Unsurprising since this goes against their pro-nationalist, pro-Asian propaganda push.
The culture of beauty is heavily racial. If you love the out-group, you do not love the in-group. Anyone who praises European beauty, hates Asian beauty. The SJWs complain about this as Eurocentric. Anyone who praises Asian beauty, hates European beauty. This is correctly called fetishistic when the person isn’t Asian themselves but also anti-white, which the SJWs approve. A house divided cannot stand. So yes, people can be racially self-loathing.
This idea ‘going abroad’ is a way to avoid Plastics is ridiculous when Asia and South America are actually bigger on it. I hope they bring in law so prospective suitors are informed about the procedures (with photos) long before an engagement or wedding because finding out when the kids are born fug is wrong.
the eyelid surgery is obvious
so is a nosejob (nobody is getting surgery to look more African)
fillers are aiming at profile ‘projection’, a white racial trait
“improved projection” White projection, because Asians have the same dip as Africans
the narrowing is also, frankly, white supremacist since the Asian face (below) is the broadest of all major racial groups
The lengths these women will go to. I can’t understand the women who spend one hour on hair and one on make-up, if you look that bad just kill yourself. It’s easier. Obviously I’m joking but seriously, when men find the Frankenstein’s monster underneath that bullshit do you think they’ll stick around? So… what’s the point, then? Wipe half her face with a wet wipe and see if her beauty does a Houdini.
White people literally wake up like that, eyebag ‘definition’ and all and they literally coined eye contour like WTF. Equal parts Lisa Eldridge tips on the shadow blending and the eyeliner gap is Marilyn Monroe but the rest is absurd and basically plastic surgery with make-up. That’s no longer you but a face painted on to look like somebody else. That is a mask. A mask in natural colours but still a mask. The white techniques on white eyes are supposed to accentuate what is already present. When a girl with the characteristic egg shaped head is daring to label a video without surgery, that’s a laugh. (Egg heads don’t exist in nature like that, it’s too short and squat, she’s had jaw surgery and they even fold in the long ears to make them seem shorter). Also, if there are men who think pink glitter is a natural look I give up.
Rounded brows pointed down are also a white trait. The orbital ridge is shaped differently. That fake brow shape makes her eyes look bigger too. Microblading weirdness.
Theirs are naturally straight and upturned.
They’ve gotten so defensive about all of this whitefishing they’re daring to claim regular make-up use is Asianfishing now. You wish you looked like that, please. Most of your tips are stolen from white women who adapted to their natural faces. Your surgical shit cannot compete. It’s like tits, plastic doesn’t count.
Nobody is getting eye surgery to look like an angry Downie.
That jaw and ear thing is so gross and creepy. Like a gremlin. Cannot unsee.
Replacement is not just territorial, it’s cultural. Trying to replace Western beauty standards for women, with fake “Western” women. Genocide is artistic, if you read the history books. You’re not allowed to have an exclusive standard (i.e. natural, genetic beauty) nor criticize others openly for appropriating it (i.e. they rule over you, have the power to censor).
TLDR: The manosphere is selling you Titanic tickets.
One of two possible explanations: the low quality males being exported there are causing it and/or degeneracy is global and cannot be blamed on the West or Western women. Pick ONE or BOTH. It cannot be statistically denied unless you a bluepill little bitch.
DO THE RESEARCH.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233709670_Divorce_Trends_in_Asia Abstract This paper presents and discusses recent trends in divorce for countries in Asia, highlighting both wide variations in divorce patterns and recent changes in divorce trends for countries in the region. Three broad regional patterns are evident: an East Asian pattern characterised by increasing divorce rates, though there are signs of stabilisation in some countries in the last few years; an Islamic Southeast Asian pattern characterised by declining divorce rates until recently; and a South Asian pattern with relatively stable and low divorce rates.
The paper also discusses divorce in international marriages in some East Asian countries and Singapore.
so try to find the PDF for that race-mixing fun! Isn’t there a piratebay for academic papers?…
It’s almost like the r-types are toxic wherever they go… it isn’t the women, it’s THEM. Sexual locust.
However, they can divorce if they’re married to a foreigner. They can also claim asylum or citizenship (green card style) by going to the embassy of the foreign spouse’s country. Does the manosphere talk about this? No. It’s a ponzi of beach, e-books and pussy. Only a few at the top can actually succeed, by profiteering off the latecomers. Contrary to popular belief in the manosphere (read: delusion) one CAN divorce as Filipino – as long as your spouse is foreign. See:
“The Church’s strong opposition to divorce is probably the main reason why the Philippines is the only country in the world, together with the Vatican, where divorce is not legal. Except for Filipinos who are married to foreigners and seek divorce in another country, and for Muslim Filipinos who are governed by different marriage laws¹, about 95% of Filipinos need to file a nullity of marriage or an annulment² to legally terminate their marriage. However, only a small fraction resort to these remedies because, while the outcome is uncertain, costs are high (usually not less than three months of average labour earnings, and sometimes much more) and the legal procedures are long and complex. Completing a matrimonial dissolution case typically takes between six and eighteen months but the procedure can also extend over several years (Lopez, 2006).”
Sorry I understand data, I guess? My opinions are based in reality.
It’s a technicality, she may not divorce you but she will still leave you.
STARE AT THE CHART. LOOK AT IT. NOT MY OPINION.
They ain’t traditional, living in sin just isn’t. “The increase in union dissolution has been accompanied by a parallel increase in the proportion of Filipinos who live together with their partner without marrying. In the past two decades, the proportion of cohabiting Filipino women of reproductive age almost trebled, from 5.2% in 1993 to 14.5% in 2013 (Abalos 2014; PSA and ICF 2014). As cohabitation has much higher dissolution rates than formal marriage (Figure 3), the rise in cohabitation will likely lead to an increase in the proportion of Filipinos who are separated³. The rise in cohabitation may also be attributable to the country’s “marriage crisis”: cohabitation may be preferable to marriage precisely because it is relatively easier and cheaper to end.”
