Slashdot Mirror
French Team Implants First Long-Term Artificial Heart
TrueSatan writes "Physicians at the Georges Pompidou European Hospital in Paris have inserted a heart made by the French Carmat company. The heart features bovine tissue components used to reduce the clot forming tendencies of fully artificial units and is intended to allow greater freedom of movement to the patient than previous, short-term use, units permitted. It is powered by external, wearable, lithium-ion batteries and is approximately three times heavier than a typical (European) human heart, though the manufacturer intends to reduce the weight and size of the unit so as to allow use by smaller recipients — in particular most women and men from areas of the world where average body size is less than white/Caucasian averages."
It's all Obama's fault.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Seriously, once in a while I like to kind of just take these sort of advancements at face value. It's just astonishing to me that we are so close to alleviating at least one facet of the organ transplant shortages that have so many people waiting for so long in uncertainty. This day could not get here fast enough and I hope that it becomes a true milestone down a great path for medical technology.
But damn that is an expensive pump.
Thanks, Obama!
Powered by external batteries? So if you run out of juice, you die? Is that it?
Barney Clark - Sometimes used for the name of a cheeseburger with bacon and a fried egg on top, but also the 85th recipient (according to Wikipedia) of a long-term artificial heart in 1982. He only survived about 4 months, but that wasn't the plan. The second recipient of the Jarvic heart lived almost 2 years.
Short-term artificial hearts have been implanted since the 60's. Long term (long being a relative term) implants have been going on for a long time.
You could just use a stone for that.
Powered by external batteries? So if you run out of juice, you die? Is that it?
Some replacement heart systems have a hand-operated backup pump. If the battery dies, the user can pump a lever to keep hydraulic pressure up and keep the heart working - long enough to get to a hospital.
I couldn't tell from the Carmat website whether their system has this type of backup, but medical device manufacturers tend to do "failure analysis" and make efforts to avoid the obvious problems.
a typical (European) human heart
. . . no, African or European . . . that determines if the recipient can migrate while carrying a coconut.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
For my money it's more likely a case of people succeeding regardless of the designs of their political masters.
Yes, but it's not polite to acknowledge them right now. Once the legacy of racism is well and truely over, then there will be no need for the taboo.
That was a Jenna Marbles "Thanks, Obama!".
I would also point out that the heart was made by a French COMPANY. It was merely installed by a university hospital.
Of course maybe the company that made it is in bed with the French Government, which might bring prudence to the idea that 'socialism did this'. But I doubt that given that socialism hates innovation, as a general rule.
And also by a French Car Mat company, what's wrong with these people installing car mats in peoples chests!
In modern times, Artificial Heart designs have been diverging into two camps. This one belongs to the old-school cardiac mimics -- complex multi-chamber pumps designed to mimic the pulsatile flow of a natural heart. The bovine pericardium lining is a clever idea -- we already make bio-prosthetic valves (mostly from pig heart valves). As the material is non-living connective tissue, it doesn't raise the same acute rejection problems that living xeno-grafts have. And, while most patients with such valves still require permanent treatment with drugs to prevent clots, the required degree of anti-coagulation is much less than those required with mechanical valves.
The other school consists of the pulse-less turbine-type devices. Instead of mimicking a natural heart, these devices use a high-speed rotating impeller to drive fluid flow. It was once thought that the shearing forces of an impeller would result in too much damage to red blood cells, and that pulsatile flow of blood was a necessary feature physiological feature, but non-pulsatile later-generation Ventricular Assistive Devices have demonstrated this is not the case. Currently, all such devices are only used as adjuncts to a failing natural heart, and there are no such devices approved as complete replacements -- yet. Compared with their more complex cousins, these devices are smaller and lighter, and mechanically more robust. However, they suffer from issues with clots and damage to leukocytes, due to the artificial materials used.
In either case, it will be interesting to see how the devices performs out in the field. The expected Five-year lifespan of a unit doesn't sound like much, but keep in mind many patients will be elderly, and your goal may simply be to give them improved quality-of-life, until in a few years something else kills them instead.
So, -biological- differences between -biological- races (yes, races...) do exist - like the size of the heart, the dick... the brain!?
