A Brave New World Will Be Born from Today’s Fertility

A recent article discussed changes in the world’s demographic structure. According to it, global population growth is becoming increasingly concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa and parts of South Asia. For example, the fertility rates in the already highly populous countries of Pakistan, Nigeria, and Ethiopia are 3.50, 4.30, and 3.81 respectively.

Even more striking figures can be found in Chad, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In those countries, women give birth to an average of 5.94, 5.91, and 5.90 children respectively. At the opposite extreme are Macao, Hong Kong, and South Korea, with fertility rates of 0.69, 0.74, and 0.75.

In Finland, the fertility rate was 1.3 children per woman in 2025. Across the entire European Union, the average was 1.34 in 2024, and in North America last year it was 1.59.

In practice, this means that in the world of the future, people will predominantly have genetic and cultural roots in developing countries — above all African ones, but also Asian peoples belonging to the Islamic cultural sphere, as illustrated by the Wikipedia map below.

* * *

The future scenario I have outlined above actually came to mind while I was reading a column by a journalist from Finland’s largest newspaper about the civil war in Sudan. In it, Europeans were criticized for not caring about the Sudanese civil war and its victims.

According to Mykkänen, the Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP), Rania Dagash-Kamara, had spoken at an event held in the Finnish Parliament’s “Little Parliament” building about rapes committed against civilians in Sudan. These acts are carried out by armed men from the various sides in the conflict, and no one seems interested in protecting the victims from sexual violence.

After the event, Member of Parliament Eva Biaudet (Swedish People’s Party) reportedly showed a UNICEF report according to which rape has become a systematically used weapon of war. And it does not affect only women — one third of the victims are boys.

In addition, sixteen of the raped children were under the age of five. Four of them were only one year old.

I repeat: only one year old. In practice, babies! What kind of person rapes babies?

* * *

Based on all this, I was left wondering what kind of world we may have in one or two hundred years’ time — taking into account what I said at the beginning of this text about the genetic and cultural roots of future humanity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Deep Roots of Violence and Disregard for Human Dignity in History
Can Peace Emerge from Horrific War Crimes?
How to Increase Fertility Rates: A Finnish Solution

Neanderthals Mated with Denisovans, Exceeded Modern Human Diversity

Neanderthals and Denisovans were prehistoric humans who interbred to some extent also with members of the human lineage that led to modern humans. In this context, an international research team – Diyendo Massilani and colleagues – has now published the entire genome extracted from DNA isolated from a Neanderthal fossil that lived about 110,000 years ago. This is the first male genome determined from this species.

The Neanderthal man in question had died in Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains, the same location where Denisovans also lived at times. According to the research group’s results, the man belonged to a human group that was more closely related to another Neanderthal found in the same cave, who had lived about 10,000 years earlier, than to his counterparts in Europe or to a Neanderthal from another cave in the Altai Mountains who lived about 80,000 years ago.

The genomes of both Neanderthals from Denisova Cave that have now been sequenced contained genes originating from Denisovans, indicating that the species interbred with each other at least in the Altai region more than 100,000 years ago. This was surprising, because later Neanderthals from the Altai region or from Western Europe show no evidence of such interbreeding.

Based on DNA – specifically the extent of homozygous chromosomal regions – it was also possible to conclude that Neanderthals living in the Altai region 120,000–80,000 years ago lived in smaller and more isolated groups than later European Neanderthals (54,000–40,000 years ago). In addition, the researchers observed that the genome sequences of Neanderthals belonging to these populations differed from each other more than the genomes of the most genetically distant modern human populations (the Mbuti of Central Africa and the Highland Papuans of New Guinea).

* * *

The study I have briefly described above is unlikely to be directly applicable for commercial purposes. Instead, it satisfies our curiosity and fulfills our need for knowledge: the opening up of the ancient world is undeniably fascinating.

Perhaps even more important than curiosity and the desire for knowledge, however, is that as science advances, humanity’s awareness of itself and of the world increases. And over time, this influences the way we see ourselves and the world we live in.

