I kind of follow your line of thought although the way it’s written is somewhat contradictory - at least how I read it.
However, I don’t think that condom companies are in the business of being racist. Heuristically, the data would have to be fairly reliable because they are in business to make a profit and if the condoms don’t fit - ie too large or too small - then the product doesn’t sell and no sales = no profit (UNLESS there is no competition to do it better). I would suggest that in all markets - even China - that there is competition and just like the larger part of us who have to buy the more boutique condoms for fit and comfort, so would guys with average sized dicks if the companies made them for racially fictitious small dicks.
Lastly the discussion of famine was provided by the original poster and it’s not unexpected that someone could also respond with comparison of different countries with the same economic conditions but perhaps different results. I read somewhere that the most interesting number is all the dick size studies would be the mode instead of average.
Conclusion - the data from some studies seems to support the concept that Asians have smaller cocks. But as you point out the data sets may not be reliable for many reasons. I think the folks at CalcSD did by far the best job of sifting through the various studies and data using only those which had trustworthy data collection methodologies all collected by professionals, no ED problems and not self reported. Using their data the 50th percentile “average” is 5.28 x 4.53” for “eastern” dicks and 5.79 x 4.74 for “western” dicks. You can read their data methodologies and links to the exact studies used for each regional group on their website calcsd.info.
So the question begs - IF CalcSD is to be trusted, is .5” in length and .2” in girth statistically significant to make a claim that “eastern” is smaller than “western”? Put another way, if a 50th percentile eastern dick is considered a 27th and 38th percentile in length and girth respectively compared to western data is that enough to say they are smaller or is it just people being biased?
,The word is contradictory or not deponds on if it is logical, not based on your own assertion..
First, even if these condom companies do not have racist behavior, though honestly there is a high probability that they will do it as part of a cultural propaganda strategy.
(promoted by the US government since they put culture, politics, and economy in an equally important strategic position even in their public speech. Whether it is Snowden's secret file or some reports released by the CIA itself, it shows that they have done this kind of thing, And what we are talking about here is an extension of this kind of thing.)
And, as I said before, even if it doesn't have this kind of racist behavior, actually it's in his own interest as a business company. Just as the porn industry caters to people's stereotypes and goes further to find bigger blacks. I also mentioned the example of Ajinomoto, whose chief scientist released a report saying that it does not affect the human brain by taking sodium glutamate, also known as monosodium glutamate(MSG), and proved it by some biochemistry or biology techniques, but the final result is Chinese food syndrome exists, which is caused by taking a lot of MSG orally through food.
I think I should make it more clear that the purpose of the Ajinomoto example is to tell people that the report issued by a commercial company may still have problems with its conclusions even if it conforms to formal even strict scientific procedures.
The core question, which can actually be put more bluntly, is what kind of reports should we believe when we have large reports from researchers, scientific reports, that conform to formal even strict scientific procedures and methodology, issued by authors from commercial companies, and market research from commercial companies.
The answer to this question is, of course, that we would rather believe the report issued by scientific researchers, and the interests of this scientific author are irrelevant.
, so we don't need to discuss whether they have racist behavior at all, even if it is more likely to have. As long as it is a business report, the problem will always exist, and as long as there is a better large-scale scientific no-interest report, it is more credible. In fact, I can point out another aspect of thinking about commercial companies, Of course, the company has internal data about their company, but the data they disclose in public must be true? If the data they disclose are true, then their balance sheet is completely reliable, so what third-party review do we need? Then why do you need so many regulations? ,Isn't the balance sheet more relevant to the vital interests of enterprises than the so-called market research results? , Companies certainly need the results of market research to guide them on how to sell, but they don't have to disclose the real one. Even if they publish a wrong result for the public, it won't really affect their business.
In the end, if there are large-scale scientific researches, and there is no relevant interests, then it is believable, there is no need to consider commercial reports.