And over HALF of Filipino women WANT to be able to divorce the weebs:
“While most Filipinos still hold conservative views about marriage and divorce, a growing segment of the population is becoming more receptive to the idea of divorce. Figure 2 shows that over the last decade the proportion of Filipinos who agreed that “Married couples who have already separated and cannot reconcile anymore should be allowed to divorce so that they can legally marry again” increased from 43% in 2005 to 60% in 2014. This growing acceptance of divorce may have contributed to reducing the stigma of being divorced or separated, particularly among women, who were, and still are, expected to make all possible efforts to keep their marriage intact.” The Bible says to forsake a cold or abusive husband so… dunno where they get that idea. If women are keeping the marriage together, they are de facto head of the household.
“The increasing exposure of Filipinos to the urban environment (42.4% were city dwellers in 2007 and 45.3% in 2010) has probably contributed to this growing liberal attitude towards divorce. Urbanization is commonly associated with non-traditional lifestyles and behaviors, and reduces the influence of the extended family on the decisions of young people, including mate selection. This means that children do not feel obliged (by their parents’ choice) to stay in a marriage when it has become unbearable. This constitutes a break from a still recent past when parents and other family members exerted strong pressure on couples to keep their marriage intact in order to strengthen family bonds and protect the family’s reputation.” No comment.
Predictably, higher IQ (education filter) women have higher rate of divorce. Well, high IQ can see something isn’t going to work, ever. The same is true of high IQ men. I don’t know why the latter isn’t mentioned. “Figure 3 shows the odds ratio or the relative probability of being divorced and separated among Filipino women, controlling for different factors. Highly educated Filipino women have higher odds of dissolving their union than women with lower levels of education. Higher education in the Philippines improves the economic status of women and is more likely to provide them with financial independence. Indeed, a key factor for Filipino women when they leave their husband is their ability to support themselves and their children. This sense of independence and empowerment also enables women to transcend the social stigma of being divorced or separated.” The education doesn’t cause that, it’s the IQ filter OF education in many ways. The ones who move West rely on the white tax welfare state to support leaving, yet another leech. Again, they’re materialistic and see white men as money banks.
“As cohabitation becomes more common and as more Filipinos come to embrace more unconventional views toward marriage and divorce, the increase in union dissolution in the Philippines is unlikely to slow down in the coming years. The continued expansion of educational opportunities for women and the growing mobility of young people to urban areas will also contribute towards the steady increase in union breakdowns among Filipinos. With the recent change in leadership in the Philippines, the political atmosphere has also become more open to laws opposed by the Catholic Church, as evidenced by the strong support for the revival of the death penalty. Despite this, the Catholic Church remains a force to be reckoned with in terms of divorce legislation in the Philippines.” TLDR: IT WILL BE MADE LEGAL IMMINENTLY AS THE OLD GENS DIE OFF. ONCE AGAIN, THE MANOSPHERE LIES.
My own country has sensible voiding laws so expect those to expand in Asia too. In the UK, if your spouse hid an STD (including lifelong ones like herpes) from you prior to marriage, it is grounds to have the union voided. It’s also a crime to willingly pass on diseases, aka without prior informed consent, so if they were to go more traditional, the manosphere would be fucked either way. Especially if they relate it to the death penalty and kill the cads. They claim to want patriarchy, but they really, really don’t.
MALAYSIA https://www.rage.com.my/divorce-on-the-rise/ “IN 2012, there were 56,760 divorces recorded in Malaysia. That’s one every 10 minutes. It’s no secret – divorce is becoming increasingly common. The numbers have doubled since 2004, and when we did a manual check at the KL Family Court (which oversees non-Muslim divorces), there was an astounding 266 divorce petitions between April 28 and May 30 – and that’s just in Kuala Lumpur! But those numbers aren’t just made up of jaded old couples. There has been a steep rise in the number of divorce petitions being brought by young couples, according to Goh Siu Lin, a family practitioner and president of the Association of Women Lawyers. Halimatunsa’diah Abu Ahmad, a Syariah lawyer, has also observed a large number of young Muslim couples seeking divorces in court.”
You don’t see the likes of Cappy covering this data, do ya? Just like he says you must kiss the feet of every central banker and a certain religion famed for usury has nothing to do with interest payment. Follow the Pied Pipers!
“Across Asia, the stigma attached to divorce often was the single biggest barrier to getting one. In this generation, that stigma virtually does not exist.” “In an article posted on the East Asia Forum in 2013, Professor Gavin Jones of the Asia Research Institute of the National University of Singapore, said “divorce rates throughout East and South-East Asia appear to have been generally on the rise since the 1980s, partly because the stigma attached to divorce appears to have faded.”” “For a lot of young couples today, personal happiness outweighs an unhappy marriage….” Global narcissism. GLOBAL. An attempted abuser story: “His own happiness was so important to him that he wanted out because he couldn’t change his spouse to his liking,” said Halimatun. This is why courtship is so important. YOU CANNOT CHANGE ANYONE EXCEPT YOURSELF. And why would a woman change after she got the ring? That’s insane. “Women now make up 57% of Malaysian graduates — they are educated, financially independent and socially empowered. They no longer have to put up with harmful relationships. …This means we will be seeing more two-income families, with young women progressively more career-oriented. That’s the good news. The bad news is, archetypal Asian stereotypes and thinking still exist, and the notion that a woman must shoulder the burden of household chores and child care has led to many divorces, said Goh.”
UP and coming economy = destroys family. You picked this.
“In 1940, the average age of marriage in Malaysia was 18.5, and in 1970, it was 22.3, according to a research paper by Barbara Von Elm and Charles Hirschman titled Age At First Marriage In Peninsular Malaysia. Now, according to a National Population and Family Development Board survey on trends between 2000 to 2007, the average marrying age of Malaysians appears likely to increase to 33 in 2015.”
That’s a K force, good. Fewer unwanted kids. Demographic transition at play.
