The buried risk factor in colon cancer

I hate the need for gross posts, the syphilis rates in Asia one was bad enough.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2917541/
“Among both men and women, rectal sex was commonly associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. Some Latinos may hold misperceptions about colorectal cancer risks, including an association between rectal sex and colon cancer, that may impact their screening behaviors. Clinicians and public health officials should consider these potential risk misperceptions and explore for other risk misperceptions when counseling and educating patients about colorectal cancer screening.”
How is that a misperception?

HOW?

“Sexual activity, specifically rectal sex, was also commonly identified as a risk factor for colorectal cancer. While this theme was more prominent in the focus group discussions among men,”

Anal with a woman also counts, guys, sexually they are gay. You should desire the female parts only. The germs can still see you.

It’s funny to see PUAs bitch about muh male cancer rates when they’re endorsing the cause of them.

Is penile cancer da wimminz fault too?

ANY Victorian short of Oscar Wilde would look at those guys and call them homosexual. Sexuality is a preference for body parts in Darwinian classification, not the people owning them. It’s a vital distinction. Even Wilde was averse to anal, he almost exclusively did oral with men. He was icked out by anal. So modern ‘straight’ men are probably more gay than Oscar Wilde. Fact.

btw Boomers are Freudians (pleasure as normal human motive, no deviancy permitted as concept).

Previously living for lust was considered part of savage cultures that people like Burton ‘explored’, mostly with his dick.

“the theme also emerged from female groups. Participants generally referred to increased risk of colorectal cancer among men who have sex with men and some participants made pejorative statements while connecting rectal sex with colorectal cancer risk. However, when questioned further, many participants noted that there is a similar risk among men and women.

No. Not until old age. When the whole body breaks down anyway.

A number of participants provided explanations for their beliefs, including presumed pathophysiologic rationale.”

“Given that anal sex has been linked to anal cancer via human papilloma virus (HPV) [11], it is possible, but unlikely, that participants erroneously made a connection between rectal sex and colorectal cancer instead of anal cancer. The belief that rectal sex is a risk factor for colorectal cancer is concerning, even if participants did confuse colorectal cancer with anal cancer, given the much lower rates of anal cancer relative to colorectal cancer. By extending the association from anal cancer to colorectal cancer, some may falsely underestimate their risk for colorectal cancer based on their sexual behavior.”

They’re not confused, there’s a link.
The rectum is a name for the end of the colon, this is linguistic hair-splitting.

Colo-rectal – it’s the same thing.

11 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2729501/

There’s a known colon cancer connection to Type 2 diabetes.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71456-2
So it’s probably also preservatives. Just throwing that in.

Like nitrates used on cheap meats, not the actual meat. Ban nitrates. Really.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1856114/
“Inflammatory benign anal lesions are associated with a significantly increased long term risk of anal cancer. In contrast, haemorrhoids appear not to be a risk factor for this malignancy.”

K.

“Anal cancer is an uncommon disease in the heterosexual population, with an incidence of 1 per 100 000. However, the incidence is much higher in men who regularly practice anal receptive intercourse (approximately 35 per 100 000).1 Apart from a strong link to sexual promiscuity and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, suspected risk factors include genital warts, herpes simplex virus type 2, and smoking.2,3,4,5,6″

35x more likely

We need to ban porn, basically. It normalises it. Perversion is less a judgement and more a description. As covered previously, circumcised men have more sexual difficulties, including porn addiction and are more …oriented toward anal sex to achieve a comparable amount of stimulation as a normal, un-mutilated man. Compare circumcision rates to rape data of that country and also homosexuality. It’s a wild ride.

“In 1863 the first connection between inflammation and cancer was made by Rudolf Virchow.7 Since then several types of cancer have been associated with infection and inflammation,7 and different mechanisms have been hypothesised. Local inflammation may contribute to ovarian cancer8; ulcerative colitis increases the risk of colorectal cancer9,10; infection by Helicobacter pylori increases the risk of distal stomach cancer11; hepatitis B virus and hepatitis B virus infection are well recognised risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma12; and tumour necrosis factor, a protein mediating inflammation, has been suggested to be involved in the progression and spread of cancer.13

The possible association of benign anal lesions, including fissures, fistulas, perianal abscesses, and haemorrhoids, with anal cancer has long been debated.2,3,14,15 In a case control study, a significantly increased risk of anal cancer was found in patients treated for anal fissures, fistulas, or with more than 12 episodes of haemorrhoids.2 Constant irritation, chronic inflammatory changes, and repeated epithelial regeneration were hypothesised as explanations for the association.2 This was supported by another case control study in which a significantly increased risk of anal cancer was reported in patients with severe haemorrhoids, and a weak association was also observed between anal cancer and other infections and inflammations in the anogenital area.15 A third case control study found an association with haemorrhoids and non‐specific anal irritation among men but not among women.16 Case control studies may be subject to recall bias and thus a cohort study design is favourable although few cohort studies are available due to the rarity of anal cancer. In the only two cohort studies, a null association was reported.14,17″

