Why Can't Whites Accept Organs From Dindus?

Can someone explain why, scientifically, whites reject nigger organs and vice versa?

I never learned this shit in (((school))) and Jewgle SEO'ed some other shit than what I was looking for because (((race is a social construct.))) Obviously, it's biological, please tell me the organ donor dilemma between the different races?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/44SgJ
web.archive.org/web/20150526233528/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116096445875393515.html?mg=com-wsj
online.wsj.com/article/SB116096445875393515.html?mg=com-wsj
archive.is/8VK5d
m.mentalfloss.com/article.php?id=65118
huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed
archive.is/wgoAP
youtube.com/watch?v=414mrPgK5Yk
journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.0010070&type=printable
organ
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2752128/
scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020)
goodrx.com/filgrastim?q=filgrastim&category=drug
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2954674/
washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2014/12/01/nows-your-chance-to-buy-james-watsons-nobel-prize-because-racism/
web.archive.org/web/20151016162513/http://zh.clicrbs.com.br/rs/vida-e-estilo/noticia/2015/01/miscigenacao-dificulta-busca-de-brasileiros-por-um-doador-de-medula-ossea-4680698.html
zh.clicrbs.com.br/rs/vida-e-estilo/noticia/2015/01/miscigenacao-dificulta-busca-de-brasileiros-por-um-doador-de-medula-ossea-4680698.html
content.time
washingtonpost
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Anyone receiving an organ no matter from what or who, your body will always reject it.

That's why patients are on medicine for life.

Same reason parts on a truck don't fit in a scooter.

It's a matter of genetic distance. Negroes are too genetically distant from whites for our bodies to accept each other's organs.

The genetic distance between whites and blacks is twice the genetic distance between most breeds of dog and a wolf.

Because your immune system recognizes it as garbage and attacks it.

The same reason BiDil only works for niggers

archive.is/44SgJ
web.archive.org/web/20150526233528/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116096445875393515.html?mg=com-wsj
online.wsj.com/article/SB116096445875393515.html?mg=com-wsj

Simply put, they aint us, proven by science.

cuz dey rayciss

in fact, only jewish organs can fit perfectly well inside niggas, chinks, pooinloos and mudslimes
not inside huwhytes because of their priviledge and racism

so mah niggas, don't hesitate to blast some kikes without damaging their organs, it helps a brotha

Unless you're pozzed by AIDS, your body just thinks it's just another Tuesday.

Why would humans accept animal organs?

Race is more than just the color of your skin, it's genetic. Thats why racemixing is bad because your body will reject everything

archive.is/8VK5d

No blood
No organs
When I fall, I fall, it is decided

the past
the present
the future
Drink of the well of memes, and you will know it

2nd pic is not quite right, it's all decided, your death, nothing you can do, but the way to get there is your to make, And which home you got to is only decided by your death. Most end up at last pic, or ewwwww 4th

Juhnetiks is raycis an shieet, wez bee equill an shiet .

This.

With organ transplants your goal is to find a match as close to the patient as possible.
The greater the difference between them and the donor the more drugs they need to be pumped with to prevent rejection.
And since said drugs are immunosuppressants the more they're on the more likely they are to contract another disease or get an infection.

Race is one of the first big barriers.
This is why mixed race people have such difficulty finding organs for transplant since it needs to be someone with the exact same racial mixture as them.
So a guy who is 1/4 white 1/4 asian and 1/2 african negro, will still have high rejection for an organ from an african negro.

The ideal scenario for a transplant coordinator is a racially pure individual who has an immediate family member who can donate an organ.
In that situation the amount of drugs needed is minimal.

Getting a blood transfusion from any race of not your own will not effect anything in anyway unless the donor is ill himself.

Yes but blood is a different scenario and different ethnic groups predominantly belong to a band of blood types.

Not to mention organ transplant is unnatural. Might work if the organ is cloned though, to be 100% the same as the original.

Every fucking time

Kikes eat organs, would you really make your self a frankenstein just to live a bit longer? Hooked on meds and shit we made here for this crap

External organisms want to exploit and suck you dry until you're cold and lifeless. To defend against this, evolution made your body xenophobic - anything external is exterminated. Every single day this saves your life. The downside is other peoples' organs are external, and are seen as a threat (even though they aren't, your body has no way to know this). The closer the organ is to your own the more likely it will be seen as one of your own and won't be attacked (twin > close family > family > race > species (the last isn't possible atm)). This is a really huge problem for mixed people since they need a donor with a close mix, and, notice, both sides of their family are incompatible.

Blood is not an organ though

We made the tech for translplants to become possible.
NOES! NEVER

Two of the most sexually perverse and promiscuous races on Earth

I heard a few years back that a synthetic(grown in a Petri dish) heart was created for mice. There's just not much funding since, I presume,it's not as profitable compared to selling a limited supply of organs.

m.mentalfloss.com/article.php?id=65118

Stay mad, Italy is the best.

Despite that, Italy is the fastest-aging country in Europe.

Requesting a rebuttal to:

What Scientists Mean When They Say ‘Race’ Is Not Genetic

huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed

archive.is/wgoAP

She can thank her degenerate parents for putting her in this position. Italians are pigs.

There is no rebuttal necessary when the article says

Essentially all they're asking for is a change of terminology.
In no meaningful way is it actually different.

What does that mean, fastest aging? Explain for a retard please.

Primarily due to your immune system. A large part of your immune system is controlled by a segment of your DNA called the Major Histocompatability Complex (MHC) complex. This largely dictates what antigens your body recognizes as "self" and what parts your body recognizes as "foreign"

The root word Histo means tissue. When testing for tissue donors for kidneys, bone marrow, lungs, hearts, liver, etc. the genetic testing that doctors do is comparing the MHC of both the patient and the donor. If the MHC in the patient is too different to the donor the body will recognize the tissue as a foreign body and attempt to destroy it. This is why patients undergoing organ transplants are frequently put on immunosuppresants.