“But, perhaps just as importantly, getting married later could also greatly reduce your risk of getting a divorce. Sociologist Belinda Hewitt of the University of Queensland told the Sydney Morning Herald in 2012: “Basically, if you marry under the age of 25, you have about a four times increased risk of divorce.” Hewitt’s research also indicated that each additional year’s delay in marriage age reduces the odds of marital breakdown by almost six per cent per year for men, and nine per cent per year for women.”
“More than 1,100 divorces have been recorded each day across Indonesia in the last three years, triggered by domestic violence and financial problems, a family care association reported. … It means that before 2017 an average of 288,000 divorces were recorded every year but the figure jumped to around 421,200 annually over the past three years, the association said.”
It’s easy to tell which MGTOW are wannabe abusers, claiming domestic abuse must be fake. “About 80 percent of cases were filed by wives who suffered domestic violence at the hands of their husbands, said Sunarti.” And for all the damage to children when their parents are divorced, it’s nothing to the trauma of living with an abusive parent or witnessing abuse of a parent. So hush.
And the Asian women are planning on locking down a white beta when Asians reject them. https://www.economist.com/briefing/2011/08/20/the-flight-from-marriage “WITH her filmy polka-dot dress, huge sunglasses and career as a psychologist, Yi Zoe Hou of Taiwan might seem likely to be besieged by suitors. Yet, at 35, she is well past Taiwan’s unspoken marriage deadline. “It’s a global village,” she shrugs. “If I can’t find a Taiwanese guy that accepts my age, I can find another man somewhere else.” Maybe—but since she still wants children, Ms Hou is also wondering whether to use a sperm bank or ask a male friend to be a sperm donor. She represents a new world of family life for Asians.”
notice the race-mixers are the shit tier of whatever society they’re from?
According to this, the weebs should be going to South America, but we know they just want a woman who looks like a little kid, so fuck data. https://www.unifiedlawyers.com.au/blog/global-divorce-rates-statistics/ Marrying a Christian also means nothing, especially if one isn’t strong in the faith oneself. You don’t get a decrease marrying a Christian unless you also have always been a Christian. Recent converts, especially deceptive ones who feel entitled to ‘trade up’ to the church virgin after picking up STDs for years with no remorse, are like trannies in all their red flag glory. It’s the comparable gender equivalent. Sneaky fucker strategy in evolution, same thing. Your divorce risk will always be high if you’ve been to Pleasure Island, because of YOU. They act like female virginity can wash away all their sins, including divorce risk. Nope. If anything, the virgin wife would hold you to higher standards, including no porn or other cheating – causing divorce. I’d like to see that data. Do those waiting for marriage have higher standards to REMAIN married? I’ve seen so. Anyway, virgins want another virgin, not a used up manwhore (or ho). Nobody waits for a slut – who couldn’t wait for you. This PC idea you cannot help falling for someone is bull. Lust is not love.
Most common reasons include incompatibility (why did you date them?), infidelity (sue), addiction (sue) and abuse (again, sue them too). “To get a divorce in the UK, you need to be married at least a year and prove to the court that your marriage has broken down due to one of the following reasons:” True but you can void it if they had an STD and didn’t openly (i.e. not jokingly) disclose it before the signature. https://www.gov.uk/how-to-annul-marriage “the other person had a sexually transmitted disease (STD) when you got married” just ONE
that’s the real reason the PUAs hate England it’s legally tricky to be a slut here, from street harassment laws to passing on STD laws
CCP panic https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/How-Chinese-fell-out-of-love-with-marriage “Then there is the age factor. Chinese are increasingly getting married later. The largest age group of people getting married in China is now 25-29, compared with 20-24 in the past, while the number of people over the age of 40 registering for marriage has risen sharply.” W-w-who will pay for the Boomers? Themselves. BOOTSTRAPS. “Most parts of China have witnessed a declining marriage rate since 2013. Generally, there is a negative correlation between a region’s growth in gross domestic product and marriage rates.” The (((economists))) don’t say that. “China’s housing prices have been rising sharply since 1998, stressing newlyweds and their parents. Between 2004 and 2018, the outstanding value of individual housing loans increased sixteenfold from 1.6 trillion yuan to 25.8 trillion yuan. In 2018, these mortgages accounted for 54% of residents’ total loans.” Boomer housing bubble strikes again! Kinda like Marxism doesn’t work? Nah, get banks to dole out eternal loans. “In 1982, there were 107.6 boys born for every 100 girls. The figure rose to 110 in 1990, and to118 in 2000. It has since exceeded 120.” When I say they will eventually ban race-mixing, I am not kidding. And where China goes, the rest of Asia soon follows. They will protect their men and their women from foreign conquest. And they’ll be righteous in doing so. Sexual predation is wrong. Poaching from foreign races is degenerate. Mark my words, they WILL bring in laws to retain their women. “There is a growing trend of people getting married and having children later in life, which has created to growing senior-care burden that could become a serious drag on the country’s economy.” K-selection, meet Marxism. The Boomers could always… get a job? “China should take measures to help people who cannot afford to get married and raise children. The government should introduce a comprehensive package of pro-family measures, covering housing, education and health care.” OH YES, THE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY A MARXIST GOVERNMENT… CAN BE SOLVED, WITH MORE MARXIST GOVERNMENT! BRILLIANT JENKINS!
and Asian Millennials are divorcing like Boomers.
Due to economic boom.
The Boomer housing bubble MUST pop. This is not a purely Western problem.
“cardiometabolic clinical correlates related to total testosterone (TT), free testosterone (fT), androstenedione (ASD), dehydroepiandrosterone-sulfate (DHEAS), estrone (E1), estradiol (E2), and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG).