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4745930/

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/grp/2016/7896716/
Ban Tinder.
“HPV-16 genotyping was performed in HPV-positive tissues and the physical status of the HPV-16 genome was determined by E2 detection. HPV was detected in 19 of 45 (42.2%) CRC cases (mean age 61.1 ± 10.7 years, 24 males) and in 1 of 36 (2.8%) controls (mean age 60.9 ± 9.6 years, 24 males) with an OR = 25.58 (95% CI 3.21 to 203.49). HPV-16 was detected in 63.2% of the HPV-positive colorectal tumors; genome integration was observed in all HPV-16 positive cases. This is the first report showing the high prevalence of HPV infections in Caribbean Hispanic colorectal tumors. Despite evidence of HPV integration into the host genome, further mechanistic analysis examining HPV oncoprotein expression and the putative role of these oncoproteins in colorectal carcinogenesis is warranted.”

HPV in 42% of colon cancers, 2.8% in controls.

“genome integration was observed in all HPV-16 positive cases.”

Yup. What it sounds like.

https://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/11/8/2862
“Results: We found that colorectal tissues from 28 of 55 (51%) patients with colorectal cancer were positive for HPV DNA. Colorectal tissues from all 10 control individuals were negative for HPV DNA (P = 0.0034). Of the 107 usable (GAPDH+) samples collected as paired colorectal tissues (tumor and tumor-adjacent tissues) from the patients, 38 (36%) had HPV16 (n = 31), HPV18 (n = 5), or HPV45 (n = 2), with HPV DNA in both tumor and tumor-adjacent tissues of 10 paired samples, 13 in only the tumor, and 5 in only tumor-adjacent tissues. In situ PCR detection of the tumor tissues confirmed the presence of HPV DNA in tumor cells.

Dat p-value.

All 10 controls negative.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that colorectal HPV infection is common in patients with colorectal cancer, albeit at a low DNA copy number, with HPV16 being the most prevalent type. HPV infection may play a role in colorectal carcinogenesis.

May?

Smoking may cause lung cancer.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection of epidermal or mucosal epithelial cells causes benign and sometimes malignant neoplasms. Certain types of HPVs, such as HPV16, 18, 31, and 45, are detected frequently in anogenital cancers, particularly cancer of the cervix and anus, and are thus considered to be high-risk or oncogenic. Integration of the viral genome into the cancer cell genome is characteristic of infection by these HPVs. Other types of HPV, such as low-risk or nononcogenic HPV6 and HPV11, induce benign anogenital warts and are rarely found in anogenital malignancies (1, 2).

HPV DNA has been detected in tumor tissues of head and neck cancer (3, 4), oral cancer (5), esophageal cancer (6, 7), and some skin cancers (8, 9), as well as lung cancer (10, 11). Detection of HPV DNA in colorectal cancer tissues by in situ hybridization (12) and PCR (13–17) has suggested that HPV infection might be associated with the carcinogenesis of colorectal cancer. However, HPV DNA was not detectable by regular PCR in one earlier study (18) and a survey of HPV16 virus-like particle antibodies in patients with epithelial cancers also failed to provide an association between HPV and colorectal cancer (19), challenging the association of colorectal cancers with HPVs. As a result, we felt that a well-controlled study would be more informative. In the present report, we did a retrospective, controlled study, in which colorectal cancers and tissues adjacent to the cancers were surgically collected from patients with colorectal cancer and subjected to nested PCR and in situ PCR detection of HPV DNAs.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20528894

HPV 6 and 11 Finland
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19408160/
“In addition to cancer of the lower female genital tract, human papillomaviruses (HPV) are associated with a large number of benign, precancer and cancer lesions at different anatomic sites in both genders. Malignant tumours and their precursors are usually attributed to the oncogenic (high-risk, HR) HPV types, whereas benign lesions (papillomas) are associated with the low-risk (LR) HPV types, most notably with HPV6 and HPV11. Until recently, the main interest in HPV research has been focused on HR-HPV types and their associated pathology, and much less attention has been paid to the lesions caused by the LR-HPV types. With the recent licensing of an effective prophylactic vaccine against the 2 most important LR-HPV types (HPV6 and HPV11)”

the ‘low risk’? then why get it?

they said cancer, people assumed high risk

“, it has become timely to make a systematic survey on the annual disease burden due to these 2 HPV genotypes in our country.”

