Main Stream Black Out.

[EFLImpudence]

Please explain. A simple statement, merely your opinion will not do.

The rest of my post explains.

We've already agreed that, types, etnicities, religions, even races or breeds, if you like.
But we can only use 'race' if it is the socially constructed concept of race because science has proven that there is only one human race. Therefore you cannot divide the human race into different races in a biological, scientific sense.
We don't use 'breed' for reasons explained yesterday. Race is used for humans, and breed is used for animals.
But it doesn't matter how many breeds of cats there are they are still all cats. That will never change.
It doesn't matter how many distinct groups humans can be sub-divided into whatever word you choose to use, they will still be humans, and that will never change.

Ok, I think. Therefore we use the word race to mean breed - not nationality, ethnicity, religion or anything else - as I have been saying all along.
It would appear I have persuaded you.

Why do you keep saying they are still cats - or still people? We know that and no one has disputed it. It is obvious.

If you insist that the human race is sub-divided into scientifically based, biologically based different classifications, you are ascribing to the outdated

I don't. It's you and Bas who keep wanting scientific reasons.
It just means the obvious and not nationality, ethnicity or religion etc.

Darwinian notion that the human race sub-divided into different 'races' some time in the distant past. That is a fundamental racist ideology because it argues that there are biological differences which predetermine the abilities, characteristics and traits.

I don't know exactly what Darwin said, but what you have written Is not racist.
Kangaroos can't climb trees; so what; it's no disgrace.

If abilities, characteristics and traits are predetermined, then that is a racist ideology.

No it isn't.
Pygmies can't reach the top shelf; so what; it's no disgrace.

Sounds to me like you are the racist one.

 

[Notch7]

I don't want your invented facts

here ya go old bean, fill yer boots
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784812/

its quite well referenced:

• ams RJ, McKie VC, Hsu L, Files B, Vichinsky E, Pegelow C, Abboud M, Gallagher D, Kutlar A, Nichols FT, et al. 1998. Prevention of a first stroke by transfusions in children with sickle cell anemia and abnormal results on transcranial Doppler ultrasonography. N Engl J Med 339: 5–11 [PubMed]
• Al Arrayed S 2005. Campaign to control genetic blood diseases in Bahrain. Community Genet 8: 52–55 [PubMed]
• Bakanay SM, Dainer E, Clair B, Adekile A, Daitch L, Wells L, Holley L, Smith D, Kutlar A 2005. Mortality in sickle cell patients on hydroxyurea therapy. Blood 105: 545–547 [PubMed]
• Balkaran B, Char G, Morris JS, Serjeant BE, Serjeant GR 1992. Stroke in a cohort study of patients with homozygous sickle cell disease. J Pediatr 120: 360–366 [PubMed]
• Baum KF, Dunn DT, Maude GH, Serjeant GR 1987. The painful crisis of homozygous sickle cell disease: A study of risk factors. Arch Int Med 147: 1231–1234 [PubMed]
• Bellet PS, Kalinyak KA, Shukla R, Gelfand MJ, Rucknagel DL 1995. Incentive spirometry to prevent acute pulmonary complications in sickle cell diseases. N Engl J Med 333: 699–703 [PubMed]
• Brozović M, Davies SC, Brownell AI 1987. Acute admissions of patients with sickle cell disease who live in Britain. Br Med J 294: 1206–1208 [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Chebloune Y, Pagnier J, Trabuchet G, Faure C, Verdier G, Labie D, Nigon V 1988. Structural analysis of the 5′ flanking region of the β-globin gene in African sickle cell anemia patients: Further evidence for three origins of the sickle cell mutation in Africa. Proc Natl Acad Sci 85: 4431–4435 [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Christakis J, Vavatsi N, Hassapopoulou H, Papadopoulou M, Mandraveli K, Loukopoulos D, Morris J, Serjeant BE, Serjeant GR 1990. Comparison of homozygous sickle cell disease in Northern Greece and Jamaica.Lancet 335: 637–640 [PubMed]
• Cumming V, King L, Fraser R, Serjeant G, Reid M 2008. Venous incompetence, poverty and lactate dehydrogenase in Jamaica are important predictors of leg ulceration in sickle cell anaemia. Br J Haematol 142: 119–125 [PubMed]
• Emond A, Holman R, Hayes RJ, Serjeant GR 1980. Priapism and impotence in homozygous sickle cell disease.Arch Intern Med 140: 1434–1437 [PubMed]
• Emond AM, Collis R, Darvill D, Higgs DR, Maude GH, Serjeant GR 1985. Acute splenic sequestration in homozygous sickle cell disease: Natural history and management. J Pediatr 107: 201–206 [PubMed]
• Gaston MH, Verter JI, Woods G, Pegelow C, Kelleher J, Presbury G, Zarkowsky H, Vichinsky E, Iyer R, Lobel JS, et al. 1986. Prophylaxis with oral penicillin in children with sickle cell anemia. A randomized trial. N Engl J Med 314: 1593–1599 [PubMed]
• Halasa NB, Shankar SM, Talbot TR, Arbogast PG, Mitchel EF, Wang WC, Schaffner W, Craig AS, Griffin MR 2007. Incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease among individuals with sickle cell disease before and after the introduction of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Clin Infect Dis 44: 1428–1433 [PubMed]
• Higgs DR, Aldridge BE, Lamb J, Clegg JB, Weatherall DJ, Hayes RJ, Grandison Y, Lowrie Y, Mason KP, Serjeant BE, Serjeant GR 1982. The interaction of α-thalassemia and homozygous sickle-cell disease. N Engl J Med 306: 1441–1446 [PubMed]
• Kar BC, Satapathy RK, Kulozik AE, Kulozik M, Sirr S, Serjeant BE, Serjeant GR 1986. Sickle cell disease in Orissa State, India. Lancet 328: 1198–1201 [PubMed]
• Koshy M, Entsuah R, Koranda A, Kraus AP, Johnson R, Bellvue R, Flournoy-Gill Z, Levy P 1989. Leg ulcers in patients with sickle cell disease. Blood 74: 1403–1408 [PubMed]
• Lee A, Thomas P, Cupidore L, Serjeant B, Serjeant G 1995. Improved survival in homozygous sickle cell disease: Lessons from a cohort study. Br Med J 311: 160–162 [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• McCavit TL, Quinn CT, Techasaensiri C, Rogers ZR 2011. Increase in invasive Streptococcus pneumoniainfections in children with sickle cell disease since pneumococcal conjugate vaccine licensure. J Pediatr 158: 505–507 [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Memish ZA, Saeed MY 2011. Six-year outcome of the national premarital screening and genetic counseling program for sickle cell disease and β-thalassemia in Saudi Arabia. Ann Saudi Med 31: 229–235[PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Miller ST, Sleeper LA, Pegelow CH, Enos LE, Wang WC, Weiner SJ, Wethers DL, Smith J, Kinney TR 2000.Prediction of adverse outcomes in children with sickle cell disease. N Engl J Med 342: 83–89 [PubMed]
• Morris J, Dunn D, Beckford M, Grandison Y, Mason K, Higgs DR, De Ceulaer K, Serjeant BE, Serjeant GR 1991. The haematology of homozygous sickle cell