Results: Waist circumference and BMI (β-coefficient: -0.03; 95% CI: -0.04; 0.03) were inversely related to SHBG, and BMI was positively related to TT (β-coefficient: 0.005; 95% CI: 0.001; 0.009), fT, E1, and E2. Smoking was positively related to TT (β-coefficient: 0.04; 95% CI: 0.01; 0.06), ASD, and fT. Systolic blood pressure (TT: β-coefficient: 0.002; 95% CI: 0.001; 0.003), hypertension (TT: β-coefficient: 0.05; 95% CI: 0.003; 0.11), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (TT: β-coefficient: 0.02; 95% CI: 0.01; 0.05), and total cholesterol (TT: β-coefficient: -0.03; 95% CI: 0.01; 0.05) were positively related to TT and ASD. Finally, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and metabolic syndrome (MetS) were positively related to fT, but inversely related to SHBG.
Conclusions: Our population-based study, with sex hormone concentrations measured by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry, revealed associations between clinical correlates including waist circumference, smoking, cohabitation, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, and MetS with sex hormones. Thus, sex hormones and SHBG may play a role in the cardiovascular risk profile of women.”
Both obesity and anxiety symptomatology were separately associated with the same sex hormone alteration in premenopausal women: higher total testosterone level (0.97 ± 0.50 in obese vs. 0.86 ± 0.49 nmol/L in normal-weight women, p = 0.026 and 1.04 ± 0.59 in women with vs. 0.88 ± 0.49 nmol/L in women without anxiety symptomatology, p = 0.023). However, women with anxiety symptomatology had non-significantly higher estradiol levels than women without anxiety symptomatology (548.0 ± 507.6 vs. 426.2 ± 474.0 pmol/L), whereas obesity was associated with lower estradiol levels compared with those in normal-weight group (332.7 ± 386.5 vs. 470.8 ± 616.0 pmol/L). Women with anxiety symptomatology had also significantly higher testosterone and estradiol composition (p = 0.006). No associations of sex hormone levels and BMI with anxiety symptomatology in postmenopausal women were found.
Conclusions: Although both obesity and anxiety symptomatology were separately associated with higher testosterone level, there was an opposite impact of anxiety and obesity on estradiol levels in premenopausal women. We did not find an evidence that the sex hormone alterations related to obesity are playing a significant role in anxiety symptomatology in premenopausal women. This could be the explanation why we did not find an association between obesity and anxiety. In postmenopausal women, other mechanisms seem to work than in the premenopausal group.
Regional fat distribution (RFD) has been associated with metabolic derangements in populations with obesity. For example, upper body fat patterning is associated with higher levels of free testosterone (FT) and lower levels of sex-hormone binding globulin (SHBG). We sought to determine the extent to which this relationship was true in a healthy (i.e., non-obese) female population and whether RFD influenced androgen responses to resistance exercise. This study examined the effects of RFD on total testosterone (TT), FT, and SHBG responses to an acute resistance exercise test (ARET) among 47 women (22+/-3 years; 165+/-6 cm; 62+/-8 kg; 25+/-5%BF; 23+/-3 BMI). RFD was characterized by 3 separate indices: waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), ratio of upper arm fat to mid-thigh fat assessed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI ratio), and ratio of subscapular to triceps ratio (SB/TRi ratio). Skinfolds were measured for the triceps, chest, subscapular, mid-axillary, suprailaic, abdomen, and thigh regions. The ARET consisted of 6 sets of 10 RM squats separated by 2-min rest periods. Blood was obtained pre- and post- ARET. TT, FT, and SHBG concentrations were determined by radioimmunoassay. Subjects were divided into tertiles from the indices of RFD, and statistical analyses were performed by an ANOVA with repeated measures (RFD and exercise as main effects). Significant (p < or = .05) increases following the AHRET were observed for TT (approximately 25%), FT (approximately 25%), and SHBG (4%). With multiple regression analysis, anthropometric measures significantly predicted pre- concentrations of FT, post-concentrations of TT, and pre-concentrations of SHBG. The SB/TRi and MRI ratios but not the WHR, were discriminant for hormonal concentrations among the tertiles. In young, healthy women, resistance exercise can induce transient increases in testosterone, and anthropometric markers of adiposity correlate with testosterone concentrations.
So exercise will boost a woman’s natural T. If they already have high T….
If their BMI is higher for their size, they already have high T comparatively. If they already have it racially… probably not good.
Compared to the decline in E2 concentrations, androgen concentrations declined minimally over the MT. T (β 9.180, p < 0.0001) and E1 (β 11.365, p < 0.0001) were higher in Whites than in AAs, while elevations in DHEAS (β 28.80, p = 0.061) and A4 (β 0.2556, p = 0.052) were borderline. Log-transformed E2 was similar between Whites and AAs (β 0.0764, p = 0.272). Body mass index (BMI) was not significantly associated with concentrations of androgens or E1 over time.
so black and white is off the hook
This report suggests that the declines in E2 during the 4 years before and after the FMP are accompanied by minimal changes in DHEAS, A4, T, and E1. There are modest differences between Whites and AAs and minimal differences by BMI.
During a median follow up of 6.3 years, 45 patients relapsed. Testosterone levels significantly increased across BMI categories (p = 0.001). Both circulating testosterone and BMI were positively associated with disease free survival (p = 0.005 and p = 0.021, respectively). A significant interaction was found between testosterone and BMI (p = 0.006). For normal-weight women, testosterone concentration around median (0.403 ng/mL) or third quartile (0.532 ng/mL) showed a high significant HR of relapse (5.52; 95% CI:1.65–18.49 and 4.55; 95% CI:1.09–18.98, respectively). Overweight patients showed increased HR at increasing testosterone levels, reaching a significant high HR (4.68; 95% CI:1.39–15.70) for testosterone values of 0.782 ng/mL (95th percentile). For obese patients HR decreased (not significantly) at increased testosterone concentrations, explaining the interaction between testosterone levels and BMI categories.
In ER-positive postmenopausal breast cancer patients, high testosterone levels are associated with worse prognosis in normal-weight and overweight women, whereas in obese seems to be associated with a better outcome. Although the results require further validation, they suggest that assessment of circulating testosterone and BMI could help to identify postmenopausal ER-positive patients at higher risk of relapse and potentially open new therapeutic strategies.
High T isn’t good, even in normal weight women. Water is wet.