Because the similarity of these two DNA sequences is critical, family members tend to make the best donors. If a family member is unavailable, the next place to look is for someone who shares common ancestry. The MHC is incredibly sensitive and you may still see organ rejections from family members, however they are the first to undergo testing.

Because the MHC has changed so much between races it is nearly impossible to find a match between say, an Aboriginal and an African. Now say you have primarily asian and african ancestry as seen in a rather well publicized Leukemia case. Some people on reddit attempted to find a bone marrow donor for this girl, they failded and she died. Because people with both asian and african ancestry are so rare it is nearly impossible to find a donor. The asian portion of the MHC will reject African donors and vice versa with the Asian donors.

This is essentially the same reason you can't accept certain types of blood, except on a scale several orders of magnitude larger.

They need a bit of fickificki to insert more blonds.

Nah it's the recession dude, the are fucked atm

The proportion of young to old as percentages of the population

Also, they say
>So, despite a widespread use of race in scientific and clinical research, race is the most controversial tool for making sense of human diversity that scientists have at their disposal.

That assertion is 100% unsupported, it's a complete non sequitur.

There's a lot of other stuff in there actually. That was near the end of it.

I remember reading something like genetics doesn't actually matter in defining race. There were a bunch of scientists from Europe and Asia who had their genes compared and found that a couple of Asians and Europeans sharing more genetic similarities with each other than their fellow continentals.

Thanks, good Italy deserves this. I've met some whores but holy shit. Italian and Thai women fuck the lowest of nigger tier trash.

My bad, was referring to this story.

...

If that was the case then how can ancestry of individuals be distinguished in a genetic test?

% of population is over 60. The higher percent the more old leeches you have in your country. Less young folks though. This die off shows you that your country is take care of these old fucks too much or there's been a on-going genocide by kikes to destroy your culture or most likely both. There would be no issue with a declining population without these factors cause its just the population stabilizing for sustainability. Instead the kikes have planned to breed out bad goys by racemixing/ causing societal issues to slow breeding and mass importing of retarded 3rd worlders.

Notice they didn't include niggers. Eurasians have been evolving and interbreeding with eachother for millennia. Unlike the current sub-species of homo rhodesiensis/sapiens hybrids in Africa.


Ancestry tests look at a small part of half the maternal DNA, basically.

Sounds like BS. All people of a race would be genetically closer to each other than any one of those with any one of another distinct race.

The one and only thing that makes you a man and not a dog is genetics. Saying genetics doesn't matter in race is ignorant at best and a lie at worst.
Either I don't understand what you mean or that's unlikely and maybe even impossible statistically. I'm no geneticist/biologist, but since your genetic data comes from your people it isn't obvious to me how you could be closer to some other race than your own. Do you remember the source?

That means that the number of people of young age is diminishing relative to the number of people of old age at a fast speed.

How bad shape would I be in?

could try south Brazil

You might as well kill yourself fam

Not fucking niggers, and you have to be of high birth….

Niggers
We called them blámenn til fjandins
We said blue to black but that, but it lit means blackmen of the "devil"

Never did we trade
Never did we negotiate
We just gassed them on site
To bad this is censored, and this not texted
Fighting niggers of mountain, there he blew his horn and they all pissed them selef
And there he sits God damn Charlemagne and now he starts to cry
Somethings never change

Sensored
youtube.com/watch?v=414mrPgK5Yk

You are the lowest trash

I was hoping for this response. If not you user, then I would have posted this. You summed it up greatly.

To further expand on this, this is also why mixed-race people have a more difficult time finding organ donors. The mix comes out different each time because there are so many possibilities that finding someone with their unique mix is incredibly difficult.

Also, the case you mentioned is largely anecdotal. For example, the definition of "genetic similarities" is undefined, so we'd need to know how that was determined first. We don't know how many scientists were European and how many were Asian, so there's no information as to the size of the sample group. In addition, we don't know if the "couple" Asians and Europeans that shared more genetic similarities with each other were products of interbreeding, even if the phenotypic expression of that interbreeding was not immediately obvious.

What about all the other Europeans, of which we can assume were more numerous? Did they have less genetic variation between each other than between themselves and Asians? I would assume so, otherwise the study would have mentioned that any pairing of European and Asian was closer in genetic variance than any European and European.


Well, you could argue that any genetic variation is going to ignore a vast majority of DNA codons because of the vast similarity of most human DNA to other human DNA, regardless of sub-species.

Here's an article that demonstrates if you cluster individual genomes by genetic similarity, individual humans are grouped in to clusters that reflect geographic regions. They also assert that geographic boundaries are largely responsible for the discontinuities in allele frequencies, which is how the clusters form in the first place, and that speaks directly to the factors that lead to distinct formation of races.

journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.0010070&type=printable

SVARTE FAEN
most common svear
it comes from niggers
Blámenn til fjandins
FAEN, fjandin
BLUE=>BLACK

lit
BLACK DEVIL/FUCK
when you hurt your self.

yeah yeah last post

May you explain this or is it just for shitposting?

:(

I've been trying to find it. It's real. I read it off some liberal board a while ago. The Asians were either Koreans or Japanese, the former likelier, while the Europeans were Swiss or Norwegian.


Obviously, there's a line between being human and not being human. But human genetic variation is so diverse that it's a matter of which combination of genes you get. You can be from the same race but have less in common genetically, even though you both have the same genes for blonde hair, colored eyes, than from someone in Asia. Genes affect a lot more than outward appearance.

Anyway, I'll try to find the paper again.

Italians and niggers have a lot in common


Fuck tomato niggers

For hundreds of years, Italians fought off invasion by Muslims. Lots of raping happened. Because of this, but mostly because of anti-Catholic sentiments in America, people like to say that Italians aren't white. They are though.

nigger or not, you mafia sucks, they were sent straight back home from here

To be fair to user, Baby Boomers are for the most part terribly shitty people. You're not American are you?

