Yeah well when expressing seemingly innocent opinions on economic/fiscal matters can invite accusations of racism......

A thoroughly suppressed inconconvenient truth....

It was established decades back that celebrated UN universal feeding boxes containing a mix of powdered milk/flour was not universal at all.

It was discovered that only Caucasions could metabolize milk, after puberty....IOW feeding that concoction to starving adult Africans/Asia only gave them the trots...

Then lactose intolerance was discovered.......

So, what's the deal?

Caffeine is just a social construct!

Who pays for these bullsh*t studies ?

Who pays for these bullsh*t studies ?

Starbucks should. ( free Estradiol patches for the clientele should improve the ambiance somewhat.)

Brilliant headline Kate.

To correct this horrible and evil truth, left-wing social engineers will insist that the study be redone using coffee that is doped with estrogen for the Asian participants. Then they will insist that this fact be left out of the final publication.

God forbid the truth ever gets out that there are biological differences between the races. Big Brother will not permit it. Hell the Bell Curve already caused enough stress for the left.

TJ

"God forbid the truth ever gets out that there are biological differences between the races"

wasn't this evident from the taliwacker study we just commented in here a few dayz ago????:-)))

The link at the bottom of The Scientist page is also interesting. Phil Jones' and Michael Mann's wet dream:

http://the-scientist.com/2012/01/18/cracks-form-in-anti-open-access-push/

"caffeine is just a social construct"

Ha!..So if we treat it in a neutral manner it might chose to be nicotine?

"caffeine is just a social construct"

Ha!..So if we treat it in a neutral manner it might choose to be nicotine?

Oops...sorry.

If I drink too much coffee will I turn into a woman?

So if I pony up for a double-espresso for a Chinese woman, I'm "In like Flynn"?

Um, nobody is seriously arguing that there are NO biological differences between races. They're just saying that a lot of the things that folks like you have tried, throughout recent history and even today, to attribute to biological race in fact can't be.

But why bother addressing your opponents actual arguments when it's so much easier to just endlessly set up and knock down the same old strawmen. Your faithful readership appears to demand nothing more.

250 women eh? It doesn't take much to publish a study these days. I wonder though whether they controlled for actual use of various caffeine products before the study. I used to be able to drink coffee to stay awake, it no longer has that affect, more of an endorphin rush if you ask me....

Old Couch

So the science is settled? It's clear what characteristics are genetic, environmental and epigenetic...right?

It's your side that sets up strawmen and you deserve to be mocked at every opportunity.

In the PC utopian world any difference in humanity is verboten. Truth is not required. Hell, I'm surprised that Kate's work on genetics with dogs has not been dismissed as racist towards poodles or whatever.

TC, I think Kate is racist towards labradoodles.

Davenport >

"Um, nobody is seriously arguing that there are NO biological differences between races."

That’s good.

Hey coucher

Should we all aspire to sickle-cell disease so we can be inclusive?

So when can we speak about the biological differences between the sexes?..Too soon?

Of course it's a social construct. Men have to have a coffee served for breakfast. Asian women associate coffee with making their man happy and fulfilment. Serving coffee to their man, and by extension coffee itself, has a different effect on white women who fiercely oppose oppression. Black women are ambivalent because, as Clinton observed, it's the black man's job to serve coffee.

WalterF

Very nuanced...I think you have a sociology thesis right there...

of course theree no difference between the sexes or the races..that estrogen/testosterone thing isn't to be considered when expecting all children to be completely interchangeable and there are only genetic markers for skin colour on the human genome..any differences in stature, physical abilities and any other dissimilarities are completely coincidental and not to be taken as any 'racial' differences...not for disease incidences or genetically linked syndromes..because not accepting that everyone is 100% identical in all ways is raaacist...but only if you're caucasian.

TC, I think Kate is racist towards labradoodles.

I am very much against the mongrelization of the dog races, and I don't care who knows it.

I was told that BigRock has a chemical in it that mimics estogen, so I will continue to drink coffee as sort of a moob preventive medicine.

A study with only 250 respondents is insufficient for scientific validity.

And - were other variables controlled? Age, nutritional levels of various vitamins and minerals, diet (inclusion/exclusion of soy, flax, legumes and other foods that might affect estrogen), fat ratio in diet, environment, genetic heredity etc etc.

I'm always suspicious of singular causality. The human body isn't a machine; it's complex.

I knew it...

ET

You mean like genetics, environment and epigenetics?

A study with only 250 respondents is insufficient for scientific validity.
~ET

My first thought.
My second thought was that the scientific validity of caffiene's effect on females of various race had little to do with the thread topic.

Variations in estrogen levels have been associated with endometrial, breast, and ovarian cancers, she added.

Do tell!
Variations, Oh My!
Associations...ooh...aaah!

By the way, ET, as someone who denies the very existence of race...why do you have anything to say about the study other than, "There is no such thing as race, therefore the study is invalid."???

While ET and I frequently disagree when the topic of race arises, I agree with her completely in this instance. The linked causality is suggestively interesting, but no more than anecdotal in this study. The hypothesis that there may be correlation is a valid one, but the study does not do anything to verify or falsify the hypothesis.

oz - yes, I deny the existence of race as an indictor of intelligence or of any collective attribute.

I do NOT deny the existence of genetic or epigenetic or environmental influences on the human body.

All of these agencies (genes, epigenetic devt, envt, local influences) can be expressed within both the individual and the family and a local collective...ie..where a particular population long resident in a particular envt will develop a particular inherited characteristic. This is not a racial but niche-dependent attribute.

I was criticizing the METHOD of the study, with its low population sample and its lack of attention to other causal variables.

"They're just saying that a lot of the things that folks like you have tried, throughout recent history and even today, to attribute to biological race in fact can't be."

I would be very curious to hear (read) you expand upon that, Davs, although something tells me you won't. ("Folks like you"? As opposed to....)