Why not BEFORE?

“These types of data should form the foundation for all calculations of the annual costs needed to treat these diseases by conventional means. Accurate estimates of disease burden are also mandatory for all modelling of the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic HPV6 and HPV11 vaccines. If proven useful for any of these purposes, this document will have fulfilled its purpose. In the first step, published HPV literature was used to create a list of benign, premalignant and malignant lesions associated with this virus at different anatomic sites. GLOBOCAN 2004 (IARC) database was used to derive the global numbers of incident cases for each of these malignancies in 2002, and the Finnish Cancer Registry (FCR) website for obtaining these (y 2005) numbers in Finland. The evidence linking HPV to each individual tumour category was classified as: 1) established, 2) emerging, and 3) controversial. All published evidence was weighted for each individual malignant, premalignant and benign lesion, anatomic region by region, while assessing the attributable fraction of HPV6/11 genotypes in each lesion. Because benign and most of the precancer lesions are not registered by FCR or GLOBOCAN, different approaches had to be used to derive the best estimates for their incidence, based on published literature or other registries (e.g. genital wart registry of the UK and Wales, and mass screening registry of FCR). With a lack of reasonable consensus, a lower and an upper limit was set for the range of estimates. In cases with different age-specific incidence (e.g. genital warts), the population pyramid of Finland was used to calculate the incident cases. Where well established, the different incidence rates among males and females were used to calculate the numbers of incident cases by gender. The malignant neoplasms with established or emerging evidence on the causal role of HPV are listed by their ICD-10 codes in Table I. Included in this list are also 2 controversial malignancies (colorectal cancer and endometrial cancer), of which the contradictory HPV data are critically discussed. The third major cancer in this same category (prostate cancer) was not included in the list, because the data are clearly insufficient to categorize this entity even among the emerging HPV associated malignancies. Estimated disease burden due to HPV6/11 in Finland, calculated as numbers of annual new cases by anatomic region and tumour type is given in Table II, and summarized in Figure 1. The present analysis implicates that a minimum of 12,666 to 13,066 new cases of HPV6- or HPV11-associated clinical lesions would be detected each y in Finland, if all were registered. Notably, these numbers represent the disease burden due to these 2 HPV types. However, these clinical lesions only represent a small minority of the total viral burden due to the infections by these 2 HPV genotypes. This is because the vast majority* of all infections by these ubiquitous viruses are latent, being transient in nature and spontaneously resolving within a few months (up to 1 y*), without ever developing a clinically detectable disease.

*it’s ‘assumed’ but doesn’t always happen, especially with multiple infections of different types

A just-so story for sluts, same with clap.

This spontaneous clearance does not make these latent infections less important, however, because as long as the virus reservoir exists, it serves as the source of viral transmission to susceptible individuals, with a multitude of HPV6/11 associated pathologies as a potential outcome, as described in this document. The implications of these data in the era of effective prophylactic HPV vaccination against HPV6 and HPV11 should be clear.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19939209/
16, 18 Finland

https://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/hpv-genital-warts/news/20191120/hpv-blamed-for-rising-rates-of-anal-cancer
Is that new?

Young people at higher risk, why?
https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/study-finds-sharp-rise-in-colon-cancer-and-rectal-cancer-rates-among-young-adults.html
“A study led by American Cancer Society researchers finds that new cases of colon cancer and rectal cancer are occurring at an increasing rate among young and middle-aged adults in the US. Once age is taken into account, those born in 1990 have double the risk of colon cancer and quadruple the risk of rectal cancer compared to people born around 1950, when risk was lowest.”

I wonder what ‘young people’ are doing now (define ‘young’) that people in the 50s did NOT?

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/codi.12257
“The HPV overall prevalence was 31.9% (95% CI: 19.3–47.9). It was lowest in Europe (14.1%, 95% CI: 4.9–34.1) and highest in South America (60.8%, 95% CI: 42.7–76.4).”
Lowest among native white people. No you’re not normal, America. Neither is your herpes.

Is this that magical white privilege I’ve been hearing about?

Thot culture kills. The Bible called it whoredom, you’re not doing anything new. Sodom was famous for….?

Spoiler: sodomy can occur with either sex. It’s the act, not the participants.

“Eight studies presented the results of HPV typing in 302 HPV‐positive colorectal carcinomas. HPV 18 was the virus more frequently found in colorectal cancer cases from Asia (73.34%, 95% CI: 44.9–90.7) and Europe (47.3%, 95% CI: 34.5–60.4). In contrast, HPV 16 was more prevalent in colorectal tumours from South America (58.3%, 95% CI: 45.5–69.9). The analysis of five case–control studies showed an increase in colorectal carcinoma risk with HPV positivity (OR = 10.04; 95% CI: 3.7–27.5).