Bulgarians too, couldn't match the locals, a bit to loco, mexico tried BTFO

I never talked about baby boomers.

That's completely ridiculous. Italian Americans are the most racially aware demographic of white people in America today. My german mother's family all love giving charity to niggers. My father (he's half-german) side of the family all hate niggers. This is typical.

Italian Americans remember being called wops and getting constantly compared to niggers, so they have zero sympathy for niggers. If they could pull themselves up and succeed in America, why can't niggers? Because niggers are subhuman. Italian Americans know this while most other white American demographics are majority deracinated.

HEIL'D

Im checking thoae trips but shitting on italy over japan is autistic. Hitler's REEEEEEE's over japan just flat out lying and not helping were way worse a slight to him than italy doing its best and failing.

Also, tomatoes like potatoes are from the Americas, not from Italy. They're only associated with Italy because Mediterranean nations had superior trade routes.

Try using bone marrow as an example instead of (replaceable and constantly replaced) blood.

That and the postings of parents of mixed who talk about how they don't recognize their children all the way, added to the whole fact that you're more genetically related to some guy on the street than your own kids makes the whole thing super tragic.

Mulattos simply shouldn't exist. Their plight is too sad.

As a white man I understand what it's like to be denied a heritage. But at least I can reclaim mine.

I don't think bad, that's a common and close enough mix. It's trouble when it's rare, like, I don't know, 1/4 irish, 1/4 burger native, 1/4 chink, 1/4 nig. Worse is no way the parents can think of that at the time (who'd think the kid they don't have yet could need a new kidney?).

South Italy has some sand blood because of the invasion. I'd guess that's the reason.

You watch too much Sopranos. And even his daughter brought home a melanzane at some point.

What I get from that is basically all that talk about cloned organs is the most viable answer as one taken from your own DNA would not be rejected. Am I right or is that some bullshit?

but dats raycist, we all hooman beans all 1 race humanz raise!
MY WORLDVIEWS, THROW SCIENCE IN THE TRASH RIGHT NOW!

I have never had HBO. Pull your head out of your ass.

Also go fuck yourself.

organ donation.nhs.uk/about-donation/organ-donation-and-ethnicity/
this breaks it down

Very well than, olive niggers

People in those countries age faster, like if you stay a year, you age for 2 years.

Is this some sort of nigger science magick at work?

there was a better one than this
it was some organ donation charity website
it totally broke down all the reasons

...

yeah they are on immune system depression medication which means they get sick more quickly , never mind all the side effects, but it is still better than dying.

I'm not going to bother going into all the details, but there are certain proteins on the surface of your cells encoded by genes called HLAs. There are tons of different combinations of HLA genes. Your immune system relies on these to identify what "things" are part of your body as opposed to being foreign pathogens that should be attacked.

The more of an HLA match the donor of something like a kidney is to your own HLAs, the lower the chance of rejection. The most ideal would be identical twin, who will have the exact same HLA typing. Next best would be a sibling. Then a first degree relative. Following this same logic, you're more likely to find a decent match from someone of your own race than of another race.

Whites are actually fucking lucky when it comes to organ transplants. Because there's a hell of a lot more availability of white organs because whites are the majority in our country, and because whites are much more likely to bother signing up as an organ donor. Some nigger wanting a new kidney is fucked, because his pool of possible donors is only 13%, and it's actually even less than that, because most niggers won't donate organs.

And if you're a mixed race mudblood, good fucking luck getting a solid organ or bone marrow transplant.

Nigger, dagos are just one half step above spics. Jersey shore was an accurate description of Italian-American people.

You niggers need to stop believing everything jews tell you. Do you also watch TV shows that make fun of "rednecks"? Jews mocking and slandering white people by identifying the worst specimens and blasting them out on TV across the entire world as typical examples is a decades old trick, yet you still fall for it? Get fucked.

You need to go back

And yesI promise I sleep now, just one sigg

Still in college? or working professionals? I'm almost done majoring in medical diagnostics.

People like you are the reason why White nationalists get called LARPers and conspiracy theorists. Always looking for an abstract entity to blame for your own short comings. Like niggers.

kys

Pharmacist. I rarely ever deal with transplant shit, but I remember the basics from school/rotations

Because science hasn't advanced enough to allow ape to human transplants.

Neat, I've been a dipshit CPhT for almost a year now.

Quick question, why do we give transplant patients a drug that strengthens the immune system like neupogen when they usually get put on immunosuppressats?

Rhesus negative factor you nigger

Literally determines if you are white or not.

Because filgrastim stimulates the innate immune system (i.e. spurs creation of neutrophils), while the organ rejection process is a function of the adaptive immune system (T- and B-cells, plus APCs).

Think of these as similar to the army & air force. There is overlap in capability between the two branches of the military, though each one has specific functions that the other cannot perform. One branch can be suppressed without suppressing the other.

-t. physician

Found it. Sorry it took a while. I was watching Konosuba.

The first Korean genome sequence and analysis: Full genome sequencing for a socio-ethnic group

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2752128/

Commentary from Scientific American:

scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/

Not the same species. Whites are homo sapiens, negroes are homo erectus.

sieg
heil

you're confusing different disease states. Neupogen is used in chemo/radiation patients to get their immune systems back up to snuff afterwards.

Neat, I asked both of the pharmacists I work under and neither of them knew. Google wouldn't really give me anything either.


see

We had a patient in our pharmacy getting the medication explicitly for transplant surgery. I remember it well because the drug is crazy expensive, like 2000$ with state insurance. Fortunately we were able to send him to a specialty pharmacy and his copay was closer to 100$

Reading the article right now, but based on just the commentary section you posted:

That's because they are comparing single alleles or single loci. There was a study by Witherspoon (link ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020) that asked the following question "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?" They found when a small number of loci were compared, there was a lot of overlap between races. When they used 1,000 loci, the answer to their question was "never," meaning that they did not find a single pair of individuals from two different populations that had a smaller difference from any two individuals in the same population.