It is, of course, true that this perspective does not affect all people in the world equally: there is a significant difference, for example, in how the Taliban in Afghanistan and secularized Europeans perceive the world. Whereas the former are guided by the writings of a prophet and war leader who lived in the 7th century, the latter make their everyday decisions based on modern scientific knowledge—though usually without explicitly realizing it.

The contribution of paleogenomics—the field represented by the study described above—may not be decisive in this broader picture, but it is not negligible either. Awareness of the lives of our ancient relatives in small, isolated populations, their interbreeding with each other—and with our ancestors—and the extinction of those lineages provides important context for understanding present-day humanity and its peoples.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Surprising Story of Europe’s Hippos
The Historical Merging of Human Groups
American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

James Watson, Great Scientist and Victim of Liberal Ideology, Has Died

One of the most significant scientists of the past century has died at the age of 97. I am referring to the American Nobel laureate James Watson, who—together with Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin—unraveled the structure of DNA.

Watson and Crick in fact determined the structure of DNA without authorization, as they did it alongside their official work, correctly interpreting Franklin’s X-ray crystallographic data. This story is fascinatingly told in Watson’s book The Double Helix, published in the late 1960s, which anyone interested in the history of science should read.

* * *

The great scientist who has now passed away was raised Catholic but later described himself as “a refugee from the Catholic religion.” In his words: “The luckiest thing that ever happened to me was that my father didn’t believe in God.” Thus, at the age of eleven, he stopped participating in religious rituals and instead embraced “the pursuit of scientific and humanistic knowledge.”

Watson completed his PhD at Indiana University in the United States, then moved to Copenhagen for a year as a postdoctoral researcher before taking another postdoctoral position in the United Kingdom. He made his breakthrough discovery concerning the structure of DNA while working at Oxford.

* * *

After these formative years, Watson later returned to his home country. There he became politically active, taking a stand against the deployment of American troops to Vietnam and later opposing nuclear technology, warning of the risk that radioactive materials could fall into the hands of terrorists.

Watson also directed the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, earning recognition for “transforming a small institution into one of the world’s leading centers for education and research.” By launching a program to study the causes of human cancer, scientists under his leadership made major contributions to understanding the genetic basis of cancer.

In 1990, Watson became head of the Human Genome Project. He was, however, forced to step down after opposing the patenting of its results. As he stated, “The world’s peoples must understand that the human genome belongs to the world’s people, not to its nations.”

According to press reports, in 1997 Watson stated that “if you could find a gene that influences sexuality, and a woman decided she didn’t want a homosexual child, she should be allowed to make that choice.” He apparently meant freedom of choice rather than advocating the abortion of homosexual fetuses.

In subsequent years, Watson made other remarks that drew attention and criticism from many quarters. In 2000, he said that “whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you’re not going to hire them.”

Later, he publicly supported genetic screening and genetic engineering, claiming that stupidity is a disease and that the “really stupid” 10% of humanity should be cured. He also suggested that beauty could be modified through genetic engineering, saying in 2003: “People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great.”

* * *

As these examples show, Watson had an interesting way of seeing things. The same could be said of his opinions on many other subjects.

According to Watson, stereotypes about race and ethnicity had a genetic basis: Jews were intelligent; the Chinese were intelligent but uncreative because of conformity; and Indians were servile due to caste-based endogamy. He further claimed that “all our social policies are based on the fact that their (Black people’s) intelligence is the same as ours (White people’s) — whereas all the testing says not really.”

These views provoked widespread protests and ultimately led to Watson’s retirement, even though his stated intention had been “to advance science, not racism.” Unfortunately, the world was not ready for such discussions then — and perhaps still isn’t.

* * *

Adding an intriguing note to his story, Watson sold his Nobel Prize medal in 2014 after being branded a “nonperson” because of his views. However, he did not keep all the proceeds; part of the money — $4.1 million — was donated to support scientific research. The Russian oligarch Alisher Usmanov, who bought the medal, later returned it to Watson.

