all other white people due to our anti-discrimination laws. We were all stupid, he said. I told him he was smart to do so, since there was nothing white Americans would do about it.
Are we stupid when we leave them all the bill for our national debt?
Like the Greeks working with the Chinese.
One thing this article highlights is that while low-trust tribes have an advantage within a high-trust society, they would never be able to organize enough to stop a high-trust people committed to a common cause. They are gonna go back, Deus Vult.
They can’t feed their own children, duh.
The clash of low-trust, highly clannish cultures can also be observed in financial institutions throughout the US, where it is mainly Indians vs Chinese, with each group almost exclusively hiring and promoting members of their own ethnicity. Whites have been largely pushed out.
Feature, not a bug.
One would expect all the low-trust people who got easily conquered by a handful of high-trust people would remember.
I find it hard to understand why they don’t seem to be worried about the inevitable backlash. Is it an IQ thing, or a cultural thing maybe, that blocks reflection?
It’s an inbred with your cousin thing.
The Jews in Europe are moaning about restrictions on circumcision and kosher slaughter, as well as Jewish education. The Europeans will have a hard time imposing legally neutral restrictions (as seems to be their wont) on the Indians. They don’t dress funny. And even if their diet is weird, it’s all plant-based. It also sounds like they send their kids to socially acceptable (by their hosts) schools.
The job is nearly complete whites are docile pussies and sheep by a HUGE margin and they are well aware of it. This is why they co-opt our businesses and institutions in plain sight. Nobody will say anything for fear of getting the dreaded ‘Scarlet R’ placed around their neck branding them for life.
If I was in their position I would do the same. If you going to leave your house unlocked and sit on the couch while I rob you, what do you expect? We have had it too good for too long. Fear & Pain. We are sorely lacking these two educational tools in the West. They are the only thing that work immediately and lastingly for behavior correction. Once we’ve achieved high fear & pain for what is left of the white population then you may see a turn around.
Maybe… or maybe the ship has sailed and they will simply roll over & die being trained to do so for decades. I’m completely ambivalent about it if I’m being honest. I gave up trying to talk to or care about those who care little for their own well being and demise long ago.
Terms useful idiot and fall guy.
My home area and workplace has been thoroughly invaded by Indians. It has not been pleasant.
Did they buy big ticket items? Houses, cars, designer labels?
I remember a Russian acquaintance and I talking about the gem trade being almost entirely Jewish controlled sometime last year. In our conversation, I’d mentioned that it likely wasn’t going to last for long as Russians developed artificial diamond manufacturing almost immediately following the collapse of the USSR and had sold the hardware to American capitalists who improved the tech dramatically since then. That was something which surprised him, as his family had moved to the states when that was all going on. I later gave him a link to a PBS documentary detailing some of how that came about. We joked how Russian and Americans could look past the old rivalries to defeat the Jewish.
I’d figured a few years ago when DeBeers sold their various mines to mostly Indian and Chinese buyers, it was in response to artificial diamonds reaching a quality point where they were no longer distinguishable from mined ones. I naturally concluded that the Jewish at the top were simply cashing out before it was no longer viable to be in the Gem trade and those remaining were mostly about to retire anyway.
Feature, not a bug.
in the end though, considering all this, I’m left with even more contempt for white people who say “I don’t see color”. Especially when all the other colors are seeing color and making it everything. Or as Vox once pointed out – a quote that sticks in my head and I have had to relay numerous times – “You may not be ethnocentric. But your conquerors will be”.
Here in Canada, a Chinese businessman in the financial industry complained that banks have special departments. When Indians come in for loans, they are sent to that department. They get loans on much easier terms, where ordinarily the loan would be refused altogether.
Feature, not a bug.
Obviously I can’t read their minds, I’m just constructing a mental model to explain their behavior. But I think they honestly believe that the reason why they’re succeeding so well is because they’re simply better than us, so there is nothing to fear from us ever.
Even if they read about how high-trust and low-trust cultures interact, my mental model holds that they wouldn’t actually be able to comprehend high trust as a quality separate from low IQ. So I expect that they hold a bone-deep belief that we must just be incredibly dumb.
Gullible, greedy and works long hours…. I think I figured out why they’re allowed here.
You can make a lot of money out of them, as a white or a jew, if you know what you’re doing.
