Comments by "John G Williams" (@johnwilliams8818) on "Institute of Human Anatomy" channel.

  1. 301
  2. 136
  3. 49
  4. 45
  5. 29
  6. 29
  7. 29
  8. 25
  9. 21
  10. 19
  11. 19
  12. 14
  13. 14
  14. 13
  15. 10
  16. 8
  17. I can add a partial explanation. If you stand up and look down at your belly area and it sort of "Rounds out" like a ball from right below the bottom ribs? That is "Likely" (not always) due to NAFLD (Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease). Our liver does A LOT of metabolic work, one of its jobs is to convert excess glucose into fat, for storage and later use. The problem is that the standard American diet is all wrong. But that's another story. a Typical human is not meant to eat so much food, especially every day. Also, every grain, cereal, and starch that we consume? gets converted into "sugar". Every "OSE" (fructose, maltose, dextrose, etc) doesn't need to be converted, because it's already in a form that our liver can convert to fat. So every bit of the "Ose's" that you consume? Go directly into the liver for use or conversion into fat. That is where the problem begins. As awesome an organ as our liver is? When we consume too much/many sugars? Our liver sort of gets backed up converting those sugars into fat and the excess builds up and creates sections of nothing but globules of fat in our liver. That is what makes the rounded bulgy look. However, if you are a drinker, or have a family history of liver disease (Cirrhosis or hepatitis (chronic inflation can damage tissue) you might wish to consult with your doctor to make sure there isn't anything dangerous going on. Blood tests are not enough to determine damage and an ultrasound should also be done. (I forget the specific name). However, someone with Fatty liver disease (non or alcohol-related) that does not have any other issues, can change their diets and allow the liver to get rid of the excess fat that is built up.
    8
  18. 7
  19. 5
  20. The most important exercise that everyone can do for their entire life... Is "Walking". Our feet act as sub-pumps that help >> PUSH >> the blood back up into our heart. This is even more important if there are extra pounds around the middle (beer bellies, love handles, any amount that has "Dun'Lap'd" over our waistline.) Keeping our feet healthy keeps the return pumps functioning and keeps the return circulation working at its best. Gravity pulls the blood down into our feet and calves and if the pumps do not work well all sorts of health problems 'WILL" occur. Seniors and even slightly overweight individuals suffer many issues from poor lower leg circulation which is related to not walking enough. P.S. I've worked with enough seniors over the years. Walking to the bathroom, refrigerator, windows to look out... Nope. Not the same as walking for exercise. Things that you do during a normal day are NOT defined as "Exercise". Sorry... Nope... 😂 Also, unless you have severe joint inflammation or back injuries (stiff unused joints don't count)... They are called WALKERS , they are not called LEANER ON'ERS ! The handles should be at or just above waist level. Basically, stand up straight, lets your arms hand naturally down the sides, the handles of your walker should be slightly above the level of the palm of your hands. Anyone tells you differently? Tell them they need to ask for a refund or ask if they missed the classes that explained how walkers work. They are to encourage an upright position, and provide a sense of spatial location to help with balance so that people can "WALK"... P.P.S. Oh and fellas? Those Dunlaps that can help encourage poor return circulation? can also inhibit the delivery. There is this thing called the "Inguinal Canal" which passes through the inguinal ligament near our groins (ladies too) that allows the major blood vessels to pass into and back from our lower extremities... Too much belly applies a restrictive pressure on those passages and can (very often is) cause "ED"... Those little blue pills? cause the blood vessels inside to close down to hold the blood inside. NOT the best way to deal with the problem...
