Ethnic studies are ILLEGAL in France

What's this

lol
(also very common in jews)

Attached: Sickle_cell_distribution.jpg (351x240, 41K)

Percentage of new born suspected to have african/asian ancestry

Which arguments ?

>the same picture again and again
cringe

Percentage of babies screened for sickle cell anemia

Remember the 6 trillions that's why

It's an interesting overview on french demographics, blame your commie state because it doesn't run accurate studies on the question

What do you mean by ethnic studies? Actual anthropological research, or meme degrees that Americans get into debt for?

Probably about the "grands remplacement", crimes statistic and such i guess.

>commie state
cringe

IIRC there's context here that's missing.

It's because literally anyone could have a southern european, north african, caribbean, balkan, near estearn or african grandparent now and many hospitals just decide to screen everyone.

The census can't ask questions about race or ethnicity.

>ethnic studies
?

For comparison:
In the United Kingdom, it is thought that between 12,000 and 15,000 people have sickle cell disease [91] with an estimated 250,000 carriers of the condition in England alone. As the number of carriers is only estimated, all newborn babies in the UK receive a routine blood test to screen for the condition.[92

(that means about 100% of the babies in UK are screened)

The prevalence among births is 1/2,415 in France, which is about 350 newborns a year.

Exactly, you said it, this is called replacement.

Yikes

Not really. Percentage of sickle cell screening when parents are suspected to have african/asian (extra european) ancestry, simple as.

This is literally out of context. Sickle cell screening =|= sick individuals, it's elementary, low tier logic here.

>les medecins depistent la dreoanocytose par mesure de prevention la ou il y a le plus de risque
>l'incèle de service croit qu'il y a 75% de bébés noirs dans les maternités

Bande d'attardes faut vous deporter dans un camp ou on vous force a vous sociabiliser

Most of the time, context invalidates right wing interpretations of statistics. That's why they ignore it.
This agency (AFDPHE) targeted "at risk" population for sickle-cell anemia detection, i.e. African and extra-Euro populations, because their goal was to detect diseases in newborns, not make thinly veiled ethnic stats to be used by the far right. So basically it's just a percentage of diseased newborns among an at risk population, not among the general french population.

Il y a quand même vraiment beaucoup de nègres. Quand vos vieillards vont passer leur proportion démographique va augmenter significativement.

That's what I thought. IIRC this image is from a far right blog, but they cropped that out of this version of the image.

Les arabes sont plus numéreux que les nègres.

Oh okay, so when some scientifical statement matches political agenda it must be removed ?

Never said this. Please, learn to read, pass your baccalauréat, come back then.

Dumbfuck.
And again, a lot of hospitals just decide to screen 100% of babies, like in the UK. The screening rate is 100% in overseas France even though not everyone is black or arab obviously.

>In the United Kingdom, it is thought that between 12,000 and 15,000 people have sickle cell disease [91] with an estimated 250,000 carriers of the condition in England alone
>The prevalence among births is 1/2,415 in France, which is about 350 newborns a year.
What don't you get about this comparison?
And again, screening in the UK is 100%.

Attached: regions at risk.jpg (574x409, 104K)

The image and datas literally come from a medical association, i.e. AFDPHE.

>f-far right fake stats
ok abdul

Y aura pas de remplacement c'est un fantasme d'ex-pied noir qui digere mal la perte des colonies d'afrique et qui projette ses psychoses sur la france (camuw, zemmour, lepen), les immigres mettent qu'une generation a faire des familles nombreuses, apres ils s'habituent au rythme demographique europeen (a part dans des rares cas qui se rarefient mais sont mis a la loupe par les medias de droite genre les familles de 8 gosses dans le fin fond du 93)

>Italy & Balkans

Attached: laughs in French.gif (500x432, 2M)

L'ironie c'est que si on avait garder l’Algérie et autres colonies ils en verraient vraiment du remplacement.

>Dumbfuck.
Don't namecall me, thank you.
>And again, a lot of hospitals just decide to screen 100% of babies, like in the UK.
UK policies have nothing to do here.
> The screening rate is 100% in overseas France even though not everyone is black or arab obviously
Ah yes, of course, oversea territories are majorily white. Please, re read yourself before posting.

>>In the United Kingdom, it is thought that between 12,000 and 15,000 people have sickle cell disease [91] with an estimated 250,000 carriers of the condition in England alone
>>The prevalence among births is 1/2,415 in France, which is about 350 newborns a year.
>What don't you get about this comparison?
>And again, screening in the UK is 100%.
Again, UK policies and demographics have nothing to do with french ones.
If you read closely, in France only babies suspected to have african ancestry are screened. Not the same policy obviously.

Whew. Anyway, OP could have just said that, or mentioned demographics.

Any visit in parisian RER or metro will tell you othetwise. I think you see so much extra european people you don't even notice them anymore. You're probably one of them.