In all three cases, it's not the size that counts, it's what you do with it.
I am officially gone from
That is correct. The South Africans invented and installed artificial hearts back in the 1900's. The only new thing is that it is a French made heart installed in France.
Having been the proud owner of a French Renault, I doubt that it will work long before the electrical parts starts wear out. Hopefully, the French have improved in the intervening years.
Seriously... why try to replicate the original heart design when you could make something so much better? And why just ONE heart? What kind of engineer came up with this design? You'd do better to have MULTIPLE hearts pushing blood through your body. I'd have no less than three in me, if i had the option.
I think that was an option in a CyberPunk book. Replacing the heart with a system of small blood pumps located throughout the body. That sounds good to me.
Now I can finally realize my dream of faithfully reenacting having a Nausicaan skewer me through the back in a bar fight...although I'm not sure I'll have the presence of mind to laugh deliriously afterward.
Just because they make car mats, they think they can make a heart?
they care.
"where average body size is less than white/Caucasian averages"
Wait a minute... I thought "We are all the same", what's this nonsense about "white/Caucasian averages"? LOL.
I'd make a few improvements myself too. Like installing sphincters on the brachial and femoral arteries that can constrict in the event of extreme trauma. It would substantially improve survival rate in serious accidents.
One heart can be enough, but it'd better be a very reliable heart. No single points of failure where a clot or blockage can cause the whole thing to shut down.
His small European heart grew three sizes that day.
I'm French. France is definitely socialist, and so-called innovations happened in spite of that, not because of it. True capitalism is the best thing that could happen to France.
Well good on them for finding something that works. And at the end of the day that's what I want to see. Things that work. Sometimes socialism works. That 5% of the time it works great. The rest of the time it usually ends up being a textbook example of now NOT to do things. And as expected the average socialist will harp about these success stories incessantly.
Oh... as an FYI 'high speed rail' is a garbage idea for the US, the space race only happened because the USSR wanted to prove that they wanted to out do the US, and finally no one uses phage therapy or ground effects because they're crap.
Now that being said they USSR did to a LOT of good work with bio-medical technology. They invented laser eye surgery and organ transplants. Go check out images of the monstrosity they made while trying to figure it out.
So, -biological- differences between -biological- races (yes, races...) do exist - like the size of the heart, the dick... the brain!?
In all three cases, it's not the size that counts, it's what you do with it.
hmmm... ok!
Well even if I, a so called 'EVIL TEA BAG NAZI' (somewhat ironic given that I DON'T support the TEA party) is willing to say that straight up capitalistic isn't the answer and more than socialism is. In all things there should be a balance. One of the big different between socialism and capitalism is that at least in the later there's real evidence that it just works better. There as in socialism you ends up with a lot of promises and no real results.
Of course the somewhat ironic thing here is that ObamaCare has little to do with actual socialized medicine. Under socialized medicine you just end up having to pay a taxes and receive sub-par medical care for it. Under ObamaCare you get to pay whatever the insurance company decided to make you pay and hope that you get enough of a subsidy to not looks your house when you don't, can't, or won't pay it. Yes, yes, that's not ALL of it. But it seems to be the salient point of it all.
This "taboo" -not acknowledging the biological differences of the races (e.g., the black race -may- have smaller IQ)- creates a serious problem in science and society; in my example, mostly negatively effecting the black race also...
Where can I apply to be a repo man?
As a proud Canadian I despise that lie. Every-time I required surgery for a life threatening condition is was provided to me instantly and free as in free beer. When I need a specialist for a non life threatening condition I got access to him in less than 3 weeks.
The case you read about in the news are only the case where a person as fallen into the systems cracks... But for 95%*1 of the population the system works way better than your stupid degenerated healthcare insurance system.
1-that five percent is mostly composed of old unproductive people that are given pain medication while they wait for a minimally beneficial*2 knee or hip replacement surgery
2-compared to an aggressive regiment of analgesic and antiflammatory drugs
sorry I meant to reply another of your parent child post but somehow I ended posting to your child post
Somehow, I think you're not suggesting something this team hasn't thought of too. However, if this design already weighs three times more than the original, I don't think the primary concern is to make it "better" until it has been made lighter. Not to mention that this is the first step.