>It turned out that Watson and Venter shared fewer variations in their genetic sequences than they each shared with Kim.
Doesn't this mean that Watson and Venter were genetically more similar to each other than to Kim? If so, that would directly support the above article by Witherspoon, given that it looks like they were comparing multiple alleles and loci, as Witherspoon did. Or am I missing something?

How so?

I think they're talking about permutations(?) of genetic sequences. They call particular sequences variations. So to say you have fewer common variations means you have less sequences in common.

I'm only slightly literate with genetics. I have a chemistry degree, and I took biochemistry, but I'm far from able to read genetic studies with accuracy.

I get a kick out of this bullshit. If the governments would stop giving jobs and gibs to the millions of shitskins they import, whites could actually afford to have larger white families. Wonder why they don't….

Yeah they tried here too but they went GTFO, same as italians. Marked it hard, and it's a very corrupt state. Police are in on a lot of shit. You dem gypsies though, they seem loosely organized

What kind of transplant? Before, I was speaking in the context of a solid organ transplant. Kidney, liver, etc.

Are you specifically talking about a hematopoietic stem cell transplant? That's a whole different ballgame. In any other type of transplant, you're trying to prevent your immune system from attacking the graft. But in an HSCT, you're straight-up replacing the immune system. You're using large doses of radiation/chemo to completely kill the host's own immune system, and then replacing it with the donor cells.

The reason you use neupogen in this scenario is because you administered stem cells that will become the new immune system, but you need them to grow and take over. That's why you give filgrastim. It's like planting a seed and then feeding that sucker some miracle grow.

Eh. I refer patients to goodrx.com so they can tell if they're getting screwed.

goodrx.com/filgrastim?q=filgrastim&category=drug

Note that actually *using* these coupons probably violates OPSEC, because the company will get your info when the coupon is used. However, normies don't care and sometimes even security conscious people have no choice because even with the discount their drugs are damn expensive.

Protip for anons: look up drugs you have been prescribed on goodrx. If your copay is high, check to see if there are alternate dose strengths that are cheaper and call your doc if so. I've saved quite a bit by choosing a different strength that was less expensive but changing the amount I use in order to get the same overall dose.

På tide å legge seg, Harald.

Ja deres Majestet, det blei et par tuborg.
Men man adlyder kongen, god natt

I can't recall specifically, however it was an older gentleman so I'm assuming it was a liver/kidney transplant.

This was a little more than just one syringe, we had maybe 5+ boxes of the stuff for this guy for his first order, and several more since he needed refills.

genetics

plenty of old people get BMTs. That's far more likely. If it's a solid organ transplant, I honestly have no idea why they'd give G-CSF. That wouldn't make any sense afaik.

No. Filgrastim is just G-CSF. It stimulates the production of neutrophils quite specifically (cf. pic related). G-CSF would be administered to any transplant patient who was neutropenic for whatever reason.

Filgrastim most certainly is *not* "miracle grow for the immune system", unless you believe the immune system is effectively nothing but the neutrophils of the innate immune system.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2954674/

When did science become so racist openly?

Your body rejects anything that isn't extremely similar. This is the greatest reason not to racemix. If you're 1/3 dindu 1/3 white & 1/3 inuit, odds are you're not going to find an organ since you need one from someone with that exact mix.

I'm using laymans terms here, because there's no need to go into the finer points. Filgrastim is used after BMTs.

You might be right about that, although that is really terrible phrasing if that is the correct interpretation. Here's some more stuff from the actual article you linked as I'm going through it.

First of all, the article discusses a full sequence for one Korean male. Not a population, just ONE individual. In fact, the article is only using five distinct genomes in its entirety, and each one was sequenced from a single individual. Whatever you mentioned in your post above (here ) is either completely wrong, or this is not the study you were thinking of. This was not "a bunch of scientists" by any measure.

In the abstract, it mentions

This looks like they're saying they found significant differences even from closely related ethnic groups, primarily Korean and Chinese, the two groups they focused on in their study. They go on to say that constructing reference genomes for minor socio-ethnic groups would be useful. I take that to mean even small variations in socio-ethnic group membership would have enough genetic variation for separability or distinguishing between those groups. That might be a little over-reaching on my part though.

Later in the study it says

I'll help decode that a bit. SJK is the Korean genome they sequenced. YH is a single Chinese sequenced genome. NA18507 (Yoruba) is a sequenced genome from a Nigerian. Venter and Watson are individual genomes from two Caucasian men. SNPs are single nucleotide polymorphisms, effectively a single difference of a nucleotide. A difference in one SNP would be one base in the place of another at the same point in a similar genetic sequence, like a "C" instead of a "T".

The study is saying that the Korean genome shared 60% of these SNPs with the Chinese genome, 50% and 53% with Watson and Venter respectively, and 56% with the Yoruba genome, which is a Nigerian genome. The Chinese genome is 54% and 52% similar to Watson and Venter and 57% similar to the Nigerian genome. Watson and Venter are 56% similar to each other, and Venter is 53% similar to the Nigerian genome.

Naturally, this does not indicate which SNPs are similar in each case, just the ratio of similar and dissimilar between each group. I'm sure the individual SNP variations between the groups would be much more telling, if elaborated on. With a little bad science and hand waving, I can proclaim from these results that Koreans and Chinese are more similar to niggers than they are to whites, and more similar to niggers than whites are to niggers.

A more reasonable statement might be that Koreans are more genetically similar to Chinese than Whites are to each other, given Watson and Venter's only 56% similarity. The biggest question is the ethnic ancestry of Watson and Venter, because they could both come from very different areas of the world and may have significant admixture present. I'd have to read more on studies comparing the two of their genomes specifically, and a breakdown of their individual ethnic lineage. In addition, I wouldn't be surprised if there was more genetic diversity in Europe than Africa or Asia, which might explain the seemingly large variance between two Caucasians.

It's important to consider that this study is only referring to single genomes from single individuals though - it is absolutely not a population based study. The conclusions you could draw from this are marginal at best because there is no way to cluster four individuals from four distinct groups into anything but those four distinct groups. Even metrics of similarity are specious at best because they are single samples.

This tells you how much the scientific community is interested in truth finding.

Leftover sandniggers from muzzie invasions are not Italian, no matter how long they've been there.

This entire thread has already been made before, with the exact same pictures and posts. What the fuck? Why does the timer says the thread was made 3 hours ago? This is the fourth time I've seen this event happen. Is there a bot on Holla Forums that saves entire threads and re-posts everything?

The goyim knows shut it down!

Well that was the first time I posted that. In a thread like this.

washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2014/12/01/nows-your-chance-to-buy-james-watsons-nobel-prize-because-racism/

The anonpill: Holla Forums is a containment board just for you where you are the only human surrounded by automated post bots talking to themselves. Ever wondered why there's so much spam and one sentence replies and non sequiturs?

I'm you, but this is my 10,672nd time. I just want to tell you, for both our sake, take the door to the right when you get there on the day of the 74th time.

Finally, the article includes this graphic and a caption below it. Pic related. The caption is as follows:

Effectively, the circular graph is showing common ancestors based on the genetic similarity of a few known sequenced genomes. Note that Watson and Venter sharing a common ancestor with YRINA18507, a Nigerian, does not mean they are niggers. You'll notice their shared common ancestor is at the innermost part of the graph - in my interpretation this would likely be the point where the African population significantly diverged due to their admixture with groups of non-Homo sapiens. You can also see that the common ancestry between Watson/Venter and all of the Asian populations is only one level down in the total hierarchy on that graph, you can see where the split between Chinese and Koreans takes place, and the fact that there are some Chinese sequenced genomes within the Korean tree implies there was significant admixture among their populations. The Japanese genome samples occur at a lower level on the Korean tree, reflecting the relatively recent split between their populations. Theoretically the Japanese genomes could also share some other ancestry due to the Ainu and Jomon, but that isn't depicted here. It's also possible all the Japanese samples show a high degree of Yayoi ancestry and hence are grouped only with Koreans.

On the bottom left graph, (B), you can see the chromosomal Y-DNA analysis of the five main genomes discussed in the article. Venter and Watson are in the same group, R, which isn't surprising because that's affiliated with European ancestry. Curiously, they felt no need to break down R into subgroups, like R1 or R1b, even though they did that for the Korean and Chinese groups. I believe this is because the primary focus of the study is to compare Korean and Chinese genomes, as well as the likelihood that both Watson and Venter might be significantly R1b, and therefore it is somewhat fruitless to show an elaboration of the R group when it would only be a single branch. You can also see the Nigerian genome sample all the way over in group E, completely separate from the rest, and in fact on a completely different derivative branch that splits off at CT.

The bottom right graph, (C), is only illustrating the mtDNA ethno-geographic lineage analysis of the Korean genome sample and does not show any others.

I'd say this pretty conclusively demonstrates that even in a highly sample constrained environment, it's pretty trivial to see that intra-group genetic similarity is greater when compared with inter-group similarity. Scientists might think that race isn't real and ethnicity is all that matters, but it seems pretty trivial to group large swaths of ethnic variation in to defined groups we call "race" on a purely genetic basis.

>Filgrastim is used after BMTs whenever a patient is seriously neutropenic
FTFY. The action of the drug is even in the generic name.


See above. While it may be given routinely in BMT it's not as if neutrophils contribute to organ rejection—so it's not contraindicated in solid organ transplant if the patient is neutropenic.

Says she found her donor.

I don't know what you're talking about user, but for what it's worth, my posts (ID 8447f0) were literally just typed out, by me, in this thread only. I just finished analyzing a study linked by another user and it took me a little over an hour to analyze and write and , so I frankly call bullshit that you've seen this entire thread before.

imagine not being able to save your own child by donating an organ because you mudsharked
the humanity of it all

I know this story, very sad. The scientific community is full of fraudsters.

Welcome to this time line, traveler.

RH negativity is rare and is most prevalent spainiards

It is much more difficult for a Brazilian to find a bone marrow donor compatible in Brazil than a German in Germany or a Japanese in Japan because of the miscegenation in the country.

Archive: web.archive.org/web/20151016162513/http://zh.clicrbs.com.br/rs/vida-e-estilo/noticia/2015/01/miscigenacao-dificulta-busca-de-brasileiros-por-um-doador-de-medula-ossea-4680698.html

zh.clicrbs.com.br/rs/vida-e-estilo/noticia/2015/01/miscigenacao-dificulta-busca-de-brasileiros-por-um-doador-de-medula-ossea-4680698.html

No, no, no, no, dude. From Flanders to the 888 I remember those exact posts being made in that exact order! Specifically and has been posted before.
I think I need a break from Holla Forums.


I did not ask for this LARP.

Finally, that Scientific American article is extremely poorly written and is highly political. scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/

It's basically asserting that race is a social construct, when the scientists quoted in the article are saying that race is a weak proxy for, get this, more accurate methods of determining genetic differences. It's like saying that since we can analyze individual genomes to determine the most effective drug treatment or tissue donor match, that race just doesn't exist goy. They want perfectly valid racial categories to stop being used in general, not because they are wrong or are invalid classifications, but simply because they are less granular than a more detailed genetic analysis.

Even their analysis of the paper that I just spent over and hour reading and breaking down in and is completely wrong, the study in no way supports their assertions. They just cherrypicked and found a paper that didn't say much about race or variation across racial lines, and used that in the article. That's despite the fact the actual paper clearly demonstrates a greater total genetic similarity between similar populations, and less similarity when comparing individuals from two distinct populations or more divergent racial groups, as illustrated by the Y-DNA analysis in the paper.

The level of false premises and false conclusion are absolutely fucking staggering for a rag like Scientific American to make, let alone the actual scientists studying genetics and ethnicity, and exposes the blatant politicization of the field. They seem utterly incapable of actually reading scientific papers and understanding the contents - seems more like they just pick a politically motivated premise and cherrypick everything to support their claim. It's just like global warming all over again - people that can't understand logic are the ones actually doing scientific research, if you could even call it that, and the same ones that are promoting MUH SCIENCE to the general populations as if they're the harbingers of sacred information.

Then here, have a harp.

Meant to link

I suppose the posts you originally saw get dubs, complete with anons checking those dubs, just so happen to get dubs a second, third, and fourth time around. Wew lad, that is one determined and precise bot.

Blåmenn til fjandins is not niggers, it's the god damn Swedes again, from the time they controlled France and served Gammel-Erik(another name for the devil.).

From my perspective, pic related is more of an issue for the racial concept.

Taken from "Genetic variation, classification and 'race'", published in Nature in 2004:
www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

The image illustrates genetic distance. There is insane genetic diversity in sub-Saharan Africa, such that native black people living some miles apart may be more genetically distant from each other than either of them are from Northern Europeans and Asians. This implies that if we are to retain a genetic / haplogroup definition of race, then we would need to promote all these sub-Saharan groups (i.e. a fuckton of them) to equal racial status that we would give Euro whites and East Asians. Basically, the point is that the black phenotype doesn't at all correlate with a "black race" haplogroup.

However, if we drop the genetic basis for race and go with phenotype instead, then that is fraught with obvious issues. If we go simply by geographic ancestry instead of genetics, then race becomes effectively meaningless. Personally, I think accepting a huge multiplicity of "black races" is the least fucked approach aside from simply giving up on the idea of race, which is the idea that is being (((pushed))).

My bad, could have swore I heard somewhere that she died before they could find one.

No, living a life pumped full of chemicals prescribed by the medical Jew is no way to live.

...

Where does this conclusion come from? Why, if we accept race as a somewhat arbitrary grouping of common genetic ancestry, do we have to give niggers equal racial status? What the fuck is equal racial status anyway? If you're saying that we need to recognize there are more black races than just "black" or "nigger" the same argument could be made for "white" and the fact that refers to a multitude of genetic sub-groups as well. How does that distinction make any difference?

Support this statement too. You're just making a baseless conclusion that race becomes meaningless without any argument as to why that is. How about the fact that race is useful as a summary classification of people regardless of its "technical" definition, and that it might not need a formal definition to still retain it's utility? How about the fact that science is trying to disparage race as a notion by making false premise arguments that it isn't useful when trying to classify specific differences between people, and hand waving race away because they can't scientifically define it, even though it absolutely exists as a theoretical concept that almost every human being alive would recognize?

Naw, there's enough diversity that I know like 10% is not a bot.

Not at all.

I'm about half of it, after all.

I really hope that was intentional roflmao

Exactly. Look at the diagram in my previous post, user. If you want to assert there is a racial distinction between northern euros and asians (i.e. something most would consider self-evident), then you must accept that from a genetic standpoint there are hundreds if not thousands of black "races". That's what I mean by racial equality, as you surmised: all these black groups would need to be promoted to first-order races (not sub-races) in order to be consistent. Whites are closely genetically related, so calling out white subgroups as "races" isn't comparable when it comes to the genetic distance approach.

So you'd assert that geographical ancestry is a sufficient basis for race regardless of genetics or even phenotypes? How far back do you go then? Is a white born in South Africa a "black"? What about the first dark-skinned "whites" from Africa that left the future niggers behind and migrated to Europe?

user, if you can't come up with a workable precise definition that isn't full of holes then that's a problem. Right now the question of the definition of race poses issues like calling Pluto a planet caused. If you go with the "because everyone says it is a planet while all these other similar objects aren't" approach to a definition then it really is a meaningless classification. Same applies here.

Which, again, is why I support the "myriad of black races" approach. It's logical, consistent, and provides a scientific basis that accepts a distinction between northern euro/asian/american indian, etc.

Pig valves seemed to work bretty good, but that's just something someone under 30 wouldn't know about, right kiddo?


(citation needed)

False, this would not be true in all cases, but it would be true in most. Sort of like how different group averages do not mean that every member of group A are higher in the quantity in question than every member of group B, also racial or ethnic groups are clusters of individuals with related phenotypes. Two members within a cluster will most likely be more alike than when compared to individuals in other clusters, but this is not always true.

Why do you have to play with my emotions like that user?

To expand on that, it would almost certainly true that a person from sub-Saharan Africa, however it could well be that some individual ethnic Russian is more closely related by some genetic measure to some individual Mongolian, than he is to some infividual Spaniard.
Actually, looking closer at the study you called BS, the way it uses the phrase "fellow continentals", it looks like they may be calling both Japanese, Cambodians, and Iranians "Asian", and saying "look, this one Asian is more related to Europeans than he is to Cambodians". My intention is to refute your categorical statement, not defend the study.

...

Systems engineer; still in college, so I'm rusty on my biology. It's nice seeing other educated fags among the sea of shills and newfags though.

I received my PhD in Human Genetics in 88. So I can say (with some authority) that White People can/should only accept organ donations from HUMAN sources. So no Nog organs, please.

Ive seen it happen a few times as well.
Not sure if its a bot, we are moving timelines, or what.
Mabey we just happen to remake the same exact thread by pure chance due to some probability manipulation shenanigans

Doesn't this rather prove race isn't a social construct?

You're trying to solve the "slavs are white" and "sicilians are niggers" debates by attempting to formalize the definition of race, but that's entirely unnecessary. If you really want to try to formalize those specific assertions you're going to have to consider ethnic and geographic background regardless, and there's no point in conflating the notion of race with those concepts. Even then, not all whites will accept your conclusion, which I'll touch on later. Race is perception based and that's fine, it doesn't need a scientific definition to exist. It's a shortcut to avoid your reductio about ethnicity, which is why it exists in the first place as a conversational or idea-based construct.

If you call someone a nigger it really doesn't matter if they're from Nigeria or Zimbabwe, how they ended up immigrating so that you're face to face with them, and what their ancestry was like, because you're basing it off a variety of observable characteristics. If you a call a white person white, it doesn't matter if they're an American seven generations down from their German immigrant ancestors that were themselves the product of 10,000 years of European evolution and migration, or if they are traveling in your country from France, because they're still white.

I get the feeling you're not struggling with your ability to see a nigger and call them that, you're struggling with the notion of "white" being hard to pin down, because not all white people are actually white, and the verbose contradiction of that is sometimes frustrating. The reason the definition of white is so nebulous, in my opinion, is because whites are at no risk of out-grouping the wrong people, so you can call just about anybody a nigger and you're okay. The risk is in-grouping the wrong people, the equivalent of calling someone half black or half asian "white" and including them as a fellow white person. That is why whites will always be more picky about the definition of who is white and who is not. But it sure as hell doesn't take a bunch of pseudo-scientific masturbation about the definition of what race is to understand or resolve that issue.

I wanted to expand on what I said at the end of the first paragraph, because I realized it kind of looks like I'm saying "race is a social construct" and that's not how I meant for it to come across. I think race fundamentally exists as a way of categorizing people, particularly for in-group and out-group purposes, and it's primarily based on a person's physical characteristics, which ultimately are direct expressions of their genetic code. Any group-wide distinguishable physical difference is going to be genetic at its core. The boundaries that exist at the edges of those categories (white, black, asian, etc), however, might be somewhat socially defined. In other words, whether you're going to call a half black half white person white or black depends a lot on your own self identified race, and possibly your culture as well. I think that's where some people get the idea that it's a social construct, because all they can see are those "exceptions" to the rule. That doesn't change the fact that the general classifications are still based ultimately on genetics and ancestry, but situations like that might mean that racial categorizations of an individual aren't always correct (if correctness of classification can even be evaluated rigorously) and also because it's hard to categorize something in what should be mutually exclusive groups when that something belongs to more than one (even though it shouldn't because mixing across racial boundaries is particularly reprehensible).

Also, the utility of race as a concept is almost entirely social, in that it provides a "shortcut" to avoid the drawn out process of examining someone's ancestral heritage and still yields important information about that person. The reason the notion of race still exists, even with our modern understanding of genetics and migratory patterns and haplogroups and all of that, is because it's a simple concept, is easy to use, and is still very effective at making distinctions between people that are still fundamentally genetic in nature.

Does it affect really mixed white people? Like white Americans who are a blend of half of Europe or more?

Careful, i got a month ban for posting


Mod must have overdosed on hotpockets.

(hh'd)
It's popular journalism in general: Whenever you are qualified in a subject, all it takes is the first paragraph to realize the writer misunderstood even the simplest things and just marched on with opinions. Given the current climate of thoughpolicing, it's no wonder the results are incomprehensible political manifests sold as "expert articles". This is especially true with social and political "sciences", which should have nothing to say about [i]biology[i] - an actual science.

That and even the actual sciences are getting filled with people that put politics ahead of logic, which to me completely invalidates their findings.

by the way toranon it's two single quotes around whatever you want to italicize

(check'd)
Which is exactly the problem of humanities: In the core of science is reproducibility. If you cannot reproduce your results they didn't happen. In social and political "sciences" the few experiments done are seldom reproducible. In any other branch this would disqualify the results. But in humanities, if you don't like the results, you disqualify the researcher. And that cancer is slowly creeping to hard sciences as well.

and thanks

A transplant essentially introduces a new immune system to a person. Without genetic similarity between the donor and the patient, the new white blood cells will attack the host body.

content.time dot com/time/health/article/0,8599,1993074,00.html

washingtonpost dot com/national/health-science/race-matters-when-a-patient-needs-a-stem-cell-or-marrow-transplant/2013/08/05/51abdf04-f2d9-11e2-ae43-b31dc363c3bf_story.html

You're absolutely right about reproducibility, and I've read some abstracts of papers suggesting it's a HUGE problem in modern science. Most results that are published are totally un-reproducible and yet they are looked at as valid results nevertheless. Another huge factor is the near total lack of falsifiability in modern science. I blame the rise of observational science to an extent since it's practically hypothesis-less. I can't even count how many supposed scientific fields are horrifically corrupted by the falsifiability problem, but climate science is one of the biggest ones. I've seen some results in the arena of medicine that suffer the same.

I can't help but see the pattern though - the actual scientific process of inquiry has slowly become corrupted and yet at the same time you have people like Bill Nye, icon to many who grew up in the 90's, going on TV and shilling for anthropogenic global warming. You have all of the "I fucking love science" bullshit all over kikebook and other social media, filled with utterly pseudoscientific bullshit, and the normalfags just eat it up. Black science man has a fucking TV show now where he interviews celebrities and basically does nothing scientific. Even Mythbusters was used to promote science, but in terms of blowing shit up and hand waving away all of the actual physics behind it, etc. It's promoting a forced idolatry of science among normalfags, and yet that institution is getting more corrupted every day.

MEANWHILE
In the field of meme magic, on the complete opposite end of the spectrum, this thread had THREE TRIP 8s, holy fuck.
(checked)
(not gonna self check because that's bullshit)
(checked)

What? That pic is some D&C kike shit. Hell, we even have Azov.

The Emperor of hard sciences, theoretical physics, has been masturbating with (((string theory))) for half a century. Results: one curious mathematical equivalence of no further importance.

So does that mean Jew practice inbreeding because they know that organs from one of their own who is dead or dying will extend their life? Maybe they've known about blood transfusion or its ingestion all this time and it is the reason they only use goy organs if they absolutely need to?

Someone has probably done a study on one identical twin donating an organ to the other. I think the first successful kidney transplant was between twins and the subject did not have to take anti-rejection medication. I don't know how long they survived and if drugs would have made a difference.

I suppose it would depend on the organ, whether it was a whole or partial organ transplant and how willing the doctor is to risk a lawsuit by not prescribing drugs.

OP is an ignorant nigger - NOBODY TELL HIM!

There's not really much to rebut here. Race is too generalizing of a concept, because you can find multiple genetic clusters or haplotypes even within a single race (divided into ethnicities). This is to be expected, since you can't genetically equate e.g. a Spaniard with a Nord or a Moroccan with a Bushman most of the time, even though they're of the same race.

The problem is when libshits use this argument to propagate an agenda discrediting all of race/ethnicity science, because apparently using a "false" categorization under which biologists publish their findings makes all of biology eligible for the trash bin.

Ive been looking for a source on this for a while now. Its a pretty redpilling statement. Is there any official sources on facts like this? Anytime i google for it i cant find this comparison. Most of my friends are very skeptical, A good source would help me redpill a lot of people.

The body reject the organs that don't belong to ours and this is why people is put on the medication to prevent the rejection however at the expense of their health. We need to mate with the people that is genetically compatible so our children have higher chances to donate their organs to their siblings or getting organs from mine and future wife.

...

I just took a random paper on dogs (;
Heidi G. Parker, et al.
Genetic Structure of the Purebred Domestic Dog, Science 304, 1160 (2004);
).

''Similarly, the average genetic distance
between breeds calculated from the
SNP data is FST  0.33. These observations
are consistent with previous reports that analyzed
fewer dog breeds (9, 10), confirming
the prediction that breed barriers have led to
strong genetic isolation among breeds, and
are in marked contrast to the much lower
genetic differentiation (typically in the range
of 5 to 10%) found among human populations
(17, 18) ''


However, taking a look at the paper I have regarding Fst in human populations, it seems to be more than 5-10% on average. Both papers are sourced in the pictures as well.

were they finns?

leaked footage of Finnish geneticists found

Finnish geneticist explains how race is a social construct

Intended to link the dog paper as well.

https:// www.princeton.edu/genomics/kruglyak/publication/PDF/2004_Parker_Genetic.pdf

Reread your initial claim and I think I found the papers it's based on. I'll link the papers at the end of my post.
This is quoting from the paper regarding dogs and wolves - "Our result shows dogs and gray wolves are genetically distinct(FST=0.165)."
And here is from the other paper regarding humans "Sub-Saharan African (Bantu) vs. Eurasian(English) - 0.24 ).

So I'd say it's an fairly accurate claim.

https: //www.researchgate.net/publication/51120919_A_genome-wide_perspective_on_the_evolutionary_history_of_enigmatic_wolf-like_canids

https: //www.researchgate.net/publication/26756268_Is_Homo_sapiens_polytypic_Human_taxonomic_diversity_and_its_implications

DOI: 10.1101/gr.116301.110
DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046

It's the Vampiric aura of the Vatican.

Thank you so much user. Thats perfect, its exactly what i was looking for.

Last question. Do you know anything about what genetic distance actially means? Is it just a measure of time to a common ancestor? Or is it actually a forumala involving genes…
The wikipeadia page on genetic distance was not helpful at all.

Basques aren't Spaniards.
They are blonde haired, blue eyed and speak a language of unknown origin.
The mountains kept them genetically separated.

It's no different in America with white males who are just playing video games as adults because they don't have enough money to have the required superiority that makes a woman's cunt wet in a world where women work the same jobs.

Fucking your equal is like masturbating for women, and fucking a perceived lower (according to the dominant social norms of the culture you're in) is akin to a woman mutilating her vagina; those are the keys behind this modern day democratic women's lib "equality" phenomenon of hypergamy.

It also explains divorce rates.

Women got married and divorced less and were content when they got a man who was their provider. You're not her provider anymore. You're not superior in the capacity of anything really, because the world has been on a crusade to make women do everything men do.


If you are wholesale dismissing what I'm saying on the basis of social psychological mechanisms that are clearly at play, maybe you should go listen to someone you always listen to, and see what Hitler said about feminism.

Same things.

I've met Italian women. They're just as Americanized as the rest of European women, that is, materialistic and Judaized strong independent SLUTS.

Here, some more. Maybe you'll find some useful.

...

...

...

Don't show that image to furries

do you have a source for this?

ayo, so – hol' up – so, you be sayin' physiognomy is REAL?

reality is racist

Have you ever seen an Italian woman? They age like milk

ayy lmao

...

redpill me on this please

Increased genetic distance means increased dissimilarity.

The easiest way of seeing this is by the phenotype, e.g. brown vs. blonde hair.

If I remember March of the Titans right:

British and Danes (or Germans) are about 22 points genetically distant from one another. British and sub-saharan Africans are at 100 times that amount, nearly 2300 points. These "points" are calculated out of genetics studies using some pretty complex math and statistics.

One way of displaying this information in a more easily readable way and more specifically than just eye/hair color is through a PCA or Principal Component Analysis.


these posts contain a total of 3 of such charts. PC 1 and PC 2 are "Principal Component" 1 and 2. In the statistical procedure that spits these out, you're basically taking a massive data set (in this case SNPs or Single Nucleotide Polymorphism, these are individual alleles, a variation of a gene) and tries mapping them out on a 2 dimensional plane. SNPs that are similar cluster together therefore giving us the racial groupings.

These PCAs also give us an idea of distance, specifically the "lack of continuum". Africans are fundamentally different to Whites and all other races actually.

The disaster that is the African American Negro shows us that "white washing" is impossible. Imagine on that "The Genetic Reality of Race" a long slew of dots between "Africa" and "Europe". Those dots would be the African American. They are ~10-20% White genetically and look how that turned out.

Yes, we call them "direct descendants of Genghis Khan."

1 in 200 men are his descendants.

Speciation.

Our species' organs are sufficiently dissimilar that our immune systems identify the tissues as invasive alien infections and proceed to destroy them.