I conclude this obituary by saying that James Watson was not only a great pioneer of science but also an honest defender of scientific knowledge and its freedom — a stance that ultimately pushed him to the margins. Not because his views were inconsistent with scientific knowledge, but because they did not fit the increasingly value-liberal dreamworld that has come to dominate the Western world.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
"Woke" pushes American science academies to favor women in their membership selections
Should forbidden questions be answered or not?
Sexual harassment and bullying in working life

The original blogpost in Finnish:
James Watson – yksi aikamme suurimmista tiedemiehistä on kuollut

Gender identity and the future of Finnishness

Suomen Uutiset, the news outlet affiliated with the Finns Party, reported that the share of young people in the United States who identify as nonbinary or as something other than heterosexual has fallen significantly since 2023. According to the article, this suggests that the phenomenon is more likely a social one produced by the rise of the woke movement rather than a hereditary tendency.

The conclusion is logical in the sense that nonbinary identity or homosexuality can easily be seen as negative in terms of reproduction and therefore as a phenomenon that would, through natural selection, tend to be weeded out — even though it is, of course, known that genetic factors may also play a role. However, this does not necessarily mean that people who experience themselves as sexually non-conforming do not genuinely feel that they are what they identify as — in other words, it is not primarily about pretending or acting.

* * *

From the standpoint of a nation’s renewal, various gender deviations are naturally detrimental because they often lead to childlessness. That, in turn, is a major problem especially in Europe, where the demographic structure of the native population is rapidly aging, meaning the proportion of the active population is shrinking even as the number of elderly people in need of care first increases and then the population begins to decline.

In Finland, this is clearly visible in Statistics Finland’s report describing the numbers of different age groups since 1900. At that time, only 5.3 percent of the population were aged 65 or older. By 2000, the figure had risen to 15 percent, and by this year it has reached as high as 22.7 percent of the total population.

Conversely, those under 15 years of age made up as much as 35.1 percent of the population in 1900, only 18.1 percent in 2000, and just 15.6 percent this year. Of the latter figure, a significant portion are of non-Finnish or even non-European descent, meaning that the share of Finland’s original population has in fact decreased even more rapidly than the statistics suggest.

This means that in addition to the aging of Finland’s population, its genetic composition is also changing rapidly — a development that will affect the nation’s culture insofar as heredity and the parents’ own cultural heritage shape people’s behavior, values, and attitudes.

Unfortunately, much of this — especially the parts related to genetics — has long been a forbidden topic in human research. As a result, we lack up-to-date, researched information that would allow us to reliably anticipate the future of Finland and Finnishness.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Eviction of Inhabitants for Incoming Immigrants Sparks Controversy
Eurovision Song Contest Funding Faces Pushback Due to Woke Ideology
A National Rally election victory does not mean that France will become like Finland under the Finns Party

Love and a Regurgitated Gift

In the world of fruit flies, romance can take surprising forms. The species Drosophila subobscura has a peculiar courtship ritual: before mating, a male must win over the female by giving her a gift. But instead of flowers or chocolates, he offers her a tiny mouth-to-mouth meal of regurgitated food. Interestingly, their close cousin Drosophila melanogaster—the fruit fly most often used in laboratories—doesn’t do this at all.

So what makes one species a generous suitor while the other skips the gift exchange? Japanese researchers discovered that the difference comes down to a single gene, called FruitlessM (FruM), which helps wire male brains for courtship behavior. In D. subobscura, this gene switches on in a group of brain cells that regulate feeding. When FruM is missing, the cells don’t grow the connections they need, and the males fail to present their nuptial gift.

Even more intriguing, when scientists turned on FruM in the same brain cells of D. melanogaster, something remarkable happened: the cells sprouted new connections, and the males began regurgitating food more often—hinting at a hidden potential for gift-giving buried in their biology.

This research shows how a small genetic change can spark big differences in behavior between species. What looks like a simple act of food sharing is, in fact, the product of evolutionary history written deep in the wiring of the brain.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Climate Warning Signs Were There 130 Years Ago – If Only We Had Noticed
Preventing future fires in Hawaii is possible, but the question remains: Are animal activists and politicians prepared for the necessary measures?
Seeing sex developed novel cultures

Evolution Doesn’t Just Create New Species – It Can Also Reverse It

When Charles Darwin pondered how a single species could, over time, become two distinct ones, he realized that natural selection could act differently on separate populations, gradually driving them apart. This insight was so powerful that it gave rise to an entirely new scientific field: evolutionary biology.