But sure, in the (frighteningly?) near future we'll probably be able to be living brains in jars and either steer our robot avatars through telepresence or if we're uncurious just have a constant stream of virtual reality entertainment fed into us whilst we're blissfully unaware of what goes on in the world around us that we have automated completely. Because what organs are really necessary as long as the brain can be kept alive and as soon as we can manage that, what point is there in moving brains outside a safe location where it's kept alive?
South Africa was first to succeed with a heart transplant but it was certainly not an artificial heart. Big difference.
Oh, and if you disregard the inequality of apartheid, South Africa was more socialist than France is now. White people were guaranteed a government job upon graduating, if they failed to find other employment.
France is definitely socialist,
A categorical statement like that about any country and any "system" is moronic. Apart from North Korea, perhaps, which btw. isn't communist or socialist but "Juche" which is a fork of communism and they make it correct by defining it so. Other countries are socialist to a degree and capitalist to a degree with the (vain?) hope to get the best of both systems because neither one is a panacea.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. North Korea is socialist. Cuba is socialist. France is not socialist, never has been. Unless you are an inbred redneck gobbing up anything Fox News (or is that BFM business for you ?) gave you.
As for true, pure, undiluted capitalism, it has brought upon the world such marvels as the 1929 crisis, the 2008 crisis and dozen of other widespread destruction of wealth since the 19th century.
Yep, once all of those European goyim have been genocided by our agenda of mass-immigration, multiculturalism, feminism, and homosexuality into Western European countries, and only Western European countries, we'll finally be able to live in a progressive world free of hate and bigotry.
In all things there should be a balance.
Like - the ideal balance between monogamy and aggravated sexual assault would be date rape?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
Reading the article and seeing how expensive it is (around $200,000) to get, it seems like it would make healthcare more expensive. I suppose many new devices have very high costs at first (lots of R&D and low volume), but not all of them start out at 6 figures! Do insurance companies end up paying for this? I totally support advancing our medical capabilities, but the US spends wayyy too much on healthcare already.
Definitely not true on all counts, you are letting your ideology cloud your objectivity. Some aspects of French society might be called "socialist" (health care for all, free education, decent minimum wage and generally better protection for workers and the unemployed than in the US), but it is still a country where there is little to no public ownership of the means of production, and no central planning. It is a land of private enterprise just like the USA!
France just had a hardcore capitalist president with Sarkozy for 5 years (succeeding Chirac who was from the same party), and even under Hollande, nothing has changed regarding the general system of government. Ultimately, there's not much room to maneuver system-wise in the EU anyway.
To get back on topic, just like in the US the French government gives incentives for innovation in various sectors, and in France, public research institutes (CNRS, INSERM, CIRAD, etc.) and public hospitals have indeed been at the forefront of many breakthroughs, some that have won Nobel prizes, again thanks to support from the government, not in spite of it.
"In our tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interest."
Yep, once all of those European goyim have been genocided by our agenda of mass-immigration, multiculturalism, feminism, and homosexuality into Western European countries, and only Western European countries, we'll finally be able to live in a progressive world free of hate and bigotry.
Dear comrade Mohamed, you forgot the first rule of our left-wing club: we don't reveal our agenda - since you did it here in slashdot our secret remains safe within the left-wing club, but don't let this happen again... now lets go destroy Western civilization!
As another proud Canadian who knows people in the Hospital system and has taken advantage of emergency surgery, one legitimate complaint about our system is that cronic, non-life-threatening problems tend to end up at the bottom of the waiting list. I know someone in that situation (back problems to the point of not being able to leave the house) and they have to wait 6 months just to get x-rays.
This is mostly caused by a lack of facilities and personel, so it basically just means that instead of the poor getting the short stick, the cronic get it instead. But still for free!
Yes, but it's not polite to acknowledge them right now. Once the legacy of racism is well and truely over, then there will be no need for the taboo.
It is truly over. Only bigoted backward liberals still cringe over that legacy.
Exhibit 1; Niggers calling white peoples 'cracker' on mainstream television. We call all call each other racist slurs and laugh it off. It's cool.