    5
  21. 5
  22. 4
  23. 4
  24. 4
  25. 4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 4
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92.  @WhichDoctor1  I am glad it worked out for you. I honestly don't care what adults do with their bodies. I will however totally disagree with your assessment of safe and effective. That is just totally wrong. Just the surgical complications alone prove that incorrect. Also the "Standards of Care" provided by WPATH are written by self-serving and biased individuals. Two of those are Dr Levine and his ex-wife. Pediatric psychologists who added all the nonsense about transitioning children, to include children with disabilities & before anyone bothers to argue? Find it and read the 260+ pages of the latest version of WPATHS SOC, v8. Because I have and I know what it says. Contrary to what someone is telling you? there is NOT an age limit for adolescents or children. Yes it says 16-18 and lays out time lines. But EVERY single one of those? Ends with "Each patient is different, so its best left to the care team or the individual." Which completely negates the 16-18 range, because if the Dr says, "It would be best for Johnny to start treatments before entering puberty, for best effect." And mommy/Daddy/ Emancipated minor say OK doc. The treatment CAN be started before 15. Review a precious video from this channel about the "rational" part of the brain and how it doesn't finish maturing till the age of 25. Then try your best to convince ANY child has the ability to rationalize such a life changing decision. Also I WISH people would stop saying TRANS. That is not a stand alone word, it cannot be an abbreviation. TRANS is a root word used as a prefix for HUNDREDS of different words. It is NOT exclusive to Transgender (before) or Transsexuals (after treatments begin).
    1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100.  jimharrington6300  OK, Dr. Bob. There is way too much to unpack there. So I'll start with your first mistake. Correlation doesn't imply causation. "If" there are limited data points to correlate to reach a logical causation, this concept is overused, dated, and, IMO, used as an excuse to be logically lazy. There is this little thing that most humans lack "genetically" and that is called "common sense.". A person who has never felt a snowflake lacks the sensory input to "know" what the snowflake feels like; they do not have any emotional or physical experience. So if you are a heterosexual male, you do not know what it feels like to be a homosexual male. No more than a biological male knows what it's like to be a biological female, you do not have all the necessary preprogrammed core instincts that are by nature distinct and functionally different in each sex. Of which there are "only" two. IE, there is a great deal more to the idea that "Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus" than just a funny book title. The differences begin with "core" primal instincts. The fallacy of assumption occurs when individuals forget that human beings are mammals and have the same natural instincts that all life has. Instincts are not learned; "skills" are, and they are not the same thing. As far as your "assumption" that I am somehow "Left Winged"? Or that I subscribe to any of that utter nonsense? Means that you must be one of those closed minded individuals that are behind the "machince" which allowed these breakdowns in logic to occur in the first place.
    1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104.  jimharrington6300  Once again, your logic is flawed. Just like we do not need to think about breathing in order to do it. Due to it being an autonomous function. Core sexual instincts are also autonomous. A man's primal brain belongs to a "male" of the species. This primal "male" brain is constructed from our DNA to support the growth and development of a biological man. As far as your last comments about groomers and drag queens, those are psychological issues that develop over time due to both developmental issues in their brains and environmental factors while growing up. A great deal of the current broken mentality is due to those with less willpower being swept up in the power of this group psychosis. That is not what I was or am talking about. And I do not support any of that nonsense, so you can shove that assumption straight up your backside! A biological male is instinctively drawn to reproduce with a biological female. You can raise two feral babies, one boy and one girl, and teach them nothing but how to eat and drink. Raise them separately. Put them together when they are old enough, and they will figure out how to mate and reproduce. The core attractions are primal and do not require any input from external sources. The environment doesn't determine sexual attraction. That is entirely biological, chemical, and physical, and those instincts are driven by various control centers of the brain. All the environmental stuff people keep going on about simply inserts variables into the core instincts that increase or decrease the primal drives. You do not need walls full of fancy degrees to understand such simple concepts.