No doubt about it. Here are some charming passages from Suketu Mehta, taken from Steve’s review of the book:
“I claim the right to the United States, for myself and my children and my uncles and cousins, by manifest destiny…. It’s our country now.”
“It is every migrant’s dream to see the tables turned, to see long lines of Americans and Britons in front of the Bangladeshi or Mexican or Nigerian Embassy, begging for a residence visa.”
More evidence that fake Amehtacans are at the top of the list of the worst fake Americans.
Expect more faked iQ data. That you’re not allowed to question.
And you’re not allowed to set up competing companies, just in case.
No such thing as a hyphenated American. Remove their exit plan, make them burn the other passport.
Uhhh, guy. I hate to have to be the one to tell you this, but Beans here in GA have been running their own plumbing and electrical businesses for over 20 years. As someone in the building industry, I had some of my biggest contracts with Beans in Mexico that run huge steel mills, back in the early 00s.
Now though,their families have come over the border and run smaller mills/retail outlets and undercut the prices that we whiteys can buy and sell at, due to their clannishness. My business has been truly suffering since the 08 crash. I
to fold my retail outlet/finishing mill in 2009, losing a crap load of cash. Meanwhile, the Bean boys in North and South Carolina are mopping up, and undercutting the rest of us.
Recently I had to get some electrical work done and my hubby’s health wouldn’t allow him to do it, so I called the service that our HOA recommended.
Quality Electrical. The person I spoke with was a nice young white woman. When they came, it was two Mestizos in a huge white Land Rover with the owners name on the truck. The father of the guys who came own the biz and they have FORTY FIVE employees. You think there are any white ones?
They want to replace the white man in particular. NO trades.
This undercutting works in our bubble economy.
And most PUA types are secretly Asian, using psyops to turn white men against white women.
Just joke about how much their spices reek and their low national IQs – they out themselves, after claiming to be white.
To avoid the same demonization and white guilt borne of that demonization, perhaps the best option is to give the minorities a long rope so that when the backlash occurs, there’s far more modern historical documentation illustrating why you don’t open your borders and why exclusionary nationalism is still required in a post-war world (which is how policy makers treat the west).
How much more evidence do we need than looking at these people’s home countries?
Don’t you want to be an obese smelly vegetarian fucking their cousin and demanding gibs?
And no hand washing, it’s white supremacy.
I’ve been thinking about this for a while now, and someone tell me how I’m wrong:
First, the welfare runs out. Then, the inner-city blacks riot. Then, the military goes in to restore order, but with the feds bankrupted they can’t really occupy every major US city. The blacks in the cities they pull out from (which will be all of them eventually due to attrition) will almost certainly rob/murder/rape/eat any other minorities that didn’t flee during the initial bad times, probably back to whatever country they came from. Eventually they’ll organize raids into the suburbs for resources, but the suburbs will organize defenses, and the losses will be heavy for the raiding parties. Rural minorities, as few as there are, will almost certainly be looked at as untrustworthy and only capable of working against whites. They’ll be removed by force in the dead of night unless they are deeply trusted and embedded within their communities.
No trust in that scenario. Weebs will smother their waifus.
I don’t see a future where America doesn’t stay white. It might have been possible if the elites weren’t deadset on robbing the gravy train, but they can’t get millions of minorities to move here if they don’t hand out lollipops and fancypants to everyone. Austerity measures are about six decades too late in fixing the problem, unless they can somehow stack the courts with people who want a socialist dictatorship.
Racial % of producers. If not kept alive, everyone dies anyway.
Even such a political entity would be working on borrowed equipment and ammunition. They almost certainly wouldn’t be able to project sufficient force to prevent multiple territories from seceding at that point. Nor would they have the capability to reconquer those territories.
Feature, not a bug. Let your enemies eat one another.
But be a Jew about it, take their shekels first.
“Everybody did it” before is right. But between then and now was not all cuckery and Free Market Uber Alles. Tribalism and Globalism are a false dichotomy here, because at one point we had a functioning civilization that was neither gang warfare nor Brave New World.
Libertarian is code for anti-West.
Before WWI, the Scots and Irish protested until the government shut down immigration from Asia completely
Jews will think they’re clever for patronizing Juan’s auto shop, because it’s so much cheaper than what white people offer – until they get their car back and all the shop did was duct tape a hose back together. Unlike with whitey, the Jews don’t have any recourse either, because these minority groups do not believe in honor or obligation like Europeans do. You can call them all you want with your complaints – all you will get back is “No habla ingles”.