I rest my case.
Yes, there is indeed biological diversity between humans.
The big difference is what you do out of this information.
The scientific/biological interpretation:
there are difference between various ethnic groups (the political correct way to speak about "biological races"). These might have some impact in some medical/biological situation (i.e.: average size of organs like this, or frequency of the ability to metabolise alcohol or milk, baseline availabilty of UV-resistance pigments in the skin, etc.) but beside that, we're all human (with an ability to cross breed, meaning that mixed ethnic groups are completely normal occurrence and the mentioned variability are only estimation of average, not 100% predictors of absolutely everything).
None the less, this kind of consideration (etchnical groups) might still be useful as a quick estimation in some small subset of biological or medical problems. But they are more rule of the thumb than laws set in stone.
Cue in some statistics about which groupings are statistically significant enough to be useful in practice.
The racist interpretation:
there are various races (the taboo version to speak about ethnic groups). some are inferior to the other, other races are inherently better. We should forbid mixing of races! We should keep race X pure! (= based on some irrelevant trait like pigmentation of hair having different transparencies to light wavelenght useful for photo-synthetising vitamins). People of race Y (= approximation of some cultural groups that have vaguely grouped historically around some religious believes) are all inferior, we are the better race. It is our duty as the better race to exterminate the inferior race. People of race Z (= more or less put together on the ground of some random common traits like baseline levels of UV resisting pigments) are all naturally lazy and unfit for modern society, they are only good as slave. It is our {deity/other imaginary entity}-given right to sell them into slavery, abuse them, and kill them, they aren't worth anything else.
Cue-in some evolution-inspired unscientific mumbo jumbo and other pseudo-science justification for awful crimes like genocide. (Rember: that is 100% bullshit. There can't be such a thing as an "inferior"-race or whatever. Evolution is about the survival of the fittest. If "it" does exist today, that mean *it is necessarily* the fittest for a given environment, other wise it wouldn't have survived. That as much valid when considering animal species [a modern-day cockcroach is as evolved as any random mammal or bird] or various ethnic groups inside the single human specie [none of the ethnic group could be considered "inferior"] ).
Remember the only distinction which really make a sense from a biological sense is "specie". (because, by its definition, members of two different specie do not cross-breed in nature. They are really separate and evolve in completely different ways). Any other subdivision is just convenient way to put thing into categorie.
Such division have some practical use:
- Can be used for tamed species to make distinction useful for breeded animals (races aka breeds are important for dog-/cat-/horses-/etc. breeders).
- Can be used to form some rule of the thumb based on variability of the average between different groups, which are significant in medicine.
But these aren't a hard hermetic separation grounded in biology, only practical way for those who need separation.
Cats breeds can none-the-less be mixed (and they DO get mixed in nature outsides of the kenels of breeders) meaning that separation are artifical and anything in between could happen too. But they are handy for breeders to produce some special type of animals
Humans are all the same specie, and can freely breed together in any way (...as long as both parties are concenting...) meaning that ethnic groups are just a way to group and consider humans for practical rule of thumb, but in practice they are NOT immutable separate divisions.
And on no ground should "
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
(e.g., the black race -may- have smaller IQ)
That is bollocks. From an evolution point of view, there can't be such a thing as an inferior race. Evolution is about the survival of the fittest. If it has survived until today, it is indeed the fittest for its environment. What you will only end up is with some small local variation due to slight adaptation to some environmental factors that might be a little bit more frequently encountered by some sub-group than others. But these are not set in stone. We are all the same specie, meaning (by definition) that we are able to fuck together (and actually do it). Meaning that such local variation also vary with time, propagate, get averaged out, etc. They are not set in stone, the ethnic groups aren't hermetically separated categories, just practical rule of the thumb which are useful for dealing in variation of average.
And I can't see a coherent reason why there should be any evolutionary advantage at being genetically stupider. Not only that, but how this inborn stupidity could be actually maintained through evolution's history, even though that we are cross-breeding(*) as a single specie.