Conclusion
The results provide quantitative evidence for an association between HPV infection and colorectal cancer risk.”

q u a n t i t a t i v e    e v i d e n c e

q u a n t i t a t i v e    e v i d e n c e

q u a n t i t a t i v e    e v i d e n c e

inspired by this meme

Video: UK disease vectors and plague

Reminder: applies to all infections, not just sexually exclusive ones.

The prohibition on sodomy also applied to sodomy with women for the same reasons. It’s the same exact act, normalised in Jewish entertainment.

Sexually, it’s always men who are the main vectors of any disease (for many reasons, including going out more, washing hands less). Until literally a few years ago, biologists assumed the male urethra was always clean (immunoprivileged, like the eyes) – until they actually checked it... Turns out no vital pipe is clean, if you’re being a slut (sorry, “sexually active”). Men are the main vectors of any condition, and with HIV, ebola, this obvious “corona” (really pneumonic plague*) virus going round, knowing who’d be the likeliest carrier socially could save your life.

R-types are known for being happy Typhoid Marys, it isn’t just bug chasing “gift givers”, they can consciously pass on lesser conditions from spite (usually homoerotic, so other men are largely at risk). Even with a simple stomach bug or a norovirus, they’ll have an impulse to “meet up with old friends” so delay those ‘invitations’ past the incubation window and they’ll suddenly lose interest.

(Borderline and sociopathic women also do this, but usually it’s men).

Making people sick gives them a thrill of power over your body. And it’s mostly legal (with certain STD exceptions, that are ABH here up to GBH dependent).

*The Chinese gov keeps writing COD as ‘pneumonia’ because it isn’t corona. It’s plague.

The Black Death came from Asia too. Do your research. This is why they refuse to share DNA with Australia – it isn’t corona. Just a theory, but it’s the only thing that fits their paranoia. COD docs are legally binding.

They never did find a cure for plague, it’s almost Biblical.

B-b-b-but muh appeal to authority?! – some moron

K.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-020-0156-y

A few days ago:

Yersinia pestis, the cause of plague, could be weaponized.

Unfortunately, development of new vaccines is limited by lack of correlates of protection.

aka unlike other diseases, they can’t pump out a plague vaccine on the pipeline

We used pre- and post-vaccination sera and peripheral blood mononuclear cells from a flagellin adjuvanted F1/V vaccine trial to evaluate for protective markers. Here, we report for the first time in humans that inverse caspase-3 levels, which are measures of protective antibody, significantly increased by 29% and 75% on days 14 and 28 post-second vaccination, respectively. In addition, there were significant increases in T-cell responses on day 28 post-second vaccination. The strongest positive and negative correlations between protective antibody levels and gene expression signatures were identified for IFNG and ENSG00000225107 genes, respectively. Flagellin/F1/V subunit vaccine induced macrophage-protective antibody and significant CD4+ T-cell responses. Several genes associated with these responses were identified that could serve as potential correlates of protection.

Paper for compulsory vaccination… just like Spanish Flu.
Fun fact: Most of those who died were vaccinated.

But wait, why would you need a vaccine for a bacterial infection?

Don’t ask questions citizen, just take the injection.

nytimes.com/2019/11/13/world/asia/plague-china-pneumonic.html

Pneumonic Plague Is Diagnosed in China

Memoryhole absolut.

EARLY NOVEMBER, 2019.

It turns out, I have been researching this stuff for my health.

The Twenties are gonna be funny.

What would happen to their economy if we knew the truth?

Even if it were coronavirus:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc2001468

The novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) from Wuhan is currently causing concern in the medical community as the virus is spreading around the world.1 Since its identification in late December 2019, the number of cases from China that have been imported into other countries is on the rise, and the epidemiologic picture is changing on a daily basis. We are reporting a case of 2019-nCoV infection acquired outside of Asia in which transmission appears to have occurred during the incubation period in the index patient.

Asymptomatic, Typhoid Mary types.

Late December 2019.

You know what spreads great during the invisible stage? Plague. Just sayin’.

What’s more likely? A disease magically changes on an almost daily basis* – or the Chicoms are lying?

*According to the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, redditfags! They’re throwing shade in academese.

I hate being smarter than everyone but I waited for them to release the truth, sportingly, and they didn’t so screw you, China.

 

[#~*intermission*~#]

 

If AA wants a wild ride, check homosexual studies of paraphilia if you can find them – inc. sadism (especially rape, interest in actual rape), cross-dressing, pedophilia (attraction to minors) and bestiality. When surveyed, interest in death and necrophilia is also reported but it’s hard to find that stuff online. Most serial killers are homosexual. (and also circumcised)

The wages of sin are death

You’re not allowed to talk about it.

