My opinion about a cliche problem: size of asian tools

outlier vs average. this is what I could deduce from the tl; dr; by asking chatgpt
That means you don't understand statistics and the report I sent.
And did you know that Chatgpt had become very stupid a few months ago? It could have achieved the minimum standard of the average required by the specific industry before, Now it is just a large intelligent search engine for some reason.
Even when he first appeared, it took a professional step-by-step guide for him to complete a complicated mathematical proof. Not to mention that he once was reported that when students used it to write papers, he attached a lot of false references, which didn't exist at all. He has no ability to tell whether the literature is valid or not. Not to mention his twin, even forging documents directly, Or, in response to a related question, say that a document gives a relevant conclusion, but this document only appears in this field, And didn't even talk about the topic.
And you are willing to believe him to answer such a question that is not particularly full of valid researches in the whole literature database?

I now explain the outlier to you (and who, also appeared before, and tried to twist this concept,) that just like the kind of idiot is so stupid that there may not be many in the whole crowd, (actually, they may have A rare disease that affects brain intelligence), Which is way beyond three standard deviations. This is a parameter used to indicate that there is something wrong with this survey. Even if only one appears in a data set of 1,000 or 10,000, Because the probability of anything beyond three standard deviations appearing in a single survey is almost zero, (whereas outliers often go beyond the fourth, fifth, or even the sixth deviation,) it is far less than 0.01%. not a concept used to explain your stupid ideas so that it will be "reasonable" but full of flaws.
It's hard for me to believe that some people don't even have a clear understanding of the basic concepts, But saying something about them here without much thought.
Average, Which means that a person randomly selected from the crowd has a 1/2 chance of meeting this average. Even the average calculated from the Probability Density Function Graph is calculated according to the definition of average.
I hope some people know what he is talking about, instead of even he doesn't know what he is talking about, and then he just says it.
(If some people can't even read the report, they should make up for his lack of entry-level statistics first or maybe the high school level one since) Ignorance is not the problem, but arrogance is
 
I said essentially the same thing based on my experiences in China. however was shot down due to sample size bias. lol. And the difference is somewhere in the 1/2” range max in length and .2” in girth. I am not sure the naked eye could detect the difference.
Do you realize that I have also not actually taken all such "positive" kind of comments seriously? I said that when the sample size is smaller, the data will be more dispersed and there may be greater system errors, So I won't take this type of experience seriously whether it is yours or someone else's, whether it agrees with my points or against mine.
 
Well, this was originally sent in the thread "Asians with Big Dicks", but it seems to be too long for it since there are more about pictures sharing. So I put it here, Try to rationly understand the whole problem.


I apologize for bringing up an old issue that is not much discussed anymore, the size of Asian tools, but there seem to be some factors that have been overlooked for a long time.

First, we need to define 'Asian' as it is generally used here, which usually includes China, Korea, Japan, and a number of Southeast Asian countries, and possibly Taiwan depending on political views.

Famine, malnutrition, and poor national economic development have been the most serious problems in these countries in the past five to six decades. This is more severe than the usual malnutrition or use of dairy products discussed. During the worst times, Chinese people even ate kaolin to fill their stomachs or tree bark, which of course had no nutrition and eventually killed them. This may be quite different from poverty as understood in most of the Western world. An exception in these countries worth mentioning is Thailand, Japan, and Taiwan. Although they were also affected by this malnutrition, it was not as severe compared to other countries. It is also worth noting that the malnutrition or deficiency discussed here is actually based on the intake of calories, proteins, micronutrients, etc., and is a comparison with the typical diet of the Caucasian world, where the most severe malnutrition and deficiency were in countries like China, which were sadly associated with Soviet communism.

As for how to understand this type of famine, whether it's the famine that once occurred in Ukraine or China, or actually in North Korea today, these are good typical examples. There may be degrees of difference, but the nature of their problems is similar, having abundant resources but serious food problems due to insufficient distribution by the bureaucratic system. Another perhaps more familiar example in the Western world, which some people may realize after reading a lot of material, is the famine caused in Germany by the blockade during World War I. Although different, some elderly people in rural Germany may still retain the practice of growing potatoes to prevent famine, as potatoes are a very easy plant to grow and are indeed very nutritious.

A typical Chinese diet, I'm talking about now, and I mean a normal diet that meets the minimum material needs of a family, is actually not complicated in terms of macronutrient calculation: 200 grams of rice or noodles for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, equivalent to about 50 grams of carbohydrates per meal, 150 grams of carbs per day, mainly rice or noodles, 200 grams of meat per day is considered a lot, actually providing 50 grams of protein, and then no more than 40 grams of oil. This totals 1160 calories. As a reference, a standard diet should actually be around 2400 calories per day, even over 3000 for a more varied diet. The calculation of macronutrients is simple: 4 calories per gram for proteins and carbohydrates, and 9 calories per gram for fats. If necessary, you can verify this by entering your daily intake into cronometer.

Another data point related to living standards is that, according to official data from China in 2020, there are 600 million people with a monthly income of less than 1000 RMB (about 150 USD), including 220 million people with a monthly income of less than 500 RMB (about 75 USD). In China, the number of people with a monthly income of less than 2000 RMB (about 300 USD) reached 964 million. It should also be remembered that China has been known to manipulate its data, so these figures are likely beautified.