Studies revealing lower IQ is some ethnic groups are much more likely to actually reveal other facts: that some ethnic groups (like black people you mention) don't have access to the same education, and thus grow up with a lower IQ as a consequence of not having gone to the same school, or having had other educationally relevant experience (gone to museum, read books, played mind challenging games). Also they can be sign that the IQ test are flawed and are heavily culturally biased. (The individual failed the answare not because of lower IQ, but because his/her culture thinks in completely different way about this matter, and thus what is considered the correct answer is completely irrelevant in that culture). Sadly, that has actually been proven to happen, too.
*: though experiment. imagine that there's indeed a small village where, due to environmental factor, people are indeed born stupider and with a darker skin. But we are all the same specie. Over the history of that village, some girl is still bound to marry someone of a neighbouring village or decide to fuck a random stranger from a land far away that happened to travel by (on horse, along a trade route, for example). Gene got mixed and among the next generation, you're statistically bound to find descendant who get the best of both worlds: they get the skin better adapted to resist UV on one side, and they get the not-being-genetically-stupid trait from the other side. Such a kid has better chance to do better in life and thus produce more offspring. Voila, the "lower IQ trait" is automatically cross-bred out of the genepool. Simple evolution at work.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Like installing sphincters on the brachial and femoral arteries that can constrict in the event of extreme trauma.
That already happens naturally. In case of some extreme trauma (like accidental amputation), there is massive vasoconstriction at the site of the severed limb, which lowers a bit the loss of blood and increase chance of survival.
One heart can be enough, but it'd better be a very reliable heart. No single points of failure {...}
The best way to be reliable against single point of failure is to have redundancy.
hum... RAID-6 Hearts system anyone ?
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
In the US, about 70% of cardiovascular disease is caused by obesity, and even more is probably preventable by good nutrition. It's better to keep the original in good working order than to try to replace it.
And now that we all are forced to pay for each other's medical care, this is also a question of money. Why should people who eat healthy and don't have these risks pay for the high cost of artificial hearts (or heart transplants) in people who made poor nutritional choices?
This is a French innovation , is the French genius who always advance. ... hand on heart!
It is a pride for us because France is a great nation, which
France is not a socialist, and never has been, and is, at this time, the Social Democratic only.
It's definitely not a new idea...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FInoU0wzgzY
From a Star Trek wiki
"Internally, Klingon physiology contains many redundancies, when compared to other humanoids. Klingons possess eight-chambered hearts, two livers, multiple stomachs, and an astounding twenty-three rib pairs, and three testicles. The duplication of vital anatomy is known as to the Klingons as brak'lul. In the field of battle these redundancies allow warriors to continue to fight even after sustaining significant injuries."
Or perhaps with genetic engineering we can splice earthworm DNA with human DNA and get humans that continue to live after they've been cut in half. On the plus side, they would have both male and female sexual organs which would fulfill most men's fantasy of being able to literally screw themselves.
It is (...) approximately three times heavier than a typical (European) human heart>/quote> This guy can now work as one of those specialists that break bad news to people ('you're fired', 'the operation was not a success', 'Paul Walker died', 'your son was KIA').
No lying when he says: "It's with a heavy heart that I inform you that..."
Set your phasers on "funky"!
If he had chronic back problems that prevented him from leaving the house, the x-ray was probably of minimal benefit and only done just in case. How much new insight was gained when he did get it and what improvement did it lead to?
Actually, socialized medicine tends to provide quality healthcare. It's our screwed up high cost system that tends to be sub-par. Even more so if your insurance runs out.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. North Korea is socialist. Cuba is socialist. France is not socialist, never has been. Unless you are an inbred redneck gobbing up anything Fox News (or is that BFM business for you ?) gave you.
Well, France is a republic, it just happens that the socialists are in power these days.
I don't know the details of his individual checks, but I do know he gets more surgery done every 6 months or so to help fix the problem (something about compacted disks, not 100% sure).
at the cost of individual liberty
They are usually meant as bridge while waiting for a heart transplant. But for one reason or another the patient never get son the list or transplant. Then the LVAD becomes a defacto long term terminal artificial heart.
I guess that's why the U.S., by any measure, has the lousiest medical care in the developed world.