I can’t think of anything worse than a cruise ship full of naked, horny Boomers.

Who still think they’re It and a bag of chips. Youth culture is cancer. The body ages but the brain remains the same…. that’s called retardation, kids!

https://www.orbitz.com/blog/2016/11/9-places-get-naked-without-raising-fuss-nsfw/

“The bar will inevitably draw its fairshare of gawkers and despite popular opinion, millennials are less likely to strip down than their baby boomer counterparts.”

Duh. Have some fucking DIGNITY.

And what does their Biblical whoredom, get them?

And yes, it’s the men pulling a Hemingway.

Suicide rates higher among baby boomer men, study finds

The women are disgusted at first with the manwhores and quietly retract (women are quiet in disgust but do have far higher sexual disgust than men, in studies) but by the time the man realises he ruined himself and even his fellow man doesn’t respect him, it’s too late.

Like the two paths pre-internet meme of a godly boy and a degenerate one. Life of vice, pay the price.

Player “burnout” is just the start.

Suicide is aka self-murder.

And atemporal, no blaming modern trends.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190313-why-more-men-kill-themselves-than-women
‘The trend goes back a long way. “As long as we’ve been recording it, we’ve seen this disparity,”
“Suicide is a hugely sensitive, complex issue with a tangled multitude of causes – and the very nature of a death by suicide means we can never fully know the reasons behind it.”
Bullshit. Kill off the white man. That’s the aim.
Men report a higher count. No, they’re not making it up, already factored in is something called a “lie scale”, I’ve taken surveys. Real ones. The maths is baked in. Even when totally anonymous with no benefit to number inflation, male count is always higher, because they’re sleeping with a smaller proportion of women.

Which niche groups have both factors?
https://www.thedailybeast.com/bisexual-women-are-at-higher-risk-for-depression-and-suicide

Why Older Gay Men Are Attempting Suicide at a Higher Rate


https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2017/10/14/Suicide-risk-for-gay-men-5x-higher-for-those-with-less-schooling-income-study/3521507999505/

PromiscuityxSuicideRisk

Is this an ageless finding?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-truth-about-exercise-addiction/201710/why-are-suicide-rates-higher-among-lgbtq-youth

https://web.archive.org/web/20141202032238/https://blogs.lcms.org/2014/study-suicide
“Robin Williams’ suicide may not have been that surprising: Baby Boomer men are 60 percent more likely to take their own life than their fathers’ generation, according to a Rutgers University sociologist.”

I wonder why the ‘free love’ generation ends up hating themselves. Mystery, that one.

“The trend is particularly alarming because middle age is typically a time when suicide rates decline before rising again in old age.”
It’s that strong of a generational change, I wonder why. What makes Boomers culturally distinct?

“The rise we’ve seen in suicide rates since 1999 among boomers while in their 40s and 50s is unusual,” Phillips said. Boomer men are now 60 percent more likely to take their own lives then men their age who were born in the 1930s — or roughly men of their fathers’ generation.

“We’re in a position now where suicide rates for middle-aged people are higher than those for the elderly,” she said. “That hasn’t happened before, at least not in the last century.”

I guess the herpes could’ve spread to their brain (a real thing).

“Their disinclination to go to church appears to be permanent.”
Sure this has NO effect on high-risk behaviour, don’t look into it. Not like it’s your job.

Let it happen. Enjoy the show. The freak show.
https://biblehub.com/romans/6-23.htm

The Lord works in mysterious ways. That’s why I like DATA.

Whites least likely homosexual

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2220120/White-people-likely-gay-Huge-study-reveals-highest-proportion-homosexual-people-African-American-community.html

“The survey – based on interviews with more than 121,000 people – contradicts the perception that lesbians and gays are mostly white, urban and affluent, said lead author Gary Gates.”
“‘But this data reveals that relative to the general population, the LGBT population has a larger proportion of non-white people and clearly is not overly wealthy.’”

In evolutionary terms, you don’t have to raise children you can’t make.

I cannot find survey data on what percentage of mixed race people aren’t straight.
That is weird.

It’s basic demographics, why is that buried?

You would think they’d shout it from the rooftops.
But parents want grandkids, don’t they? Or their own investment is worthless.

Very little research has been done into which races are more likely to be homosexual.”

That sounds likely.

“Estimates of the proportion of the population who are lesbian or gay range from 2 per cent to 10 per cent, although recent US surveys have put it at around 4 per cent.
In 2010, a survey by the Office for National Statistics concluded that 1.5 per cent of Britons identified themselves as gay or bisexual, although a 2008 poll put the proportion at 6 per cent.”

