Debunk this: Mitochimerism/Telegony via sexual intercourse in humans
I have been going crazy over this. I know a little about fetal microchimerism, fetuses, aborted or not effecting DNA in the mothers brain. But studies on mitochimerism or telegony though sexual Intercourse changing future offspring is disturbing.
Can sex with previous partners forever alter or influence the DNA/genes/traits, of the woman or her future offspring with different men? Again, I'm not talking about fetal microchimerism, I'm talking about a woman who has had sex but never has been pregnant.
I'm at the point of thinking about leaving my girlfriend who was not a virgin when we met. Converting to Islam and finding Muslim women who are more likely to be virgins isn't off the table here. I want a wife and kids and I refuse to have a kid that has had any genetic influence from abother man in any way shape or form. Won't do it.
No no, do not read the bible, this backward old book. Women are free to open their fanny for everyone, are you against equality?
Samuel Nguyen
Bump
Ayden Moore
>I refuse to have a kid that has had any genetic influence from abother man in any way shape or form. What about the child's grandfather?
Sebastian Hall
based purepilled bro
Logan Price
Of course I don't give a shit about that. No one has posted any science to prove or disprove this yet
Nathaniel Perry
nobody's going to, either Veeky Forums doesn't have actual scientists. the best you can hope for is a circlejerk where people tell you aren't an asshole for wanting a virgin wife, which is probably what you want to hear anyway.
Jeremiah Flores
>which is probably what you want to hear anyway. No, what I want to hear is that this shit isn't true. If it is I need to know so I can find a virgin wife, I don't give a fuck I'd people think I'm an asshole or not
Ryan Fisher
>tfw only two girls ive loved ive infested with microchimerisms >tfw i know their babies with other men are actually mine
Jeremiah Clark
The evidence seems ambiguous at best for never-pregnant women.
The first article concludes ": Male microchimerism was not infrequent in women without sons. Besides known pregnancies, other possible sources of male microchimerism include unrecognized spontaneous abortion, vanished male twin, an older brother transferred by the maternal circulation, or sexual intercourse. Male microchimerism was significantly more frequent and levels were higher in women with induced abortion than in women with other pregnancy histories. Further studies are needed to determine specific origins of male microchimerism in women." for the 10% incidence of detected microchimerism in nulligravid women. I find it significantly more likely for the former than the latter factors to result in the presence of dizygotic (i.e. not originating from unfertilized sperm) cells in women.
The second article doesn't appear to be talking about nulligravid women at all, but rather the known exchange of cell lines between pregnant women and their children and qualifying it. Please note in your picture that most of the sample distribution is on the low concentration side (gEq/10^5 is 10^9/10^5 Eq ) and that fetal cells making it to the brain doesn't necessarily or likely entail future fetuses also receiving these cells.
The last article is about flies. Nothing to suggest complex mechanisms in an insect are gonna translate to a vertebrate unless you have evidence to suggest so.
In short, it seems doubtful that it occurs at all without fertilization and even when there has been a pregnancy and it exists, it doesn't mean your future child with hypothetical non-virgin woman is also gonna have them or be influenced in development by them from available evidence.
David Hughes
The sun and the food you eat alters your DNA.
Hudson Sanders
So, "we don't know but probably not"? I guess that's a common state for scientific questions but I wish there was a more define answer.
There are tons of terrifying articles on this shit. Heres some more
"Cuck", short form of "cuckhold" is an expression meaning a man whose wife is cheating on him with Jamal or any other subhuman*. i.e. "Sven is a cuck. Ahmed just fucked his wife and he liked to watch"
*in this context means anyone who has or had sexual intercourse outside of marriage, not just ahmed or jamal.
Juan Clark
>*in this context means anyone who has or had sexual intercourse outside of marriage, not just ahmed or jamal.
you cant just redefine words to fit your meaning. I mean i guess you can, but no one will take you seriously. Cuck does not magically mean "non-virgin" because you want it to
Ayden Rodriguez
i know. i just believe, imo of course, that sex before marriage should be discouraged and I instantly regard as subhumans people (either man or women) who jump around different cocks or pussies
Jackson Gonzalez
Oh gotcha, yea i just believe, imo of course, that people who judge others based on an action that doesnt affect them in any way should be discouraged and i instantly regard as subhumans people (either man or women) who jump around different arbitrary judgement.
