BR Note:
Based on other studies that have been  available for years if you  actually 
do the research, this is what I have been saying since before 2001. 
My views are, in fact, based on science and are, in fact, 
documented in detail.
 
 
 
 
 

No Scientific Evidence That People Are Born  Gay or Transgender, Johns 
Hopkins Researchers Say
_www.christianpost.com_ (http://www.christianpost.com) 


 
 
By _Samuel Smith_ (http://www.christianpost.com/author/samuel-smith/)   , 
CP Reporter
August 22,  2016






 

Distinguished scholars at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland released a 
new  143-page report on Monday that argues that there is not enough 
definitive  scientific evidence available to suggest that gay, lesbian and 
transgender  individuals are born with a certain sexual orientation or gender 
identity. 
In the _three-part report_ 
(http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/number-50-fall-2016)  published by 
The New Atlantis, Lawrence  Mayer, a 
scholar-in-residence at Johns Hopkins University's psychiatry  department and a 
professor of statistics and biostatistics at  Arizona State University, and 
Paul 
McHugh, a professor of psychiatry and  behavioral sciences at Johns 
Hopkins, take on prevailing claims that sexual  orientation and gender 
dysphoria 
are caused by natural traits. 
Additionally, the scholars challenge the claim that discrimination and 
social  stigma is the sole reason why those with same-sex attractions or 
transgender  identity suffer higher rates of mental health problems. 
In the first part, _the report argues_ 
(http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/number-50-fall-2016)  that there is 
insufficient evidence to  claim 
that heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual attractions are an innate trait  
that people are born with. 
The report goes into detail about past  epidemiological studies that have 
found a modest association between genetic  factors and sexual orientation 
and behaviors. However, the  report states that such studies have not been 
able to provide significant  evidence "pointing to particular genes." 
The report also looks at other evidence of  hypothesized biological causes, 
such as prenatal development and hormones but  finds that evidence is also 
limited. 
"Studies of the brains of homosexuals and heterosexuals have found some  
differences, but have not demonstrated that these differences are inborn 
rather  than the result of environmental factors that influenced both 
psychological and  neurobiological traits," the report reads. "One  
environmental 
factor that appears to be correlated with non-heterosexuality is  childhood 
sexual abuse victimization, which may also contribute to the higher  rates." 
There is actually some evidence that suggests sexual orientation is  fluid.


 
 
 
A study by the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health  
tracked the sexual orientation of children aged 7 to 12 in 1994-1995 and 
again  in 2007-2008 when they were young adults. 
The study found that 80 percent of male respondents who had reported 
same-sex  attraction and both-sex attraction in their childhood, later 
identified 
as  exclusively heterosexual. Meanwhile, more than half of the females 
respondents  who reported both-sex attractions as children, reported being 
exclusively  attracted to males as adults. 
"The idea there that sexual orientation is fluid, that people change as  
people grow," Mayer told The Christian Post in an interview  last Friday. 
"There are probably some people that identify as heterosexual that  then later 
on identified as homosexual, so it goes both ways. The importance  there is 
the fluidity and flexibility that these things change in time." 
The report also analyzed studies that focused on  concordance rates in 
twins. One study the scholars looked at was a 2010 study  from psychiatric 
epidemiologist Niklas Långström and his colleagues that  analyzed 3,826 
identical 
and fraternal same-sex twin pairs. 
In analyzing twins pairings where at least one of the twins was same-sex  
attracted, the report found that only in a fraction of  the cases resulted in 
both twins being same-sex attracted. There was a  concordance rate of 18 
percent of identical twin males, 11 percent for fraternal  twin males, 22 
percent for identical twin females, and 17 percent for fraternal  twin females. 
"Summarizing the studies of twins, we can say that there is no reliable  
scientific evidence that sexual orientation is determined by a person's genes. 
 But there is evidence that genes play a role in influencing sexual 
orientation,"  the report explains. "So the question 'Are gay people  born that 
way?' requires clarification. There is virtually no evidence that  anyone, gay 
or straight, is 'born that way' if that means their sexual  orientation was 
genetically determined. But there is some evidence from the twin  studies 
that certain genetic profiles probably increase the likelihood the  person 
later identifies as gay or engages in same-sex sexual  behavior."


 
 
 
In the third part of the report, the scholars  analyzed a number of studies 
that attempt to show the links between transgender  identity and 
neurological differences. 
Although some studies have found that brain activation patterns differ 
among people who identify as  members of the opposite biological sex, the 
scholars hold that "these studies do  not offer sufficient evidence for drawing 
sound conclusions about possible  associations between brain activation and sex
ual identity or arousal. The  results are conflicting and confusing." 
"The question is not simply whether there are differences between the 
brains  of transgender individuals and people identifying with the gender 
corresponding  to their biological sex, but whether gender identity is a fixed, 
innate, and  biological trait, even when it does not correspond to biological 
sex, or whether  environmental or psychological causes contribute to the 
development of a sense  of gender identity in such cases," the report asserts.  
"Neurological differences in transgender adults might be the consequence of  
biological factors such as genes or prenatal hormone exposure, or of  
psychological and environmental factors such as childhood abuse, or they could  
result from some combination of the two." 
"There are no serial, longitudinal, or prospective studies looking at the  
brains of cross-gender identifying children who develop to later identify as 
 transgender adults," the report continues. "Lack of  this research 
severely limits our ability to understand causal relationships  between brain 
morphology, or functional activity, and the later development of  gender 
identity 
different from biological sex." 
Additionally, the report took issue with the  conditioning of children to 
believe that they need to block their puberty or get  a sex reassignment in 
order to avoid mental health issues. 
The report cites the fifth edition of American  Psychiatric Association's 
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of  Mental Disorders to show that the 
persistence of gender dysphoria in children  does not often persist into 
adulthood. 
"In natal [biological] males, persistence [of gender dysphoria] has ranged  
from 2.2 to 30 percent," the report explains. "In  natal females, 
persistence has ranged from 12 to 50 percent. Scientific data on  persistence 
of 
gender dysphoria remains sparse due to the very low prevalence of  the disorder 
in the general population, but the wide range of findings in the  literature 
suggests that there is still much that we do not know about why  gender 
dysphoria persists or desists in children." 
The Christian Post asked Mayer what his response will be to criticism  
received from the Left and from conservatives who might disagree with certain  
aspects of his report. 
As Mayer's co-author Paul McHugh has _spoken out in the past_ 
(http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgendered-me
n-dont-become-women-they-become)  with remarks that some might  consider 
inflammatory on the subject of gender identity and sexual reassignment  
surgeries, Mayer suspects that critics will claim the  report was only issued 
to 
serve McHugh's biases. 
"That isn't true," Mayer said. "Every line in this I either wrote or 
approved  of. There is no bias either way. The bias is just towards science." 
"I think we get into these very high volume battles, particularly in this  
current environment," Mayer continued. "When science supports our position,  
sometimes it is better to tone down a bit. In other words, conservatives 
have  been highly critical of the report too already because  it didn't 
support this or didn't support that. The idea is that let the science  speak 
and 
then see how they respond to  it."


-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • [RC] No... BILROJ via Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
    • Re... Dr. Ernie Prabhakar

Reply via email to