If you sample urban gay areas, your data will be skewed.

This is interesting but twists things.

http://www.mixedracestudies.org/wordpress/?tag=journal-of-the-history-of-sexuality

“The concept of continuity was harnessed to growing attention to miscegenation, or “amalgamation,” in social science writing in the first decades of the twentieth century. Edward Byron Reuter’s The Mulatto in the United States, for instance, pursued an exhaustive quantitative and comparative study of the mulatto population and its achievements in relation to those of “pure” white or African ancestry.”

That bias isn’t science, it’s propaganda.

How little he turned up is great negative evidence though.

Spot the frauds.

“Xavier Mayne, for example, one of the earliest American advocates of homosexual rights, wrote, “Between whitest of men and the blackest negro stretches out a vast line of intermediary races as to their colours: brown, olive, red tawny, yellow.” He then invoked this model of race to envision a continuous spectrum of gender and sexuality: “Nature abhors the absolute, delights in the fractional. . . . Intersexes express the half-steps, the between-beings ”

Most hermaphrodites are infertile.

We evolve FOR one thing and AGAINST another.

Nature loves the absolute, bears can’t breathe underwater.

You evolve for ONE ecosystem at the EXCLUSION of all else.

This is Origin of the Species tier, old biology. This guy’s anti-evolution.

“In this analogy, Mayne reversed dominant cultural hierarchies that privileged purity over mixture. Drawing upon irrefutable evidence of the “natural” existence of biracial people,”

What about the evidence of their fertility issues?

And there’s no such thing as irrefutable in biology on the level of individuals.

Real identity problem, huh?

If race doesn’t matter, why pretend you have one?

Miscellaneous is not a category, that’s a category error.

Why have racial pride if that’s the root of evil to you?
And how can atheists believe pride is a sin?

“Mayne posited a direct analogy to a similarly mixed body, the intersex, which he positioned as a necessary presence within the natural order.”

False equivalence. Naturalistic fallacy.

You can see the slow creep of genocidal rhetoric.

Pure races have a human birthright to exist in their homeland, invader.

If you want the whites kicked out of Africa but not the blacks from America, you’re a massive hypocrite.

Is homosexuality immoral? thread

I didn’t expect this to be lucid, a very logical treatment.

Right click, open it solo and zoom to 100%.

If x then y style. Get a cup of tea. They don’t teach the controversy, do they?

An interesting read. References are always a sound idea.

source

http://img.4plebs.org/

boards/pol/image/1469/80/1469803738587.png

When it was considered a mental disorder by the psychiatrists, it was considered such because it was common in pathological populations, especially criminals. If you look at prison populations, many are not homosexual by situation but preference. There are also connections to violence even within intimate relationships of “love”, personally, I don’t consider one woman beating another to be very loving. Evolution is full of errors – infertility, disability, genetic deformity, there is no teleology to evolution as we’ve been mistaught. There is the Darwinian imperative (to reproduce AND nurture said offspring) and if an organism fails that, it is both maladaptive (for its environment) and unfit (as a genome package).

There is a high co-morbid amount of what we’d now call personality disorders (or at least features) – histrionic, narcissistic, borderline, codependent, sadistic. Unusual for such a small population. Indeed, it would be incorrect to label the homosexuality the primary feature of study. It is likely a symptom of a cluster of mental abnormalities (statistical) yet to be discriminated (possibly microbial in trigger). The amount of child abuse suffered in such populations and obsession with youth and youthful cavorting (regressive parties) does point to a personality-induced hypersexuality. If we look clearly.

Those who need alcohol (or drugs) to engage in other debauchery cannot be fully desirous of it.

The fear of women (the root of misogyny) and disdain for femininity (femme women are viewed with hostility, even lesbians) are never commented upon. It used to be common knowledge. It sounds like erotophobia when described, but exclusive to female parts. The love of twinks is based on the simple reason they are supposedly tighter (what’s tighter than a young man?)…

They tend to view themselves as the perfect model of a human being, needing nobody and nothing, complete androgyny in a way to be proud of (narcissism comes in here).

Sadistic personality couldn’t be placed in the DSM because they found the reference populations were un-PC.

Social behaviours can also be anti-social depending on the outcome e.g. adultery results in reduced fitness, as does homosexuality. Child outcome studies bear this out. The promiscuity in common is no coincidence. It is a pre-civilization behaviour when humans rarely encountered one another (selection pressure), much like murder and rape. From time to time, those genes may emerge and become triggered by epigenetics to present (then willfully acted upon, there is always a choice) but the law enforcement system used to cull them without much trouble e.g. the dis-loyalty also punished in deserting soldiers into the last century.