The image isn't from the AFDPHE. The version OP posted isn't the original image - it cropped out part of the right edge, and in the original image that's where the attribution is. It's attributed to Fdesouche.

Attached: Graphique-drepanocytose_hd_chiffres_2015-1[1].jpg (1500x1587, 1.73M)

You are coping hard

People from the Antilles are also considered at risk, it's not just people of African origin. Says so on your picture. So most people in the French Antilles are de facto considered at risk.

That's not what I said? The stats are real. The sample method is absent from that picture, although it is crucial to interpreting the results. Learn to fucking read before you respond to me.

No one is discussing that, it's just that there's more to it than what is shown on the picture.

Attached: from-logic-fig1.jpg (650x655, 40K)

posting a based frog in a based frog thread

Attached: 1407756763363.jpg (396x385, 25K)

>the few hundred people I see everyday in one particular place are an accurate representation of the French ethnic distribution
Get a scientific education. Please, for the sake of all of us.

>If you read closely, in France only babies suspected to have african ancestry are screened.
You're literally in denial.
>non-african ancestry gets screening, like eastern med or south italian or indian
>ALL babies get routinely screened in many places because it's cheap and why take chances

>Ah yes, of course, oversea territories are majorily white
They're not 100% black, dumbfuck.

Nah you're wrong. Picrel are the types of tables used to make the maps, these datas are provided by AFDPHE reports. Funny thing they stopped these reports because they can indeed be used as demographic indexes.

Attached: drepanocytose-total-2012.jpg (1400x1978, 335K)

Your pic looks like a Franco-Italian who hates being labeled Italian.

You're the one who's wrong. These seem to be statistics for screening of at-risk children, not of the general population.
Outside sources indicate maybe 3-5% black African and 9-10% Arab/North African.

Ok link me these outside sources

Genius, you are one. You just won an internet point. Congratulations.

The country doesn't allow actual scientific study on the matter, the irony in this post is delicious to be frank. Otherwise, I've been in more labs than you've seen them on tv.

More.

>You're literally in denial
This is literally what is said in the report. You haven't even read it and you talk about it ? What sort of scientist are you lol ?

>They're not 100% black, dumbfuck
Never said that. Don't give me things I've never said. They're on a firm majority non-european, that's my position, that's the facts. Guadeloupe, guyana, Martinique, Reunion island : majority non european or mixed. Simple as. You can deny it if yoi want.

There is no such thing as a ethnic French today. To be an accepted Frenchmen you just have to be white European from anywhere in the continent who speaks French. They are Western Europe's biggest mutts.

worldatlas.com/articles/what-is-the-ethnic-composition-of-france.html

>You're the one who's wrong. These seem to be statistics for screening of at-risk children, not of the general population.
This is the initial point. This is all about newborn at risk, that's how you can make a percentage of extra european babies/babies with extra european ancestry on a total. I beg you to reconsider your statement, user, because you're obviously mistaken.

Yes if the specific political agenda benefit and has the ability to , it will gladly deny reality.

>According to some estimates it is postulated that about 51 million are white who account for 85% of the total French population
So France is 25% non-white.

On this table, you can compare the actual prevalence to the numbers tested to see how much they're overscreening.
For example, in Aquitaine and Languedoc-Rousillion, the prevalence is only 1/35000 and 1/15000 of newborns, despite 17% and 40% of newborns being tested (I'm rounding). Compare with Normadie, which tests 15.5% of babies and finds 1/3752 prevalence.
This means that despite Aquitaine and Normandie testing roughly the same percentage of babies, Normandie actually has much more babies of African, Middle Eastern etc origin. (x10 as much as Aquitaine, apparently)

And in majority black areas like Guyane and Guadeloupe, the prevalence is 1/244 and 1/336, which is several orders of magnitude more common.
The disease is vastly overscreened in many areas of metropolitan France because many hospitals just screen every baby.

>25%
>finish education

85 + 15 = 100

It's not saying the total percentage of newborns at risk. It's just saying the percentage of at-risk newborns who get tested.

>They're on a firm majority non-european, that's my position, that's the facts. Guadeloupe, guyana, Martinique, Reunion island : majority non european or mixed. Simple as.
Yet they get 100% screened, despite being only "majority" non european or mixed, not 100%.

Nah mate it's AT LEAST 69%, more likely 420% we're fucked big time

>The country doesn't allow actual scientific study on the matter

>So France is ~20% african or more?
>More.

You obviously have no idea how statistics work, being cleaning personnel in a lab does not make you a scientist.

Not remotely true, ethnical statistics are forbidden here.
At least 25% of the french are of extra european ancestry, estimated by myself. Take it or leave it.

Attached: brainlet 5.jpg (766x919, 79K)

Ethnic statistics can't be taken by the census, but other groups can make estimates.