“The findings of this study suggest high plasma levels of testosterone could play a role in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes among women,” Jon Jarløv Rasmussen, MD, PhD, a specialist registrar and postdoctoral researcher in the department of endocrinology at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark, told Healio. “The incidence of type 2 diabetes was rather low in the study, but the results implicate that screening for type 2 diabetes among women with higher plasma levels of testosterone may be beneficial, even among women who are young and without established comorbidities, such as polycystic ovary syndrome.”
In a retrospective study, Rasmussen and colleagues analyzed data from 8,876 healthy women (mean age, 38.5 years) who provided blood samples to measure plasma testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone-sulfate (DHEAS), dihydrotestosterone (DHT) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) between January 2007 and December 2015. Researchers analyzed androgens using tandem liquid-chromatography mass spectrometry. Researchers used Poisson regression models to calculate incidence rate ratios for developing type 2 diabetes during a median follow-up of 8.1 years, stratified by androgen quartiles.
‘Normal weight’ women can get Type 2. Since Asians have higher T from higher BMI (against the white norm), they’ll be more likely to get it. This also explains the gestational diabetes common in Asian women, especially if the baby is mixed.
Nationwide, as many as 1 in 4 people who have diabetes don’t know they have it. But for Asian Americans, that number is much higher—1 in 2, the highest of all ethnic/racial groups. Why aren’t more getting diagnosed?
Weebs do not mention this. If your apparent rationale for avoiding fat white women is avoiding the Diabeetus genes, Asian is then categorically the worst racial group to mix with.
1 in 2, flip a coin, rice cooker.
I bet it’s higher in the women due to sweet tooth, so likely worse.
But people of Asian descent have less muscle and more fat than other groups and often develop diabetes at a younger age and lower weight. That extra body fat tends to be in the belly (visceral fat). This isn’t the “inch you can pinch,” the fat stored just under the skin. Visceral fat is out of sight, wrapped around organs deep in the body. You can’t tell how much visceral fat someone has by looking at them.
I didn’t call them skinny-fat to be mean, they really are!
Visceral fat is also sometimes known as “active” fat because it drives certain processes in the body that can increase the risk for heart disease, stroke, and other serious health conditions. Everybody has some visceral fat, but having too much is a major risk factor for developing type 2 diabetes.
….But BMI doesn’t catch Asian Americans in the normal weight range (18.5 to 24.9) who may very well have too much visceral fat and be at risk for type 2 diabetes. Researchers are now suggesting that people of Asian heritage get tested if their BMI is 23 or greater. Type 2 diabetes can be prevented or delayed, but only if people know they’re at risk and can take action!
They need a totally different (lower) testing standard, but they’re just like us, guys! Nay, SUPERIOR!
The same volume food in a smaller body, this isn’t hard to figure out. They’re not white women, eating like us makes them FAT.
Pregnant South Asian women carry a higher risk for developing gestational diabetes, a condition that’s dangerous for both mother and child. Between 2 and 10 percent of all pregnancies each year are complicated by gestational diabetes
2-10% in which demographic? Sounds like all? I bet it’s higher in certain ones, isn’t it?
Under risk factors is basically – be non-white
Being of Hispanic, Native American, African-American, Asian-American or Pacific Islander descent.
Women who have had gestational diabetes have a 20 to 50 percent chance of developing diabetes in the 5 to 10 years following pregnancy.
Our data indicate that although the historical or clinical risk factors for GDM are valid in Asians, using risk factors alone to select such patients for testing for GDM is inadequate. Many Asian women who develop GDM have no risk factors at all.
When Natural Selection hates you so much… maybe give it up?
r-types have higher numbers of issues like this, that would be fatal under natural law
They don’t ‘choose’ to stop at 1-2 kids, it isn’t ‘culture’, it’s fear (see below).
To avoid overlooking significant numbers of women with GDM, one may lower the specificity of the criteria, but this requires that the majority of patients be tested.
wow, that bad
Logistically, it is much simpler to conduct universal screening for all Asian women in Western countries, rather than to apply selective testing in order to spare a small percentage of women from being tested. Therefore, our findings strongly support recommendations for universal screening for GDM in pregnant women of Asian origin in Western countries. However, in places where the incidence of GDM is low, such as in some developing countries, the selection of patients for testing by the risk factors may be reasonable.
Introduction:Asian women have a higher prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus than women of other races/ethnicities. We aimed to compare the prevalence of gestational diabetes among Asian American women to other racial/ethnic groups and explore whether the higher occurrence of the disorder among Asian women can be explained by acculturation.
Clearly I am making this all up to feel better, right guys?
Among the 5,562 women studied, the weighted prevalence of gestational diabetes was 15.5% among Asian American women, followed by 9.0% among non-Hispanic black women, 10.7% among Hispanic women, and 7.9% among non-Hispanic white women.
15.5% v. 7.9%
Diabetes at DOUBLE the rate of whites!
but they’re just like us
2.44x the risk
and that’s controlled, independently
Compared with non-Hispanic white women, Asian women had 2.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.81–3.29; P < .001) times the odds of having gestational diabetes, independent of maternal age, education, marital status, income, prenatal care adequacy, prepregnancy BMI, and physical activity. Acculturation was negatively associated with having gestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR] = 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86–0.99) and explained 15.9% (95% CI, 11.38%–25.08%; P < .001) of the association between Asian race and the condition.
About 85% genetic. Great odds.
We found that Asian race was an independent risk factor for gestational diabetes, and higher acculturation may play a protective role against it in Asian American women.
What is already known about this topic?
Asian women have a higher prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus than women of other races. However, little data exist on why prevalence is highest among Asian women.
I sense genetics.
If they’re having unnatural babies (too large for their race, mixed) supported by modern medicine, they’d be more likely to die anyway, right? Medicine can only do so much. Weaker genes die a la Darwin.
The biggest r-select factor would be risk of death while breeding, that would be the surest thing. The genes trying to extinct themselves.
Does this data exist? Also for the neonates?
YOU BET IT DOES.