 

[jasonzyx]

Ok, I think. Therefore we use the word race to mean breed - not nationality, ethnicity, religion or anything else - as I have been saying all along.

Race and breed is not interchangeable. We use race, in its socially constructed concept for humans, and we use breed for animals.
You could argue that the concepts are interchangeable, but we don't actually interchange the words.
However the words race is eminently interchangeable with ethnicity, religion, nationality, etc. That is the socially constructed concept of race.
If you do not accept that socially constructed concept, then you are affirming that you relay on the racial essentialist definition of race.

It would appear I have persuaded you.

What an utterly pointless remark.

Why do you keep saying they are still cats - or still people? We know that and no one has disputed it. It is obvious.

Don't pad out the discussion with irrelevancies.

I don't [insist that the human race is sub-divided into scientifically based, biologically based different classifications, ascribing to the outdated Darwinian notion that the human race sub-divided into different 'races' some time in the distant past].

You clearly are because you refuse to accept and acknowledge the socially constructed concept of the word 'race'. You persist in the racial essentialist definition of humans sub divided into different biological and scientifically based 'races'

It's you and Bas who keep wanting scientific reasons.

We don't want. We already have and have presented them multiple times.
In contrast you have consistently failed to provide your definition of 'race'

It just means the obvious and not nationality, ethnicity or religion etc.

According to you, which is identical to the racial essentialist ideology.

II don't know exactly what Darwin said, but what you have written Is not racist.
Kangaroos can't climb trees; so what; it's no disgrace.
No it isn't.
Pygmies can't reach the top shelf; so what; it's no disgrace.

Don't pad out the discussion with irrelevancies

Sounds to me like you are the racist one.

Based on your understanding of modern science, I wouldn't put too much reliance on your opinion.

 

[jasonzyx]

here ya go old bean, fill yer boots
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784812/

The very first sentence of that article:

The term sickle cell disease embraces a group of genetic conditions​

Do you still maintain that Sickle Cell anemia is a trait, a characteristic? Something that determines ability?
It only affects a minority of the population. How can it possibly be a trait associated with a whole group of people?

Do 40% of native Africans have dark skin, while the other 60% are white skin?

The prevalence of the sickle cell trait varies markedly between different regions but reaches levels as high as 40% in some areas of sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Saudi Arabia, and central India.

You really are talking total nonsense!

Looking further into the article:

The sickle cell trait is widespread throughout Africa with low frequencies (<1%–2%) in the north and south of the continent and high but variable frequencies throughout much of equatorial Africa.​

How can you present a disease as being such low frequencies as being a trait of a specific group of people?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Race and breed is not interchangeable. We use race, in its socially constructed concept for humans, and we use breed for animals.
You could argue that the concepts are interchangeable, but we don't actually interchange the words.
However the words race is eminently interchangeable with ethnicity, religion, nationality, etc. That is the socially constructed concept of race.
If you do not accept that socially constructed concept, then you are affirming that you relay on the racial essentialist definition of race.


What an utterly pointless remark.


Don't pad out the discussion with irrelevancies.



You clearly are because you refuse to accept and acknowledge the socially constructed concept of the word 'race'. You persist in the racial essentialist definition of humans sub divided into different biological and scientifically based 'races'



We don't want. We already have and have presented them multiple times.
In contrast you have consistently failed to provide your definition of 'race'


According to you, which is identical to the racial essentialist ideology.


Don't pad out the discussion with irrelevancies


Based on your understanding of modern science, I wouldn't put too much reliance on your opinion.

Unbelievable twaddle.

It is pointless replying to you. I should know better.

 

[jasonzyx]

Unbelievable twaddle.

It is pointless replying to you. I should know better.

Aah, the abuse. There's nothing like admitting you are wrong, have exhausted your ability to respond reasonably, than abusive behaviour.

 

[Notch7]

low frequencies as being a trait of a specific group of people?

race, genetics and health have a lot in common. All three of these things have an influence on our risk that we will acquire a specific disease or heath condition. In the article “How Race becomes Biology: Embodiment of Social Inequalities” on the section with epidemiologist it is mentioned that there is a lot of evidence of health inequalities among racially defined groups in many societies. I took that to mean that some diseases depend of the racial group. Some diseases are more common in one race than another due to genetics. Race is important because although any race can carry the sickle cell trait this condition is most common in African Americans. Genetics is important for this disease because sickle cell anemia is a genetic disorder caused by a mutation in the b globin gene. Genetics increases or decreases the risk of sickle cell based off of an individual family history. Having this genetic disease leads to the individual health outcome

 

[jasonzyx]

race, genetics and health have a lot in common. All three of these things have an influence on our risk that we will acquire a specific disease or heath condition. In the article “How Race becomes Biology: Embodiment of Social Inequalities” on the section with epidemiologist it is mentioned that there is a lot of evidence of health inequalities among racially defined groups in many societies. I took that to mean that some diseases depend of the racial group. Some diseases are more common in one race than another due to genetics. Race is important because although any race can carry the sickle cell trait this condition is most common in African Americans. Genetics is important for this disease because sickle cell anemia is a genetic disorder caused by a mutation in the b globin gene. Genetics increases or decreases the risk of sickle cell based off of an individual family history. Having this genetic disease leads to the individual health outcome

I see no source attributed to your information again. Are you claiming ownership of this?
You still subscribing to the ideology that insists there are different races within the one human race?
Are you claiming now that the existence of faulty genes in some eco-groups is proof that it must be true?
Or are you now admitting that Sickle cell anemia is inherited from your parents, but only in some cases. Perhaps 1 - 2% of cases. So hardly representative of a trait among ethnicities.

Tell us what your definition of race is. Then maybe we can judge the basis of your ideology.

 

[Notch7]

Aah, the abuse. There's nothing like admitting you are wrong, have exhausted your ability to respond reasonably, than abusive behaviour.

I am unsure that you grasp the concept of abusive behaviour.

It seems your definition of abusive behaviour, is anybody that proves what you post is incorrect. Sadly for you, what you post is frequently incorrect, so you get upset by the responses and claim it is abuse.

Perhaps you should learn to accept when you are wrong, you might find life less stressful

 

[jasonzyx]

I am unsure that you grasp the concept of abusive behaviour.

Perhaps our concepts differ. if you are giving it out, then you'll probably not consider it to be abusive.
Such as this:

"Thats an Oxymoron.
Maybe Ive used 3 letters too many "​

I suppose you think that is not abusive?
There's loads more I can pull up.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

There's loads more I can pull up.

Have a day or two off. Chillax.

 

[Notch7]

suppose you think that is not abusive?

Its factual

 

[jasonzyx]

Its factual

Are you suggesting it's OK for you to call someone a moron, because in your fantasy land, you think it's factual?
But if someone else suggests something resembling licking windows, you're all over them like a rash, complaining about their abusive behaviour.
Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/acid-attacks-stabbings-drugs.519557/page-15#ixzz5ieNM1100

Good for the goose, good for the gander, just not in your world, eh?

 

[JohnD]

one of the people on here likes to troll that he's brain-damaged. When he remembers (not all the time) he inserts spelling and grammatical errors into his posts.

IMO this is vile mocking of the disabled.

 

[jasonzyx]

Notch has been demonstrably inconsistent in his allegations about me.
He has been demonstrably inconsistent in his subject assessment of what constitutes abuse.
He is well known for distorting or inventing facts.

He hops from pillar to post to suit his current argument.
He's just an inconsistent troll.
I'd put him on ignore but his distorted, inconsistent arguments need dismantling and disproving.