It sounds like the 6 month wait is more the natural course of treatment than any sort of rationing. It takes time to recover from a surgery and to see what it's ultimate result will be. The back in particular can take months to heal from any injury including surgery. Meanwhile, sorry to say, back surgery has a fairly poor success rate in the first place.
This doesn't sound at all like a failure to provide care. In the U.S. he would be charged a fortune to get probably worse results if he could afford it and if not, he wouldn't get any further treatment at all. I hope your friend gets better.
I was just pointing out that not all of the French agree to what the above poster said.
The funny thing is that while Sarkozy is considered hardcore rightwing in France, in the US he would probably be considered a democrat. That's just how different the two countries are.
I am a former researcher affiliated to a CNRS laboratory and I am now an entrepreneur with an innovative start-up. Without the incentives (which are relatively hard to get, unreliable and require a tremendous amount of effort and paperwork), I wouldn't even have considered creating a company in France due to the enormous welfare costs (60% of salaries, and that's without income tax which is very variable, but usually around 15%) and society being generally hostile to entrepreneurs (impossible to get loans or even rent an apartment). The tax lay-offs for research have been gradually reduced from 50% to 30% (with a possible lowering to 20% for some research being re-qualified as merely innovation), so even that is becoming less useful every day. Investors only play it secure and will rarely invest in ideas that were not proven by establishing a profitable company first. Getting a research grant (be it from regions, the state or from the UN) is also a huge effort unlikely to pay off, the only strategy to make it profitable is to join another company's project and let spend all the man-hours necessary to present the project, but of course it doesn't work if everyone does that.
There is no question that the US is much better at fostering entrepreneurship and creating new businesses, as it is easier for both businesses and research to get money there, and the administration doesn't try to prevent you from doing your job everyday.
The French government relies on public spending to run the economy (20% of the active population are permanent government workers) instead of using that money to encourage private parties to create autonomous economic activity. Even when the French government gives 100 million to entrepreneurs, 70 million out of these go to government workers whose role is to distribute this money. If it wanted to embrace capitalism, it should try to be at least a bit more efficient.
Yes, it shall be like the good old days of the USSR. And those people who don't agree will be sent to reeducation camps in Siberia, and if that doesn't help, to insane asylums; after all, you'd have to be insane not to want to live in our "progressive world free of hate and bigotry".
IQ -when tested right- is not related to education or similar external factors so much but mostly to biological factors such as the brain's size and evolution (or the lack of it).
emphasis added by me.
in theory a perfect IQ test should only test biological factors (of which, belonging to a specific ethnic groups end up not having a strong impact after scrutinity of study results).
in practice it has been shown that some IQ test *are imperfect* and inadvertently have cultural biases (thus showing strong segregation between ethnic groups even if not revealing actual difference in intellect).
That "survival of the fittest" does not exclude lower IQ people/races when that IQ, even if low, is good enough.
And how would a "lower IQ" trait survive the first occurence of cross-breeding ?
"Good enough" means that a population carrying this trait might not immediately go extinct.
But "good enough" does NOT means that, come a better one, the better one doesn't have advantages.
To put it into simple term.
Being "stupider", might be not bad enough to get the whole tribe eaten by the nearest lion.
but still, if mixed with someone "brighter", the brighter person still has chance to fare better in life, have more offsprings and over the whole history of humanity, the "brighter" trait carrying people will tend to be more frequently featured in the population, regardless of which ethnic group you're considering.
humans do the same, but, as dogs, they have some differences between races, with IQ been one of them.
difference in dogs breeds is due to breeder selectively breeding them. breed is a useful rule of the thumb to put the dogs in varied categories, as suits dog breeders and their clients. (a long time ago, It might have been more utilitarian trait "dogs breed X are better hunter", nowadays it might be more aesthetic traits such as "dogs of breed Y have such funny ears").
difference in humans is mostly due to interaction with the environment(*), which used to concern nature (in older context), and more recently the ability to function in groups (as soon as tribes became importent functionnal elements) and in society in general (as society grew in scale).
environmental natural factors such as sun exposition, might lead to different point of balance between getting too much sun-burns and health problems or heaving too much UV-blocking pigments and being unable to photosynthetise enough vitamine D.
tribal factors such as better skill at communication and empathy thus being better at working as a group (for example hunting as a pack).
larger society factors such as being able to metabolise alcohol and milk, because the local type of agriculture is producing them.