Let’s see the weebs explain away these studies. They’ll probably just ignore me… again.
Pregnancy related mortality can be defined as death of the mother during pregnancy, delivery, or within one year postpartum. While 700 pregnancy-related deaths occur each year, 2/3 of these deaths are considered to be preventable.
Modern medicine, dysgenic again.
Overall pregnancy related mortality in the United States occurs at an average rate of 17.2 deaths per 100,000 live births. However, that number jumps to 43.5/100,000 for non-Hispanic Black women and decreases to 12.7/100,000 for non-Hispanic white women and 11/100,000 for Hispanic women.
No data listed for Asian, odd?
For mothers of all backgrounds, leading causes of death include cardiovascular conditions, hemorrhage, and infection. However, for non-Hispanic Black women, leading causes of death include cardiovascular conditions in addition to cardiomyopathy, pre-eclampsia, and eclampsia (hypertensive disorders).
Non-Hispanic Black women are also significantly more likely to have a severe maternal morbidity (SMM) event at the time of delivery. For every maternal death there are 70 cases of SMM events that are considered “near misses.” These events can have long-term or short-term consequences to a woman’s health. Over the past 20 years, cases of SMM have increased by over 200%, while cases disproportionately affect Black women. One study found Black women experienced SMM at a rate 2.1 times greater than that of white women.
To better understand and address these disparities, researchers suggest providers increase screening for social determinants of health. Levels of stress, trauma, food insecurity, neighborhood violence, and access to prenatal care are all factors that may contribute to the disparities and warrant further investigation.
Although most maternal deaths result from cardiovascular and hypertensive disorders, researchers found Asian/Pacific Island women exhibit the highest prevalence of gestational diabetes, which can increase pregnancy complications, at 14.8%.
One study presented in the session focused on behavioral interventions and protective factors among women with gestational diabetes. A Kaiser Permanente analysis of women in northern California found Black women have a lower prevalence of gestational diabetes when compared with Asian Indian, Filipina, Southeast Asian and Chinese women. White women had the lowest rates of the disease overall.
Screening for postpartum diabetes is recommended to all women within 4 to 12 weeks postpartum. However, rates of screening vary among women with different racial and ethnic backgrounds, suggesting tailored strategies to reduce risk and improve healthcare behaviors may be effective.
Racial medicine, openly.
An additional study explored how racial and ethnic disparities impact severe neonatal morbidities, specifically among very preterm children (born <32 weeks of gestation). Preterm birth has been associated with several health conditions developing later in life, including diabetes.
Presenter Teresa Janevic, PhD, defined race as “linked to phenotype and /or ancestry that indexes one’s location on the US social hierarchy of socially constructed groupings (i.e., races) that has been based primarily on skin color.”
genes aren’t social
Africans in Africa also have the same ‘risk’ as one in America. No magic dirt.
In contrast, Janevic defined ethnicity as “tied to race and used both to distinguish diverse populations and to establish personal or group identity, usually based on shared culture or beliefs.”
Culture? Belief? Believe your way out of diabetes. I’ll wait.
In a population-based retrospective cohort analysis using hospital discharge data linked with vital statistics at birth and death records, researchers determined Black infants were at the highest risk of dying within less than 28 days after discharge, or suffering neonatal morbidities in the time between birth and discharge. Black infants were followed by Hispanic infants, while white and Asian infants had similar low risks.
We’ll see about that.
Of the 39 New York City hospitals included in the study, researchers found a 6-fold difference in risk of combined mortality and morbidity outcomes. “Black infants were at twice the risk of being at a hospital that has risk-adjusted high rates of combined mortality and morbidity,” Janevic noted, while Hispanic infants had a 1.5 increased risk to receive care from one of these hospitals. “Hospital quality where women of color deliver likely contributes to these disparities,” she concluded.
Like schools, it depends on the IQ of the people working there.
Another investigation detailed how environmental factors and population level exposures impact disparities in preterm birth and infant mortality. “Non-Hispanic Black infants compared with non-Hispanic white infants have twice the risk of death in the first year,” explained presenter Heather Burris, MD. “This is particularly striking because Black infants just make up 15% of all births in the United States but are counting for 29% of all deaths.”
Among causes of infant death, preterm birth and low birth weight related death, along with pregnancy complications, account for the highest racial and ethnic disparities between non-Hispanic Black and white infants. Black infants are also significantly more likely to be born preterm than white infants.
an r-factor unless twins
Researchers note genetics and education level have very little impact in accounting for disparities in preterm birth. Although women with higher education tend to have lower preterm birth rates, Black women who graduated from college have a higher risk of preterm birth than white women who dropped out of high school.
I’m so glad white people already survived multiple genetic purges in our history.
Through analyzing delivery data and creating models based on air pollution severity in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, investigators discovered air pollution is associated with spontaneous preterm birth. Data also show Black Americans experience consistently higher exposure to air pollutants, measured in fine particulate matter (PM)2.5.
An additional analysis between preterm birth and nationwide neighborhood deprivation index (encompassing income below the poverty level, vacant homes, education levels, among other factors) found that Black women experience neighborhood deprivation exposure at almost 2 standard deviations (SDs) higher than white women in Philadelphia.
Overall, Black women are 4 times more likely to live in a neighborhood with high violent crime and high air pollution than white women. “When we look at preterm birthweights, we can see that it is women living in these high-high neighborhoods that have the highest risk of preterm birth,” Burris said. However, these associations were consistent regardless of race.
They gestate for less time than whites, this is known. Africans in Africa do it.
Now we’ve established some things. An r-study in Asian women.
Increased Perinatal Morbidity and Mortality Among Asian American and Pacific Islander Women in the United States
Background: Asian American/Pacific Islanders (AAPIs) are the fastest-growing racial group in the United States.
America is now owned by Asia, demographically.
Despite a higher socioeconomic status, AAPI women experience higher rates of maternal morbidity and mortality.
can’t pay your way out of r-genes
if controlled for SES, aka $, their data would be even worse
Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis of women who were hospitalized for delivery from 2002 to 2013. The primary outcome variable was inpatient mortality rate, and the presence of severe maternal morbidities was estimated using the Bateman Comorbidity Index, a validated tool for predicting obstetric morbidity.
