Melanin is an aggression hormone

Not just a pigment. Biologists know this. It’s found in countless other species.
We even know the reputation of black birds with witchcraft and death.

“Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?”
http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity.com/articles/Rushton-Templer-pigmentation-aggression-sexuality.pdf

Remember the femme fatale is always black (haired*).

From the abstract:

“Both within human populations (e.g., siblings), and between populations (e.g., races, nations, states), studies find that darker pigmented people average higher levels of aggression and sexual activity (and also lower IQ).”

Yes, they look at IQ too.
It’s a reason Asians try to look paler (even the men).
The classic intellectual is pale. It’s status, it’s about money.
It’s also more ‘civilized’, as in less prone to criminality. This is key to collectivists, such as Asians.

*Historical references to black women e.g. Anne Boleyn, always referred to hair because black skinned people obviously didn’t naturally exist in Europe (they’d be referred to by geography, Moors are common descriptors). An African in Europe wouldn’t do well for many reasons including Vitamin D deficiency. Without imported sources, it can be fatal and the NHS guidelines do target Africans in Europe for warnings about this.
Italians were considered the most passionate women in the Middle Ages (and angry) due to their black hair, closely followed by dark-haired Irish women.
Spanish women were considered mongrels due to Islamic conquest, along with some Italians to this day. Northern Italians are what all Italians used to be, genetically.

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.

Study: Chinese women gold-diggers

No, that’s literally the study.

“Partner wealth predicts self-reported orgasm frequency in a sample of Chinese women”

Seems quite an Asian thing, probably an outcome of cultural and genetic collectivism.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090513808001177

They controlled for everything else.

Vegans hate women

Not specifically vegan in some studies but close. They daren’t do direct studies.

Already shown you this
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070228064902.htm
“Researchers in the United States have found a link between a low-fat dairy diet and increased risk of anovulatory infertility.”

ALAS!

There’s more!

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028216498845
“Seven of nine women in the vegetarian group became anovulatory.”
78%. Wow.

For the many obese vegans:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648310616008
“In young women being overweight appears to be one of the major and still neglected causes of subfertility. Not only the excessive amount but also the distribution of body fat is clearly related to loss of fertility.”
We already knew it causes subfertility in men.

“These high concentrations of androgen and insulin in turn are important factors in the preferential abnormal localization of body fat.”
aka Unhealthy women have boy hips and no waist.

(Actually, I’d pay good money to see a subfertility study in Asians, especially considering all the GMO soybean products).

“in addition, have a higher rate of miscarriages”
forcing pregnancy means sickly babies, a miscarriage where not stress-based is just rejecting the genome that would be an infant mortality statistic anyway

If they aren’t responsible for their body, why are they allowed a baby?
“Drugs increasing insulin sensitivity also improve spontaneous ovulation and fertility in obese women but still need to be tested in larger controlled trials.”

Why don’t you listen to Mother Nature and stop trying to force babies?

At least do a follow-up study on their own health risks to show the practice is safe.
Fertility is not an entitlement.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1783583/
Obese people are not healthy.

Agriculturally pushed carbs are the culprit, not meat or dairy
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309800126_High_carbohydrate_diets_are_positively_associated_with_the_risk_of_metabolic_syndrome_irrespective_to_fatty_acid_composition_in_women_the_KNHANES_2007-2014

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950329318304944
“Vegans take more pride in their diets than do vegetarians.”
Yeah, we know they do.
“Vegans view their diets as more central to their identity than do vegetarians.”
Isn’t that a mental illness? Orthorexia?

“had more positive feelings toward their dietary in-group (higher private regard)”
so vegans are racist?
“evaluated out-group dieters more negatively (lower out-group regard)”
yep, most meat-eaters in the world aren’t white…
Veganism was invented in 1944 in England, so clearly it’s racist.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160316194551.htm
“A retrospective review indicated that vegans should ensure adequate intake of a few nutrients.”
Supplements are either animal derived or tested on animals.
“”We found that some of these nutrients, which can have implications in neurologic disorders, anemia, bone strength and other health concerns, can be deficient in poorly planned vegan diets,”
“The study points out that some vegans rely heavily on processed foods and may not eat a sufficient variety of fruits, vegetables and whole grains.”
Obese vegans.

They also tend to consume non-organic coffee that’s been sprayed with fungicides, herbicides and pesticides.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/89/5/1627S/4596952
“In some cases, iron and zinc status of vegans may also be of concern because of the limited bioavailability of these minerals.”
Things you need to live. Really?