    1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113.  @johnwest6690  They key term you are using is "Influence". Everyone is subjected to influences that shape their likes and dislikes. But they are not the driving instinct. They are what shape and mold distinct tendencies, not core instincts. I know countless people who claim they "know" what makes someone "become gay" who are not gay themselves, so have zero firsthand knowledge of what they speak of to build their hypothesis. Being homosexual is not something a person "becomes", you either are or you are not. Personal influences might contribute to someone being somewhere in the middle. this is true, but it is not the core driving instinct, it is a choice made. I developed a crush on my best friends older brother, we became friends at 5 years old and were inseparable growing up. When I was 15 she went to a family reunion out of town that her brother couldn't attend. The short story? He manipulated me into thinking he had "feelings" for me, used that to lure me to a private place, and had a surprise waiting for me. He and two of his "buddies" raped me over two days. That "trauma" caused me to avoid my friend, how do you tell your best friend her brother did this? My shame and pain and fear caused me to erupt on her for not leaving me alone, and I destroyed her publicly in front of schoolmates. I attempted suicide and damn near succeeded, spent a month in a psychiatric hospital... I survived, it caused issues, but it DID NOT influence me NOT to be gay. Trauma affects you, and it may affect aspects or emotions or desires, but it doesn't build your core instincts. Anymore than a newly born puppy being raised by nothing but cats makes it into a kitten or teaches it to meow instead of bark. That is not how "Core Instincts" work. Nor is that how influence, trauma, or surroundings work.
    1
  114.  @johnwest6690  You should read my perspective on how its not just that Men are from mars and Women are from Venus. Which "explains" or provides context into the physical manifestations of the two sexes. But how that needs a part two, "Men run on Windows and Women run on Linux". To provide contextual insight into how different Operational systems might perform similar functions, but use entirely different "coding" to get there. Do you know that all mammalian embryos start out female? Which is why the males of all mammalian species have nipples? Yet "man" has determined they were "First" (adam) and that God is therefore represented as a "Male"? Yet that makes entirely zero sense in the context of only the females can reproduce life, that all life is female "first" and that if logic were to be applied? God would need to be "Female" in order to create all life, as God make us in God's own image. Then God said, "My creation cannot have the same power to create life as I do..." So split the ability to create life into two, creating Adam from Eve as a separate entity and making it so that 'HE" would be the stronger protector of "Her" while she was vulnerable incubating a new life. I only mention this as my conclusion to highlight how easily man, who was "made" to be the stronger dominant hunter/protector, has taken that role to the extreme and IMO interpreted reality in such a manner that makes them "first". When the reality is quite different, simple, elegant in its design if you will, and that we were intended to be imperfect beings. That with that imperfection comes unintended circumstances that are only made difficult to comprehend because we, as imperfect beings, are incapable of accepting the easier, more logical answer, instead of overthinking the obvious and moving on to the next challenge. I believe that there is ONE GOD with infinite faces, that religion is the cultural manifestation of our need to comprehend purpose and to define that meaning into what is turned into a more complex subject than necessary due to our inherent tendency to overthink things. Mine is a long explanation for a simple fact. We are all born to be what we were intended to be. Imperfections and all. It's not that complicated to believe that when the spark "soul" (battery) that powers the unique "life" is first inserted, and the brain, "Bios" (Operating System) firsts powers up and wakes the hardware (wetware) up for the very first time, that there will never be a time where a miscommunication occurs. Causing hardware configured and designed for the Windows Operating system to be setup and run by the Linux OS, that is compatible, but coded to operate the system of a different setup with different hardware. I can only speak for myself, but I have always been gay, I am biologically (physically) a male anatomically. But the operating system, how all the hardware works and interprets the world, makes it so that I see and experience things psychologically as a female would. Do you know why heterosexual men are really uncomfortable around homosexual men? Truly... Because when they imagine intercourse? They are programmed to be the inserters, not the insertee's. They are not psychologically equipped to "imagine" how homosexuals actually think about sex. If homosexuals "thought" about or "Viewed" sexual intercourse the same as their biological sex does? They would not be homosexual. On a more Ha Ha note (if you've read this far? Thank You!)... Do you know what the first question is that all heterosexual men eventually ask me is? 1.) Is it true when two men have sex that one is the "Man" and one is the "Woman"? Followed by (if they have the courage)... 2.) Which one are you? Let that sink in for a minute... All gay men are the same, we are penetratee's, not penetrators. Some have accepted that if they wish to be penetrated? They must reciprocate by "being" a penetrator. But I can assure you, 99.9% of all gay men deep down are penetratee's and do not look at other men and think "I'd like to penetrate" that. That is not how it works at all.