This kept their numbers to the minimum of random variation.

A courtship system closely studied social behaviors and an individual’s reputation was a hallmark of their fitness, recognized by society as healthy for it.

We used to correct the will to “sin” with character-building efforts. The more character a person has, the less hedonic they are and reliant on pleasure-seeking in general. This has been borne out of centuries of psychology findings and you can see the pattern in self help books based off them too.

Present psychologists choose to deny character as an excuse not to study it because, quite simply, almost nobody has it. They study personality, that everyone has and can be read into like tea leaves ad infinitum. They’d hate to connect diseased personalities with a lack of character, an over-arching structure above it (like a roof to a carpet). It’s like the buried finding that stereotypes are often true. They cannot find funding unless they rig it. Replications will show they did.

Looking at homosexuality in a vacuum isn’t quite fair, in my opinion. The fact only bisexuals breed is actually a good thing, keeping the totally erroneous (homosexual) mutations out of the gene pool entirely. Their impulse not to bring children into the world, while selfish, is also correct. Society has acknowledged some people would make unfit parents, literally. Technically, their behaviour harms no one outside the small group, unlike the other forms of degeneracy. It is like ignoring a wolf pack for the easier enemy of a small domestic dog. They were fine when kept out of marriage (confirmed bachelors) circles and underground (no cultural influence). Given what a tiny amount of the population they represent, it is the smallest rock on the beach to turn over. It is one side of the die of hedonism in societies, demonstrated through case study individuals and groups.

They are an effect, not a cause.

Why was homosexuality illegal?

The public health hazard, just show them this video.

Womb envy + Pregnancy fetish = HIV craving.

Trigger warning, even I was like

fuck you, jim boy

fuck you with a used condom from your dad

So we’re clear, you can’t be a rapist if you’re

a – brown

b – Muslim

c – homosexual

because no judge will prosecute you.

If you aren’t taken down, does it really count?

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-are-drug-resistant-hiv-strains-more-prevalent

Why Are Drug-Resistant HIV Strains Becoming More Prevalent?

It’s a fucking mystery, children.

HIV subtypes are so genetically distant from each other that we might as well be talking about a different species of virus per subtype.”

Salvaña says that needle sharing can create drug-resistant strains because “HIV subtypes can mix and the mixed HIV strains will combine with other subtypes as well.”

Evolution?

These are the gay guys that make gay guys look bad.

You don’t see lesbians pulling this shit. Lesbianism was never illegal.

Homosexuality may be developmental error

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/12/homosexuality-may-start-womb
They’re claiming 8% of the population now, the number keeps going up!

“Although epigenetic changes are usually temporary, they involve alterations in the proteins that bind together the long strands of DNA. Thus, they can sometimes be handed down to offspring. According to the hypothesis, homosexuality may be a carry-over from one’s parents’ own prenatal resistance to the hormones of the opposite sex.”

Explains Goethe.

Great man, unusual number of homosexual offspring.

“The initial benefit to the parents may explain why the trait of homosexuality persists throughout evolution, he says.”

Evolution presumes the fit ones will breed more (reducing the downside loss to zero as 52:48 female to male birth ratio) and there’s no parasitism between high and low fitness.
There are other studies along these lines e.g. a review

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3296090/
“More recent research suggests that 2-6% of men in the United States, France and Great Britain have had homosexual experience”

It’s always the men being the most degenerate, generic finding of sexology.
And they wonder why they die sooner.

Big winners, bigger losers.

“This article reviews the evidence regarding prenatal influences of gonadal steroids on human sexual orientation, as well as sex-typed childhood behaviors that predict subsequent sexual orientation.”

But it doesn’t work the other way around, parent forcing a Barbie on your son.
And it isn’t 1:1, kids will play with most things if allowed.

“The evidence supports a role for prenatal testosterone exposure in the development of sex-typed interests in childhood, as well as in sexual orientation in later life, at least for some individuals.”

Yay, we can blame men! – feminists, if they had any balls

“It appears, however, that other factors,”

Pathogens.

in addition to hormones, play an important role in determining sexual orientation.”

Pathogens.

“These factors have not been well-characterized,”

Pathogens, billions of pathogens.

“but possibilities include direct genetic effects, and effects of maternal factors during pregnancy. “

You can try blaming the woman but you’d be wrong. If women were responsible, nobody would be straight because everyone has a mother, and therefore a cause. We wrongly assume anything “wrong” with a baby is the mother’s fault. This is like blaming your food poisoning on the oven rather than the handling before that stage (paternal factors, research the other half too, paternal factors!) or once it comes out.