Results: AAPI women presenting for delivery between 2003 and 2012 were older, more likely to reside in a zip code in the top quartile of annual income, be privately insured than Caucasian women,
where’s Asian privilege?
and less likely to have a higher Bateman Comorbidity Index. However, AAPI women had a higher likelihood of postpartum hemorrhage (3.4% vs 2.7%, P < .001), uterine atony, severe perineal lacerations, and severe maternal morbidities. Procedures such as transfusion, hysterectomy,
So they could have one kid and die, have one kid and have that die, OR have one kid and then their organs all removed – so no more kids?
Yes clearly our biological superiors, right weebs? Totally not rationalising a fetish, are we?
I wonder why one child was law? They don’t have a culture of many kids because they’re too r-select to survive without modern medicine. Wake up. They pretend 1-2 is a choice and that’s why they mock and envy large white families (3+ standard) like the Amish. They envy us that ability. They would die.
and mechanical ventilation were also more common in AAPI women.
Calling it – Mother Nature is anti-Asian.
Furthermore, AAPI women had a higher mortality rate that persisted despite adjustment for an apparently higher income and comorbidities (odds ratio 1.72, 95% confidence interval: 1.14-2.59, P = .01).
Conclusions: Despite having a higher socioeconomic status, AAPI women had higher rates of maternal mortality during hospitalization for delivery. This increase persisted even after adjustment for factors known to affect peripartum outcomes. Further investigation is needed to better clarify the causes of racial differences in maternal morbidity and mortality.
Results: A total of 360,370 women with postpartum hemorrhage from 2012 to 2014 were included in this analysis. Risk for severe morbidity was significantly higher among non-Hispanic black women (26.6%) than non-Hispanic white, Hispanic, or Asian or Pacific Islander women (20.7%, 22.5%, and 21.4%, respectively, P < .01).
The white is 20%, Asian is 21%.
And these are the fattest white people, like, ever.
White and Asian bolded-
For non-Hispanic black compared with non-Hispanic white, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander women risk was higher for disseminated intravascular coagulation (8.4% vs 7.1%, 6.8%, and 6.8%, respectively, P < .01) and transfusion (19.4% vs 13.9%, 16.1%, and 15.8%, respectively, P < .01). Black women were also more likely than non-Hispanic white women to undergo hysterectomy (2.4% vs 1.9%, P < .01), although Asian or Pacific Islander women were at highest risk (2.9%). Adjusting for comorbidity, black women remained at higher risk for severe morbidity (P < .01). Risk for death for non-Hispanic black women was significantly higher than for nonblack women (121.8 per 100,000 deliveries, 95% confidence interval, 94.7-156.8 vs 24.1 per 100,000 deliveries, 95% confidence interval, 19.2-30.2, respectively, P < .01).
The weebs either did 1. no research (typical gammas) or 2. they’re delusional.
Almost double the risk of hysterectomy, roughly.An additional 52% risk over white women, minimum, in just this study.
What’s the point of being married to them, at that point? Their baby machine is broken.
Non-Hispanic black (black) and non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) women experienced higher PRMRs (40.8 and 29.7, respectively) than all other racial/ethnic populations (white PRMR was 12.7, Asian/ Pacific Islander PRMR was 13.5 and Hispanic PRMR was 11.5). This was 3.2 and 2.3 times higher than the PRMR for white women – and the gap widened among older age groups.
Notably, we found that, when aggregated, the top cause of death among Asian Americans is cancer. However, when disaggregated, there is wide variation in the leading cause of death. For instance, for Asian Indians, nearly twice as many men die of heart disease (31 percent), compared to cancer (18 percent). In contrast, for Koreans, the opposite is true — the death rate for cancer (34 percent) is much higher than the death rate for heart disease (19 percent).
Remember the breast cancer and Asian BMI/testosterone stuff?
Research led by the University of Birmingham has found that increased levels of hormones including testosterone could cause a brain condition that can lead to blindness in women.
We are all jealous of your waifu, yes.
Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension—also known as IIH—is caused by high pressure in the brain with consequences from blindness to incapacitating daily long-term headaches. IIH was originally identified over 100 years ago yet the cause of the condition has remained unknown although there has been much speculation about why more than 95 per cent of total incidence is in women with obesity.
And Asians, they’re 1/2 obese in America!
They then compared the results with the levels observed in women with obesity of the same age and body mass index (BMI), as well as a cohort of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
PCOS is far more common in Asians. Look it up.
Most notable were the high levels of the androgen ‘testosterone’ found in the blood in IIH women. Crucially, levels of androgens were uniquely increased in the brain fluid (CSF) of women with IIH. When the researchers, analysed human choroidal plexus tissue, which is the site in the brain where CSF is produced, they confirmed that androgens could increase the rate of CSF secretion, a potential driver for increased brain pressure.
Results: We found that the South Asian women presented at a younger age for the management of sub-fertility. An extended stimulation phase and Caucasian ethnicity showed an inverse correlation with the number of oocytes retrieved in the PCOS subgroup. Caucasian ethnicity was associated with a higher fertilization rate however increase in body mass index (BMI) and the laboratory technique of IVF appeared to have a negative impact on fertilization rates in the PCOS subgroup. Commencing down regulation on day 1 of the cycles was negatively associated with fertilization rates in the tubal group. In terms of clinical pregnancy rates, the Caucasian PCOS had a 2.5 times (95% CI: 1.25-5) higher chance of an ongoing clinical pregnancy as compared with their Asian counterpart. Also, a unit increase in the basal FSH concentration reduced the odds of pregnancy by 18.6% (95% CI: 1.8-32.6%) in the PCOS group.
Conclusions: The Asian PCOS have a greater sensitivity to gonadotropin stimulation with lower fertilization and ongoing clinical pregnancy rates as compared with their Caucasian counterparts.