And that’s only scratching the surface. Jews perhaps foolishly believe there will always be a need for their law firms, media, regulatory bodies – but these things are only beneficial to a lawful society. That’s not the case with Africans and Mexicans who live in a lawless shitholes. They will be entirely unable to find employment in a nonwhite society.
While they think it’s their nepotism that benefits them, it’s actually meritocracy of Europeans and their frugality which allowed them to flourish here. The nepotism will be what kills them, because they are several hundred years out of practice using it against those with much more serious in-group preferences.
The asians in general assume whites are cowards who won’t fight for their countries.
Long fuse and wrong. Backed into a corner, you’d better run.
The upper echelons at Canadian oil fields are Pakistani and Muslim now; whitey still has the low pay low IQ jobs at the bottom of the stack. So I’ve been informed by a friend in Alberta.
No, the manosphere cucks welcome their Asian boss!
because they’re not as mean as the white man! right?
No, I think you’re wrong — I think they’re going to be lucky to even get the chance to go back.
They’ll go back in boxes.
I think [perhaps cynically] that what’s going to happen is that after decades of our globalist and (((elite))) leadership keeping our borders open, despite it being a big issue for so long, and their continual disregard for this desire the people of the US are going to strike back against the invasion, suddenly and without mercy. — as the replacement/conquest becomes ever more obvious, and impossible to hide; an us vs. them existential battle — Trump is likely the last chance for “You have to go back” (little to no bloodshed) solutions.
It literally doesn’t matter if Trumps “I want immigration in the highest numbers!” was all lies and what’s really going on is deportation in the highest numbers if these efforts are completely hidden/unknown to the public — all the US Citizens unconsciously feeling the pressure build up as they’re further and further displaced simply aren’t going to “snap back” to being “happy and productive” instantaneously: much like the prolonged bad economy from 2008 conditioned [esp. younger] workers to expect a hard time finding employment (in part due to ridiculous employer-requirements) as well as conditioned employers to expect they could get away with “you’re lucky to even have a job” that makes them mistrust that our economy is doing as good as it’s purported to be doing.
In the case of dot-Indians, I would venture that’s it’s their incredible arrogance — seriously, it’s almostBoomer-tier.
Since the fake eyelids revelation freaked enough of you out.
Yes. It is real. You cover it with foundation.
Notice how the mandible itself (the true jaw) cannot be compressed at the corner edges, except with surgery.
Why I don’t trust “contour”. It’s old theatre make-up, literally it is, to look like another person.
This is, according to her, “a small face”. As you can see, still square.
In a natural square jaw (see Jolie or Grace Kelly for white ones) the corner of the “square” is lower than in other women.
Ahigher-set corner, smooth (less bone) and curved jaw sweeping down to the chin is feminine.
I’m scientifically, indisputably correct on that point.
THAT is a gracile jaw.
Finally, the angle of the face is important. She naturally tucks her chin to recess her face’s sides in shadow behind hair but she actually has a recessed chin already. That’s unhealthy, causes double chins but culturally encouraged.
It’s strange how this is suggested once you’ve watched that.
And plenty of “White” Jewish girls are still pushing the definition of natural into absurdity.
Very natural, quack quack on, bitch.
A hallmark of that eye surgery is that to appear more doe-eyed, the best the surgeon can do is make the eyes look more distant from one another. This requires more surgery to open them out again, giving them that sexy ET look.
While it should be available (white people get pigment), and I don’t believe in banning skin products for political reasons, there shouldn’t be a pressure to visibly change your race. That isn’t healthy.
However, Beyonce and co have been doing it years and everybody’s scared to bring it up so…. clean house.
Darker people (including Asians, most Asians are swarthy but they’re also the biggest bleachers – Jackson tier*) who think they can pull off that pale look are wrong. They just look like zombies. Even if a Southern European does it, some Italians and Greeks couldn’t do it either, they’d just look dead.
You can’t erase undertones, it’s literally your blood.
Why hate yourself? Skin is so basic. They don’t look white, they just look ill.
I don’t just think white people should play the cards they were dealt, everyone should.
Bit weird to dye your hair red/blonde and wear blue/grey/green contacts though.
That’s the next thing.
She also refused to have children until she could get white DNA sperm. Deliberately wanted to be a single mother, what a bitch.
Update: most Asians are brown too, that’s true. Remember the B in LBFM.