Vegans dosing b12 probably don’t get it
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/108/3/525/5042715
“Approximately 85% of participants categorized as having low vitamin B-12 were taking vitamin B-12 supplements at doses in excess of the Recommended Dietary Allowance, which suggests that more research is needed to determine breast-milk adequacy values.”
again, women suffer more from stupid fad dieting, as the sex with a more complex body that’s intended to support another body in the form of a fetus
it suggests since their body isn’t adsorbing it that they’re still suffering brain shrinkage and also logically so too would the baby

You’d think that would be an important study to do.

Racial confound but okay
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/107/6/909/5032650
“4.5% lower body fat in vegan women”
thinner isn’t better, it isn’t healthier, especially for women
women need a higher body fat %
doesn’t control for source of meat
“Patterns of differences by diet group were similar in white men.”
Thinner men is also bad.
“In the Indian population, compared with meat eaters, vegetarian women were shorter (−1.1 cm) and had lower lean mass (−0.5 kg), and both vegetarian women and men had lower grip strength (−1.3 and −1.4 kg, respectively).”
Malnutrition 101
This suggests an Asian subfertility study must be done.
They also had less lean mass… hmm….
Differences in anthropometric and physiologic characteristics were observed across diet groups in white participants, but fewer differences were observed in British Indian participants.”
Diet is more important for white people who evolved to eat more meat during the Ice Age.
Water is wet.

And the word you use from the passport doesn’t count medically. They are not British, they are their bodies – Indian.

British Indian makes it sound like they belong to the Empire, technically they do. They can’t medically blend with their passport, they’ll never be British. Ever. They missed the local evolutionary events as we missed theirs.

We ain’t related, mate. You aren’t entitled to any claim on this place culturally. You will never belong here. A passport doesn’t make you a Martian either. It reminds me of Doctor Who psychic paper, just stop.

Someone tell them a passport is actually a license to draft. Including stupid dual passport holders thinking that places like Singapore don’t have any legal hold over them.
It isn’t a golden ticket. You’d have to have a permanently slow group IQ to think that.

Actually, diet x IQ study? Why no?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073139/
You have to scroll for the real findings.
“In contrast, both lacto-ovo-vegetarian and vegan females do not seem to have a lower risk of mortality from cardiovascular diseases. Not so clear patterns are observed for cancer outcomes. While lacto-ovo-vegetarians have lower risk of cancer of the gastrointestinal tract, vegans experience a higher risk for cancer of the urinary tract. For other-cancer sites, the risk is slightly but not significantly lower for both lacto-ovo-vegetarians and vegans compared to non-vegetarians. Subsequent reports with longer follow-up time and more cancer cases will help clarify the role of specific vegetarian diets with cancer outcomes.”

Little to no difference, especially for women.
Some cancer rates higher.
Any benefits are largely not being obese. If properly controlled for, that suggests cancer may be higher risk.

“In the EPIC-Oxford study [67], vegans had 30% higher fracture rates than meat-eaters. ”
Vitamin B12 deficiency may increase CVD risk factors [70], and is associated for a wide range of neurological disorders [71]. In addition, for those following a vegan diet, optimizing intakes of n-3 fatty acids is highly recommended ”

reconcile absorption study above

the lower cardio risk is an assumption based on supplementation, not the dietary fact per se

“large randomized dietary intervention trials on vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian patterns are warranted to duplicate the findings and further investigate the health effects of these diets.”
They’re mainly studying religious people, not the typical atheist vegan.
“The research on the health effects of vegan diets and chronic diseases have mostly derived from observational studies of Adventist and Oxford vegetarians cohorts”
That isn’t generalisable.
“In general, the protective effects of vegetarian diets are stronger in men than in women.”
Paleo makes no sense considering all the diseases men are at risk of most, are made worse by eating tons of red meat. If you won’t listen to science, you’ll have to talk to Mr Prostate Cancer.

Where’s the sex realism in dietary advice? No, men can’t get away with eating like women either. Almost like there are chemicals varying between the two.

And body builders have atrocious health. I’d like to see a study on how unhealthy gyms are. Exercising in those are the worst places you can exercise. I heard there’s HPV on the machines.

https://www.medicalnewsbulletin.com/vegan-diet-lead-to-bone-loss/

Plot twist:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/29/long-term-vegetarian-diet-changes-human-dna-raising-risk-of-canc/
“Populations who have had a primarily vegetarian diet for generations were found to be far more likely to carry DNA which makes them susceptible to inflammation.”
Racial confound.
That’s why Indians or Asians especially need to be vegetarian.
Their DNA is quite fragile.
“Scientists in the US believe that the mutation occurred to make it easier for vegetarians to absorb essential fatty acids from plants.
But it has the knock-on effect of boosting the production of arachidonic acid, which is linked to inflammatory disease and cancer.”
Vegetable oils are especially toxic for them (break out the ghee).
https://www.newsmax.com/Health/Health-News/vegetarian-diet-increases-heart/2016/03/30/id/721500/

White people more ill

Guess we deserve all the positive discrimination, according to the last post‘s link.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4619848/
The science is settled. We’re genetically oppressed, hire us, BBC.
Celtic blood is especially prone.
RH-Neg blood is also connected to Ancient Hebrews, choose your opinion wisely.
It could even be a fine test for Jewish pretenders. If you’re one of the original tribe, you won’t mind a glance at your sheet?
Recessive genetics (islands and nomads) are more fragile and deserve special legal status because we don’t want to be anti-science, do we?

According to this proof, the Japanese, Chinese, Korean and Indians merit less positive discrimination than the British, Basque, other European and American.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rh_blood_group_system#Population_data
I guess Mother Nature isn’t a white supremacist. Tell me, where’s the data for immigrant RHF? Does Magic Dirt transform them? Who is needy?

“Rhesus-positive and Rhesus-negative persons differ in the presence-absence of highly immunogenic RhD protein on the erythrocyte membrane. The biological function of the RhD molecule is unknown. Its structure suggests that the molecular complex with RhD protein transports NH3 or CO2 molecules across the erythrocyte cell membrane. Some data indicate that RhD positive and RhD negative subjects differ in their tolerance to certain biological factors, including, Toxoplasma infection, aging and fatique. Present cross sectional study performed on 3,130 subjects) showed that Rhesus negative subjects differed in many indices of their health status, including incidences of many disorders.

Which direction?

Rhesus negative subjects reported to have more frequent allergic, digestive, heart, hematological, immunity, mental health, and neurological problems. On the population level, a Rhesus-negativity-associated burden could be compensated for, for example, by the heterozygote advantage, but for Rhesus negative subjects this burden represents a serious problem.”

Since wikipedia tends to delete certain data once I link, here’s a spare.

Read it and weep.

[groans in HBD]

The Race Relations act looks like a tightening noose, year on year.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/11/new-law-employers-reveal-race-pay-gap-figures

Freedom of association? Freedom of hiring/firing?

Freedom of productivity?

The gender wage gap (while it exists all over the place in varying directions) is a generally false question because it assumes you have more in common with your group demographically (sex) than your occupation – at WORK.

Work is a role, and this would logically lead to demanding the tall poppies be cut short.

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. – Boetcker

Do you want a welfare state or not?

We need all the GDP we can get, ya blithering idiots.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2018/04/25/we-are-totally-fucked/

The Bell Curve has already explained different performance in the same roles by IQ (or GPA) and the military has known for about a century.

If you want to crack open the can of worms, have at it.

It’s well known if that book came out today, the evidence would be undeniable (we have MRIs and genetics now).

Should we hand over all positions of power to a group of people purely based on how they were born?

How is that ANYTHING but a privilege?

A protected class is the new aristocracy.

If you want a democracy, a meritocracy, you don’t demand employers release CONFIDENTIAL PRIVACY DATA on other employees. Equality of outcomes is insanity, especially from those plugging diversity!

Ironically, it will become all about performance, and since certain groups

have lower-ranked performance, if you push this, they simply won’t be hired.

This will undo AA hiring. A company cannot afford to pay everyone top performer wages.

Category error – using the top wages as an anchor point, a norm, is statistically false.

If you want a cause, married people earn more than single people for the same work.

It’s known but you won’t see them bring it up because wifey poo likes to spend spend spend.

Singlism is a problem, where equal work is done, because of outdated notions of supporting a family like companies are a miniature welfare state. Bachelor men (including cohab) are screwed by occupational singlism more than women, because their jobs tend to compete with married men. I think that’s why manosphere types haven’t brought it up, because they can’t blame women when it’s intrasexual competition.

All fair competition is fair game under meritocracy though.

Trends in genome scans and sources of error

Cropped link – https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13339
I’ll be honest, I’m linking this for a stupid reason.
Links to – https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mec.13339
One author is called Payseur.

Things that make nerds go Ooh.

But yeah, there are tons of methodological issues with DNA tests, exhibit A.

From issue entitled: “Detecting Selection in Natural Populations: Making Sense of Genome Scans and Towards Alternative Solutions”

They’re studying ongoing human evolution, people. They’re biologists.

It isn’t like every mutation-prone cell in the world decided to play nice and stop while they play catch up.

Don’t give away something so valuable the police can’t steal it to a shady faceless corporation with ties to Israel and Google. Mmkay?

Medical ethics quiz round, rhetorical Q:

Is it really a murder if they clone your DNA?

Biologically, no.