People don't think that when nutrition is insufficient, even with good genetic endowment, a person can grow very big. This actually explains a lot, especially considering the Asians who are in their forties and fifties now but were in their twenties and thirties when the thread started (06-08), i.e., the mainstream Asians seen at that time. Due to malnutrition, it's normal for them to be smaller than the global average. It might be a foot difference compared to the current world average of 5.5 inches; 4.5, and I'm being very generous with 4.5, considering my experience living in the north and visiting public baths. I thought about 3 feet, but those old people had lived through the Cultural Revolution or the Great Famine in China, hadn't they? This somewhat matches people's past personal experiences (sadly, yes, those Asians seen early in the thread, especially those with six or seven inches, might have had slightly better diets and environments, and could have grown an inch or more). Nutrition's impact on size can be understood as a shift to the left of the entire bell curve of penis size; if the curve goes from small to large from left to right, the curve has shifted left, so it seems that earlier Asians had a smaller average, but there were also larger ones.

As examples of how nutrition can impact human body size, I can cite two more cases. Medieval Europeans' heights can be reasonably inferred from the sizes of the armors found today, which suggest that Europeans, especially during the Middle Ages, were not taller than Easterners. I don't remember the exact figures, but I believe the inferred average height was around 1.5 meters. However, this has now reversed. Similarly, Dutch people have undergone a noticeable change in height over nearly 200 years due to increased intake of dairy products and proteins, reaching an average height of nearly 1.85 meters today. The influence of nutrition on physical development is much greater than we think, but it takes much longer than we might expect for an event to unfold.

I'm not trying to say that the earlier statements about Asians having smaller average sizes but also larger penises exist is without problems. There's an unintended malice in these statements. Yes, they're based on personal experiences, but those experiences only apply to the previous generation, the Asians who are now in their forties and fifties. Asian countries have undergone significant changes in the past three to four decades. Their economies have made their own achievements, so nutrition and living standards have changed a lot, although still relatively poor compared to the rich dietary life of the Western or Caucasian world. Because this was their past experience, it seemed reasonable to them, and it's the reason they unconsciously concluded that Asians are smaller. But extending this conclusion to all Asians, regardless of their growth environment and, intentionally or unintentionally, tracing it back to race, is problematic. Their real point is that they don't believe Asians can be large; they should first prove why they don't believe.

For those truly curious about the size of Asian tools, it may take some time before they see more, as the millennial generation has just grown up. Starting from this generation, it's possible to change the stereotype that Asians tend to be smaller and eliminate any interracial differences. I've heard from many of my Asian friends (specifically Chinese) that there's a lot of discussion about why the new generation seems to be significantly larger on average than their generation. Well, this is anecdotal evidence and may not prove much. But the disappearance of such gaps is always good, especially when these size differences actually reflect a country's development and the quality of people’s daily lives.

Some have mentioned research reports indicating that these interracial differences do exist, but these conclusions are based on specific samples. As I said, the previous generation is indeed a bit smaller, simply due to malnutrition and a horrific living environment. So, whatever report you look at, as long as the sample is based on people born before the 2000s, the data is more likely to be smaller. Everyone lives in a specific environment, but many surveys fail to consider this factor. For example, some American surveys overlook the harm done to homosexuals by homophobes during the Stonewall movement of the seventies and eighties, comparing masculinity between homosexual and heterosexual men.

Another important issue is the sexual shame of Asians. Asian culture not only avoids discussing sex but also views it as kind of taboo, much like pedophilia is taboo in the West. So yes, no matter what natural gifts an Asian man has, he's unlikely to be as openly confident about his masculinity as Caucasians. They consider it barbaric, shameful, and primitive, lacking in education. Yes, I think it's wrong, but that's the mainstream in Asian culture. Perhaps when you talk to Asian friends, they might say that's a thing of the past, but their subconscious is still influenced by culture.

So, when addressing this issue, the best response might be to post their own photos directly, but usually, they are reluctant to do so. Maybe it's just around the average, so posting it won't prove anything, but even if they are that large, they might not be interested in doing so. The cultural factors surrounding this issue are not as simple as a choice like Muslims not liking pork, but rather a complex, perhaps not so scientific or rigorous, collective subconscious-like thing. Caucasians generally don't have this problem because they've never been ashamed of sex, and if they're exceptionally endowed, they'd proudly display it. Such behavior would only invite severe criticism and social ostracism in Asian societies.

Regarding the issue of photos, there's another point worth discussing. I wonder if anyone has overlooked the elephant in the room: the full erection in Asians and Caucasians is different. Firstly, most Asians are growers, and the difference between their flaccid and erect conditions can be very impressive. On average, this change is more noticeable than in Caucasian growers. Secondly, possibly due to the aforementioned sexual shame or other subtle cultural reasons, many photos shown by Asians are only semi-erect (50%). A simple way to tell is that Asians are hard and upward when fully erect; when an Asian is about 75% erect, it no longer feels soft,

but many of the photos actually posted about Chinese are of commercial male models from China, and these commercial models' photos are mostly soft, maybe 50%, but definitely not over 75%. Therefore, many people might mistakenly think that these images represent their fully erect condition.

Additionally, there's another aspect that might venture into politically incorrect territory but is factual. Asian countries, especially East Asia (which often refers to China, Japan, and Korea, all parts of the Confucian cultural sphere), are very resistant to masculine traits. The Masculinity I mentioned demands bravery, self-expression, fighting for honor, etc., but in collectivist Asian countries, this is often seen as the biggest threat by rulers. So, even though every founding emperor or king was full of masculinity, knowing how they had rebelled, they also blocked the path they had taken, leading to a tendency towards demasculinization in Asian culture.

But we can understand this issue more simply. One might wonder how China could have such a vast territory with pre-information age technology. Rulers would go to great lengths to maintain their rule, plotting against their people and ruthlessly killing anyone who might try to rebel. This parallels our understanding of authoritarian regimes. A culture has long been formed: do not resist, conform, and abandon masculinity. Japan is an exception due to its samurai class, which changed Japanese society through coup d'états, so the perception of Japanese people is not as demasculinized.

I must point out that the masculinity I'm referring to is not about being alpha or sigma males but about being resilient, strong, willing to resist and speak up for oneself, like a warrior, and not "toxic masculinity."

Regarding the tendency towards demasculinization, it only applies internally within Asian countries when it comes to stability and security (preventing rebellion, etc.). In people's daily lives, it's not the case. Asian policies and cultural habits often say one thing officially but mean another in reality. The trend towards demasculinization is official, but in real life, people don't act that way. Male stars on TV may be increasingly feminized, but this inner aesthetic preference always remains a small minority in the population. A better explanation for this phenomenon is that investing in and operating male stars with a relatively feminine appearance, like those in Korea, is much cheaper and simpler than those with a rugged style.

About the genetic factors controlling size, it's indeed complex, but not as complex as imagined. 99% of the human genome consists of regulatory factors (auxiliary genomic elements), and 1% are actual genes (controlling enzymes or proteins). Especially with epigenetics now so hot, everyone should realize that their lifestyle, whether or not they get sunlight, what they eat, etc., all have profound effects on their gene expression. And yes, these effects can be passed down for many generations, although they can also be reversed within a generation. However, Asians live under a lot of stress. They go to school from primary to high school from 7 am(get up at 6 am) spending almost all day in classrooms or limited activity spaces until 5-6 pm(middle school) or even 10 pm(high school). They not only lack sunlight and physical exercise (teachers always say the PE teacher is sick), but their classroom lights are primitive, without blue light filtering LEDs. Their homework even forces them to work until 3-4 in the morning(Yes, and they get up at 5 or 6). Many might think I'm making this up, but this is the reality in China, where I've lived for many years. I think I don't need to add too much detail on how hard this life is, as these points are enough. As for whether these poor lifestyle habits can have such a deep impact even over such a long period, men can search for articles on how to increase testosterone to find out.

Imagine being a teenager growing up in such a sexually repressive environment, going to school every day not only without any pleasure but also destroying your sleep. Without space and time for independent thought, without sunlight, without exercise, repeatedly doing useless exercises only for scores. Even with the best genetic endowment, how much can it be utilized? If the earlier famines are too far removed from today's Asians, these hard lives are not. Everyone knows Asians are very diligent, but few think about how painful this diligence is. By the way, don't forget that most East Asians are still in a condition of calorie deficiency, even during adolescence, a time when the body needs to grow and be nourished. Even now, we can derive a very bad new stereotype: Japanese don't eat, Koreans don't sleep, Chinese don't rest. This may be strange for the West, but familiar with East Asians.

I think I should add that the earlier discussion of nutritional famine and poor conditions doesn't quite apply to Japan, which has developed well compared to its less fortunate Asian neighbors. But Japan has always had a culture of eating less due to being an island nation with relatively scarce resources. It's easy to find videos online of Japanese girls eating tiny cakes the size of their palms and pretending to be full. Regarding Japan, isn't it known that for a long time, and I don't know if it's still the case, Japanese AV deliberately chose men with smaller or average-sized penises for filming? The purpose of such filming is to give the majority of men who have average size confidence. And can someone really use the porn industry, which has always been racially discriminatory and pandering to stereotypes, to validate their racially biased beliefs?

My reply aims to express my understanding of this issue and offer thoughts that might help others who are similarly puzzled. We shouldn't deceive ourselves; in the past, we've seen both small and large, and we shouldn't deceive ourselves that all this is changing. Sometimes, to arrive at a comprehensive, neutral, and objective statement, one must invest a lot of effort and thought, not just pretend to be neutral.

Eating little or poorly, or having a terrible lifestyle, enormous pressure, that's why we have Asian stereotypes, and why it's so hard to objectively and soberly get rid of them logically, not just politically correctly.

So my personal conclusion is that there are no interracial differences. If you insist there are, yes, maybe one day we need to seriously discuss a difference of 0.1 inches, although it can be significantly exceeded daily, like trying to get harder or when it's a bit colder. There are no genetic endowment differences, but there are indeed cultural, dietary, and lifestyle differences. The latter is more complex than discussed here, but malnutrition is indeed too crucial; no matter how fine and varied the diet, insufficient quantity is not enough. (introduce a website: calcSD - About)

Many of my views are indeed based on my life experiences in China and discussions with Chinese friends. But given that when we talk about East Asia, we often actually mean China, I think my conclusions, while limited, are worth considering for everyone.

I apologize for this lengthy response about an old issue. It might have interrupted some people's mood for viewing pictures, but I think it's necessary to say these things, not for political correctness, but to clarify things.
So, eat a sirloin steak and mashed potatoes with gravy and grow a bigger dick? Perhaps. Such a popularized notion in East Asia would be a boon to cattle ranchers everywhere. That possibility stated, and even if true, does not obviate the possibility of genetic differences. I'm not sure a typical sub-Saharan African diet or experience with malnutrition is much different than that of East Asia, but their reputation for endowment purported by many (not me) on this site provides a counterpoint to your gastronomical assertion.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: VIIby5 and Satisha
So, eat a sirloin steak and mashed potatoes with gravy and grow a bigger dick? Perhaps. Such a popularized notion in East Asia would be a boon to cattle ranchers everywhere. That possibility stated, and even if true, does not obviate the possibility of genetic differences. I'm not sure a typical sub-Saharan African diet or experience with malnutrition is much different than that of East Asia, but their reputation for endowment purported by many (not me) on this site provides a counterpoint to your gastronomical assertion.

I don't think you have read the last reply on nutrition before, And I'm talking about adequate nutrition intake, You have turned this concept into specific objects, which is not my argument


  • I really hope that people who come to discuss genetics with me in the future have studied genetics and understand epigenetics well And understand how the surroundings affect people's gene expression, rather than making some personal points behind the "genetics" shield. Read the reports here and before and think, do not just say something for their "personal" experience, when you say some personal staff in public, that's no longer personal anymore.
    • 1. Tanner's report about puberty, who set the ground theory of puberty. Point out how malnutrition affects puberty growth and development.
    • 2. Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I is a Marker for the Nutritional State,IGF-I concentration is sensitive to short-term and chronic alterations in the nutritional state
      • Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I is a Marker for the Nutritional State.
      • abstract: Measurement of the serum concentration of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-I) is generally used as a screening investigation for disorders of the growth hormone (GH)/IGF-I axis in children and adolescents with short stature. IGF-I concentration is sensitive to short-term and chronic alterations in the nutritional state, and the interpretation of IGF-I measurements requires knowledge of the child’s nutritional status. In this review, we summarize the effects of nutrition on the GH/IGF-I axis, and review the clinical implications of these interactions throughout childhood, both in under-nutrition and over-nutrition.
      • "Food availability can be a significant issue for many families, and may not be immediately apparent during a clinical visit. The worldwide prevalence of undernourishment is estimated at 11.3% (49), and an estimated 50 million people in the United States are uncertain of having enough food (50). This may affect the type and quantity of food available in the household (51,52). As will be discussed later in this section, even a transient 50% reduction in calorie or 33% reduction in protein availability can result in a reversible reduction in IGF-I concentrations (Figure 3) (53). This may be relevant in families where the next paycheck is required before food can be purchased. Dietary intake may be decreased despite adequate food availability due to certain feeding behaviors and/or diminished appetite. Sometimes the dietary intake is inadvertently over-restricted by the parent(s) and/or child due to fear of obesity (5456) or hypercholesterolemia (56) to the extent that nutritional growth stunting ensues. Unstructured mealtimes, particularly those with distractions, as well as food aversions and dysfunctional parent-child interactions related to eating can all lead to failure to thrive, a topic extensively reviewed elsewhere (57). Reduced caloric intake can also result from decreased appetite, which may be endogenous (such as from delayed gastric emptying) or induced by medications. Attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 7% of children (58) and methylphenidate or dexamphetamine are commonly used to treat this disorder. These medications can be associated with appetite suppression and subsequent weight loss (59). In a small study that included healthy children treated with methylphenidate, reduced weight and BMI were seen within 4 months of treatment and an associated reduction in IGF-I concentration was observed (60)."
      • View attachment 117385631
    • 3. the importance of GH/igf-1(that promoted by GH) for genital growth.(As the negetive contrast that how losing all igf-1 effect the growth of genital)
      • I. Why Do Normal Children Have Acromegalic Levels of IGF-I During Puberty? Gene-Knockout
        • Abstract
        • Context
        • The rapid pubertal height growth is unique to humans, but why do we have it? Although the spurt contributes 13% to 15% to the final adult height, we hypothesized that the biological significance of the high acromegalic levels of GH and IGF-I, which are behind the pubertal growth spurt, might primarily occur to stimulate the reproductive organs.
        • Evidence Synthesis
        • Animal data have demonstrated that adult Igf1 and Igf2 gene knockout mice that survive show a dramatic reduction in the size of the reproductive organs and are infertile. In humans, case reports of mutations in the genes affecting the GH–IGF axis and growth (GH, GHRH, GH-R, STAT5b, IGF-I, IGF-II, IGF-1R, PAPPA2) are also characterized by delayed pubertal onset and micropenis. Furthermore, GH treatment will tend to normalize the penile size in patients with GH deficiency. Thus, the endocrine effects of high IGF-I levels might be needed for the transition of the sexual organs, including the secondary sex characteristics, from the “dormant” stages of childhood into fully functioning reproductive systems. The peak IGF-I levels, on average, occur 2 years after the peak height growth velocity, suggesting reasons other than longitudinal growth for the high IGF-I levels, and remain high in the years after the height spurt, when the reproductive systems become fully functional.
        • Conclusion
        • We suggest that the serum levels of IGF-I should be monitored in children with poor development of sexual organs, although it remains to be investigated whether GH should be added to sex steroids in the management of hypogonadism for some pubertal children (e.g., boys with micropenis).
      • II. Role of the GH-IGF1 axis on the hypothalamus–pituitary–testicular axis function: lessons from Laron syndrome Laren's syndrome reviews
        • Laron syndrome is a condition characterized by resistance to GH caused by mutations in its receptor. This results in a disease characterized by high levels of structurally normal GH, with low levels of IGF1. Phenotypically, these patients are characterized by dwarfism, obesity, severe hypoglycemia, typical head configuration with a small face and bulging forehead resulting in a saddle nose. Their voice is high-pitched and they have thinning hair. Finally, another feature common to male patients with Laron syndrome is poor genital development, which strengthens the correlation between IGF1 and the HPT axis function (8).
        • The presence of micropenis in patients with Laron syndrome might be firstly ascribable to the effects of the GH-IGF1 axis on the HPT one. In fact, low IGF1 levels might affect the GnRH neuron secretion and function, inducing hypogonadism (6). However, the direct effects of IGF1 on the penis may also be involved in pathogenesis. IGF1 indeed enhances penile smooth muscle cell proliferation (31), their relaxation (32), and fibroblast proliferation (33). Consequently, IGF1 has been speculated to be needed to achieve normal penile growth (33).
        • The results of this study showed that a complete restoration of penile length was achieved only with the combined therapy, whereas GH or testosterone alone were not effective (52).
    • 4. Penis growth by igf-1 injection(As positive contrast that how igf-1 affect the growth of genital)
      • https://www.researchgate.net/public...on_syndrome_primary_growth_hormone_resistance
      • In the very young boys(0-5) no change in serum gonadotrophins, androgens, gonads or genitals was registered. In the two older boys(10 and 14.5) and the adult(28) patient, there was a progressive rise in luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and testosterone. Concomitantly, there was an increase in size of the testes and penile length. The two boys started puberty.
      • View attachment 117385671
      • The adult patient who started treatment at age 28 with full sexual development showed a further increase in testicular size (Fig. 1) from 13 to 18 ml and his stretched penile length increased from 12 to 13.5 cm.
  • Over the years, the academic attitude toward genes has gradually changed from a blueprint to a toolbox. Who else would really think that genes are really what sets everything except for people who actually didn't major in biology, didn't finish a book named genetics, even don't know how genes work and change and so on, Ignoring the results of so many years of genetic development, refusing scientific new ideas, but only clinging to his own "genetic" hat. Please stop talking about genetics every day without knowing it, , If you do finish reading a book named Genetics and are willing to discuss it rationally, you can send out your academic views instead.
    • Epigenetics - Wikipedia wiki about epigenetics
      • Memory formation and maintenance are due to epigenetic alterations that cause the required dynamic changes in gene transcription that create and renew memory in neurons.
      • Epigenetics play a major role in brain aging and age-related cognitive decline, with relevance to life extension.[156][157][158][159][160]
      • Nutrients could interact with the epigenome to "protect or boost cognitive processes across the lifespan".[165][166]
      • A review suggests neurobiological effects of physical exercise via epigenetics seem "central to building an 'epigenetic memory' to influence long-term brain function and behavior" and may even be heritable.[167]
      • Epigenetic mechanisms were a necessary part of the evolutionary origin of cell differentiation.[[183]] Although epigenetics in multicellular organisms is generally thought to be a mechanism involved in differentiation, with epigenetic patterns "reset" when organisms reproduce, there have been some observations of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance (e.g., the phenomenon of paramutation observed in maize). Although most of these multigenerational epigenetic traits are gradually lost over several generations, the possibility remains that multigenerational epigenetics could be another aspect to evolution and adaptation. As mentioned above, some define epigenetics as heritable.
    • Epigenetics: The Science of Change Epigenetics: The Science of Change
      • "Michael Skinner, a professor of molecular biosciences and director of the Center for Reproductive Biology at Washington State University, and his team described in the 3 June 2005 issue of Science how they briefly exposed pregnant rats to individual relatively high levels of the insecticide methoxychlor and the fungicide vinclozolin, and documented effects such as decreased sperm production and increased male infertility in the male pups. Digging for more information, they found altered DNA methylation of two genes. As they continued the experiment, they discovered the adverse effects lasted in about 90% of the males in all four subsequent generations they followed, with no additional pesticide exposures."
      • "Substances aren’t the only sources of epigenetic changes. The licking, grooming, and nursing methods that mother rats use with their pups can affect the long-term behavior of their offspring, and those results can be tied to changes in DNA methylation and histone acetylation at a glucocorticoid receptor gene promoter in the pup’s hippocampus. "
    • Advances in epigenetics link genetics to the environment and disease - Nature Advances in epigenetics link genetics to the environment and disease

Since you don't know enough about sub-Saharan nutrition, can you boldly assert that East Asia is not different from it?? Do you want to say that the nutritional status of South Korea is similar to sub-Saharan?
So many people agree with the specific point, so what? What I want is facts, just as heliocentric theory was rejected by others at that time, isn't it also the facts in the end Instead of geocentric theory?? How many concepts/theories in the history of science have been rejected even by professional scholars, not normal people, but have these proved to be true in the end? When Athenians thought that Socrates was disturbing the minds of young people, The final result was that they were all wrong and led to a great tragedy
A counterpoint has to give good valid proofs with valid reasoning, not that there are enough opponents, so that makes a counterpoint


.Well, one of the funniest things is that, in fact, my previous report mentioned an experiment even performed in a human body since it happened to be a study of Laren syndrome, which showed that insulin-like growth factor can cause penis enlargement, which has been confirmed, And no one Attach importance to this result and wants to know about this substance, But keep repeating about genetics, genetics, genetics over and over again.
Epigenetics is so powerful for changes, although the Gene base pair has not changed. Childhood trauma and nutritional status, or living environment, can obviously affect people's bodies and moods. It doesn't need any epigenetics to explain it further. People have basically regarded this as a kind of common sense.
, However, on this small issue, it is necessary for some people to emphasize that genes are genes.....


When discussing facts, shouldn't we really take a good look at how to construct facts, especially when this is something mentioned by a person hundreds of years ago and should be known to people now?
  • Francis Bacon and the Four Idols of the Mind
  • Idols of the Tribe
  • The Idols of the Tribe made the false assumption that our most natural and basic sense of things was the *correct *one. He called our natural impressions a “false mirror” which distorted the true nature of things.
  • Idols of the Cave
  • The Idols of the Cave were the problems of individuals, their passions and enthusiasms, their devotions and ideologies, all of which led to misunderstandings of the true nature of things.
  • Idols of the Marketplace
  • You might call the Idols of the Marketplace a problem of political discourse: The use of words to mislead. (Nearly half a century later, Garrett Hardin would argue similarly that good thinkers need a literary filter to suss out sense from nonsense.)
  • Idols of the Theater
  • The final idol, of the Theater, is how Bacon referred to long-received wisdom, the ancient systems of philosophy, the arbitrary divisions of knowledge and classification systems held onto like dogma. Without emptying one’s mind of the old ways, no new progress could be made. This would be an important lasting value of the Baconian view of science. Truth must be reasoned from first principles.
 
So, eat a sirloin steak and mashed potatoes with gravy and grow a bigger dick? Perhaps. Such a popularized notion in East Asia would be a boon to cattle ranchers everywhere. That possibility stated, and even if true, does not obviate the possibility of genetic differences. I'm not sure a typical sub-Saharan African diet or experience with malnutrition is much different than that of East Asia, but their reputation for endowment purported by many (not me) on this site provides a counterpoint to your gastronomical assertion.
You may need to look at the starting post, which talks about Japanese people who only eat 1000 calories a day and try to feel full. , Chinese people basically don't have an eating habit of protein products, such as meat or milk, except for some ethnic minorities like Mongolian.
And at the same time, what is talked about in the West is green poverty

,If hunger is too far away for you, you might as well think about how children grow up in war
 
by"

"
I mean it was my reply to your third reply here in this thread, not your current reply, and you did it in that

So, eat a sirloin steak and mashed potatoes with gravy and grow a bigger dick? Perhaps. Such a popularized notion in East Asia would be a boon to cattle ranchers everywhere. That possibility stated, and even if true, does not obviate the possibility of genetic differences. I'm not sure a typical sub-Saharan African diet or experience with malnutrition is much different than that of East Asia, but their reputation for endowment purported by many (not me) on this site provides a counterpoint to your gastronomical assertion.
He’s all yours now…
 
You may need to look at the starting post, which talks about Japanese people who only eat 1000 calories a day and try to feel full. , Chinese people basically don't have an eating habit of protein products, such as meat or milk, except for some ethnic minorities like Mongolian.
And at the same time, what is talked about in the West is green poverty

,If hunger is too far away for you, you might as well think about how children grow up in war
So eat your vegetables and grow a bigger dick? In my defense, I did include mashed potatoes and gravy in my response. But I took your suggestion and reviewed again the OP. After a few breaks to rest my eyes from reading that post worthy of Tolstoy, I remain unconvinced it contained anything of merit and failed to support the underlying proposition that genetics do not contribute to differences in penis size across groups of people. The motivation for the OP to engage in such a tortured argument to justify his explanation of under-endowed East Asian men is a matter for further conjecture.
 
So eat your vegetables and grow a bigger dick? In my defense, I did include mashed potatoes and gravy in my response. But I took your suggestion and reviewed again the OP. After a few breaks to rest my eyes from reading that post worthy of Tolstoy, I remain unconvinced it contained anything of merit and failed to support the underlying proposition that genetics do not contribute to differences in penis size across groups of people. The motivation for the OP to engage in such a tortured argument to justify his explanation of under-endowed East Asian men is a matter for further conjecture.
take a good look at the material I sent, not only the OP but also the reports, instead of distorting my opinion into other things.

what I mean is not that the gene is not involved, but that when the effect caused by genes is interfered by many factors with the mechanics of epigenetics by environmental factors(Biological phenotype equals genotype plus Internal or external environment factors). In the epigenetic example I mentioned earlier, the interaction between mice and mothers changes the methylation pattern of hippocampal-related genes in the brains of mice, thus changing their final expression thus the development and phenotype. The influence of genes on biological traits does not mean that there is a gene A, then there is trait A, but that after having specific genes may be not only A (In fact, many biological phenotypes are affected by multiple genes, There are only a few phenotypes that are really controlled by only one gene), and meeting certain conditions, there will be trait A. If a person's genes can make him reach six feet according to speculation in average conditions, but if he lives in a war era without eating sufficient food or is mentally affected by the war, he can't achieve such a result,

What I mean by adequate dietary intake is enough protein, enough carbohydrates, enough fat, and then enough calories. And then we start thinking about vitamins, trace elements, and so on. , I repeat, I don't mean what a particular food can do to people, but a good enough nutritional state.

The core of what I said is that nutrition will affect the igf-1 in the human body, which is the most important growth executive factor growth factor, responsible for the differentiation and maturation of all cells in the body, and sensitive to nutritional state
, its best known example is in muscle growth, but he also has a good effect on the nervous system, and at the same time he also has an effect on the specific smooth muscle system, and so on.



You naysayers are really interesting,
When I first started talking about some of my own ideas and some of my own guessing to discuss, you started throwing away some of the literature or search results about size,
When I throw out the credible (how to define credibility has been posted and discussed before) literature and point out why the material you throw out was not enough credible though still scientific(also discussed before), you start to say that you don't believe in the nutrition thing, Although I briefly pointed out in my first reply to this question, the insulin-like growth factor is the key substance in this mechanism
When I throw out the nutrition-related literature (Not only the observation of facts posted by the original reports but the explanation constructed by related experimental evidence), you start to say that it is too long here or to start guessing that I have unique motives.
You guys don't respond to my questions directly, But have been trying to find other topics to try to say there must be something wrong with my explanation. I won't say that there must be no problem with my explanation but If there is a problem, I will find it and correct it. But this roundabout way is really not the way to discuss, If I had sent out the material to make a rebuttal, but you naysayers did not read the material, but to criticize the tone or my motivation

One of my earlier replies which may be really a little difficult to understand, about the second law of thermodynamics, has talked about genetic differences caused by evolution, The formation of species takes millions of years, while the evolution and separation of different human races take less than 100,000 years(even less than 50,000 years), There is actually no fundamental genetic difference between races, The differences between races and races are far less than the differences between people. Whether Caucasians do better than Asians in digesting lactose or Asians handle fatty acids metabolism better than Caucasians, The only interracial differences found so far are these tiny, though existent, differences, they are far from the essential differences. All you guys talking about "genetics", in fact, all adopt an assumption that maybe you don't realize, that you think there is a huge difference in genes between different races but it is not. If the genes' gap is large enough, reproductive isolation will occur between species, which is also the standard to judge whether species are formed or not. if you have a friend of a different biological rather than cultural race, what kind of essential difference do you think between you guys?
 
Wow!

The amount of time and energy you guys have spent on this thread seems like a total waste of both, to me.

Nothing has been "proven"!... Scientists and sociologists are NOT going to be reading LPSG's Forums for actual data.

Are any of you having some fun with your own dick, here, instead of obsessing about global penis size differences?

Vive la différence!

A/B
 
Last edited:
Wow!

The amount of time and energy you guys have spent on this thread seems like a total waste of both, to me.

Nothing has been "proven"!... Scientists and sociologists are NOT going to be reading LPSG's Forums for actual data.

Are any of you having some fun with your own dick, here, instead of obsessing about global penis size differences?

Vive la différence!

A/B
It would be a boring world if the only topics worthy of debate were ones that could be "proven." This is not a court of law and proof is not the requirement. A presence and clash of diverse views is essential in an argument. Attempting to shut down those views -- even if delivered in your avuncular manner -- impedes the free expression of thought.
 
take a good look at the material I sent, not only the OP but also the reports, instead of distorting my opinion into other things.

what I mean is not that the gene is not involved, but that when the effect caused by genes is interfered by many factors with the mechanics of epigenetics by environmental factors(Biological phenotype equals genotype plus Internal or external environment factors). In the epigenetic example I mentioned earlier, the interaction between mice and mothers changes the methylation pattern of hippocampal-related genes in the brains of mice, thus changing their final expression thus the development and phenotype. The influence of genes on biological traits does not mean that there is a gene A, then there is trait A, but that after having specific genes may be not only A (In fact, many biological phenotypes are affected by multiple genes, There are only a few phenotypes that are really controlled by only one gene), and meeting certain conditions, there will be trait A. If a person's genes can make him reach six feet according to speculation in average conditions, but if he lives in a war era without eating sufficient food or is mentally affected by the war, he can't achieve such a result,

What I mean by adequate dietary intake is enough protein, enough carbohydrates, enough fat, and then enough calories. And then we start thinking about vitamins, trace elements, and so on. , I repeat, I don't mean what a particular food can do to people, but a good enough nutritional state.

The core of what I said is that nutrition will affect the igf-1 in the human body, which is the most important growth executive factor growth factor, responsible for the differentiation and maturation of all cells in the body, and sensitive to nutritional state
, its best known example is in muscle growth, but he also has a good effect on the nervous system, and at the same time he also has an effect on the specific smooth muscle system, and so on.



You naysayers are really interesting,
When I first started talking about some of my own ideas and some of my own guessing to discuss, you started throwing away some of the literature or search results about size,
When I throw out the credible (how to define credibility has been posted and discussed before) literature and point out why the material you throw out was not enough credible though still scientific(also discussed before), you start to say that you don't believe in the nutrition thing, Although I briefly pointed out in my first reply to this question, the insulin-like growth factor is the key substance in this mechanism
When I throw out the nutrition-related literature (Not only the observation of facts posted by the original reports but the explanation constructed by related experimental evidence), you start to say that it is too long here or to start guessing that I have unique motives.
You guys don't respond to my questions directly, But have been trying to find other topics to try to say there must be something wrong with my explanation. I won't say that there must be no problem with my explanation but If there is a problem, I will find it and correct it. But this roundabout way is really not the way to discuss, If I had sent out the material to make a rebuttal, but you naysayers did not read the material, but to criticize the tone or my motivation

One of my earlier replies which may be really a little difficult to understand, about the second law of thermodynamics, has talked about genetic differences caused by evolution, The formation of species takes millions of years, while the evolution and separation of different human races take less than 100,000 years(even less than 50,000 years), There is actually no fundamental genetic difference between races, The differences between races and races are far less than the differences between people. Whether Caucasians do better than Asians in digesting lactose or Asians handle fatty acids metabolism better than Caucasians, The only interracial differences found so far are these tiny, though existent, differences, they are far from the essential differences. All you guys talking about "genetics", in fact, all adopt an assumption that maybe you don't realize, that you think there is a huge difference in genes between different races but it is not. If the genes' gap is large enough, reproductive isolation will occur between species, which is also the standard to judge whether species are formed or not. if you have a friend of a different biological rather than cultural race, what kind of essential difference do you think between you guys?
I'm satisfied I boiled your original tome down to its essence and its rehash in bold type does nothing to change my takeaway. Perhaps if you had erected a stronger, larger, more powerful argument in the first place, rather than the under-nourished, puny, limp supplications offered, then things would have been different.
 
take a good look at the material I sent, not only the OP but also the reports, instead of distorting my opinion into other things.

what I mean is not that the gene is not involved, but that when the effect caused by genes is interfered by many factors with the mechanics of epigenetics by environmental factors(Biological phenotype equals genotype plus Internal or external environment factors). In the epigenetic example I mentioned earlier, the interaction between mice and mothers changes the methylation pattern of hippocampal-related genes in the brains of mice, thus changing their final expression thus the development and phenotype. The influence of genes on biological traits does not mean that there is a gene A, then there is trait A, but that after having specific genes may be not only A (In fact, many biological phenotypes are affected by multiple genes, There are only a few phenotypes that are really controlled by only one gene), and meeting certain conditions, there will be trait A. If a person's genes can make him reach six feet according to speculation in average conditions, but if he lives in a war era without eating sufficient food or is mentally affected by the war, he can't achieve such a result,

What I mean by adequate dietary intake is enough protein, enough carbohydrates, enough fat, and then enough calories. And then we start thinking about vitamins, trace elements, and so on. , I repeat, I don't mean what a particular food can do to people, but a good enough nutritional state.

The core of what I said is that nutrition will affect the igf-1 in the human body, which is the most important growth executive factor growth factor, responsible for the differentiation and maturation of all cells in the body, and sensitive to nutritional state
, its best known example is in muscle growth, but he also has a good effect on the nervous system, and at the same time he also has an effect on the specific smooth muscle system, and so on.



You naysayers are really interesting,
When I first started talking about some of my own ideas and some of my own guessing to discuss, you started throwing away some of the literature or search results about size,
When I throw out the credible (how to define credibility has been posted and discussed before) literature and point out why the material you throw out was not enough credible though still scientific(also discussed before), you start to say that you don't believe in the nutrition thing, Although I briefly pointed out in my first reply to this question, the insulin-like growth factor is the key substance in this mechanism
When I throw out the nutrition-related literature (Not only the observation of facts posted by the original reports but the explanation constructed by related experimental evidence), you start to say that it is too long here or to start guessing that I have unique motives.
You guys don't respond to my questions directly, But have been trying to find other topics to try to say there must be something wrong with my explanation. I won't say that there must be no problem with my explanation but If there is a problem, I will find it and correct it. But this roundabout way is really not the way to discuss, If I had sent out the material to make a rebuttal, but you naysayers did not read the material, but to criticize the tone or my motivation

One of my earlier replies which may be really a little difficult to understand, about the second law of thermodynamics, has talked about genetic differences caused by evolution, The formation of species takes millions of years, while the evolution and separation of different human races take less than 100,000 years(even less than 50,000 years), There is actually no fundamental genetic difference between races, The differences between races and races are far less than the differences between people. Whether Caucasians do better than Asians in digesting lactose or Asians handle fatty acids metabolism better than Caucasians, The only interracial differences found so far are these tiny, though existent, differences, they are far from the essential differences. All you guys talking about "genetics", in fact, all adopt an assumption that maybe you don't realize, that you think there is a huge difference in genes between different races but it is not. If the genes' gap is large enough, reproductive isolation will occur between species, which is also the standard to judge whether species are formed or not. if you have a friend of a different biological rather than cultural race, what kind of essential difference do you think between you guys?
I'm satisfied I boiled your tome down to its essence and the bold-type rehash does nothing to change my takeaway. Perhaps if you had erected a larger, stronger, more powerful argument in the first place, rather than the under-nourished, limp, puny supplication offered, then things would have been different between us.
 
I'm satisfied I boiled your tome down to its essence and the bold-type rehash does nothing to change my takeaway. Perhaps if you had erected a larger, stronger, more powerful argument in the first place, rather than the under-nourished, limp, puny supplication offered, then things would have been different between us.
Take more classes in biology, endocrinology, and logic, instead of winning in the brain.
 
It would be a boring world if the only topics worthy of debate were ones that could be "proven." This is not a court of law and proof is not the requirement. A presence and clash of diverse views is essential in an argument. Attempting to shut down those views -- even if delivered in your avuncular manner -- impedes the free expression of thought.

My intent wasn't to "shut down" or "impede" anything at, @FrankieGuile, and, keep in mind that you just said that on a website that totally shut down it's own Politics Forum and forbids political discussions.

I guess I should have posed my observation of this tedious thread, and the endless and tiresome debate about penis size based on race, as a question:

What are you guys getting from it? All that time spent! Where's the "Win"?

A/B
 
What are you guys getting from it? All that time spent! Where's the "Win"?

A/B
Where to start! lol!!!

Really I was amused by the endless ramblings and paranoid delusions of corporate condom conspiracy convincing cock owners of their insufficient size by making the wrong size condom for them. To hell with profit! Rule over insecure penis owners with fake data! Sorry it was too much…low hanging fruit I guess.

But really, you also read at least a little and in the end commented and responded too. That’s how it always starts. LOL

<time and energy wasted = CHECK!>
 
My intent wasn't to "shut down" or "impede" anything at, @FrankieGuile, and, keep in mind that you just said that on a website that totally shut down it's own Politics Forum and forbids political discussions.

I guess I should have posed my observation of this tedious thread, and the endless and tiresome debate about penis size based on race, as a question:

What are you guys getting from it? All that time spent! Where's the "Win"?

A/B
My position on free expression is independent of actions taken on this site and actions taken on this site do not obviate that position. That much should be obvious. Not so obvious is an attempt to intimidate or shame or claim boredom to shut down that free expression, which is what I think you are trying to do. If you are not interested in the topic, then you can ignore the thread rather than trying to steer people's behavior. As for me, and your question, the "win" is having open discussion.
 
My position on free expression is independent of actions taken on this site and actions taken on this site do not obviate that position. That much should be obvious. Not so obvious is an attempt to intimidate or shame or claim boredom to shut down that free expression, which is what I think you are trying to do. If you are not interested in the topic, then you can ignore the thread rather than trying to steer people's behavior. As for me, and your question, the "win" is having open discussion.

Good luck with that. If questioning your motivation regarding your obsession with race-based, supposed "data" about penis size is "intimidating" to you, well, so be it.

A/B
 
Last edited:
It would be interesting to see the difference between generations, who knows what lies in store in 20 or 40 years. I haven't seen many Asian guys naked, but i remember one in the locker room. He was adopted (from Korea), raised in the Netherlands. And he was actually quite tall (almost 1.90) and soft his dick was bigger than mine, probably 11-12 cm.
We all come from one person and out of that person different "races" developed. I think and believe that that there is variation in all penis size.
 
aiya does it even matter? as they always said "all dicks are made beautiful"
So just make do with whatever the size may be lol.

I simply dont see the need for some individuals to expound a whole long ass clinical thesis in this wanking space. And go all night to argue who is right or wrong.
 
Take more classes in biology, endocrinology, and logic, instead of winning in the brain.
It is always a sign the point has been won when the only remaining counter is to imply that one is not sufficiently knowledgable to merit further discussion. If that is what you mean by "winning in the brain," then I accept the victory graciously.