To this day, the emergence of new species remains a central concept in evolutionary biology, and understanding the mechanisms behind it is one of the field’s key research questions. At the same time, hybridisation between populations that have evolved in isolation can influence the pace of speciation—either speeding it up, slowing it down, or even reversing it altogether.

A recent study by Ingo Müller and colleagues delved into the evolutionary history of Melidectes, a bird genus found in New Guinea that includes six species living in various mountainous regions at different elevations. Most of these species occupy separate areas, but two of them meet and hybridise in the central mountain range.

Despite this overlap, scientists had assumed that differences in plumage and adaptations to elevation would help maintain clear species boundaries. However, Müller and his team used genomic and genetic analyses to show that these visible differences do not, in fact, prevent gene flow between the two species. On the contrary, the researchers discovered that their genes are mixing extensively across most of their shared range.

This makes the bird community formed by these two species quite unusual. It follows a pattern where the most genetically distinct and least interbreeding populations are found at the geographical edges of their ranges. Remarkably, this is the case even though their maternally inherited mitochondrial genomes still sort neatly into two deeply divergent lineages, consistent with their traditional species identities.

These findings led the researchers to conclude that the two incipient species have recently begun to merge—possibly due to increased contact brought on by climate warming—resulting in nearly complete fusion into a single lineage. In other words, a speciation process that was well underway has now stalled, and the two almost-species appear to be on the path to becoming one unified species again.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Dire Wolf and the Rights of Extinct Human Species
Shower Taking and Interfering Elephants
The fundamentals of conservation biology wavered

Blame the Philanthropist Or Understand the Facts

Every person who follows current events even a little understands that the mass migration from developing countries to Europe has led to a new type of crime, with extreme manifestations seen this year in e.g. Magdeburg, Germany, or earlier in Paris, France.

More common forms of immigration-related crime, however, include sexual crimes directed at women—sometimes even mass rapes—as well as the formation of gangs among young immigrants and their battles, for example, over control of drug markets. And, of course, the humiliation crimes committed against the native children.

Unfortunately, it seems that not everyone has the understanding needed to acknowledge these facts. This was exemplified—once more—when a book was published in our country, Finland, claiming that the root of the immigrant problem lies with the native people.

The logic of the book's authors is that the arriving immigrants have supposedly been pushed to the margins of society, and their offspring made to believe that they can never belong to the community. This marginalization, the book argues, has been achieved by failing to provide these people with sufficient support upon their arrival.

In reality, however, these immigrants have received more support in Finland than any other group of migrants before them (an example and another). And yet they are the first group to cause widespread and shocking levels of crime. Not even the Ukrainians who arrived afterward have caused such issues.

Therefore, the true reasons behind the problems caused by immigrants from developing countries must be sought within the newcomers themselves. Do they have a culture that is incompatible with Western society? Or is there a pattern of mate selection among them that has led to inbreeding and, as a result, unstable behavior and reduced intelligence?

We all know the answers to these questions, of course. What I fail to understand is why someone has published a book blaming the philanthropist—for that is what taking in immigrants in need truly is—while completely ignoring the other factors leading to the phenomenon in question.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Immigrants, Gangs, Decisions, and Self-Interest
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?
Should the Dutch Do Something About the Fact That Immigrants Don't Tolerate Visiting Jews?

Society, Genetics, and the Impact of Consanguineous Marriages: At the Intersection of Education and Heredity

Many immigrant groups in Europe are known for having a high occurrence of consanguineous marriages, or incestuous unions. The issue with this can be summarized as follows: children born to closely related parents have a lower degree of heterozygosity because a significant portion of their genes comes from the same individual—for example, from a grandparent in the case of cousins. In other words, these individuals inherit identical gene variants more frequently than others.

