...5-point rating scale (5 = very attractive; 4 = rather attractive; 3 = averagely attractive; 2 = little attractive; 1 = not at all attractive). The mean of the scores expressed by the four independent evaluators defined three separate categories (>3.5 = very attractive or...
-
-
...rather attractive; 2.5–3.5 = averagely attractive; <2.5 = little or not at all attractive) that were used for data analysis. Two male and one female evaluator remained the same throughout the study period, whereas the fourth female evaluator changed twice."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"In theory, human beauty standards may vary across different countries, cultural backgrounds, and ethnic groups, thus limiting the generalizability of our findings. However, it has recently been demonstrated that standards for evaluating attractiveness are shared across...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
...cultures as different as Caucasian, Chinese, and Japanese (https://www.fertstert.org/servlet/linkout?suffix=e_1_5_1_2_29_2&dbid=8&doi=10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.08.039&key=12834020&cf= …, https://www.fertstert.org/servlet/linkout?suffix=e_1_5_1_2_30_2&dbid=8&doi=10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.08.039&key=17238049&cf= …)."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @apeofpentacles
@apeofpentacles unfortunately this kind of mushy, culture-bound methodology's all we've got for subjective metrics like attractiveness. Hence the term "soft science." It was a 2013 study; maybe it went nowhere, but ideally it'd be replicated, or a starting pt for harder research1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I for one am annoyed at all the innuendo about doctors just wanting a chance to scope out their hottest patients naked. Have no idea how much of an issue it is, but the research add nothing; kind of seems to be baked into the idea of being a gynecologist in the first place, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
gynecologist/whatever title an endometriosis specialist would have, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Correct. These women were literally undergoing an invasive procedure (laparoscopy) to determine the site/severity of their disease (after already undergoing the standard gyn speculum exam), not outrageous to measure their bra size and waist to hip ratio too, w informed consent!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SchnarkTank @complexifire and
Dwiw I consider early sex causing the disease an unlikely direction of causality, but frankly it’s just not clear what this finding means and the result is *interesting.* I wish the authors would clarify why they suspected such diffs might exist for site-specific endometriosis.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
i don't think it's blazingly likely either, it's just an illustration of how it doesn't take a doctorate and a staff to come up with a scenario where the data is useful if one isn't starting from a commitment to it being useless
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
tbqf though if in the course of your ob/gyn practice you've noticed that women with a particular condition are highly attractive weirdly often, the *responsible* thing is to test and document that, not hare off into proxy hypotheses
-
-
This whole study was actually one doc’s attempt to prove he’s NOT sexist and/or a creep. “See! They really are hot! I’ve got *data* now!”
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.