>retards thinking this is a new law because of nig nogs even though it's been here for decades

Attached: france.png (1025x27, 5K)

It was a mere typo

>it's been here for decades
but why implement it in the first place?
unless they knew what would be happening in the future

Working in a lab as nothing to do with this knowledge. I work in a chemistry lab, have a chemist formation. I know Jack shit about census methodology and demographic stats.

so, being srs, what do french people think the demographics of their country is now? if you had to make a guess?

Or to sum it up another way: in Languedoc, they test 40% of the babies and find 1 baby in 15000 with sickle cell disease, or 1 in 5870 babies tested.
In Normandie, they only test 15.5% of babies and find 1 baby in 3500, or 1 in 555 babies tested, has sickle cell disease.
Which department is more BLACKED?

In 1958 there weren't nearly as many North Africans, let alone black Africans.

@110044422

Attached: 1533387818794.gif (413x243, 51K)

>110044649

Attached: brainlet 4.jpg (645x729, 48K)

25% of africans, 30% of european mutts, dagos, polaks, the rest is purely french.

You better read the report, then you will have some right to say who is a scientist or not. You don't even know the methodology.

How about you address this, mr scientist?

15% non european

Never understood all the fuzz about black man. Do some white dudes really think that white women belong to them? Wtf?

that's pretty optimistic.

only 45% french? that's grim

Not french but based on my visit there (Paris, Le Havre, Rouen among some others) imo there aren't as many non whites as the people claim but still, Paris is at least 20% black and even in the smaller cities you'd see quite a few africans hanging around the city centre. It's harder to guess how many were nafri because some of them look med/white-ish. My guess would be that France is 65-80% white

Read the report first then we'll talk. By the way, my smug frog counterpart, let me remind you one think. From the beginning we're using a non related study to make demographical statement. That's the purpose of this map : a global idea of what is happening since we haven't one single serious work on the subject. And the sickle cell screening ? It does the work. Absolutely nobody said that the percentages were accurate, nor that they are reliable statistics, no. But we have an idea, with numbers, and we're using this method to show that it's happening right now. You can deny it as you want, France is changing, quickly, and the state doesn't want to report it for some reasons.

>only 45% french? that's grim
Grim ? Nobody cares lol.

Also contrary to popular belief, outside ile-de-france the departments with the most African immigration seem to be Picardie and Centre (12 and 16 newborns tested positive for sickle cell disease) despite only testing 23% and 20% of newborns, while Languedoc only found 2 newborns with sickle cell despite testing 40% of newborns.
The prevalence rates among newborns screened in Centre and Picardie (1/369 and 1/442) are actually similar to the prevalence rates in our overseas colonies, or even higher: Mayotte and Reunion "only" have 1/651 and 1/2863 prevalence!

>Read the report first then we'll talk.
I read it. Now answer those posts, and this

I was contesting your personal observations of the ethnic distribution of the French population, which was utterly unscientific and complete bullshit.
As for the methodology of the sickle-sick disease report, it was questioned earlier in the thread, by me among other people.

Yeah I've had the same experience traveling Paris and south France.

In Germany we have around 8 million Turks, 2 million refugees and quite a lot of eastern European immigrants. So if guess that France is about 16%. And it's definitely accelerating.

Black males are the most saught after males in France especially by white women so the are breeding in big numbers.

>especially by white women
especially by arab women*

No you didn't, it's more than 60 pages. Sneeky that one lol.

We can't scientifically talk about french demographical composition.

>No you didn't
I've read it before.

Of course you didn't. Let's admit you did, it's all about the screening, not the sick babies, what you're using as clue here and here and here .
You're quite literally off topic.

dios mio...
la criatura francais...

Another surprising find: Rhones-Alpes has many more babies with sickle cell (22, 1 in 3771 newborns) than PACA + Corse (5 with sickle cell, 1 in 12931 newborns. Despite screening slightly less babies (38% vs 43%)

I wonder why

Attached: races.gif (2970x2483, 861K)

I think you miss the point of the map. I will repeat it for the third time itt : it's not a perfect demogrpahical index. I hope you will understand this out of your stubborness.

why are enlightenment ideals disastrous for mankind?

Attached: 1515936100520.jpg (699x485, 60K)

>but muh screening
Bretagne, Champagne-Ardenne have x3 as many babies with sickle cell as Languedoc Rousillion (despite screening much, much less). Rhones-Alpes has x11 (!) as many babies with sickle cell disease as Languedoc-Roussillion and roughly x4 the prevalence while screening a bit less.
Centre find x8 as many babies with sickle cell as Languedoc-Roussillion and 8 times the prevalence despite screening half as many.

What exactly do the screening percentages show, then? If sickle cell prevalence is tied to African ancestry, then all those departments got much, much more African immigration than Languedoc, despite Languedoc having a higher screen rate. Simple math.