Secondly, most reports offer averages, where do you see the reports that they will offer mode? And considering that the length gap between penises may be between millimeters, If the difference between the modes is not big enough, I.e. the gap between the first mode, the second mode, the third mode, and so on are not big enough, they don't make much more sense than averages.
As for this part of economic development, I actually pointed out that it may be easier to do, just by comparing the developed countries and the relatively developed not-so-well countries in Europe. The example of Italy was given earlier, You can compare it with the report of the British study..
, And again, I have sent the black data. In fact, apart from pornography and media propaganda, we don't really have valid data to show that black people are bigger, , On the contrary, because the economic development in Africa is not particularly good today, their situation is actually worse than imagined. I have to say that I have responded to this type of rebuttal for the third time. The person who says this argument every time didn't really prove that there are different results in the same economic situation, but every time he thinks this is the truth. Wouldn't it be possible for each of us to assert that a unicorn exists without proving it? Since there is no different situation in a similar economic situation, Then this type of rebuttals are actually invalid.
Thirdly, Unfortunately, I thought calcsd's data was reliable at first, until I actually looked at the dataset, only after I found out that the report samples they chose were too small. ,Actually, that's why I talked about it in the first post, but I never talked about it again.
I don't know why the report is not displayed, but the home page of this journal is displayed..
A small sample was selected, although the number did not differ from that of white people
The sample size is only 88..
The sample is a little small, only 800 though are barely usable, and it Is composed of four parts, each of which is only 200, 200 is definitely not enough. In this way., people are deceived into thinking that the sample size is enough, but The error level is determined by the sample size of a single sample, not by the sample size finally pieced together, that is to say, even if it is a report of 800, Its error level still stays at the error corresponding to 200 sample sizes. The level of error did not change, although the average would make the average they worked out more credible.
It is also worth adding that their data were collected from patients rather than healthy volunteers, Although they did exclude patients with a range of conditions such as Peroni's disease or acquired injuries to limit the error.
There are only over 100 people in the diabetic and non-diabetic groups, ,This sample is also too small
The sample size is only 239 and 59 people, and this sample is too small.
The sample size is only 104 people, and its data is not far from the average provided by the British report
,Oh, sample of 80 people. This is even less than the above
The sample sizes are 111 and 32, too small
The sample size of 248 patients is a bit small, although it is not much different from the British report
The sample size of 309 is too small
, sample size 201 sample size is too small
,The credibility of all the above reports is doubtful because of the small sample.
.This is the Italian study I discussed above, with a result of 12.5cm for average
and
There is no link
It's a pity that this is all their report
![1704605418106.png]( "1704605418106.png")
.
Their Westerners average, come from a data set where only a large report is credible, but they actually get a stereotype number, far exceeding the conclusion of the reliable report. ,
![1704605531468.png]( "1704605531468.png")
And the data sets they use for what they call the Eastern and Middle Eastern averages are not even credible without a large report.
,The data of this website is not credible, and I have told you why it is not credible, so I don't need to answer the non-existent question you assumed later.
Since you especially want to pretend to be professional, say that all those reports are not self-measuring and are done by professionals, following the "right" methodology. I think I need to give you a little more professional advice as some hints to make you have an open insted of stubborn mind: , Have you considered that there is a correspondence between stretching lengths and erectile lengths, I have previously shared a report on this relationship between the two, and in the final the author has also pointed out the approximate force(450g) with which the measurement is accurate by measuring when patients are lying down. Can you guarantee that the your so-called "scientific" reports you are talking about can guarantee this? Although I have mentioned they are small-sampled, no matter what they do, they will not make their reports credible. Another problem that should be mentioned is that erection by injecting E1 can indeed promote firm erection to measure but It may lead to such a good state that many people can't achieve it every day every time. If you want to be an expert so much, Have you considered these things?
Don't expect others to be friendly with you when you are unfriendly.
look at what has been written before(,I've already provided large studies of whites and large studies of Asians). Your sarcasm doesn't give your argument any more persuasiveness,but it does show that you are arrogant. I hope you can communicate in a more friendly tone next time.