Anthony Torres
The first two you linked me are repeats from the OP which I responded to earlier, and the "Return of Kings" article (please, if you MUST use sources written by people who are so scarcely familiar with science at least just look up the studies they reference and not their own "slut face" interpretations. Seriously, they're not objectively representing anything, this is popsci tier)
Their more interesting source is munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2013/1023-older-siblings’-cells-can-be-passed-from-female-dogs-to-their-puppies-in-the-womb-mu-researchers-find/ which is still slightly unsatisfying because it's some journalism major's interpretation of ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3704588/ which is a more interesting article. What really called my attention on the missouri.edu site is that it claimed that it had found Y-chromosomal DNA in female dogs who had never had offspring, and they acknowledge in the article itself its possible this came from the microchimerisms present in the mother. As (picture related) the study acknowledges, however, all of these dogs (n=9 !!!) had male littermates, which makes these the more likely sources of the microchimerism (i.e. the siblings, not the mother are the more likely source). Still, the rudimentary character of this part of the study, which was very short compared to the rest of it, makes any certain conclusions, you guessed it, impossible).
So, in short..... "we don't know but probably not"
Andrew Peterson
That was someone else. So that study is suggesting the mall DNA cam from their brothers? Wouldn't that be an easy thing to control for? I feel like that would be very easy to find out, havin a group with no male littermates and the grandmother having her sexual contact controlled.
Has anyone done this with rats?
Christian Kelly
And thank you for contributing so much to the discussion
Another such belief is “telegony,” which goes back to Aristotle; it alleged that the heredity of an individual is influenced not only by his father but also by males with whom the female may have mated and who have caused previous pregnancies. Even Darwin, as late as 1868, seriously discussed an alleged case of telegony: that of a mare mated to a zebra and subsequently to an Arabian stallion, by whom the mare produced a foal with faint stripes on his legs. The simple explanation for this result is that such stripes occur naturally in some breeds of horses.
All these beliefs, from inheritance of acquired traits to telegony, must now be classed as superstitions. They do not stand up under experimental investigation and are incompatible with what is known about the mechanisms of heredity and about the remarkable and predictable properties of genetic materials. Nevertheless, some people still cling to these beliefs. Some animal breeders take telegony seriously and do not regard as purebred the individuals whose parents are admittedly “pure” but whose mothers had mated with males of other breeds. Soviet biologist and agronomist Trofim Denisovich Lysenko was able for close to a quarter of a century, roughly between 1938 and 1963, to make his special brand of Lamarckism the official creed in the Soviet Union and to suppress most of the teaching and research in orthodox genetics. He and his partisans published hundreds of articles and books allegedly proving their contentions, which effectively deny the achievements of biology for at least the preceding century. The Lysenkoists were officially discredited in 1964.
Thoughts on this?
Daniel Bennett
>All these beliefs, from inheritance of acquired traits to telegony, must now be classed as superstitions. They do not stand up under experimental investigation and are incompatible with what is known about the mechanisms of heredity and about the remarkable and predictable properties of genetic materials. what more is there to discuss?
Nathaniel Phillips
I just want my fairy tale princess ree
Gavin Phillips
one day you will grow up user, don't worry. you legitimately sound like a 16 year old girl waiting on her prince charming to rescue her from... her boredom?
Grayson Price
I'm 24 I'll never grow up.
Logan Nelson
Go find yourself a nice white supremacist chick and one of their numerous rallies.
Leo Stewart
>white supremacist The fuck? How is that related? I'm not him so I can't speak for him but I don't care who it is, I want my child to be mine. White black or brown I don't want any previous partner to influence my kids genetically
Landon Hughes
well you dont have to worry about that. >All these beliefs, from inheritance of acquired traits to telegony, must now be classed as superstitions. They do not stand up under experimental investigation and are incompatible with what is known about the mechanisms of heredity and about the remarkable and predictable properties of genetic materials.
Jaxson Adams
I'm white, I want my kids to be white and I want my white tribe to survive. If you want to race mix, whatever, but seeing as we'll soon be heading for a cooling period fairly soon, I want my descendants and my extended race to be ready for those conditions and European adaptation best-fits for the geographic location.
Levi Nelson
everything about this post just screams brainlet
Julian Ramirez
Well I happen to be dating a white chick so our kids would be European. I've dated black chicks and jews too.
Cooper Taylor
>That was someone else. So that study is suggesting the mall DNA cam from their brothers? They say that although "other mechanisms cannot be excluded" "in utero sibling microchimerism is a likely mechanism for the Y chromosomal DNA found in these dogs"
Full quote is on this picture >Wouldn't that be an easy thing to control for? They were looking for Y chromosomes, not at whether they matched their littermates'. Yes, this is something you can control for but this finding was secondary to the study so they apparently didn't dedicate that much effort to it. Plus, the sample was retrospective so the dogs they evaluated for this were likely not present for evaluation at the time they evaluated whether the Y chromosomes were there, which further complicates the matter of finding where it came from. A 9 dog sample is a slap in the face to statistical power anyways.
>Has anyone done this with rats? Not to the best of my knowledge. Consider that the finding in flies isn't very old and science is a bit slow to catch up on this stuff