As a result, genes that usually appear in humans as a single copy without affecting their outward characteristics, or phenotype, become visible. Among these genes, there are often many defective variants in one way or another.

The rarity of these recessive genetic defects is due to natural selection, which works against them. It operates in such a way that individuals with an observable genetic defect tend to have fewer offspring than others. Consequently, their genes do not pass on to future generations as effectively as those of other individuals.

It’s important to note that recessive genetic defects are not always clearly visible diseases. Often, they are only mildly harmful and thus primarily affect an individual’s vitality—for example, by impairing physical or mental performance—and are not considered outright diseases.

Since recessive gene variants only affect people when inherited from both parents, children born from consanguineous marriages are more likely to have disabilities. Even the seemingly healthy offspring of such unions tend to have, on average, fewer abilities than other people.

This is likely one of the most significant reasons why certain immigrant groups have struggled to succeed in Western societies, and it strongly influences the poor learning abilities observed in their children.

For this reason, consanguineous marriages should not be a taboo or off-limits topic in an increasingly diverse society but, rather, the opposite. And because this is a growing issue, the public—especially those from cultures that favor consanguinity—must be educated on the negative consequences of this tradition.

In other words, incestuous unions and their harmful societal effects must be openly discussed!

This should also be addressed—especially in schools—even if some students are themselves the offspring of cousin marriages. It is essential for them to understand this issue, break the harmful tradition of their culture, and choose spouses from outside their family.

It’s worth emphasizing that the hereditary harms caused by consanguineous marriage disappear entirely within a single generation. Therefore, even the descendants of the most inbred members of the most incestuous cultures are not doomed to the bottom of society—provided they understand the importance of not procreating with a relative.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish Society Adopts Medieval Characteristics
Freudian slip, 9-year-old girl and cultural appropriation
Cousin is not just a delicacy, but also a hindrance to social success

The Historical Merging of Human Groups

Understanding human evolution has progressed step by step during my lifetime. One of the most sensational discoveries was the evidence of interbreeding between Neanderthals, who lived in Europe before modern humans, and our ancestors.

Significant new information has once again been obtained on this matter. It was based on an excellent idea: previously, the focus had been on determining how much Neanderthal DNA is present in our genes, but now researchers decided to investigate how much so-called modern human DNA is present in Neanderthal genes.

This was possible using two criteria. The first was based on the fact that Neanderthals were already known to be much fewer in number than modern humans, so their genomes likely contained less variation. Thus, the more variable regions of the Neanderthal genome would be possible gene regions originating from modern humans.

When such gene regions were then found, the corresponding segments of heritage could be searched for in modern Africans, who have never interbred with Neanderthals. If they had similar genome segments to the now-found more variable regions, they must have developed in modern humans and not in Neanderthals. And indeed, this confirmed that as much as about ten percent of Neanderthal genes ultimately came from modern humans.

Based on this new information, it can also be concluded that Neanderthals may not have disappeared from the world after all but simply merged into the much more numerous populations of modern humans. And they left their genetic mark on them— a set of genes that developed in Neanderthals and have since been passed down to me and to all of you, dear readers, unless you are entirely of African descent.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The amazing adventures of the German cockroach
Violent demographic changes in Denmark
American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

Cousin is not just a delicacy, but also a hindrance to social success

As my esteemed reader surely knows, it is customary in many cultures to marry young virgins to male relatives. Such inbreeding causes genetic issues because children inherit the same gene forms from both parents, and each individual carries recessive genes in their genetic makeup, which, when inherited from both parents, can cause more or less serious problems.

In addition to the genetic effects, it has been claimed that consanguineous marriages also have negative implications for societal development. To test this hypothesis, a recent study was published, examining the differences among U.S. states in their attitudes towards cousin marriages.

The study analyzed data from millions of individuals from the 18th to the 20th century and found that cousins who married each other were more likely to reside in rural areas and engage in fewer wage-earning jobs compared to others. On the other hand, bans on cousin marriages resulted in people moving from rural to urban areas, leading to better-paying occupations.

The researchers' findings also indicated that these changes were attributed to the social and cultural impacts of diminished family ties rather than genetic factors. Simultaneously, people's support for their relatives decreased, resulting in a higher prevalence of institutional care for the elderly relatives.