    1
  115.  @johnwest6690  To your last point, for the most part yes. I am a often looked at by other gay men as an "Oddity". While I find other gay men physically attractive, I am NOT attracted to their minds (personalities). I like heterosexual men because they are complete men. I don't want Martha Steward or June Cleaver wearing a man suit. I also do not care what particular sub genre a gay man ascribes to, I'm just John, I am not defined by anyone's categories. My experiences with various subcultures (gay, hetero, S&M, B&D, Leather, etc.) Is that those people have had exposure to things (traumas, surroundings, etc.) which have created emotional associations with various ideals or things. For example. I person who has never felt a strong close "love" with a human, but who has been smothered with it by a favorite pet... Might develop a sense of sexual attraction to said animal. They know its wrong, but still fantasize about it, so... Become "Furries". Or a person who has been exposed to a dominant personality might create strong association with desire of and pleasure from someone taking a dominant posture over them. I was introduced at a young age, which some suggest made me gay (nonsense) and as a result of exposure during formative years, developed a "belief" that making friends included sex. I avoided friendships with women because sex felt "wrong" and sought out friendships with men, by offering sex. As a result I had a very promiscuous youth/ young adulthood, still have issues with it at 57. But that is an entire novel in itself. Growing up I became convinced that the only reason men wanted anything to do with me was because they wanted sex. So it made making real friends impossible, because I never actually learned how to, as stupid as that may sound. I am always looking for the underlying reason why someone is being nice to me or expressing any friendly gestures.
    1
  116. 1
  117.  @johnwest6690  A "Femme" lesbian (AKA in my day as a "Lipstick Lesbian") is a sub category, the opposite is "Butch" (AKA "Dyke or Bull Lesbian") It is the equivalent of "Top" ("MAN" Dominant- Inserter) & "Bottom" ("WOMAN" Submissive- Insertee). The two distinctions (and the range in between) are self identified based on likes/tastes & dislikes/distastes. But all are homosexual by natural design. There is an inherent dislike (even disgust) at the idea of having sex with the opposite biological sex. So your friend is either lesbian by design (birth) or Bisexual (Heterosexual but chooses women "IF" they are dominant and mannish). You're friend has had her DNA sequenced? The mail in kits for places like 23&Me & Ancestry (same lab) and others is not a complete or reliable test. It focuses on a limited section of the DNA and doesn't involve various blood/cellular sections of the DNA. Also there are only a few reliable online sources that do a deep analysis of DNA tests performed via mail-in kits that have complete and up to date datasets. The only reliable one I know is Promethease. And even the researchers at Promethease baulk at doing research to identify genetic links to homosexuality. I've been in contact with more than a few and they all same the same thing, "That is a Pandora's Box That nobody wants to open." The best answers I have been able to get is that they know there are gene specific identifiers but they are afraid to make that publicly know as they believe that there would be a drive to "Fix in Utero". Which IMHO should be an option for the simple fact that heterosexuals have NO IDEA what its like to grow up homosexual, even with all the "Acceptance". It is NOT something that can be fixed after the fact or "prayed" away. That is not how it works. But trust me, I am in the minority as a gay man who thinks that way. There are many who think they would be ostracized if it could be fixed before the baby is born. Also, Nature always finds a way to fix imbalances. I think that is what homosexuality is. a natural fix for some imbalance. So it is indeed a "Pandora's Box".
    1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1