I still fail to see which environmental factors would selectively advantage stupider individual. Either from one point upward, intellect realy doesn't matter absolutely at all, in which case the whole point is moot, and IQ testing as a concept should be called into question as it doesn't bring anything actually relevant. Or there is still some advantage at being brighter, at which point, no matter what, the less bright trait will be cross-bred and out-selected (see me argumentation at the begining of the post).
If you look closely, lots of the trait considered "negative" that haven't disappeared yet actually have some limited environmental advantage.
Take as an exemple anemia. They are more frequently featured in african ethnic group (sickle cell anaemia for example) and in caucasians from around the mediterranean sea (thalasshaemia, for exemple). They are problematic (specially the sickle cell sort which can be quite deadly). BUT if you look closely, these anaemia can provide some advantage against malaria, which has been more prevalent in the regions were this trait is more seen. That explains while anaemia hasn't been out evolved.
I still don't see valid reasons why "stupider" trait might confer so
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
As I, too, have mentionned elsewhere.
The black -the "usual suspect", since it's the most problematic- race (easily defined based on biology-anthropology) have some -bad, problematic- characteristics.
This is not shown in actual studies.
Most of the studies (for exemple looking at children adopted by different families) tend not to show a genetic component to IQ (all people of black ethnic group being of lower IQ independent of up-bringing or something like that).
A studies few have been shown to have been based on broken IQ tests.
Most of the studies show that the IQ in late life heavily depends on the upbringing from an early age. A child, no matter the ethnic group, adopted by a white family from an early age has a better chance than the same child in a black family. This is not due to genes (and thus race or whatever) this is mostly due to socio-economic factors. black families are currently in the most defavorised classes of the society. If the same black baby gets adopted by a white family, this family will be very often richer, and will enable access to more education, schooling, better conditions for the child's brain to develop, etc. The children ends-up with a higher IQ.
When most of the studies show that the IQ doesn't have to do with genes as much as the socio-economic conditions of the raising family, you have to admit that the left-wing politically crowd was right this time around: it's not being black that makes you stupid. it's the eduction (or more likely the lack of).
The "black have lower IQ because they are black" doesn't show in the results of most studies.
Your claim simply isn't supported by the numbers.
This is completely different than other traits which *are indeed* more prevalent.
As mentionned in the other post black people HAVE problematic characteristics, such as a higher frequency of anaemia (sickle cell anaemia).
(the same as do also have caucasian from around the mediterranean sea, they also have a higher frequency of a slightly different anaemia [thalassaemia] )
this has been repeatedly found in studies.
(And recently this has also been linked to increased resistance to malaria, explaining why in these specific regions - Africa and southern Europe - the anaemias haven't been out-selected when breeding with other ethnic groups: because these disease actually bring a small advantage in malaria infested regions).
So there are problematic characteristic linked to some ethnic groups, which has been statistically found to be significative repeatedly by studies. Scientist know them, and take them into account.
"lower IQ" happens not be one among them. That's a problem not of ethnic groups (at least not due to their genes). that's a problem that has been found to be more linked to socio-economic conditions.
We -humans, including blacks- must stop that ridiculus "political correctness" so we can deal with the issues.
My problem -not with you- is that left-wing/"political correct" faggets (sorry about that!) refuse my right to even discuss those issues with people that have similar opinions with me.
Yup, these issue need to be addressed. But the *race* isn't the factor that needs to be addressed. According to numerous studies' results, what needs to be addressed is socio-economic factors.
Find ways to compensate for the lack of eduction (try increase ressource to eduction, try to help giving additionnal eductionnal assistant to help defavorised score enough to get admitted into fields where they do not have been that much represented until now) (while avoiding "positive discrimination" such as mandatory quota. That's still a form of discrimination and a bad idea in my book. it will also have the negative impact of stimatising the new comer as "not being here because of merit but just because of unfair quotas").
and tons of other similar efforts
(including things very remote from actual eduction, like giving better access to family planning. A baby in a f
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]