Overall, the study I have discussed here supports the notion that immigration policies should aim to break the tradition of consanguineous marriages within immigrant groups where it is common. This issue should not be seen as a matter of equality or human rights but rather as a natural part of eliminating harmful cultural practices - such as female genital mutilation or blood feuds - in order to promote the social integration and individual success of immigrants.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Discrimination against women?
African female and Persian male ancestors
Should forbidden questions be answered or not?

History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?

In 2022, I wrote a series of blog posts briefly describing the most important stages in Finland's history, mostly based on the writings of Professor Heikki Ylikangas. Today, I have decided to translate the entire story for my international readers as I assume this topic is not very familiar to almost anyone outside Finland. 

In this series you can expect a total of sixteen posts covering ancient history up to the 21st century, which I hope will increase understanding of my homeland in other parts of the world.

Hunter-gatherers populated Finland from various directions immediately after the end of the Ice Age. However, about 3 500 years ago, a strong population flow from Siberia altered the genes of the people living in Finland at that time.

The well-known early medieval Levänluhta people, with one exception, were ancestors of the Sámi people, who had spread over a much wider area than present-day Sápmi. On the other hand, ancient DNA has also been found in two other locations in southern Finland, but there it differs from the DNA of most present-day Finns, but has similarity to DNA of the Volga-Ural region.

The population of present-day Finland is roughly divided into two genetically separate groups along the border of the Treaty of Nöteborg that runs through the country from southeast to the northern west coast. Agriculture arrived in to Finland about 5 000-4 000 years before the beginning of the Common Era, but interestingly, medieval DNA is divided so that the forms associated with hunter-gatherers are common in southwestern and southern Finland, where agriculture has been most common according to the historical records. In the east and north, on the other hand, there are more gene forms associated with agriculture. This suggests that there were significant population movements in Finland during the medieval period - or perhaps the limited medieval samples available do not accurately represent the true relationships of these genes at prehistorical time.

Following Finland's early history, its subjugation to Swedish rule almost 1000 years ago set the course for the country's future and its population. According to Professor Heikki Ylikangas, this happened mostly voluntarily because the organization of Finnish society was not sufficient for military resistance, as in the Baltics, and enemies could be avoided simply by fleeing into endless forests.

An exception to this rule was the more densely populated region of Satakunta, South-Western coast of Finland. There the society was better organized and the prevalence of crop farming forced people to defend their property. As a result, Swedish settlements along the coast were thinner in Satakunta than in other parts of Finland.

With the arrival of the Swedes, Finland received a legal system and Christianity copied from the mother country, which in turn brought with it also the social organization. At this stage, the Catholic Church can be considered the most powerful force in the country, owning as much as 21 percent of the cultivated land in Sweden. In addition to the church, power was in the hands of the king and locally with powerful families.

Thus, Finland had become linked to the Western world. Its future was tied to Sweden's destiny for hundreds of years, for better or for worse.

The original blog post in Finnish: 
Suomen liittyminen osaksi läntistä kulttuuria

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

African female and Persian male ancestors

When individuals migrate from their homes to different geographic regions, they encounter people from different backgrounds. This can lead to peaceful coexistence or intergroup violence, or both.

Over the past few decades, Europe has seen an influx of people from Africa and the Middle East. However, their integration into receiving societies has not always been smooth. As a result, a subset of the local population in almost all European countries holds highly negative attitudes towards newcomers.

The problem has been exacerbated by the fact that especially many muslim-background immigrants have been guilty of appalling sexual crimes against women in the majority population. For example, in UK an organised child sexual abuse in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, Northern England continued for decades from the late 1980´s until the 2010´s. And in Finland the raping frequency per Iraqi male is more than an order of magnitude higher compared to local men.

Therefore it was interesting to read a recent study on the genetic makeup of individuals from medieval and early modern coastal towns on the Swahili coast of eastern Africa. The study found that many individuals had a mix of African and Asian ancestry, with a significant proportion of their DNA coming from primarily female African ancestors and primarily male Persian ancestors.