The ethnicity of women undergoing fertility treatments like IVF can affect the rate of successful live births, according to new research. After adjusting for certain factors including age of patient at time of treatment, cause of female or male infertility, and type of treatment, 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.
White women, still winning. Thank God for the Ice Age.
Overall, studies have shown higher testosterone levels in women and lower levels in men are related to incident diabetes. The major risk factors contributing to diabetes are biochemical, environmental, sedentary lifestyle, socioeconomic status and genetic factors. All of them together or independently are responsible for the development of the DM.  Besides, certain studies show Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) is more common in females than males independent of age. 
We found a high prevalence of GDM among the Asian population. Asian women with common risk factors especially among those with history of previous GDM, congenital anomalies or macrosomia should receive additional attention from physician as high-risk cases for GDM in pregnancy.
Body mass index (BMI) was a very strong negative predictor of body attractiveness ratings, similar to previous findings. Zero-order associations between women’s mean hormone concentrations and mean attractiveness ratings were not significant; however, after controlling for BMI, attractiveness ratings were independently and positively associated with both estradiol and testosterone concentrations. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for whether attractiveness assessment mechanisms are specialized for the detection of cues of differential fecundity in young women’s bodies.
High T = ugly!
Did I mention water is wet? Can they seriously accuse of cherry picking? I’m not even looking hard.
Previously covered WHR, use search bar. Asians lose. Even black women do better.
Asians have way more T as a race than Europeans, get over it. Historically, we considered them savages, less civilized, for that reason. How is this surprising? Do you think we colonised India for fun? It’s obvious in the broad manjaws, duh. Marquardt covered this. Anyone can do a replication study, but I suggest you include the women too, so it isn’t just a sexual effect but race.
From a blog “East Asians were found to have the highest average total plasma testosterone (5,673 ρg/mL) followed by Africans (5,442 ρg/mL) and then Europeans (4,992 ρg/mL). Given that the sample size for Africans is smaller (N < 10,000), their relative position may change with more data. Nonetheless, the claim that East Asians have the least testosterone is not supported by scientific data. “
Yeah, fake redpills who think T = manly, good thing. It’s just a hormone.
“There is no way of accurately determining free testosterone. Even if there was, this would also be irrelevant since bio-availability is prime. Since race realists use total serum testosterone, why is this an issue?”
true, it’s just applying the same standard
Culturally, gang rape is more normal in Asia than Africa. This is why. You don’t get African Taharrush, really. Asia has Eve Teasing and the like. Trust me, you don’t want this.
“Mass sexual assault is the collective sexual assault of women, and sometimes children, in public by groups of unrelated men. Typically acting under the protective cover of large gatherings, victims have reported being groped, stripped, beaten, bitten, penetrated and raped.”
As for the contention that there are no studies indicating a 10% difference between East Asians and Europeans, I did find one age controlled study where the Chinese sample had 8.8% more total T, 11.4% more bio-available T and 12% more free T than the European sample. The Japanese sample had 10.5%, 5.1% and 6.7% more than Europeans respectively [Wu et al. 1995]. Wonder if race realists discuss this study, or perhaps they are too busy in celebratory dance around the Korean/Swede campfire?
They’re not really redpill. I believe data even if I dislike it. Asians have high T as a race. Get over it.
High T can also dovetail with lower national IQs e.g. India, so…. why want this? Low IQ nations have more crime.
Additionally, this recent study shows HK Chinese having some 3% more bio-available T than US Europeans.
Lol, he’s right. But T isn’t a good thing. It’s just a hormone, in men or women.
Being a race realists seems to be a length engagement with delusion, fantasy and ‘scientific’ homo-erotica.
Not here, son. I believe the T-data. Penis size generally correlates to racial height (in white men), not really T. Forum bros are wrong again. Penis stuff is sexual selection, aka chosen by women.
There was a similar increase in the positive effect of penis size on attractiveness with a more masculine body shape (i.e., greater shoulder-to-hip ratio). Surprisingly, larger penis size and greater height had almost equivalent positive effects on male attractiveness. Our results support the hypothesis that female mate choice could have driven the evolution of larger penises in humans. More broadly, our results show that precopulatory sexual selection can play a role in the evolution of genital traits.
It was concluded that all penile measurements are interrelated to each other; the height and weight also the other body measurements that are related to the penile measurements in less than 50%. It seems that the penile measurements are polygenic traits and are under multifactorial influences.
There are racial differences in associations of hormone levels with age and BMI in late reproductive age women. Further study is needed to replicate these findings and to determine the relationships of these hormonal associations with menopausal symptoms
Obesity is an important factor in hormone dynamics independent of age, race and smoking in mid-life women, although the mechanisms remain unclear.
From “A Study of the Correlation of Some Sex Hormone with Obesity in Women with Secondary Infertility” (google it)
Infertility is the inability to conceive a child for more than one year. The present study indicates
that the obesity associated with infertility. The aim of the study to determine follicle stimulating
hormone, luteinizing hormone, testosterone hormone and prolactin levels. and cholesterol and
triglyceride concentration in 2nd inferetid women. This study was carried out at kamal al-samaarai
hospital the data were collected from 95 secondary infertilial women were age between 16-45 years old and grouped them in to obese (n = 46) and non obese(n = 49). There was no significant difference between the two groups (p <0.05).Body mass index in Infertile obese women is slightly higher than non obese Infertile women which is statistically significant (P<0.001). However LH,
TSH, cholesterol and triglyceride concentration in obese infertile women is significantly higher than
non obese infertile women (p >0.05).The BMI was correlated positively with triglyceride in obese
group while BMI was positive correlation highly significant with cholesterol in non obese group.
Regression analysis revealed obese to be strongly associated with observed infertility. The elevated
prolactin values in secondary infertile women clearly shows that there is a mechanism operating at
the anterior pituitary level which shows an abnormal distribution of FSH and LH which may further
explain the abnormal delay ovum maturation. This study also indicates obese associated with
infertile more than non obese women.
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’
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.”