Paternal degeneracy would be an interesting factor. A very interesting factor.
Are promiscuous men* likelier to have gay sons, easy observational study.

You’d essentially be testing for r-selection. Homosexual men are extreme sexual r-types: high volume, low discrimination, nomadic patterning…

“Although a role for hormones during early development has been established, it also appears that there may be multiple pathways to a given sexual orientation outcome and some of these pathways may not involve hormones.”

….Pathogens?

Where’s the science, right?

How would it occur from father to germline like an STD, mother to child or both?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertically_transmitted_infection

Have we seen pathogens change things about babies in other cases?

http://www.dw.com/en/five-pathogens-that-can-harm-an-unborn-child/a-19014487

Wouldn’t there be a genetic brake on that?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21767812

A gene that can be compromised in mothers and lead to increased infection risk for the infant. Too little compromise and the mother suffers from carrying the foetus.

Start with the pathogens it encourages?

But where’s the science, I know, I know…

If only we had a clear-cut sign of societal sexual selection.
Say, weaker men sexually preferring masculinized women.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women-muscles-attraction-more-thin-bodies-image-study-men-a8179481.html

That’ll do.

Should women be uber-feminine then? No, older women are hormonally and it causes pregnancy failure.

http://home.bt.com/news/science-news/male-sex-hormones-help-towards-a-successful-pregnancy-11364036745307

*we know there’s already a link with mothers, fathers constantly go under-studied, especially in terms of promiscuity outcomes.

https://www.livescience.com/7056-mom-genetics-produce-gay-sons.html

But gay penguins adopt!

Why do you think this makes homosexuals look less like predators?

If you look them up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad%C3%A9lie_penguin#Reproduction

Young Adélie penguins which have no experience in social interaction may react to false cues when the penguins gather to breed. They may, for instance, attempt to mate with other males, with young chicks, or with dead females.

On account of the birds’ relatively human-like appearance and behavior, human observers have interpreted this behavior anthropomorphically as sexual deviance. The first to record such behavior was Dr Levick, in 1911 and 1912, but his notes were deemed too indecent for publication at the time; they were rediscovered and published in 2012.[17][n 1] “The pamphlet, declined for publication with the official Scott expedition reports, commented on the frequency of sexual activity, auto-erotic behaviour, and seemingly aberrant behaviour of young unpaired males and females, including necrophilia, sexual coercion, sexual and physical abuse of chicks and homosexual behaviour,” states the analysis written by Douglas Russell and colleagues William Sladen and David Ainley. “His observations were, however, accurate, valid and, with the benefit of hindsight, deserving of publication.”

They blame global warming.

It makes frogs gay too?

unpaired = r-selected

Reminder: compulsive masturbation is a paraphilia-related disorder.

(keyword: auto-erotic)

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00926239908404008

The subgroup of males with both PAs and lifetime PRDs (n = 123) self-reported the greatest number of lifetime SIDs, the highest incidence of physical and sexual abuse, the fewest years of completed education, and the highest likelihood of current unemployment or disability.

Oh look, a male promiscuity study – the promiscuous are losers!

no experience in social interaction” – in humans, that is abuse experience
a strangely common prevalence in homosexual adult males

Why not test IQ too?
Impulse control is tied to it.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-012-9900-3

Why is this relevant?

Well, pedophilia has already been claimed as NOT a paraphilia.

Like homosexuality before it. I guess it’s just a coincidence most pedophiles are homosexually-oriented men.

The present article examined the question instead by comparing the major correlates and other features of homosexuality and of the paraphilias, including prevalence, sex ratio, onset and course, fraternal birth order, physical height, handedness, IQ and cognitive neuropsychological profile, and neuroanatomy.

You could just study it directly.

e.g.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3769077/

Various ‘preferences’ and sexual interests have fallen in and out of being defined as paraphilic, for example, up until 1973 homosexuality was classified as paraphilic under the DSM (diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders)-II. Its subsequent removal led to some arguing that if homosexual orientation is not in itself abnormal, then the inclusion of other sexual behaviors classified as paraphilic cannot be justified as a concept and should be removed entirely from future editions

Paraphilia essentially means anti-Darwin, that was the purpose of the concept.

http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-03599-001

 Besides homosexuality, the DSM also listed sadism, masochism, exhibitionism, voyeurism, pedophilia, and fetishes as mental disorders.

Yah.

Members of the activist committee believed that the law and psychiatric diagnosis were and should be independent.

Nay.

Our hope was that one day the entire group of sexual disorders would be dropped from DSM, at least those currently listed as the paraphilias.

Thanks, Silverstein!

I’m resting my case gently so you can do your own research.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynophobia