Also, if there was so little mixing, why do so many Filipinos have Spanish surnames despite so few people actually speaking Spanish? Did the American colonisation lead to an erosion of Spanish, or was it never a particularly prominent language among native Filipinos in the first place?
I know many countries here have big minorities from other Balkan countries: Albanians in N Macedonia, Serbs in Kosovo, Albanians in Greece, Hungarians in Romania etc
This was sent to me by one of the students I mentored years ago. Looks like the school is having a workshop on the topic of vaccines and minority communities.
It's great there is representation of minorities...but guess who are being left out of the conversation despite being significant minority populations in San Diego? Southeast Asians (especially Viets in the area) and Chinese communities. Many of the Vietnamese in the area suffer from the same health disparities the school claims to want to eliminate, yet not a single Southeast Asian community leader was invited to the table? That's not inclusion. That's doing a disservice to some of the vulnerable populations in the area. This is during a time when these communities are especially being impacted by violence, racism, and distrust of traditionally white institutions.
I don't know what goes on there but I highly doubt they couldn't find a single Viet representative when the population is pretty big...or perhaps their faculty is lacking in Asian representation and the institution need to revise their diversity policies. People should also understand that one ethnic group of Asians doesn't represent all Asians. We are not to be treated as an aggregated dataset. Having a Filipino representative (which is great!) doesn't give them a free Asian-token pass when there are additional vulnerable ethnic groups that make up a large minority population in the area/state.
See image
https://imgur.com/a/KHkaS2z
I'm basing this question off Mahmood Mamdani quoted in Ben Nugent's 'Africa Since Independence'.
The Southern or Asiatic Aryans may be similarly divided into three principal branches: the Armenians, the Persians, and the Indians. The Kurds and Afghans are of less ethnical importance. The Armenians, like the Celts, are now few in number. It will be my endeavour to prove that the race to which they belong once occupied a much greater extent of country, and were spread westward from Armenia to Italy under the names of Phrygians, Thracians, Pelasgians, Etrus-
> Three groups of people were examined for how much amylase they had in their saliva. The amylase activity was indicated as units per cm3 of saliva. Below is a description showing the three different peoples, what their diet consists of and their measured amylase activity.
> The people of Tswana from South Africa had a diet consisting of carbohydrates derived from sorghum and corn. Sometimes they use small amounts of milk and meat. They only eat fruits and vegetables during the harvest season. The amylase activity was 248/cm^3.
> Then the population of Europeans, fed on a mixed diet was examined, and the amylase activity was 101/cm3.
> Bushmen from the Kalahari Desert were mainly fed on birds, lizards, snakes, and insects. They also ate small amounts of roots and other plants. The amylase activity was 22/cm^3.
- How can these differences be explained, are there any hypothesis that supports the explanation, and can one apply a method to get a reason for this?
> If we take it a step further and then say that some of these bushmen get a diet consisting of potatoes, flour, beans, and meat, thus, more carbohydrates than they are used to in some, and the amylase activity rises to about 100 units/cm^3.
- What would the previous hypotheses provide in support of this new information that we get?
Here's what I think
This is/would be definitive proof that the Amylase activity is linked to diet and not to ethnicity.
>some of these bushmen get a diet consisting of potatoes, flour, beans, and meat, thus, more carbohydrates than they are used to in some, and the amylase activity rises to about 100 units/cm3
It seems pretty obvious (now), that the hypothesis is:
"Given this information, is the difference in amylase activity in these different ethnic groups due to genetic adaptation or due to the specific diet? Does eating carbohydrates upregulate amylase production?"
But I am wondering why it is the case that the amylase activity is so high. Does genes play a role? The questions are manifold.
For questions like this, would it be better to rather than discuss it as if it is real data? Or that the point is a mental exercise looking at evolutionary vs environmental changes to the human physiology? And the point being to determine whether the amylase levels are something that has evolved due to diet or something that is adaptable based on diet?
In the first case, the levels would not change in a population if the diet was ch
... keep reading on reddit ➡I apologize in advance if I sound too ignorant but I haven't really encountered any discussions IRL regarding our local ethnic groups lately. I did see a few comments from netizens claiming that they saw people who were part of a local ethnic group getting discriminated and mocked but I don't think those alone are enough for anyone to make any valid conclusion.
As an Armenian I've always heard contradicting and differing opinions. Many people (particularly older generation) reminisce the USSR days. It was a time when almost everyone had a job and didn't have to worry as much for money. I've also heard that the USSR (particularly in the 60's/70's) paved the way for cultural and academic advancements. However, nobody disagrees with the fact that majority of the time people were constantly afraid of "saying the wrong thing" which might end up sending them to jail or even worse, Siberia.
The younger generation (from my observation) values independence and self-determination. Despite the fact that unemployment is still a problem in the current Republic, it is still far better than living a life of fear under the authority/control of a country so different than Armenia (i.e. Russia and Russian culture.)
So r/AskCaucasus, how were the Soviet years seen/viewed in your respective countries/peoples?
> Three groups of people were examined for how much amylase they had in their saliva. The amylase activity was indicated as units per cm3 of saliva. Below is a description showing the three different peoples, what their diet consists of and their measured amylase activity.
> The people of Tswana from South Africa had a diet consisting of carbohydrates derived from sorghum and corn. Sometimes they use small amounts of milk and meat. They only eat fruits and vegetables during the harvest season. The amylase activity was 248/cm^3.
> Then the population of Europeans, fed on a mixed diet was examined, and the amylase activity was 101/cm3.
> Bushmen from the Kalahari Desert were mainly fed on birds, lizards, snakes, and insects. They also ate small amounts of roots and other plants. The amylase activity was 22/cm^3.
- How can these differences be explained, are there any hypothesis that supports the explanation, and can one apply a method to get a reason for this?
> If we take it a step further and then say that some of these bushmen get a diet consisting of potatoes, flour, beans, and meat, thus, more carbohydrates than they are used to in some, and the amylase activity rises to about 100 units/cm^3.
- What would the previous hypotheses provide in support of this new information that we get?
Here's what I think
This is/would be definitive proof that the Amylase activity is linked to diet and not to ethnicity.
>some of these bushmen get a diet consisting of potatoes, flour, beans, and meat, thus, more carbohydrates than they are used to in some, and the amylase activity rises to about 100 units/cm3
It seems pretty obvious (now), that the hypothesis is:
"Given this information, is the difference in amylase activity in these different ethnic groups due to genetic adaptation or due to the specific diet? Does eating carbohydrates upregulate amylase production?"
But I am wondering why it is the case that the amylase activity is so high. Does genes play a role? The questions are manifold.
For questions like this, would it be better to rather than discuss it as if it is real data? Or that the point is a mental exercise looking at evolutionary vs environmental changes to the human physiology? And the point being to determine whether the amylase levels are something that has evolved due to diet or something that is adaptable based on diet?
In the first case, the levels would not change in a population if the diet was ch
... keep reading on reddit ➡