This raises the question of whether something happened in Africa during the Middle Ages that is commonplace for Europeans today. Should we learn something from it?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A set of immigration-derived sexual crimes in a Finnish town
Rape statistics in Finland and Sweden are breaking prejudices
When will they ever learn?

Should forbidden questions be answered or not?

In the past, it was common to characterize different groups of people bluntly. For example, about the appearance of the dark-skinned African population, it could be said even in school textbooks that "the negro is black or brown in color, the hair is black and curly like sheep´s wool. The lips are strong, the nose is low and the teeth are crooked."

The characterization did not only concern people´s appearance, but also all kinds of claims were made about the nature of different races. For example someone could have said that "a negro never works if he only has enough to eat". Or "they are never angry, that´s why they are too cheerful. Our rowers also sing and talk from morning to night."

Today such characterizations are not scientifically justified nor acceptable. However, forbidden topics are not limited to words that sound stupid or to inaccurate generalizations, but for example scientific inquiry of mental differences between different human groups or people´s cultures are considered politically incorrect. 

This is despite the fact that we know, for example, intelligence to be inherited quite similarly to height - and that there are hereditary differences in people´s heights between groups of people. Logically it would be concluded -  if that was not politically incorrect - that intelligence differences between different groups of people are highly probable.

These thoughts came to my mind, when I was reading one of the recent news from Haiti. According to it, serious violence is taking place in the country due to increasing prizes of food. The situation was described as "a real battlefield. It is impossible to estimate how many people have died."

As you may remember, when Haiti became independent, a massacre of nearly all the remaining white men, women, children was conducted. In just three months several thousand whites were killed, including those who had been friendly and sympathetic to the black population. 

Thereafter, Haitians have had dominantly African ancestry. At the same time, the country is the poorest in the Western hemisphere, and - as now - suffers time after time from violence. Neither have we seen welfare states created by African people in Africa (although the Republic of South Africa has been able to keep and even increase its relatively high standard of living after whites stepped out from the power). The question not scientifically addressed is, that does the genetics or culture of Haitians as Afro-American have anything to do with their poverty?

Naturally I have no answer to that, but in my opinion it would be beneficial if such questions could be subjected to scientific inquiry. If it would be proven that people or culture of a country matters, that information could also be used in finding ways to minimize such an effect if negative. In contrast, refusing research on forbidden topics will only guarantee the continuation of people´s suffering in the future.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2
World Resources Institute had an arrogant demand
Seeing sex developed novel cultures

American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

The spread of the Omicron variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has turned the number of COVID-19 cases up again. In Finland, the number of daily deaths have during the last weeks been the highest during the epidemic that started more than two years ago. Globally, however, the number of deaths were higher in January and May 2021. 

Omicron variant is known to cause less serious symptoms compared to previous variants of concern, and thus the death rate per the number of infections is lower. Therefore it was highly interesting to read from the Science magazine about research conducted in the USA on COVID-19 related differences between ethnic groups. 

The leading American science-journal reported that black adults were hospitalized for this disease at four times higher rate compared to white adults. The difference between the two groups was 40% versus 47% after two vaccinations and 44% versus 55% if they were given a booster. However, in both groups the hospital stays for Omicron were shorter compared to those caused by the previously common Delta variant, namely 5 days versus 4 days, and intensive care was not needed that often. 

The question that came to my mind was, whether this racial difference has something to do with the genes from archaic humans, Neanderthals, which do not occur in African groups of people. That was because it was previously noted that in the UK people with South Asian roots died for corona considerably more often that those associated with other ethnic groups - and the explanation was the genetic inheritance from the Neanderthals, which made them more susceptible for the virus. 

It was, however, also noticed that the same genes were rare among people of the easternmost Asia, possibly due to prehistoric selection caused by ancient viruses related to SARS-CoV-2. So, could it be possible, that most people with roots outside Africa, have some - yet unknown - genes associated with a higher tolerance to the Omicron virus? 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
An ignorant mediahouse failed again in historical facts
Vikings and the technological cutting edge